| Literature DB >> 35745654 |
Zenon Węglarz1, Olga Kosakowska1, Ewelina Pióro-Jabrucka1, Jarosław L Przybył1, Małgorzata Gniewosz2, Karolina Kraśniewska2, Marek S Szyndel3, Rosaria Costa4, Katarzyna Barbara Bączek1.
Abstract
Helichrysum italicum (Roth) G. Don. is one of the most important cosmetic and medicinal plants originating from the Mediterranean region of Europe. The aim of this study was to assess the chemical profile as well as antioxidant and antibacterial potential of the species cultivated in the temperate climate of Central Europe. The analyses were carried out using herbs and inflorescences. The content of essential oil ranged from 0.25 g × 100 g-1 in the herb to 0.31 g × 100 g-1 in the inflorescences. Neryl acetate, accompanied by α-pinene in the herb (10.42%), and nerol in inflorescences (15.73%) were the dominants here. Rutoside, as well as rosmarinic, chlorogenic, neochlorogenic, isochlorogenic b and cichoric acids, were detected in both raw materials using HPLC-DAD. Within this group, cichoric acid was the dominant (2647.90 mg × 100 g-1 in the herb, 1381.06 mg × 100 g-1 in the inflorescences). The herb appeared to be more abundant in phenolics in comparison with the inflorescences. When given antioxidant activity (determined using DPPH and ABTS assays), both methanolic extract and essential oil obtained from the herb indicated higher potential than those originating from the inflorescences (74.72, 61.38 and 63.81, 58.59% in the case of DPPH, respectively). In turn, regarding antimicrobial activity, the essential oil from inflorescences was distinguished by stronger bacteriostatic power than the herb essential oil. Gram-positive bacteria were more sensitive to both essential oils in comparison with Gram-negative ones, with S. aureus ATCC 25923 as the most susceptible (MIC 1; MBC 16 mg × mL-1) among tested strains.Entities:
Keywords: Helichrysum italicum; antibacterial activity; antioxidant activity; cultivation; essential oils; herb; inflorescences; phenolic compounds
Year: 2022 PMID: 35745654 PMCID: PMC9227552 DOI: 10.3390/ph15060735
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8247
Morphological traits and the mass of the plants.
| Investigated Traits | |
|---|---|
| Plant height (cm) | 47.5 ± 3.9 |
| Number of flowering shoots per plant | 236.1 ± 31.2 |
| Plant diameter (cm) | 92.4 ± 8.1 |
| Fresh weight of herb (g × plant−1) | 438.5 ± 32.3 |
| Dry weight of herb (g × plant−1) | 167.5 ± 30.4 |
| Fresh weight of inflorescences (g × plant−1) | 141.3 ± 28.4 |
| Dry weight of inflorescences (g × plant−1) | 54.8 ± 6.4 |
The content (g × 100 g−1) and chemical composition (% area) of essential oils.
| No | Compound | RI a | RI b Range | Herb | Inflorescences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Essential oil content | 0.25 | 0.31 | |||
| 1 | α-pinene | 1029 | 1008–1039 | 10.42 | 4.05 |
| 2 | camphene | 1074 | 1043–1086 | 0.28 | 0.06 |
| 3 | β-pinene | 1112 | 1085–1130 | 0.10 | 0.08 |
| 4 | δ-3-carene | 1150 | 1122–1169 | 0.18 | 0.25 |
| 5 | α-terpinene | 1185 | 1154–1195 | 0.06 | 0.12 |
| 6 | limonene | 1204 | 1178–1219 | 2.17 | 0.82 |
