4.5 Article

Casearia sylvestris Essential Oil Degradation Products Generated by Leaf Processing

期刊

CHEMISTRY & BIODIVERSITY
卷 18, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/cbdv.202000880

关键词

Casearia sylvestris var; sylvestris; var; lingua; essential oil; oxidation; thermal desorption

资金

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior - Brasil (CAPES) [001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the chemical composition of the essential oil from different varieties and states of Casearia sylvestris leaves, finding that dried leaves had higher essential oil yield compared to fresh leaves, with changes in volatile composition during leaf drying and hydrodistillation. Differences in chemical composition between varieties and states of leaves could potentially impact the biological activities of the essential oil.
Casearia sylvestris is an endemic tree of the Latin America that the essential oil (EO) has anti-inflammatory and gastroprotective actions. This study evaluates the chemical composition of the EO from the volatile fractions of in natura, fresh, and dried C. sylvestris var. sylvestris and var. lingua leaves. For both varieties, the dried leaves presented higher EO yield as compared to fresh leaves. The major EO chemical components were (E)-caryophyllene, alpha-humulene, germacrene D, bicyclogermacrene, spathulenol, caryophyllene oxide, and humulene epoxide II. In both varieties, the content of sesquiterpene hydrocarbons decreased and oxygenated sesquiterpenes increased on going from in natura to fresh and dried leaves, which indicated that leaf drying and hydrodistillation modified the volatile composition. The results also suggested that bicyclogermacrene and (E)-caryophyllene were oxidized during processing, to generate spathulenol and caryophyllene oxide, respectively. C. sylvestris varieties and in natura, fresh, and dried leaves differed in terms of the chemical composition of volatiles, which could affect the EO biological activities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据