Subscriber access provided by UCL Library Services
Article
Biological and non-biological antioxidant activity of some essential oils. Renato Pérez-Rosés, Ester Risco, Roser Vila, Pedro Peñalver, and Salvador Canigueral J. Agric. Food Chem., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.6b00986 • Publication Date (Web): 23 May 2016 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on May 27, 2016
Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.
Page 1 of 36
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
1 2 3
Biological and non-biological antioxidant activity of some essential oils
4 5
Renato Pérez-Rosés a, Ester Risco a,b, 1, Roser Vila a, Pedro Peñalver c
6
and Salvador Cañigueral a,*
7 8
a
9
Unitat de Farmacologia, Farmacognòsia i Terapèutica, Facultat de Farmàcia, Universitat de Barcelona. Av. Joan XXIII, 27-31. E-08028 Barcelona, Spain.
10
b
Phytonexus, S.L. Na Jordana, 11. E-46240 Carlet (València), Spain.
11
c
Lidervet, S.L. Plaça García Lorca, 17, Baixos. E-43006 Tarragona, Spain.
12 13 14
E-mail addresses of all contributing authors: Author
e-mail
Renato Pérez-Rosés
[email protected] Ester Risco
[email protected] Roser Vila
[email protected] Pedro Peñalver
[email protected] Salvador Cañigueral*
[email protected] 15 16 17
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 934024531; Fax: +34 934035982. E-mail address:
18
[email protected] (S. Cañigueral)
19
1
Present address: Phytonexus, S.L.
20 21
ACS Paragon Plus 1 Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
22
Abstract
23
Fifteen essential oils, four essential oil fractions and three pure compounds (thymol,
24
carvacrol and eugenol), characterized by gas chromatography (GC) and gas
25
chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS), were investigated for biological and
26
non-biological antioxidant activity. Clove oil and eugenol showed strong DPPH (2,2-
27
diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl) free-radical scavenging activity (IC50 = 13.2 µg/mL and
28
11.7 µg/mL, respectively) and powerfully inhibited reactive oxygen species (ROS)
29
production in neutrophils stimulated by PMA (phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate) (IC50 =
30
7.5 µg/mL and 1.6 µg/mL) or H2O2 (IC50 = 22.6 µg/mL and 27.1 µg/mL). Nutmeg,
31
ginger and palmarosa oils were also highly active on this test.
32
Essential oils from clove and ginger, as well as eugenol, carvacrol and bornyl acetate
33
inhibited NO (nitric oxide) production (IC50 < 50.0 µg/mL). The oils of clove, red
34
thyme and Spanish oregano, together with eugenol, thymol and carvacrol showed the
35
highest myeloperoxidase (MPO) inhibitory activity. Isomers carvacrol and thymol
36
displayed a disparate behaviour in some tests. All in all, clove oil and eugenol offered
37
the best antioxidant profile.
38 39
Keywords: essential oils, clove oil, eugenol, antioxidant, DPPH, ROS, flow cytometry,
40
NO, myeloperoxidase.
