Medicinal & Aromatic Plants

Medicinal & Aromatic Plants
Open Access

ISSN: 2167-0412

+44 1300 500008

Research Article - (2018) Volume 7, Issue 6

Chemotypic Characterization and Antioxidant Activities of Rosemarinus officinalis Essential Oil from Ethiopian Cultivars

Bekri Melka Abdo1*, Gelila Asaminew2, Beriso Mieso1 and Weretaw Sisay3
1Natural Product Research Laboratory, Wendo Genet Agricultural Research Center, Ethiopia
2Agricultural Quality Research Laboratory, Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Ethiopia
3Technology Multiplication and Seed Research Process, Wendo Genet Agricultural Research Center, Ethiopia
*Corresponding Author: Bekri Melka Abdo, Natural Product Research Laboratory, Wendo Genet Agricultural Research Center, Ethiopia, Tel: +251461190702, Fax: +251461191245 Email:

Abstract

In Ethiopia, R. officinalis is locally known as "Yetibs Qitel" used for flavor of various cuisine. Three varieties of R. officinalis were registered at Wendo Genet Agricultural Research Center and aimed to define the Physico-chemical properties and antioxidant activities of their essential oils. Hydro distillation of fresh R. officinalis leaves was acquired an essential oil yield (v/w) of 1.02% (Rosemary-01), 0.84% (Rosemary-02) and 0.65% (Rosemary-03). GC-MS analysis of the essential oils also revealed that major abundance of Eucalyptol (22.25%), α-Pinene (20.39%) and camphor (8.04%) for Rosemary-01; Eucalyptol (21.46%), α-Pinene (17.27%) and Verbenone (13.65%) for Rosemary-02 and Eucalyptol (17.33%), α-Pinene (15.75%) and endo-Borneol (9.09%) for Rosemary-03 variety. R. officinalis essential oils show a free radical scavenging activity against DPPH with an IC50 value of the range 457.01-589.68 μL/mL. The synergy of genotype and environmental conditions makes variability on yield, chemical composition and biological activities of R. officinalis essential oils to be established in Ethiopia.

Keywords: Antioxidant; Essential oil; Ethiopia; Cultivar; Chemotype; Rosemarinus officinalis

Introduction

Aromatic plants have been used since ancient times for various purposes such as preservative and flavors in food, perfumery in fragrance and aromatherapy. One of the products obtained from those plants are essential oils, Concrete, Absolutes and Resinoids [1]. Rosemarinus officinalis L. (Labiatae) is among the essential oil-bearing plants which is widely used in fragrance, cosmetics, food and pharmaceutical industry. Besides, it has a potential of antimicrobial and antioxidant activity which are claimed to extend the shelf life of food products [2-4].

In Ethiopia, R. officinalis L. locally known as " Yetibs Qitel" and its leaf used as a flavor of varieties of dishes and spices ingredients on preparation of Capsicum annum food colorant powder. The R. officinalis essential oil has also used for aromatherapy, cosmetics and flavoring, and preservation of food products. Enemor and Aner Wereda from Gurage Zone and Sebeta from Oromia region are the known commercialized area and source of R. officinalis leaves for central market.

One of the research thematic plants conducted at Wendo Genet Agricultural Research Center is R. officinalis and has been released three known varieties namely, Rosemary-01, Rosemary-02 and Rosemary-03. Chemotypic characterizations of these three varieties are crucial to provide a specification-based application. The important concepts related to quality of essential oils are the chemical composition and its biological activities. Those physico chemical property and biological activities of the plant’s product can vary accordingly to climate, soil composition, plant organ, age and vegetative cycle stage [5,6]. As of the above concept, this work was done to address physicochemical variability and antioxidant activities among three varieties of R. officinalis essential oil in Ethiopia (Figure 1).

medicinal-aromatic-plants-Rosemary-Plants

Figure 1: General View of Rosemary Plants.

Materials and Methods

Sample preparation

The plants before flowering (10 months old) were harvested on mid of January 2017 from Wendo Genet Agricultural Research Center experimental field (1800 m a.s.l., N 39° 1' 44" E 8° 25' 59"). The leaves were striped from the stem and subjected to extract.

