Antioxidant properties of lemon essential oils: a meta-analysis of plant parts, extraction methods, dominant compounds, and antioxidant assay categories
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, 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","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> < 0.001); (ii) the maceration preserves antioxidant properties better than hydro-distillation and Soxhlet extraction (<i>p</i> < 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> < 0.01). These findings consistently demonstrated significant antioxidant activity across multiple assays, including ABTS, β-carotene bleaching, DPPH, and FRAP (<i>p</i> < 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> < 0.01). Specifically, limonene and Z-citral make substantial contributions to its antioxidant capacity (<i>p</i> < 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.
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.