4.6 Article

Bioactive Compounds and Functional Properties of Herbal Preparations of Cystus creticus L. Collected From Rhodes Island

期刊

FRONTIERS IN NUTRITION
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.881210

关键词

bioactive compounds; natural antioxidant; antimicrobial compounds; Cystus creticus; herbal preparations

资金

  1. Romanian Ministry of Education and Research, CNCS-UEFISCDI [PN-III-P2-2.1-PED-2019-5360]
  2. Serbian Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development [451-03-9/2021-14/200007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that aqueous extracts of C. creticus contained main compounds such as myricetin and quercetin glycosides, especially in aqueous extracts, which were probably responsible for their enhanced antioxidant and antimicrobial potential. On the other hand, hydroethanolic preparations exerted a strong anti-inflammatory and anti-biofilm activity.
The members of Cystus genus are perenial shrubs with a well-established use in traditional medicine. Among these, C. creticus is the most popular, herbal preparations obtained from its aerial parts being recognized as antimicrobial, antitumor and anti-inflammatory agents. The present study aimed to evaluate phytochemical profile and bioactive potential of aqueous and hydroethanolic extracts of C. creticus aerial parts harvested from two different areas of Rhodes island. LC-DAD-ESI/MSn analysis revealed the presence of myricetin and quercetin glycosides as main compounds, especially in aqueous extracts, being probably responsible for their enhanced antioxidant and antimicrobial potential. On the other side, hydroethanolic preparations exerted a strong anti-inflammatory and anti-biofilm activity. Our findings suggest that the use of solvents with intermediate polarity can assure the best recovery of bioactive compounds from C. creticus, increasing the extraction yield for other non-phenolic compounds which can enhance therapeutic potential of the extract through a synergistic action.

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

4.6
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