Antioxidant properties of lemon essential oils: a meta-analysis of plant parts, extraction methods, dominant compounds, and antioxidant assay categories

IF 5.2 2区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture Pub Date : 2024-09-27 DOI:10.1186/s40538-024-00621-w
Rahmat Budiarto, Ana Khalisha, Dwi Novanda Sari, Tri Ujilestari, Teguh Wahyono, Amirul Faiz Mohd Azmi, Danung Nur Adli, Evellin Dewi Lusiana, Pradita Iustitia Sitaresmi, Mohammad Miftakhus Sholikin
{"title":"Antioxidant properties of lemon essential oils: a meta-analysis of plant parts, extraction methods, dominant compounds, and antioxidant assay categories","authors":"Rahmat Budiarto,&nbsp;Ana Khalisha,&nbsp;Dwi Novanda Sari,&nbsp;Tri Ujilestari,&nbsp;Teguh Wahyono,&nbsp;Amirul Faiz Mohd Azmi,&nbsp;Danung Nur Adli,&nbsp;Evellin Dewi Lusiana,&nbsp;Pradita Iustitia Sitaresmi,&nbsp;Mohammad Miftakhus Sholikin","doi":"10.1186/s40538-024-00621-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Recent studies have explored the antioxidant properties of lemon essential oil (LEO), taking considering factors like plant part, extraction methods, and antioxidant assay. However, due to varied results and limited precision in individual studies, our meta-analysis aims to offer a comprehensive understanding across different experiments, irrespective of location or time. Out of 109 scientific articles published between 1947 and 2024, only 28 successfully validated their data on differences in antioxidant capacity and IC<sub>50</sub>, using weighted averages of Hedges’ <i>d</i> in meta-analysis. A meta-analysis revealed several key findings: (i) lemon leaf and peel extracts have higher IC<sub>50</sub> compared to controls, whereas whole plant extracts show lower values (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001); (ii) the maceration preserves antioxidant properties better than hydro-distillation and Soxhlet extraction (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001); (iii) LEO require higher concentrations to achieve comparable free radical inhibition as the standard controls such as AsA, BHT, and quercetin, suggesting lower antioxidant efficiency. This was supported by IC<sub>50</sub> result, which showed no significant difference between LEO and other compounds like thymol, <i>Thymus vulgaris</i> EO, and <i>Citrus aurantium</i> EO. However, compared to AsA, BHT, limonene, and trolox, the inhibition efficacy was significantly lower (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). These findings consistently demonstrated significant antioxidant activity across multiple assays, including ABTS, β-carotene bleaching, DPPH, and FRAP (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). Notably, the predominant components of LEO including α-linoleic acid, D-limonene, limonene, L-limonene, neryl acetate, sabinene, and Z-citral, which demonstrate significant potency as antioxidant agent (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). Specifically, limonene and Z-citral make substantial contributions to its antioxidant capacity (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). Despite variations in purity among LEO extractions, there is potential for future enhancement through nanoemulsion. In conclusion, LEO show promise as an alternative antioxidant, with emphasis to selecting samples based on leaves or peels and employing maceration extractions for various antioxidant assays. Active components rich in terpenoids, such as limonene and Z-citral, are particularly noteworthy.</p><h3>Graphical Abstract</h3>\n<div><figure><div><div><picture><source><img></source></picture></div></div></figure></div></div>","PeriodicalId":512,"journal":{"name":"Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://chembioagro.springeropen.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s40538-024-00621-w","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40538-024-00621-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent studies have explored the antioxidant properties of lemon essential oil (LEO), taking considering factors like plant part, extraction methods, and antioxidant assay. However, due to varied results and limited precision in individual studies, our meta-analysis aims to offer a comprehensive understanding across different experiments, irrespective of location or time. Out of 109 scientific articles published between 1947 and 2024, only 28 successfully validated their data on differences in antioxidant capacity and IC50, using weighted averages of Hedges’ d in meta-analysis. A meta-analysis revealed several key findings: (i) lemon leaf and peel extracts have higher IC50 compared to controls, whereas whole plant extracts show lower values (p < 0.001); (ii) the maceration preserves antioxidant properties better than hydro-distillation and Soxhlet extraction (p < 0.001); (iii) LEO require higher concentrations to achieve comparable free radical inhibition as the standard controls such as AsA, BHT, and quercetin, suggesting lower antioxidant efficiency. This was supported by IC50 result, which showed no significant difference between LEO and other compounds like thymol, Thymus vulgaris EO, and Citrus aurantium EO. However, compared to AsA, BHT, limonene, and trolox, the inhibition efficacy was significantly lower (p < 0.01). These findings consistently demonstrated significant antioxidant activity across multiple assays, including ABTS, β-carotene bleaching, DPPH, and FRAP (p < 0.01). Notably, the predominant components of LEO including α-linoleic acid, D-limonene, limonene, L-limonene, neryl acetate, sabinene, and Z-citral, which demonstrate significant potency as antioxidant agent (p < 0.01). Specifically, limonene and Z-citral make substantial contributions to its antioxidant capacity (p < 0.01). Despite variations in purity among LEO extractions, there is potential for future enhancement through nanoemulsion. In conclusion, LEO show promise as an alternative antioxidant, with emphasis to selecting samples based on leaves or peels and employing maceration extractions for various antioxidant assays. Active components rich in terpenoids, such as limonene and Z-citral, are particularly noteworthy.

