| Literature DB >> 35567209 |
Antonello Paparella1, Bhagwat Nawade2, Liora Shaltiel-Harpaz3,4, Mwafaq Ibdah2.
Abstract
Laurus nobilis L. is an aromatic medicinal plant widely cultivated in many world regions. L. nobilis has been increasingly acknowledged over the years as it provides an essential contribution to the food and pharmaceutical industries and cultural integrity. The commercial value of this species derives from its essential oil, whose application might be extended to various industries. The chemical composition of the essential oil depends on environmental conditions, location, and season during which the plants are collected, drying methods, extraction, and analytical conditions. The characterization and chemotyping of L. nobilis essential oil are extremely important because the changes in composition can affect biological activities. Several aspects of the plant's secondary metabolism, particularly volatile production in L. nobilis, are still unknown. However, understanding the molecular basis of flavor and aroma production is not an easy task to accomplish. Nevertheless, the time-limited efforts for conservation and the unavailability of knowledge about genetic diversity are probably the major reasons for the lack of breeding programs in L. nobilis. The present review gathers the scientific evidence on the research carried out on Laurus nobilis L., considering its cultivation, volatile composition, biochemical and molecular aspects, and antioxidant and antimicrobial activities.Entities:
Keywords: Laurus nobilis; bay; biochemical; essential oil; traditional uses
Year: 2022 PMID: 35567209 PMCID: PMC9100900 DOI: 10.3390/plants11091209
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1Distribution of L. nobilis L. Source-FAO.
Figure 2Variation in leaf morphology of some of the L. nobilis L. cultivars. Source: https://sierplant.be/soorten/ (accessed on 3 April 2022).
Salient features of selected bay cultivars.
| Cultivar Name | Main Features | Common Name |
|---|---|---|
|
| Blades much narrower, usually lanceolate to oblanceolate. Leaves are a lighter or brighter green than typical species. | Willow-leaved laural |
|
| Golden yellow foliage, brightest in winter and spring, and dense clusters of small, greenish-yellow male flowers in spring | Golden bay |
|
| In old literature, | |
|
| Compact and slower growth habitat grows more slowly with a smaller leaf but produces very full, dense foliage-medium-wide elliptic leaves. | |
|
| The cold-resistant cultivar produces fewer or no flowers | |
|
| Elongated, narrower leaf with a thinner blade; fruits more spherical large to ca. 1/2 inch. | Borzis bay |
|
| Stem is often reddish in new shoots, contrasting and showy at times. Leaves are bright yellow, faintly tinged red on margins at young later yellowish-green. | |
|
| Fast-growing—can grow to 8 feet tall in 3 years and is hardy tolerating as low as −4 F, deep green foliage | |
|
| Mottled and sectored leaf with narrow elliptic to linear-elliptic blade much as ‘Angustifolia’ with chimera | |
|
| Leaf margin distinctly undulate, egg-shaped fruits, low shrub seldom higher than 4 to 6 feet. | Wavy-leaved bay |
|
| Leaves are fairly wide and ovate; cylindrical fruits. | Cylinder-fruited bay |
|