41 42
Introduction
43
Aromatic plants have been used since ancient times for their preservative and medicinal
44
properties, as well as aromatising and flavouring agents for food. These properties are,
45
at least in part, attributed to the essential oils, which are complex mixtures of volatile
46
compounds, mainly terpenes, in addition to some other non-terpene substances, such as
ACS Paragon Plus 2 Environment
Page 2 of 36
Page 3 of 36
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
47
phenylpropanoids. Modern society looks at food not only for the basic nutrition it
48
provides but also for the health benefits it brings about. The latter is coupled with a
49
clear trend in consumer preference for natural food ingredients and additives, which are
50
perceived to be healthy, with names that are familiar to the consumer.1 Essential oils fit
51
perfectly into this trend, they are reservoirs of bioactive compounds and they are aligned
52
with current consumer preference for natural products.2
53
Essential oils have shown good antibacterial and antifungal properties useful against
54
infectious diseases in humans and animals. In addition, essential oils are also active
55
against the more serious foodborne pathogens such as Salmonella spp., E. Coli and
56
Listeria monocytogenes.3,4 Essential oils also act along the animal digestive tract to
57
improve appetite and digestion, and are able to modulate the intestinal microbiota. One
58
advantage of essential oils is that they occur in nature as complex mixtures, hence
59
microorganism resistance is less likely to become a problem than with single synthetic
60
compounds.5
61
Due to human health and safety concerns, the European Union (EU) banned the use of
62
all antibiotics as animal growth promoters in EU member states since the beginning of
63
2006. Proposed alternatives include essential oils.6 Nevertheless, its mechanism of
64
action, which goes beyond its antibacterial activity, is only partially known. In
65
particular, immunomodulatory and antioxidant activities may also be relevant.7
66
Essential oils can act as immune enhancers and, consequently, support gut health of
67
farm animals raised in an antibiotic-free production environment. For example,
68
supplementing certain essential oils to piglets improved their immune status after
69
weaning, as indicated by the increase in lymphocyte proliferation rate, phagocytosis
70
rate, as well as IgG, IgA, IgM, C3 and C4 serum levels.8
ACS Paragon Plus 3 Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
71
Antioxidant activity has been described in several essential oils and it has been recently
72
reviewed.9,10 This property can contribute to food and feed preservation. In addition, the
73
use of antioxidant essential oils as additives in feedstuffs for farm animals may be
74
relevant for product quality: essential oils may improve the dietary value and lead to a
75
better oxidative stability and longer shelf-life of fat, meat and eggs.5
76
Moreover, the antioxidant activity of essential oils may play a role in the prevention of
77
some diseases, such as brain dysfunction, heart disease and immune system decline.
78
Increasing evidence has suggested that these diseases may result from cellular damage
79
caused by free radicals.10 In addition, reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reactive
80
nitrogen species (RNS) play important roles in inflammation as messenger molecules.
81
Thus, essential oils can also act as anti-inflammatory agents.10,11
82
The in vitro evaluation of the antioxidant activity of the essential oils can be done using
83
two main types of assays:12 those mainly related to the chemical properties of the
84
constituents, usually called non-biological, and those known as biological tests,
85
performed on a biological substratum, such as cells or enzymes. One of the best known
86
in the former group is the assay on the radical 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH).
87
In the group of biological tests, the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) or
88
reactive nitrogen species (RNS) at cellular level, or the activity of enzymes, such as
89
glutathione reductase, glutathione peroxidase, Nitric oxide (NO) synthase or
90
myeloperoxidase (MPO), are usually assessed. The information obtained from the two
91
types of tests is different, but complementary.
92
In the literature on in vitro antioxidant activity of essential oils, the number of published
93
studies varies greatly depending on the assay concerned. For example, there are a great
94
number of papers using the DPPH assay. They show that the essential oil constituents
95
having the highest activity are phenols, either terpenic or phenylpropanoid.9
ACS Paragon Plus 4 Environment
Page 4 of 36
Page 5 of 36
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
96
On the contrary, published literature that examines essential oil effects on ROS
97
production by flow cytometry assays in living cells is scarce. Only the essential oils of
98
Melaleuca alternifolia and threes species of Cymbopogon have been studied. Results
99
showed antioxidant activity in stimulated human leukocytes for the former.
100
Nevertheless, also prooxidant activity can be observed, either when using unstimulated
101
cells, in the case of M. alternifolia, or at high concentrations in the oils of Cymbopogon
102
winterianus and C. citratus (1000 µg/mL or higher, human lymphocytes).13,14
103
The number essential oils investigated for their activity on leukocyte NO production is
104
limited, and none of the oils studied here has been previously studied. However, the
105
activity for some of their constituents has been described, such is the case of eugenol,
106
carvacrol, thymol, linalool, sabinene, limonene, and bornyl acetate.15-19
107
Links between essential oils or their constituents and MPO activity have been somehow
108
explored in several in vivo experiments, especially in inflammation models. MPO
109
activity was reduced by carvacrol in a periodontitis model in rats20 and the essential oils
110
of Eucalyptus globulus and Melaleuca alternifolia also decreased the MPO activity in a
111
dermal inflammation model in mice.21 It is noteworthy, however, that the in vitro
112
activity of essential oils on MPO has been scarcely investigated. For example, the oils
113
of Cymbopogon citratus (DC.) Stapf and C. winterianus Jowitt significantly reduced the
114
MPO activity in PMA stimulated human leukocytes.22 It has been also reported that
115
eugenol caused a significant reduction in MPO release by human neutrophils, but at
116
high concentrations, between 0.625 mM (102.6 µg/mL) and 2.5 mM (410.5 µg/mL).23
117
Finally, it should be noted that papers dealing with in vitro testing of essential oils or
118
their constituents in the isolated MPO enzyme were not found in literature.