| 7 | eucalyptol | 1214 | 1186–1231 | 0.30 | 0.82 |
| 8 | p-cymene | 1275 | 1246–1291 | 0.40 | 0.44 |
| 9 | terpinolene | 1284 | 1361–1300 | 0.19 | 0.15 |
| 10 | 3-methyl-2-butenoic acid | - | - | 0.16 | 0.55 |
| 11 | α-copaene | 1495 | 1462–1522 | 0.16 | 1.01 |
| 12 | β-cubebene | 1538 | 1518–1560 | 1.87 | 1.12 |
| 13 | linalool | 1542 | 1507–1564 | 0.49 | 2.25 |
| 14 | cis-α-bergamotene | 1559 | 1534–1580 | 0.38 | 1.03 |
| 15 | (E)-caryophyllene | 1594 | 1570–1685 | 4.06 | 4.50 |
| 16 | α-humulene | 1659 | 1637–1689 | 0.00 | 0.09 |
| 17 | italicene | - | - | 6.89 | 7.25 |
| 18 | neral | 1678 | 1641–1706 | 2.42 | 1.91 |
| 19 | β-selinene | 1711 | 1686–1743 | 8.20 | 4.63 |
| 20 | neryl acetate | 1721 | 1693–1740 | 20.27 | 16.38 |
| 21 | α-selinene | 1726 | 1696–1748 | 9.05 | 5.27 |
| 22 | ar curcumene | 1775 | 1743–1788 | 3.43 | 3.82 |
| 23 | α-cadinene | 1794 | 1734–1803 | 0.00 | 0.84 |
| 24 | nerol | 1797 | 1752–1832 | 4.49 | 15.73 |
| 25 | geraniol | 1814 | 1795–1865 | 6.80 | 6.32 |
| 26 | guaiol | 2088 | 2061–2104 | 1.07 | 1.40 |
| 27 | rosifoliol | - | - | 3.82 | 6.40 |
| 28 | humulane-1.6-dien-3-ol | - | - | 0.70 | 0.52 |
| 29 | α-eudesmol | 2221 | 2186–2250 | 1.13 | 1.08 |
| 30 | cubenol | 2063 | 2026–2090 | 0.00 | 1.62 |
| 31 | β-eudesmol | 2235 | 2196–2272 | 0.37 | 0.50 |
| 32 | carvacrol | 2210 | 2140–2246 | 2.41 | 1.88 |
| 33 | selinen-4-α-ol | 2251 | 2207–2274 | 2.44 | 1.86 |
| Total: | 94.71 | 94.75 | |||
| Monoterpene hydrocarbons | 13.40 | 5.53 | |||
| Oxygenated monoterpenes | 34.77 | 43.41 | |||
| Sesquiterpene hydrocarbons | 34.04 | 29.56 | |||
| Oxygenated sesquiterpenes | 9.53 | 13.38 | |||
| Others | 2.97 | 2.87 | |||
a RI—experimental retention index on polar Omegawax® column. b RI—range of retention indexes on polar column reported in the literature (Refer to Section 2.5 for more details).
The total content of phenolics (g × 100 g−1 DW).
| No | Group of Compounds | Herb | Inflorescences |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Flavonoids | 0.19 ± 0.02 * | 0.15 ± 0.01 |
| 2 | Phenolic acids | 1.40 ± 0.11 * | 0.88 ± 0.05 |
| 3 | Tannins | 0.18 ± 0.01 | 0.28 ± 0.02 * |
* p < 0.05.
The content of detected phenolic compounds (mg × 100 g−1 DW).
| No | Compound | Herb | Inflorescences |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flavonoids | |||
| 1 | Rutoside | 191.23 ± 6.50 * | 24.30 ± 12.99 |
| Phenolic acids | |||
| 2 | Caffeic acid | 41.71 ± 1.17 * | 27.26 ± 1.15 |
| 3 | Rosmarinic acid | 53.39 ± 7.76 | 64.48 ± 7.87 |
| 4 | Chlorogenic acid | 338.81 ± 7.32 * | 142.94 ± 6.56 |
| 5 | Neochlorogenic acid | 85.83 ± 3.38 | 59.41 ± 1.22 |
| 6 | Isochlorogenic acid b | 435.10 ± 7.49 * | 162.61 ± 6.58 |
| 7 | Cichoric acid | 2647.90 ± 62.20 * | 1381.06 ± 31.77 |
| Sum | 3793.96 * | 1862.04 | |
* p < 0.05.
Figure 1Chromatograms of H. italicum herb (a) and inflorescences (b) methanolic extracts.
Figure 2Chemical structures of identified phenolic compounds: (1) rutoside; (2) caffeic acid; (3) rosmarinic acid; (4) chlorogenic acid; (5) neochlorogenic acid; (6) isochlorogenic acid b; (7) cichoric acid.
