| Literature DB >> 34961288 |
Wessal Ouedrhiri1, Hamza Mechchate1, Sandrine Moja2, Ramzi A Mothana3, Omar M Noman3, Andriy Grafov1, Hassane Greche4.
Abstract
Several studies have demonstrated the possible synergistic effect as an effective strategy to boost the bioactivity of essential oils. Using this framework, this study was conducted to effectively establish the ideal combination of six essential oils from different plants (Origanum compactum, Origanum majorana, Thymus serpyllum, Mentha spicata, Myrtus communis, and Artemisia herba-alba) that would express the best antioxidant activity. Each mixture was optimized using a mixture design approach to generate the most effective blend. The 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl radical scavenging method was used as a reference method to assess the antioxidant activity. Each essential oil's composition was identified using the GC/MS method. The single essential oil activities demonstrated variable antioxidant effects, and following the mixture design approach, the optimal antioxidant blend was revealed, as two mixtures demonstrated the best antiradical activity with 79.46% obtained with the mixture of O. majorana (28%) and M. spicata (71%) and 78.8% obtained with the mixture O. compactum (64%), O. majorana (13%), and T. serpyllum (21%). This study proposes a practical way to elaborate mixtures in the search for a boosting effect that can be oriented for the food or pharmaceutical industry.Entities:
Keywords: DPPH; antioxidant; essential oil; medicinal plants; mixture design; optimal combination
Year: 2021 PMID: 34961288 PMCID: PMC8704227 DOI: 10.3390/plants10122817
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Essential oils IC50 of DPPH.
| Plants Species | IC50 (mg/mL) |
|---|---|
|
| 0.49 ± 0.019 |
|
| 1.88 ± 0.20 |
|
| 0.07 ± 0.01 |
|
| 0.13 ± 0.00 |
|
| 0.408 ± 0.006 |
|
| 3.42 ± 0.10 |
| BHT (positive control) | 0.33 ± 0.00 |
Essential oil mixtures.
| Mixture n° | EO1 | EO2 | EO3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (M1) |
|
|
|
| 2 (M2) |
|
|
|
| 3 (M3) |
|
|
|
Original components of the design matrix and experimental responses (AA%) obtained for M1, M2, and M3 mixtures.
| EO (%) | AA% of M1 * | AA% of M2 * | AA% of M3 * | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experiment | EO1 | EO2 | EO3 | |||
| 1 | 50 | 0 | 50 | 79.55 | 79.55 | 40.93 |
| 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 75.13 | 47.3 | 78.5 |
| 3 | 33.333333 | 33.333333 | 33.333333 | 74.74 | 74.74 | 33.68 |
| 4 | 50 | 0 | 50 | 73.91 | 73.91 | 46.65 |
| 5 | 50 | 50 | 0 | 71.49 | 71.49 | 8.15 |
| 6 | 0 | 50 | 50 | 55.04 | 55.04 | 45.6 |
| 7 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 47.3 | 66.41 | 45.73 |
| 8 | 0 | 50 | 50 | 56.04 | 56.04 | 49.29 |
| 9 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 69.63 | 72.49 | 69.63 |
| 10 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 52.32 | 69.63 | 46.02 |
| 11 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 66.41 | 77.32 | 66.41 |
| 12 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 74.96 | 52.32 | 75.42 |
| 13 | 33.333333 | 33.333333 | 33.333333 | 73.31 | 73.31 | 36.58 |
| 14 | 50 | 50 | 0 | 74.48 | 74.48 | 5.17 |
| 15 | 33.333333 | 33.333333 | 33.333333 | 73.31 | 73.31 | 36.58 |
AA: antioxidant activity. * The formulation was carried out to obtain solutions containing 3 mg/mL.
Analysis of variance for the different models fitted to responses.
| M1 | M2 | M3 | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source | ddl | SS | MS | Rapport F | ddl | SS | MS | Rapport F | ddl | SS | MS | Rapport F | |||
| Model | 6 | 1373.75 | 228.96 | 45.71 | <0.0001 | 6 | 1369.82 | 228.3 | 35.29 | <0.0001 | 6 | 6317.3 | 1052.9 | 194.97 | <0.0001 |
| Residue | 8 | 40.08 | 5.01 | 8 | 51.76 | 6.47 | 8 | 43.2 | 5.4 | ||||||
| Total | 14 | 1413.82 | 14 | 1421.58 | 14 | 6360.5 | |||||||||
| R2 | 0.97 | 0.96 | 0.99 | ||||||||||||
| R2 adjusted | 0.95 | 0.93 | 0.98 | ||||||||||||
Figure 1Three dimensional surface plots for the effect of different combinations of studied essential oils mixture, M1, M2, and M3.
Coefficients of model fitted for M1 and their level of significance determined by p-value.
| Name | Coefficients | Estimation | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| b1 | 75.041966 | <0.0001 * |
|
| b2 | 49.81 | <0.0001 * |
|
| b3 | 68.02228 | <0.0001 * |
|
| b12 | 42.253951 | 0.0006 * |
|
| b13 | 20.784374 | 0.0279 * |
|
| b23 | −13.50677 | 0.1197 |
|
| b123 | 107.81547 | 0.0575 |
* p-value less than 0.05 is statistically significant, “1” refers to O. compactum coefficient, “2” referes to O. majorana coefficient and “3” refers to T. serpyllum coefficient.
Coefficients of model fitted for M2 and their level of significance determined by p-value.
| Name | Coefficient | Estimation | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| b1 | 49.81 | <0.0001 * |
|
| b2 | 68.02228 | <0.0001 * |
|
| b3 | 74.904624 | <0.0001 * |
|
| b12 | 56.293322 | 0.0002 * |
|
| b13 | 57.483617 | 0.0002 * |
|
| b23 | −63.69602 | <0.0001 * |
|
| b123 | 107.40345 | 0.0880 |
* p-value less than 0.05 is statistically significant, “1” refers to O. compactum coefficient, “2” referes to O. majorana coefficient and “3” refers to T. serpyllum coefficient.
Coefficients of model fitted for M3 and their level of significance determined by p-value.
| Name | Coefficient | Estimation | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| b1 | 76.957119 | <0.0001* |
|
| b2 | 45.87975 | <0.0001* |
|
| b3 | 68.02228 | <0.0001* |
|
| b12 | −219.0295 | <0.0001* |
|
| b13 | −114.8024 | <0.0001* |
|
| b23 | −38.02838 | 0.0015* |
|
| b123 | 359.37738 | 0.0001* |
*p-value less than 0.05 is statistically significant, “1” refers to O. compactum coefficient, “2” referes to O. majorana coefficient and “3” refers to T. serpyllum coefficient.
Figure 2Optimal design regions for the antioxidant effect of the mixtures M1, M2, and M3.
Figure 3An overview of the simplex-centroid design for a three component mixture and point test.
Content of essential oils mixtures.
| Experiment n° | EO1 | EO2 | EO3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 100% | - | - |
| 2 | - | 100% | - |
| 3 | - | - | 100% |
| 4 | 50% | 50% | - |
| 5 | 50% | - | 50% |
| 6 | - | 50% | 50% |
| 7 | 33.3% | 33.3% | 33.3% |