Sample extraction

The fresh leaves were distilled through hydro distillation by using Clevenger type apparatus for 3 hours and collected the pale-yellow essential oil after drying with anhydrous Na2SO4. The essential oils were subjected to determine the physical property, antioxidant activity and chemical composition profile.

Physical property of essential oil

The yields of the essential oil were calculated based on the formula described below.

Oil yield (v/w (%))=(Amount of distiled oil (mL))/(Amount of fresh distiled leaf (g)) × 100.

The specific gravity of the essential oil was measured by using Picno meter. The refractive indexes of the essential oils were measured by Refractometer (Reichert, AR200) and the optical rotations of the essential oils were measured by a Polari meter (Bio base, Automatic) (Table 1).

Parameters Rosemary-01 Rosemary-02 Rosemary-03
Essential oil yield (%v/w) fresh based 1.02 ± 0.02 0.84 ± 0.05 0.65 ± 0.06
Specific gravity (g/mL) 0.89 0.87 0.87
Refractive index (25°C) 1.46758 1.46878 1.47068
Optical rotation (0) 17.54 32.819 11.211
FRSA, IC50 (µL/mL) 18.72 457.01 589.68

Table 1: Physical property and FRSA activity of R. officinalis varieties essential oil. FRSA: free radical scavenging activity.

Free radicals scavenging activity on 2, 2-diphenyl-1- picrylhydrazyl (DPPH)

The DPPH free radical scavenging activities of the essential oils were determined by the method described by Williams et al. [7]. Five concentrations (100, 50, 25, 12.5 and 6.25 μL/mL) of 50 μL samples were mixed with 5 mL of 0.004% methanol solution of DPPH. The mixture was incubated for 30 minutes at 37°C. After incubation, the absorbance of the mixture was read at 515 nm using UV-Vis spectrophotometer. Ascorbic acid was used as a positive control. Tests were carried out in triplicate and average values were taken. Inhibition of DPPH free radical was calculated by using the equation:

I(%)=(Ao-As)/Ao × 100,

Where Ao is the absorbance of DPPH solution (containing all reagents except the test sample), and as is the absorbance of the tested sample. The IC50 value which represented the concentration of the samples that caused 50% inhibition was determined based on the linear equation of concentrations of the R. officinalis oil versus inhibition for all tested samples.

GC-MS analysis

GC-MS (Agilent model 7820 A) was used to determine the chemical composition profile of the essential oil. Solutions of essential oils (2%) were prepared by dissolving with N- Hexane. The instrument was conditioned with a split/ split less injector mode, MS detector (5975), and HP-5 SM capillary column (0.25 mm i.d. × 30 m × 0.25 μm film thickness). Injector was operated on a split ratio of 1:5 with an injection volume were 1 μL and injector temperature was set at 250°C. The MSD interface temperature was set 260°C. Helium was used as carrier gas and controlled in constant flow mode at a linear velocity of 36.6 cm/sec. The oven temperature was programmed to started at 60°C, which is held for 1 minute and ramped at 5°C/min to 80°C with 3 minutes holding; next to the temperature was ramped at 4°C/min to 180°C, which was held for 3 minutes, finally raised at 25°C/min to 300°C with 6 minutes held. The MSD was operated on scan mode in 40-500 m/z range, with ion source and transfer line temperatures held at 230°C and 260°C, respectively. The solvent delay time was 3.4 minutes and taken 43.8 minutes for total run.

Results and Discussion

The oil yield obtained from Rosemary-01 variety is superior (1.02%) and followed Rosemary-02 (0.84%). Rosemary-03 yielded less essential oil (0.65%). Comparable results were reported irrespective of variety from different origins of R. officinalis such as Pakistan (0.35%) [8]; Nepal (0.5%), South Africa (0.8%) and Australia (0.9%) [9].

Different physical properties were observed by the varieties of R. officinalis essential oils. A higher Optical rotation value was scored by Rosemary-02 variety (32.82o) and next to Rosemary-01 (17.54o). The variability of specific rotation value is occurred due to presence of different enantiomeric distribution and concentration among varieties. Principally the abundance of Verbenone in the R. officinalis essential oil enhances positive value of optical rotation due to favors 100% (R) enantiomer in nature and contrarily the abundance of Borneol in the R. officinalis essential oil may reduce the optical rotation value as favor of >90% (S) enantiomer [9,10].