| Shorter in height, darker, blackish-green leaves and their margins are crisped and imbricated. | |
|
| Leaves are uniformly green, and fruits are green-tinged red with large sizes. | |
|
| Wavy-edged, emerald green leaves; slender, upright form grows slowly and gracefully into a small pyramidal tree, ideal for topiary. | |
|
| Very large, wide, toothed leaves resemble Eriobotrya. | Loquat-leaved bay |
|
| Cold hardy cultivar. | |
|
| A double-flowered version of the broad-leaved Dutch myrtle. | Double-flowered bay |
|
| More glaucous or bluish (waxy) leaves. | Glaucous-leaved bay |
|
| Slightly undulate classic bay leaf with white midrib. | |
|
| Larger fruit diameter than average. | |
|
| Leaves irregularly margined white to cream and with a thin margin, irregularly twisted and very asymmetrical. | |
|
| Origin–Israel, leaves are slightly wavy on the edges. | |
|
| Leaves are broad and smooth, less hardy than most other varieties, native to Spain, Italy, and Asia. | Broad-leaved bay |
|
| Privet-shaped leaves. | Privet-leaved bay |
|
| A more compact sweet bay with highly aromatic, deep green foliage that emerges on unique red-tinged stems. Fabulous fragrance. | |
|
| Much larger fruit diameter. | Large-fruited bay |
|
| Tall plants, leaves are rounded apex, tapering to base, stout while fruits are globular, large, ca. 1/2 inch. | Large bay |
|
| Small fruit diameter. | |
|
| Leaves mottled and sectored white to 35%. | |
|
| Flowers in multiples or numerous. | Many-flowered bay |
|
| Very large blade and the blades are more flaccid. Leaves are a whitish hue. It is named for its use in cakes called mustaceum. | Mustaceum |
|
| Roots are hardy to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. | Nancy Howard bay |
|
| Fruits are more olive-shaped. | Olive-fruited bay |
|
| Distinctly oval-shaped leaf. | Oval-leaved bay |
|
| Leaves are yellow-green; fruits have reddish, shrubby growth. | |
|
| Small leaves; French origin Caribbean. | Small-leaved bay |
|
| Flowers are more pedunculate. | Pedunculate-flowered bay |
|
| Narrowly pyramidal tree with shorter internodes and compact for small spaces. | |
|
| Compact growing bay tree with lush dark green shiny foliage; shorter internodes, requiring little or no trimming. | Hedge bay laurel |
|
| Leaves are wide, mostly round. | Round-leaved bay |
|
| Red-veined leaves. | Red-veined bay |
|
| Narrow lance-shaped leaves are not as thick as the normal variety, have a lighter green color, shrubby growth (1.8 to 2.4 m); Mostly confused in nursery trade with ‘Angustifolia.’ | Willow-leaf bay |
|
| Leaves are thick, dark green; shrubby growth | |
|
| Leaves are small, polished, spherical fruits. | Ball-fruited bay |
|
| Gold-variegated foliage. | Sunspot sweet bay |
|
| gold-striped bay |
Along with these cultivars, many cultivars and/or genotypes have been enlisted in the literature, but detailed information is not available for them.
Figure 3Representative terpenoids biosynthesized by bay (Laurus nobilis L.). (A) Bay leaf terpenoids; (B) Bay fruit erpenoids. (C) Bayroot erpenoid; (D) Bayflower erpenoid.
Variation in the major volatile composition from essential oils (%) of bay plant parts from different geographic regions.
| Leaves | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Location | 1,8–Cineole | Sabinene | Linalool | Methyl Eugenol | Eugenol | Camphene | Reference | ||||