119
From the above overview, it is concluded that the knowledge on the biological
120
antioxidant activity of essential oils is limited and, in some cases, practically inexistent.
ACS Paragon Plus 5 Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
121
This knowledge could help to a better understanding of the immunomodulatory activity
122
of this group of substances, which can be relevant for their applications in medicine, as
123
well as feed additives.7 Thus, the objective of the present study was to examine the
124
antioxidant effect of a group of essential oils, fractions and pure constituents by
125
different in vitro tests, mainly biological.
126 127
2. Materials and methods
128
2.1. Chemicals and reagents and instruments
129
Water was freshly taken daily from a Milli-Q system (Millipore, Bedford, MA).
130
Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), o-dianisidine
131
dihydrochloride, quercetin, absolute ethanol, Hanks’ balanced salt solution (HBSS),
132
modified Hanks’ balanced salt solution without Ca2+ and Mg2+ (modified HBSS), 2′,7′-
133
dichlorofluorescin diacetate (DCFH-DA), hydrogen peroxide solution (H2O2) 30%,
134
phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (PMA), ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid tetrasodium
135
salt dihydrate (EDTA-Na4 · 2H2O), sodium azide (NaN3), propidium iodide, ammonium
136
chloride (NH4Cl), potassium bicarbonate (KHCO3), paraformaldehyde, Griess reagent
137
(modified), L-arginine, lipopolysaccharides (LPS) from Escherichia coli 0127:B8, NG-
138
methyl-L-arginine acetate salt (L-NMMA), and sodium nitrite (NaNO2) were obtained
139
from Sigma Chemical Company (St. Louis, MO, USA).
140
A microtiter plate spectrophotometer Benchmark Plus (Bio-Rad Laboratories, USA), a
141
flow-cytometer Cytomics FC 500 MPL system (Beckman coulter, Inc., Bea, CA, USA)
142
and the flow-cytometry software Summit v4.2 were employed for the analysis.
143 144
ACS Paragon Plus 6 Environment
Page 6 of 36
Page 7 of 36
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
145
2.2. Essential oils and compounds studied
146
Essential oils from nutmeg (Myristica fragrans Houtt.), niaouli (Melaleuca
147
quinquenervia (Cav.) S. T. Blake), clove (Syzygium aromaticum (L.) Merr. & L. M.
148
Perry), tarragon (Artemisia dracunculus L.), coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.), juniper
149
(Juniperus communis L.), tea tree (Melaleuca alternifolia (Maiden & Betche) Cheel),
150
ginger (Zingiber officinale Roscoe), rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.), bay laurel
151
(Laurus nobilis L.), palmarosa (Cymbopogon martini (Roxb.) Will. Watson), cajuput
152
(Melaleuca cajuputi Powell), lemon (Citrus limon (L.) Burm. f.), red thyme (Thymus
153
zygis L.) and Spanish oregano (Coridothymus capitatus (L.) Rchb. f. = Thymbra
154
capitata (L.) Cav.) were tested. The terpenic fractions from nutmeg, clove and lemon
155
were also included in our research. Finally, the pure compounds eugenol, carvacrol, and
156
thymol, as well as a mixture of bornyl (76.8%) and isobornyl (21.7%) acetates, were
157
also investigated. All samples except eugenol (Sigma-Aldrich) were supplied by
158
Lidervet S.L. (Tarragona, Spain) and obtained from commercial sources (Lluch Essence
159
S.L., Barcelona, and Ernesto Ventós S.A., Barcelona). All samples were kept in sealed
160
airtight glass vials, protected from the light, at 4 ºC.