From the DPPH assay result, the IC50 value of the R. officinalis varieties essential oils were varied with 457.01 μL/mL (Rosemary-02) to 589.68 μL/mL (Rosemary-03) and the control Ascorbic acid had an IC50 value of 577.04 μg/mL. The variability of FRSA among varieties came due to having different concentration of chemical constituents in their essential oils (Figures 2 and 3).

medicinal-aromatic-plants-radical-scavenging

Figure 2: Plots of inhibition of free radical scavenging activities of Ascorbic acid.

medicinal-aromatic-plants-essential-oils

Figure 3: Plots of inhibition of free radical scavenging activities of R. officinalis varieties essential oils.

GC-MS analysis reports of R. officinalis varieties essential oils revealed that a total of 31 compounds were identified. Eucalyptol and α -Pinene were the dominantly found compounds of the three varieties essential oils with 22.25% and 20.39% (Rosemary-01), 21.46% and 17.27% (Rosemary-02) and 17.33% and 15.75% (Rosemary-03) respectively. Rosemary-01 had higher amount of Camphor (8.04%) and Rosemary-02 had higher amount of Verbenone (13.65%) which is the natural R isomer that made higher value of optical rotation. The third variety (Rosemary-03) was superior in endo Borneol content (9.09%) which is the bitter taste that made to be unpleasant taste among three varieties. This results are comply with the composition of the R. officinalis oils reported by Satyal et al. [9-12], from USA, Nepal, South Africa, Kenya, Yemen and Australia origins which are an abundance of α - Pinene (13.5%-38.1%), 1,8-cineole (16.1%-29.4%), Verbenone (0.8%-18.6%), Borneol (2.1%-7%), camphor (0.7%-7.0%), and limonene (1.6%-4.4%) (Figures 4 and 5; Table 2).

medicinal-aromatic-plants-GC-chromatogram

Figure 4: GC chromatogram of R. officinalis essential oil.

medicinal-aromatic-plants-abundant-compounds

Figure 5: Structures of major abundant compounds of Rosemarinus officinalis.

S No RT (min) Name of compound Molecular Formula Molecular Weight Percentage Composition
Rosemary 01 Rosemary 02 Rosemary 03
1 4.81 Tricyclene C10H16 136 - - 0.27
2 4.87 3-Thujene C10H16 136 0.30 0.35 0.29
3 5.09 1R-α-Pinene C10H16 136 20.39 17.27 15.75
4 5.37 Camphene C10H16 136 5.17 3.79 4.72
5 5.47 2,4(10)-Thujadiene C10H14 134 0.44 0.72 0.78
6 6.02 (-)-β-Pinene C10H16 136 4.33 3.45 4.56
7 6.34 β-Myrcene C10H16 136 1.40 1.93 1.48
8 6.75 α-Phellandrene C10H16 136 - - 0.35
9 7.14 α-Terpinene C10H16 136 1.01 1.16 0.74
10 7.42 o-Cymene C10H14 134 0.68 0.22 1.32
11 7.72 Eucalyptol C10H18O 154 22.25 21.46 17.33
12 7.87 trans-β-Ocimene C10H16 136  -  - 0.63
13 8.67 γ-Terpinene C10H16 136 1.70 2.64 1.22
14 9.82 Terpinolene C10H16 136 1.47 1.36 1.08
15 10.30 β-Linalool C10H18O 154 3.43 3.76 4.38
16 11.25 Chrysanthenone C10H14O 150 0.60 1.08 1.07
17 11.77 L-Pinocarveol C10H16O 152  -  - 0.86
18 12.01 (-)-Camphor C10H16O 152 8.04 4.48 3.46
19 12.92 endo-Borneol C10H18O 154 5.76 6.02 9.09
20 13.18 3-Pinanone, cis C10H16O 152 1.08 1.22 2.56
21 13.30 (-)-4-Terpineol C10H18O 154 1.62 1.71 1.66
22 13.82 α-Terpineol C10H18O 154 3.52 2.00 2.80
23 14.37 (-)-Borneol C10H18O 154  -  - 1.03
24 14.58 l-Verbenone C10H14O 150 5.99 13.65 6.47
25 15.71 exo-2,7,7-trimethylbicyclo [2.2.1] heptan-2-ol C10H18O 154 0.72 0.74 0.74
26 16.21 Geraniol C10H18O 154  - 3.94 0.91
27 17.37 Bornyl acetate C12H20O2 196 3.35 2.25 7.22
28 21.42 Methyleugenol C11H14O2 178  - 0.35 0.97
29 21.90 Caryophyllene C15H24 204 5.50 3.18 3.88
30 22.96 Humulene C15H24 204 1.25 0.62 0.79
31 25.17 (-)-β-Cadinene C15H24 204  -  - 1.20