Graphical Abstract

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
柠檬精油的抗氧化特性:对植物部位、提取方法、主要化合物和抗氧化检测类别的荟萃分析
最近的研究探讨了柠檬精油(LEO)的抗氧化特性,其中考虑到了植物部位、提取方法和抗氧化测定等因素。然而,由于单项研究的结果各不相同且精确度有限,我们的荟萃分析旨在提供对不同实验的全面了解,而不论实验地点或时间。在1947年至2024年期间发表的109篇科学文章中,只有28篇在荟萃分析中使用海德斯d的加权平均值成功验证了其抗氧化能力和IC50差异的数据。荟萃分析揭示了几个重要发现:(i) 与对照组相比,柠檬叶和皮提取物的 IC50 值较高,而全植物提取物的 IC50 值较低 (p < 0.001);(ii) 浸渍法比水蒸馏法和索氏提取法更能保持抗氧化特性 (p < 0.001);(iii) LEO 需要更高的浓度才能达到与标准对照组(如 AsA、BHT 和槲皮素)相当的自由基抑制效果,这表明其抗氧化效率较低。IC50 结果表明,LEO 与百里酚、百里香环氧乙烷和枳壳环氧乙烷等其他化合物之间没有显著差异。然而,与 AsA、BHT、柠檬烯和 trolox 相比,LEO 的抑制效果明显较低(p < 0.01)。这些研究结果一致表明,在 ABTS、β-胡萝卜素漂白、DPPH 和 FRAP 等多种检测方法中都具有明显的抗氧化活性(p < 0.01)。值得注意的是,LEO 的主要成分包括α-亚油酸、D-柠檬烯、柠檬烯、L-柠檬烯、乙酸橙花酯、沙比利烯和 Z-柠檬醛,这些成分具有显著的抗氧化功效(p < 0.01)。特别是柠檬烯和 Z-柠檬醛对其抗氧化能力有很大贡献(p < 0.01)。尽管 LEO 提取物的纯度存在差异,但未来仍有可能通过纳米乳液提高其抗氧化能力。总之,LEO有望成为一种替代抗氧化剂,重点是要选择基于叶片或果皮的样品,并采用浸渍萃取法进行各种抗氧化检测。富含萜类化合物(如柠檬烯和 Z-柠檬醛)的活性成分尤其值得关注。 图文摘要
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture
Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Biotechnology
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
3.00%
发文量
83
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture is an international, interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed forum for the advancement and application to all fields of agriculture of modern chemical, biochemical and molecular technologies. The scope of this journal includes chemical and biochemical processes aimed to increase sustainable agricultural and food production, the evaluation of quality and origin of raw primary products and their transformation into foods and chemicals, as well as environmental monitoring and remediation. Of special interest are the effects of chemical and biochemical technologies, also at the nano and supramolecular scale, on the relationships between soil, plants, microorganisms and their environment, with the help of modern bioinformatics. Another special focus is the use of modern bioorganic and biological chemistry to develop new technologies for plant nutrition and bio-stimulation, advancement of biorefineries from biomasses, safe and traceable food products, carbon storage in soil and plants and restoration of contaminated soils to agriculture. This journal presents the first opportunity to bring together researchers from a wide number of disciplines within the agricultural chemical and biological sciences, from both industry and academia. The principle aim of Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture is to allow the exchange of the most advanced chemical and biochemical knowledge to develop technologies which address one of the most pressing challenges of our times - sustaining a growing world population. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture publishes original research articles, short letters and invited reviews. Articles from scientists in industry, academia as well as private research institutes, non-governmental and environmental organizations are encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Integrated metabolome and transcriptome analyses provide comprehensive insight into dark- and light-responsive mechanisms in Althaea officinalis hairy root cultures Microbiologically modified bioorganic fertilizer and metal-tolerant Bacillus sp. MN54 regulate the nutrient homeostasis and boost phytoextraction efficiency of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) in nickel-contaminated soil Enhanced phytoremediation of Cd-contaminated soil by Solanum nigrum L. through the addition of earthworm and organic wastes Reduction of oxidative damage caused by Fusarium falciforme and Fusarium foetens in schefflera plants using chitosan nanoparticles loaded with l-proline or indole butyric acid The auxin-like effect of substrate and auxin sensitivity of plant modulate the PGPR activity of Lysinibacillus pinottii sp. nov. PB211
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1