161 162
2.3. Essential oil characterization
163
The essential oils and fractions were characterized by its composition and some physical
164
constants. The analyses of the composition of the oils were carried out by gas
165
chromatography (GC–FID) and gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry
166
(GC–MS) as previously described.7 The main constituents of the oils and fractions are
167
shown in Table 1. Additional data on the characterisation of the samples can be found in
168
Pérez-Rosés et al. (2015).7
169
ACS Paragon Plus 7 Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
170
2.4. Sample preparation for activity testing
171
Recent findings on the incompatibility of Tweens for solubilisation of essential oils for
172
antioxidant activity testing were taken in account.24
173
For the DPPH antioxidant assay, samples were dissolved in absolute ethanol to give
174
solutions that ranged from 5.0 x 10-2 % to 9.8 x 10-5 % (v/v).
175
For assays on the inhibitory activity of ROS and NO production, samples were initially
176
dissolved (1% v/v) in modified HBSS supplemented with 10% (v/v) DMSO and 1.5%
177
(v/v) E-484 (glyceryl polyethyleneglycol ricinoleate). Thirteen dilutions, ranging from
178
1.50 x 10-2 to 7.80 x 10-7 % (v/v), were tested on the ROS assay, while nine dilutions,
179
ranging from 5.00 x 10-3 to 7.80 x 10-7 % (v/v); were investigated on the NO test.
180
Dilutions were prepared with modified HBSS.
181
For MPO inhibition tests, samples were initially dissolved at 1% (v/v) with DMSO.
182
Nine dilutions with HBSS, which ranged from 1.00 x 10-2 to 7.81 x 10-6 % (v/v), were
183
examined.
184 185
2.3. Radical scavenging activity
186
The radical scavenging activity of samples were evaluated using 2,2-diphenyl-1-
187
picrylhydrazyl (DPPH•)25 in flat bottom microtiter plate.
188
Quercetin was used as positive control of antioxidant activity while absolute ethanol
189
was used as negative control. After incubation for 30 min at room temperature in the
190
dark, absorbance at 515 nm was measured. Scavenging activity on DPPH• free stable
191
radical by the samples was calculated as percentage.
192 193
ACS Paragon Plus 8 Environment
Page 8 of 36
Page 9 of 36
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
194
2.4. Isolation of human leukocytes
195
Leukocytes were isolated through a controlled haemolytic shock with an ammonium
196
chloride solution from buffy coats obtained from blood of healthy donors at the Blood
197
and Tissue Bank of Catalonia.26 The pellet was suspended in modified HBSS.
198 199
2.5. In vitro ROS production assessment by flow cytometry
200
ROS production was quantified by oxidation of 2’,7’-dichlorofluorescin-diacetate
201
(DCFH-DA) by flow cytometry in stimulated human leukocytes. The method described
202
by Perez-Garcia et al., 1996,27 was followed with minor modifications to adapt it to
203
microtiter plates.
204
A human leukocyte suspension was incubated in the darkness with DCFH-DA (10 µM)
205
and sodium azide (1 mM) for 10 min at 37 ºC. After centrifugation for 5 min at 300 x g,
206
supernatant was removed and the cell pellet resuspended in 4 mL of HBSS. In a
207
microtiter plate, 200 µL of this suspension of human leukocytes (approximately 106
208
cells) were added to all wells. Twenty µL of each treatment dilution or quercetin (1
209
µg/mL, positive control) were added. After incubation for 5 min at 37 ºC, 20 µL of the
210
stimulant of ROS production, either hydrogen peroxide (H2O2, 100 µM in modified
211
HBSS) or phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (PMA, 10 µM in DMSO) were placed in all
212
wells, except those designated as base line controls, where 20 µL of modified HBSS
213
were added. Microtiter plates were again incubated for 5 min at 37 ºC. Finally, 50 µL of
214
paraformaldehyde (1% w/v) were added to all wells. Just before flow cytometry
215
analysis, 2 µL of propidium iodide (10 µg/mL) were added in all wells with the purpose
216
of discriminating viable cells. Plates were analysed by flow cytometry. Cellular viability
217
was well over 95% in all experiments. The gate for neutrophils was established based
218
on the size and granularity. The acquisition process was stopped when 20,000 viable
ACS Paragon Plus 9 Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
219
neutrophils (negative to propidium iodide) were acquired, and the fluorescence
220
histogram of dichlorofluorescein (515-540 nm) was obtained. Inhibition of ROS
221
production in treated cells was calculated.