Table 2: Chemical compositions of R. officinalis varieties essential oils.

Conclusion

Genotypic effect is making variability on the essential oil yield and physiology of the three varieties of R. officinalis. Unlike, the environment effect influenced to have similar major compounds which are dominated by Eucalyptol and α -Pinene. From relative concentration of the third majorly found compound of three R. officinalis varieties, it's proposed to be characterized as camphor (Rosemary-01), verbenone (Rosemary-02) and endo Borneol (Rosemary-03) chemo types. R. officinalis essential oils have a strong antioxidant activity against DPPH free radicals with comparable to the reference Ascorbic acid.

Acknowledgement

I am gratefully acknowledged Wendo Genet Agricultural Research Center for financial support.

References

  1. ICS-UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organization and the International Centre for Science and High Technology) (2008) Extraction Technologies for Medicinal and Aromatic Plants. January 2008.
  2. Hussain AI, Anwar F, Chatha SAS, Jabbar A, Mahboob S, et al. (2010) Rosmarinus officinalis essential oil: antiproliferative, antioxidant and antibacterial activities. Braz J Microbiol 41: 1070-1078.
  3. Raskovic A, Milanovic I, Pavlovic N, Cebovic T, Vukmirovic S, et al. (2014) Antioxidant activity of rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.) essential oil and its hepatoprotective potential. BMC Complement Altern Med 14: 225.
  4. Sanchez-Gonzalez L, Vargas M, Gonzalez-Martinez C, Chiralt A, Chafer M (2011) Use of essential oils in bioactive edible coatings: A review. Food Eng Rev 3: 1-16.
  5. Masotti V, Juteau F, Bessiere JM, Viano J (2003) Seasonal and phonological variations of the essential oil from the narrow endemic species Artemisia molinieri and its biological activities. J Agric Food Chem 51: 7115-7121.
  6. Angioni A, Barra A, Coroneo V, Dessi S, Cabras P (2006) Chemical composition, seasonal variability and antifungal activity of Lavandula stoechas L. ssp. Stoechas essential oils from stem/leaves and flowers. J Agric Food Chem 54: 4364-4370.
  7. Brand-Williams W, Cuvelier ME, Berset C (1995) Use of a free radical method to evaluate antioxidant activity. Lebensm Wiss Technol 28: 25-30.
  8. Khaliq Jan A, Rehman N, Khan NM, Rauf A, Farooq U, et al. (2017) Chemical Composition and Biological Profile of Essential Oil of Rosmarinus officinalis L. Sci Technol Development 36: 1-5.
  9. Satyal P, Jones TH, Lopez EM, McFeeters RL, Awadh-Ali NA, et al. (2017) Chemotypic Characterization and Biological Activity of Rosmarinus officinalis. Foods 6: 20.
  10. Tomi K, Kitao M, Konishi N, Murakami H, Matsumura Y, et al. (2016) Enantioselective GC-MS analysis of volatile components from rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.) essential oils and hydrosols. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 80: 840-847.
  11. Arnold N, Valentini G, Bellomaria B, Laouer H (1997) Comparative study of the essential oils from Rosmarinus eriocalyx from Algeria and R. officinalis L. from other countries. J Essent Oil Res 9: 167-175.
  12. Palevits PD, Yaniv Z (1991) Medicinal plants of the holy land. Tammuz Publisher Ltd., USA.
Citation: Abdo BM, Asaminew G, Mieso B, Sisay W (2018) Chemotypic Characterization and Antioxidant Activities of Rosemarinus officinalis Essential Oil from Ethiopian Cultivars. Med Aromat Plants (Los Angeles) 7: 325.

Copyright: © 2018 Abdo BM, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Top