Transcript CompoPOSTER 6 CHEN LUNG HO sition and bioactivities of the

Composition and bioactivities of the leaf
essential oils of Cinnamomum subavenium
Miq. from Taiwan
Chen-Lung Ho1,2 Eugene I-Chen Wang2 Yu-Chang Su1*
1
Department of Forestry, National Chung Hsing University
2 Division of Wood Cellulose, Taiwan Forestry Research Institute
* Corresponding Author
 Initially we used hydrodistillation and headspace-GC
methods to isolate leaf oils and headspace volatiles, and
GC/FID and GC/MS to compare the leaf oil compositions
from 2 different collection sites.
 Fushan Botanical Garden (FSB)
 Lienhuachih Research Center (LHC)
 With regard to the oil yields, we used the multiple
headspace extraction (MHE) of the headspace-GC (HSGC) method to conduct the comparative analysis.
 The second part of the study involved bioactivity analysis,
including antioxidant and antimicrobial activities, for
multi-purpose utilization of the leaf essential oil of C.
subavenium.
Results
 Leaf oil yields
 Hydrodistillation
 MHE
1
0.82
0.8
0.71
0.6
Yield (%)
Yield (%)
1
0.85
0.8
0.74
0.6
FSB
LHC
FSB
LHC
Hydrodistillation and the HS-GC methods gave comparable leaf
essential oil yields.
Results 1
Concentration (%)
Consituents
K.I.
FSB
LHC
Identification
b)
c)
HD
HS
HD
HS
α-pinene
939
0.3
0.2
6.3
6.5
MS, KI, ST
camphene
954
1.1
1.5
MS, KI, ST
f)
β-pinene
979
t
t
2.7
2.9
MS, KI, ST
β-myrcene
979
t
t
1.3
1.3
MS, KI, ST
p-cymene
1025
t
t
21.6
21.7
MS, KI, ST
limonene
1029
5.0
4.9
MS, KI, ST
β-phellandrene
1030
1.0
0.8
MS, KI, ST
1.8-cineole
1031
0.3
0.1
16.5
20.5
MS, KI, ST
linalool
1097
7.3
7.7
11.9
13.7
MS, KI, ST
terpinen-4-ol
1177
t
1.9
1.9
MS, KI, ST
cryptone
1186
3.2
1.2
MS, KI, ST
α-terpineol
1189main 0.2
t
3.0
 HS-GC yielded
components
similar
to3.1
thoseMS,
of KI,
theST
methyl chavicol
1196
2.6
3.0
MS, KI, ST
cuminhydrodistillation
aldehyde
1242 results.
1.1
0.9
MS, KI, ST
thymol
1290
2.2
2.1
MS, KI, ST
eugenol
1359
6.6
6.3
MS, KI, ST
methyl eugenol
1404
75.9
78.7
MS, KI, ST
caryophyllene
1583
1.1
1.0
6.2
6.6
MS, KI, ST
oxide
Yield (%).
0.71
0.74
0.82
0.85
a)
d)
Results 2
 DPPH photometric assay
Scavenging capacity (%)
Scavenging capacity (%)
100
80
Both leaf essential oils had excellent
antioxidant activities
FSB essential oil having the best free
radical scavenging capacity, and an IC50
value of merely 29.50 μg/mL
10060
80
6040
40
2020
0
00
500
0
250
1000
1500
2000
Concentration
500 (ug/ml)
750
1000
Concentration (ug/ml)
Fu-shan
Lien-huwan pool
ascorbic acid
methyl eugenol
eugenol
1,8-cineole
p-cymene
thymol
carvacrol
Results 3
 Disk-diffusion method
 FSB leaf oil
 LHC leaf oil
B. cereus
B. cereus
60
60
C. albicans
40
S. aureus
C. albicans
20
V. parahaemolyticus
40
20
S. epidermidis V. parahaemolyticus
S. epidermidis
0
P. aeruginosa
K. pneumoniae
0
E. coli
Ent. aerogenes
P. aeruginosa
K. pneumoniae
Both leaf essential oils had excellent
antimicrobial activity as well.
The FSB sample had the best
activity. zone in diameter (mm)
X and Y axissuppression
represent inhibition
10 μl/disc
S. aureus
Ampicillin 1000 ppm
E. coli
Ent. aerogenes
Penicillin 1000 ppm
Conclusion
 Both leaf oils had the best bioactivities. We determined
that the main sources of bioactivity were phenolic
compounds, such as eugenol, thymol, and carvacrol.