| Albania | 26.70 | 11.80 | 12.00 | 2.20 | 18.50 | 2.50 | 2.40 | 6.50 | 0.20 | 1.20 | [ |
| Algeria | 17.6–44.13 | 2.20–9.60 | 7.90–17.33 | 0.90–9.20 | 4.18–12.57 | 5.10–11.0 | 0.80–3.80 | 1.20–3.60 | 0.20–8.91 | 2.58–7.6 | [ |
| Argentina | 37.3–43.8 | 8.4 | 7.9–10.6 | 4.8 | 12.7–19.4 | 3.0–3.6 | 3.5–20.1 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 2.2–2.8 | [ |
| Brazil | 26.9–37.3 | 10–4−13.7 | 15.3–17.4 | 8.9–10.9 | 0.4–0.6 | 0.71–0.72 | - | 0.39 | 0.44–0.51 | 0.04 | [ |
| Bulgaria | 41.0 | 8.8 | 14.4 | 2.56 | 4.92 | 6.0 | 2.45 | 1.47 | 0.18 | 3.11 | [ |
| China | 25.5–43.0 | 2.1–6.8 | 9.5–18.0 | 1.0–5.2 | 4.4–22.7 | 1.7–8.9 | 1.0–4.4 | 1.4–2.4 | 0.2 | 1.5–2.5 | |
| Colombia | 22.0 | 1.5 | 11.1 | 2.9 | 16.4 | 2.9 | 6.1 | 2.0 | 0.1 | 4.9 | |
| Croatia | 45.5 | 5.7 | 9.1 | 2.1 | 8.5 | 10.0 | -- | 2.5 | -- | 1.5 | [ |
| France | 39.1 | 4.4 | 18.2 | 2.2 | 10.0 | 11.8 | 1.7 | -- | 0.2 | 1.3 | [ |
| Germany | 23.3 | 5.3 | 9.8 | 4.6 | 2.0 | 3.5 | 4.0 | 2.9 | 0.7 | 3.3 | [ |
| Greece | 49.60 | 7.80 | 5.25 | 5.96 | 1.50 | 2.10 | 5.12 | 5.60 | 1.21 | 1.90 | [ |
| India | 0.27–3.31 | 0.22 | -- | 1.37–7.68 | 29.08–50.68 | 1.00 | 0.71–1.52 | 63.57 | 0.26–1.14 | 0.39–0.60 | [ |
| Iran | 25.7–61.0 | 2.33–8.7 | 6.14–15.14 | 2.35–6.59 | 1.40–3.96 | 3.08–5.18 | 1.40–4.6 | 0.4–2.88 | 0.27–10.22 | 0.69–3.88 | [ |
| Israel * | 1698.2–2549.7 | 168.8–277.1 | 255.6–482.3 | 58.6–77.6 | 106.7–151.5 | 36.8–40.2 | 37.2–69.2 | 7.5–11.8 | 4.2–4.5 | 184.5–233.1 | |
| Italy | 22.84–35.70 | 4.30–6.50 | 4.43–14.23 | 2.6–5.72 | 7.08–19.47 | 2.52–16.22 | 2.40–3.46 | 1.6–5.97 | 0.14–0.30 | 2.42–6.44 | [ |
| Jordan | 36.80–40.91 | 3.10–6.92 | 5.86–14.6 | 4.60–5.82 | 1.29–2.60 | 1.62–4.20 | 3.60–4.55 | 0.92 | 0.50–0.58 | -- | [ |
| Morocco | 35.62–58.88 | 0.42–6.13 | 0.45–8.96 | 3.72–4.58 | 1.98–9.45 | 1.70–3.93 | 1.92–3.14 | 0.56–1.97 | 0.5–4.87 | 1.56–5.83 | [ |
| Lebanon | 57.05–65.99 | 4.06–9.74 | -- | 2.14–6.03 | 0.51–0.75 | -- | 2.51–4.17 | -- | 0.14–0.17 | 2.90–3.64 | |
| Nepal | 1.64–26.64 | 0.26–0.43 | -- | 2.05–6.70 | 28.97–72.67 | -- | 1.17–3.03 | 0.21–0.23 | 0.49–1.68 | 0.37–3.05 | [ |
| Portugal | -- | 4.00 | 10.20 | 2.3 | 8.4 | 5.4 | 1.8 | 1.2 | 0.1 | 2.7 | [ |
| Turkey | 46.61–72.09 | 4.44–14.05 | 4.04–25.70 | 2.19–6.11 | 0.37–1.9 | 0.41–3.39 | 2.58–3.91 | 0.40–1.55 | 0.19–0.67 | 0.95–6.83 | [ |
| Spain | 33.28–43.56 | 2.48–5.80 | 6.0–11.75 | 0.85–11.6 | 6.50–26.70 | 3.12–4.64 | 3.47–4.90 | 1.23–3.00 | 0.7–1.06 | 0.9–4.95 | [ |
| Serbia | 15.54–41.86 | 0.55–9.12 | 5.49–24.74 | 0.12–7.20 | 1.81–16.00 | 5.32–8.67 | 0.16–5.23 | 1.07–6.14 | 0.06–0.83 | 1.65–4.28 | [ |
| Syria | 58.66–73.70 | 3.56–8.89 | -- | 2.62–3.85 | 0.32–0.97 | -- | 2.66–3.25 | -- | 0.05–0.27 | 1.12–3.50 | [ |
| Fruit | |||||||||||
| Location | 1,8–Cineole | Sabinene | ( | Camphene | Germacrene-A | Reference | |||||
| Bulgaria | 33.33 | 6.30 | 10.30 | 11.01 | 0.72 | 5.18 | 0.28 | 7.45 | 4.33 | [ | |
| Turkey | 9.50–20.45 | 1.70–6.03 | 1.20–4.88 | 3.3–16.55 | 11.88–28.35 | 10.58–15.87 | 2.1–12.83 | 2.0–4.46 | 0.80–2.08 | 0.80–4.35 | [ |
| Jordan | 29.8 | 4.4 | 1.2 | 10.9 | 3.2 | 9.0 | 8.4 | 6.2 | 1.3 | 0.2 | [ |
| Lebanon | 17.64–48.01 | 2.93−4.49 | 0.87–2.07 | 7.69–17.96 | 0.57–11.82 | 8.29–17.07 | 3.91–9.51 | - | 1.08–2.61 | - | |
