| Literature DB >> 33139758 |
Mariana Roxo1, Mónica Zuzarte2,3,4, Maria José Gonçalves5,6, Jorge M Alves-Silva7,8,9,5, Carlos Cavaleiro5,6, Maria Teresa Cruz8,5,10, Lígia Salgueiro5,6.
Abstract
Thymus albicans is an endemic species of the Iberian Peninsula with a vulnerable conservation status. In an attempt to contribute to the valorization of this species, the present study brings new insights on the antifungal and anti-inflammatory mechanism of action of T. albicans essential oil. The antifungal activity of the oil and its major compounds was assessed for the first time against standard and clinically isolated strains of yeasts and filamentous fungi. The effect on the two major virulence factors of Candida albicans (germ tube formation and biofilm disruption) was considered in more detail. At 0.08 μL/mL, the oil inhibited C. albicans germ tube formation by more than 40% and decreased biofilm biomass at MIC values, thus pointing out its antivirulent potential. The anti-inflammatory activity of the essential oil was investigated on LPS-stimulated mouse macrophages (RAW 264.7) by evaluating the levels of several pro-inflammatory mediators, namely nitric oxide (NO), inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2). T. albicans oil reduced the production of nitrites, a NO derived sub-product, at non-cytotoxic concentrations of 0.32 and 0.64 μL/mL, by 27 and 41%, respectively. In addition, the iNOS protein levels of essential oil pre-treated cells were reduced by 14%. Overall, the high essential oil yield of T. albicans as well as its bioactive effects at concentrations without cytotoxicity, encourage further studies on the potential pharmacological applications of this species. Furthermore, these results raise awareness for the need to preserve endangered species that may hold relevant medicinal value.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33139758 PMCID: PMC7608662 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-75244-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Composition of the essential oil of Thymus albicans.
| RIa | RIp | Compoundsa | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 922 | 1030 | α-Thujene | 0.2 |
| 930 | 1030 | α-Pinene | 1.7 |
| 943 | 1073 | Camphene | 2.3 |
| 964 | 1128 | Sabinene | 1.1 |
| 970 | 1118 | β-Pinene | 1.9 |
| 980 | 1161 | Myrcene | 0.7 |
| 1006 | 1185 | α-Terpinene | 0.4 |
| 1013 | 1272 | 0.1 | |
| 1020 | 1206 | Limonene | 0.6 |
| 1020 | 1212 | 1,8-Cineole | 40.5 |
| 1035 | 1250 | 0.2 | |
| 1047 | 1250 | 0.3 | |
| 1050 | 1459 | 0.1 | |
| 1081 | 1543 | Linalool | 25.0 |
| 1115 | 1516 | Camphor | 3.4 |
| 1129 | 1668 | 0.1 | |
| 1142 | 1667 | 3.0 | |
| 1142 | 1693 | Borneol | 6.4 |
| 1158 | 1595 | Terpinen-4-ol | 1.4 |
| 1166 | 1692 | α-Terpineol | 4.5 |
| 1178 | 1780 | Myrtenol | 0.1 |
| 1210 | 1764 | Citronellol | 0.2 |
| 1233 | 1842 | Geraniol | 0.4 |
| 1266 | 1574 | Bornyl acetate | 0.3 |
| 1359 | 1755 | Geranyl acetate | 0.1 |
| 1382 | 1585 | β-Elemene | 0.3 |
| 1411 | 1590 | 0.5 | |
| 1498 | 1751 | 0.1 | |
| 1526 | 2070 | Elemol | 0.1 |
| 1557 | 1968 | Caryophyllene oxide | 0.4 |
| 1569 | 2072 | Viridiflorol | 0.2 |
| 1579 | 2025 | Ledol | 0.1 |
| 1615 | 2153 | T-Cadinol | t |
| 1628 | 2218 | α-Cadinol | t |
| 1628 | 2208 | α-Eudesmol | t |
| Monoterpene hydrocarbons | 9.5 | ||
| Oxygen containing monoterpenes | 85.5 | ||
| Sesquiterpene hydrocarbons | 0.9 | ||
| Oxygen containing sesquiterpenes | 0.9 | ||
| Total | 96.8 |
RIa, retention indices on the SPB-1 column relative to C8 to C24 n-alkanes. RIp, retention indices on the SupelcoWax-10 column.
aCompounds listed in order of their elution on the SPB-1 column; t, traces (≤ 0.05%).
Figure 1Total ion current chromatogram of the essential oil of Thymus albicans.