Antioxidant activity of essential oils and methanolic extracts (% RSC).
| Method | Essential Oils | Methanolic Extracts | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Herb | Inflorescences | Herb | Inflorescences | |
| DPPH | 61.38 ± 0.54 | 58.59 ± 0.73 | 74.72 ± 0.77 | 63.81 ± 0.30 |
| ABTS | 67.78 ± 0.31 | 60.53 ± 0.65 | 81.96 ± 0.38 | 72.48 ± 0.41 |
MIC and MBC values of essential oils (mg × mL−1).
| Bacteria Strains | Herb | Inflorescences | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIC | MBC | MIC | MBC | |
| 32 | ˃64 | 64 | ˃64 | |
| 32 | ˃64 | 64 | ˃64 | |
| 4 | 16 | 1 | 16 | |
| 8 | 32 | 4 | 32 | |
Climatic parameters.
| Month | Year | Min. Temperature | Max. Temperature | Rainfall | Air Humidity | Sun Days | Sun Hours |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| January | 2018 | −1 | 2 | 35.5 | 80 | 11 | 191 |
| 2019 | −4 | 0 | 65.1 | 85 | 7 | 137 | |
| February | 2018 | −4 | −1 | 18.5 | 74 | 13 | 156 |
| 2019 | 0 | 5 | 27.3 | 80 | 14 | 218 | |
| March | 2018 | −2 | 4 | 29.8 | 74 | 10 | 173 |
| 2019 | 3 | 10 | 42.1 | 68 | 8 | 239 | |
| April | 2018 | 8 | 19 | 26.9 | 67 | 14 | 315 |
| 2019 | 6 | 16 | 26.3 | 59 | 19 | 318 | |
| May | 2018 | 12 | 23 | 110.7 | 68 | 11 | 350 |
| 2019 | 9 | 18 | 14.6 | 74 | 4 | 275 | |
| June | 2018 | 13 | 24 | 72.2 | 65 | 5 | 327 |
| 2019 | 16 | 27 | 73.0 | 70 | 9 | 357 | |
| July | 2018 | 16 | 26 | 165.5 | 70 | 3 | 344 |
| 2019 | 13 | 22 | 102.9 | 74 | 3 | 314 | |
| August | 2018 | 16 | 27 | 56.1 | 63 | 14 | 349 |
| 2019 | 15 | 25 | 66.2 | 66 | 8 | 352 | |
| September | 2018 | 12 | 22 | 67.4 | 68 | 17 | 323 |
| 2019 | 11 | 19 | 78.5 | 71 | 12 | 274 | |
| October | 2018 | 8 | 16 | 50.1 | 68 | 20 | 292 |
| 2019 | 9 | 16 | 31.4 | 73 | 18 | 316 | |
| November | 2018 | 3 | 8 | 19.3 | 77 | 21 | 280 |
| 2019 | 4 | 9 | 34.8 | 78 | 16 | 269 | |
| December | 2018 | −1 | 3 | 73.5 | 86 | 5 | 131 |
| 2019 | 2 | 5 | 48.3 | 80 | 10 | 188 |
Soil parameters.
| pH | NO3− | NH4+ | P2O5 | K2O | Mg | Organic Matter |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.05 | 75 | 23 | 21.9 | 95.0 | 21.9 | 2.71 |
Figure 3Field experiment overview (a) and flowering plants of H. italicum (b).
Figure 4Raw materials from H. italicum: herb (a), inflorescences (b).
HPLC-DAD validation parameters (n = 6).
| No. | Compound | Precision Intra-Day | Precision Inter-Day | Calibration Equation | R2
| Linear Range | LOD | LOQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rutoside | 0.37 | 0.86 | 0.9999 | 0.90–90.67 | 74.6 | 248.8 | |
| 2 | Caffeic acid | 1.00 | 1.72 | 0.9996 | 1.00–998.40 | 2.50 | 8.32 | |
| 3 | Rosmarinic acid | 1.24 | 2.12 | 0.9999 | 0.43–434.02 | 3.20 | 9.82 | |
| 4 | Chlorogenic acid | 1.32 | 1.63 | 0.9997 | 0.40–39.47 | 20.97 | 69.90 | |
| 5 | Neochlorogenic acid | 0.27 | 0.78 | 0.9999 | 0.39–392.0 | 18.39 | 61.31 | |
| 6 | Isochlorogenic acid b | 0.81 | 1.23 | 0.9994 | 0.19–190.00 | 9.56 | 31.87 | |
| 7 | Cichoric acid | 0.18 | 0.49 | 0.9998 | 0.46–456.96 | 11.47 | 38.23 |