| Iran | 14.4–46.7 | 5.4 | 5.8.5 | 2.8–6.6 | 20.8–22.1 | 4.7 | 5.1–7.3 | 2.1–3.5 | [ | ||
| Tunisia | 8.1–8.8 | 1.8–2.6 | 3.0–3.8 | 8.0–10.3 | 20.9–23.7 | 4.2–5.8 | 2.6–3.8 | [ | |||
| Israel * | 800.0–1278.5 | 97.6–103.1 | 312.4–340.1 | 1262.9–1284.6 | 204.7–212.6 | 228.5–242.0 | 411.8–373.1 | 53.2–55.5 | 904.2–1012.9 | ||
| Flower | |||||||||||
| Location | 1,8–Cineole | Sabinene | ( | Linalool | Bornyl acetate | Reference | |||||
| Turkey | 8.8 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 5.1 | 2.7 | - | 3.7 | 5.4 | 2.1 | 5.1 | [ |
| Italy | 7.9–42.8 | 0.5–6.0 | 0.3–12.0 | 0.9–3.8 | 0.1–65.3 | 0.6–14.4 | 0.4–2.9 | 0.1–5.3 | 0.1–0.6 | 0.1–15.4 | [ |
| Morocco | 45.01 | 3.01 | 0.1 | 3.04 | - | 1.04 | 3.01 | - | 0.25 | 0.42 | [ |
| Israel * | 1186.4–3526.1 | 328.5–344.1 | 1314.4 | 278.7–452.1 | 1046. | 346.7 | 401.4 | 421.0–498.1 | 1019.7 | 1715.1 | |
* Concentration in ng g−1 of fresh weight.
Comparative studies of improved extraction methods and their effect on volatile composition in Laurus nobilis.
| Sample Number | Extraction Method | Features/Treatment | Effect on Volatiles Composition | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Enzyme assisted extraction | Pre-treatment with cellulase, hemicellulase, xylanase for 1 h at 40 °C | Increase in 1,8-cineole, methyl eugenol, terpinen-4-ol, | [ |
| 2 | Simultaneous distillation extraction (SDE) | Extraction for 2 h in dichloromethane using microscale simultaneous distillation apparatus | More hydrocarbon monoterpenes (15.7%) as with from SPME (3.6%) | [ |
| 3 | Solid-phase microextraction (SPME) | Adsorption in headspace using dimethylsiloxane | Oxygen terpenes (95.7%) as compared with SDE (83.4%) | [ |
| Sample 3 mg instead of | Identified 98 different volatiles | [ | ||
| 4 | Supercritical carbon dioxide (SFE) | Pressure, 100 bar; temperature, 40 °C; and CO2 flow, φ 0.3 kg/h; time, 1.4 h | Two times less monoterpene hydrocarbons and oxygenated monoterpenes (43.89%) in comparison to HD (98.4%). | [ |
| Pressure, 100/250 bar; temperature, 40/50 °C; and CO2 flow, φ 1.629 dm3/min; time, 3 h | 100 bar/40 °C and 250 bar/40 °C had the highest amount of 1, 8-cineole, but at 100 bar/60 °C, | [ | ||
| Pressure, 90 bar; temperature, 50 °C; and CO2 flow, φ 1.0 kg/h. | Monoterpenes were extracted in shorter times than sesquiterpenes | [ | ||
| Pressure, 80 bar; temperature, 40 °C and 50 °C; and CO2 flow, φ 1 mL/min; time, 20 min. | A decrease in monoterpene hydrocarbons (6.8–5.1%) in comparison to hydro–(19.5%) and steam (16.5%) distilled oils | [ | ||
| 5 | Solvent-Free Microwave Extraction (SFME) | Power, 850 W for 30 min | 1,8-cineole, linalool, eugenol and Methyl eugenol content increased | [ |
| Power, 300, 600, and 900 W for 20 min | Oxide volatile organic compound reduced in comparison to HD. The highest 1,8-cineole (72%) content at 300 W | [ | ||
| Power, 622 and 249 W for 1 h | No significant differences in volatiles by SFME and HD but 55–60% time was reduced by SFME | [ | ||
| Power, 200, 300 W and pulsed microwaves system for 1 h | Higher amounts of oxygenated compounds and lower amounts of monoterpenes | [ | ||
| 6 | Optimum ohmic heating assisted hydrodistillation (OAHD) | 120 min, 8.53 V/cm, and 40 g | EO yield of OAHD was found to be higher when compared with HD methods | [ |