222 223
2.6. Nitric oxide assay
224
In a 96-well U bottomed microtiter plate, all experimental wells received an aliquot of
225
200 µL of a suspension of human leukocytes (approximately 106 cells). Then, 20 µL of
226
the different treatment dilutions or modified HBSS (negative controls) were added.
227
Microtiter plates were incubated for 10 min at 37 ºC. Then, 20 µL of LPS (3 mg/mL)
228
and 20 µL of L-Arg (2 mg/mL) were added to all wells, the plate was incubated for 1 h
229
at 37 ºC and centrifuged (12 min, 2700 rpm). Aliquots of 100 µL of supernatant from
230
each well were transferred to a 96-well flat bottomed microtiter plate and mixed with
231
100 µL of Griess reagent.28,29 After 15 min at room temperature, absorbance was
232
measured at 540 nm. The amount of nitrite was calculated from a NaNO2 standard
233
curve. Supernatant from leucocytes not exposed to LPS was used as negative control
234
while NG-methyl-L-arginine acetate salt (L-NMMA), a well-known NOS inhibitor was
235
used as positive control. Results were expressed as inhibition of NO production.
236 237
2.7. MPO inhibition assay
238
Ten millilitres of a human leukocyte suspension (approximately 2x106 cells/mL) were
239
treated with 0.5 mL of lipopolysaccharides from Escherichia coli 0127:B8 (50 µg/mL)
240
and incubated for 30 min at 37 ºC. The supernatant (containing the enzyme) was
241
centrifuged 7 min at 2500 x g and kept for later use. MPO enzymatic activity was
242
determined by measuring the rate of oxidation of o-dianisidine dihydrochloride by
243
H2O2.30 In a microtiter plate, 100 µL of the cell free supernatant plus 10 µL of the
ACS Paragon Plus 10 Environment
Page 10 of 36
Page 11 of 36
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
244
different treatments were added, including quercetin (positive control) and HBSS
245
(negative control). After 6 min incubation at 37 ºC, 100 µL of o-dianisidine
246
dihydrochloride (1.25 mg/mL final concentration, supplemented with 0.004% H2O2)
247
were added and incubated at room temperature for 5 min. Aliquots of 50 µL from each
248
well were transferred to a new flat bottomed microtiter plate, and were completed with
249
150 µL HBSS and 30 µL NaN3 (2% w/v). Absorbance was determined at 460 nm.
250
Inhibition of MPO activity was calculated.
251 252
2.8. MPO release from human leukocytes
253
About 200 µL of human leukocytes suspended in HBSS (approximately 106 cells) were
254
added to a 96-well U bottomed microtiter plate, 20 µl of the different treatment dilutions
255
or quercetin (1 mg/mL, positive control) were added and the plate was incubated for 10
256
min at 37 ºC. Then, 10 µl of LPS (50 µg/mL, for stimulation of MPO release from
257
leukocytes) or modified HBSS (negative controls)
258
incubated at 37 ºC for 30 min and centrifuged for 10 min at 2500 x g at 4 ºC. MPO
259
enzymatic activity was determined in the supernatant by measuring the rate of oxidation
260
of o-dianisidine dihydrochloride by H2O2, as described for the MPO inhibition assay.
261
Results were expressed as inhibition of MPO activity.
were added and the plate was
262 263
2.9. Data processing and statistics
264
The results were expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) of at least four
265
independent experiments. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by a
266
Dunnett´s test was used. A paired t test was employed for detecting statistical
267
differences between the two MPO assays for each treatment. In all cases, a difference
268
was considered significant when p