Antifungal activity (MIC and MLC) of Thymus albicans essential oil and its major compounds (1,8-cineole, linalool, borneol and α-terpineol) against collection type and clinical strains of Candida, Cryptococcus neoformans, dermatophytes and Aspergillus.
| Strains | 1,8-Cineole | Linalool | Borneol | α-Terpineol | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MICa | MLCa | MICa | MLCa | MICa | MLCa | MICa | MLCa | MICa | MLCa | |
| 1.25 | 2.5 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 5 | 2.5 | > 20 | 1.25 | 2.5 | |
| 2.5 | 2.5 | 20 | 20 | 5 | 5 | 2.5 | > 20 | 1.25 | 2.5 | |
| 2.5 | 2.5 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 5 | > 20 | 1.25 | 2.5 | |
| 1.25 | 1.25 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 10 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 1.25 | 1.25–2.5 | |
| 2.5 | 2.5 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 5 | > 20 | 0.64–1.25 | 2.5 | |
| 1.25 | 1.25 | 5–10 | 10 | 5 | 5 | 1.25 | 1.25 | 0.64–1.25 | 1.25 | |
| 0.64 | 0.64 | 5 | 5 | 1.25–2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 1.25 | 1.25 | |
| 1.25 | 1.25 | 5 | 5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 1.25 | 1.25 | |
| 1.25 | 1.25 | 5–10 | 10 | 1.25–2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 1.25 | 1.25 | |
| 1.25 | 1.25 | 5 | 5 | 1.25 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 5 | 1.25 | 2.5 | |
| 1.25 | 1.25 | 10 | 10 | 2.5 | 2.5–5 | 2.5 | 5 | 0.64 | 1.25 | |
| 0.64 | 0.64 | 2.5–5 | 5 | 1.25 | 1.25–2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 1.25 | 1.25–2.5 | |
| 1.25 | 1.25 | 10 | 10–20 | 1.25–2.5 | 1.25–2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 0.64 | 1.25 | |
| 2.5 | 10–20 | 10 | > 20 | 5 | ≥ 20 | 5 | > 20 | 0.64 | 10–20 | |
| 2.5 | 5 | 10 | 10–20 | 2.5 | 20 | 2.5 | > 20 | 0.32–0.64 | 2.5 | |
| 5 | 5–10 | 20 | 20 | 10 | ≥ 20 | 5 | > 20 | 0.64–1.25 | 2.5 | |
aMIC and MLC determined by macrodilution method and expressed as μL/mL.
Figure 2Germ tube formation in Candida albicans ATCC 10231 treated with sub-inhibitory concentrations—ranging from MIC to MIC/64—of Thymus albicans essential oil and its main compounds (1,8-cineole, linalool, borneol and α-terpineol). The values are presented as percentage of control (oil-free samples with 1% DMSO (v/v)) ± SEM of at least three independent experiments performed in duplicate. Statistical differences were calculated by one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001).
Figure 3Influence of Thymus albicans essential oil on Candida albicans ATCC 10231 biofilm viability (A) and effect on biofilm biomass after 24 h (B). Each value represents the mean ± SEM of at least three independent experiments performed in duplicate. Statistical differences were calculated by one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test (**p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001). The grey bar represents the minimum lethal concentration (MLC) of Thymus albicans essential oil against Candida albicans ATCC 10231.
Figure 4Effect of Thymus albicans essential oil on macrophages viability (A) and nitrites production (B). Cell viability is expressed as a percentage of MTT reduction in comparison to control cells (100% viability). Nitrite production is expressed as a percentage of nitrite production in comparison to cells stimulated with LPS alone (100% nitrite production). Each value represents the mean ± SEM from three experiments, performed in duplicate. Statistical differences between groups were calculated by one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test (###p < 0.001, compared to control (B); **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 compared to control (A) and to LPS (B)).
Figure 5NO scavenging potential of Thymus albicans essential oil. Different concentrations of essential oil (0.08–1.25 μL/mL) were incubated with SNAP (300 μM) in culture medium for 3 h. Results are expressed as a percentage of NO release triggered by SNAP. Each value represents the mean ± SEM of three independent assays, performed in duplicate. Statistical differences were calculated by one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test (###p < 0.001, compared to control).
Figure 6Effect of Thymus albicans essential oil on the iNOS and COX-2 protein levels in LPS stimulated RAW 264.7 macrophages. Cells (1.2 × 106 cells/well) were kept 24 h in medium (control) or pre-treated for 1 h with 0.64 μL/mL of T. albicans essential oil and then stimulated with LPS (1 μg/mL). Total cell lysates were analyzed by western blot. Results are expressed as protein levels compared to LPS. Statistical differences were calculated by two-tailed unpaired student’s t-test (###p < 0.001, compared to control; **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, compared to LPS).