Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Scientific Reports logoLink to Scientific Reports
. 2024 Jul 16;14:16360. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-67482-z

A new leaf essential oil from the Andean species Gynoxys szyszylowiczii Hieron. of southern Ecuador: chemical and enantioselective analyses

Yessenia E Maldonado 1, Omar Malagón 1, Nixon Cumbicus 2, Gianluca Gilardoni 1,✉
PMCID: PMC11252159  PMID: 39014058

Abstract

The essential oil obtained from the dry leaves of Gynoxys szyszylowiczii Hieron. was described in this study for the first time. The chemical analysis, conducted on two stationary phases of different polarity, permitted to identify sixty-four compounds, that were quantified with at least one column. The main components, on a non-polar and polar stationary phase respectively, were germacrene D (21.6–19.2%), α-pinene (4.4–4.9%), n-tricosane (4.3% on both columns), (E)-β-caryophyllene (3.3–4.3%), 1-docosene (3.2–2.8%), α-cadinol (2.8–3.1%), and cis-β-guaiene (2.6–3.0%). This investigation was complemented by the enantioselective analysis of some major chiral compounds, carried out on two chiral selectors based on β-cyclodextrines. As a result, (S)-( +)-α-phellandrene, (S)-( +)-β-phellandrene, and (1S,2R,6R,7R,8R)-( +)-α-copaene appeared enantiomerically pure, whereas α-pinene, β-pinene, terpinen-4-ol, and germacrene D were detected as scalemic mixtures. Finally, linalool was practically racemic. The distillation yield, analytically calculated by weight of dry plant material, was 0.03%.

Subject terms: Mass spectrometry, Stereochemistry, Secondary metabolism

Introduction

During the last decades, the increasing and almost exhaustive information about phytochemistry in the boreal hemisphere, shifted the interest of natural product chemists from temperate countries to tropical regions, where most of the botanical species are often still unstudied. In this regard, Ecuador is an ideal place to investigate secondary metabolites since it has been mentioned by the United Nations among the seventeen “megadiverse” countries1. So far, mainly for historical reasons, Ecuador’s outstanding biodiversity has been very poorly investigated, and most of its native and endemic plants still lack a systematic chemical description2,3. For this reason, and with the aim of contributing to the chemotaxonomic description and the biological enhancement of the Ecuadorian biodiversity, our group has been searching for new natural products in this region during the last twenty years4,5. More recently, our interest focused on the description of new essential oils (EOs), with emphasis on their chemical compositions, enantioselective analyses, and gas chromatography–olfactometry (GC-O) profiles6–9. In particular, the present research is a part of an unfunded project, dealing on the systematic description of volatile fractions from the main species of genus Gynoxys Cass. (Asteraceae) in southern Ecuador. In this respect, based on their accessibility on the territory, twelve unprecedented species were selected for their EOs to be described: Gynoxys miniphylla Cuatrec., Gynoxys rugulosa Muschl., Gynoxys buxifolia (Kunth) Cass., Gynoxys laurifolia (Kunth) Cass., Gynoxys szyszylowiczii Hieron., Gynoxys sancti-antonii Cuatrec., Gynoxys calyculisolvens Hieron., Gynoxys pulchella (Kunth) Cass., Gynoxys cuicochensis Cuatrec., Gynoxys reinaldii Cuatrec., Gynoxys hallii Hieron., and Gynoxys azuayensis Cuatrec. All these species grow wild in the highlands of the province of Loja, and they are native or endemic of this region. So far, the chemical and enantioselective analyses of the EOs from G. miniphylla, G. rugulosa, G. buxifolia, and G. laurifolia have been published, G. szyszylowiczii is the object of the present study, whereas all the other species are currently under investigation10–13. The species Gynoxys szyszylowiczii Hieron. is a quite uncommon taxon, with no botanical synonyms and it is absent in the Catalogue of Vascular Plants of Ecuador14–16. However, despite the diffusion area of this species corresponds to Peru, the only available reference specimen was collected in Ecuador in 1998, in the same collection place of the samples that were used in this research (see plant material, Section "Plant material")15. Botanically, G. szyszylowiczii is a tree, 5 m tall, with hexagonal branches when young. The plant is densely reddish-tomentose, with opposite petiolate leaves. Blades are elliptical-oblong or ovate-oblong, with rounded or slightly cordate base, obtuse and pointed apex, denticulate margin, subcoriaceous, sparsely tomentose above when young. The inflorescences are corymbose and branched17.

No traditional use has been reported for this species in Ecuador or elsewhere. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this report represents the first description of an EO obtained from G. szyszylowiczii. The study has been completed with the enantioselective analysis of some major chiral terpenes and terpenoids.

Results

Chemical analysis

The dry leaves of G. szyszylowiczii analytically produced an EO with a 0.03 ± 0.004% yield (w/w), as a mean value over four distillations. The volatile fraction, despite in cyclohexane solution, was characterized by a mild sweet, hay like odour, very similar to the ones of most of the Gynoxys EOs so far studied. The qualitative analysis permitted to identify and quantify sixty-four components with at least one of the two columns used. The quantification corresponded to 86.1–84.1% of the whole oil mass, on the non-polar and polar stationary phases respectively. The EO was dominated by the sesquiterpene fraction, with sesquiterpenes and oxygenated sesquiterpenoids accounting for 37.5–35.6% and 10.8–10.0% of the total mass respectively. Secondly, as usual in Gynoxys EOs, a heavy aliphatic fraction is present, corresponding to 27.5–28.5% of the entire oil composition. Finally, a monoterpene fraction was identified, with monoterpenes and oxygenated monoterpenoids corresponding together to 10.1–9.8% of the whole volatile fraction. Major constituents of G. szyszylowiczii EO (≥ 3.0% on at least one column) were germacrene D (21.6–19.2%, peak 29), α-pinene (4.4–4.9%, peak 1), n-tricosane (4.3% on both columns, peak 57), (E)-β-caryophyllene (3.3–4.3%, peak 24), 1-docosene (3.2–2.8%, peak 54), α-cadinol (2.8–3.1%, peak 43), and cis-β-guaiene (2.6–3.0%, peak 30). The complete chemical analysis is reported in Table 1, whereas the gas chromatographic profiles with both stationary phases are reported in Figs. 1 and 2.

Table 1.

Qualitative (GC–MS) and quantitative (GC-FID) chemical composition of G. szyszylowiczii EO on 5%-phenyl-methylpolysiloxane and polyethylene glycol stationary phases.

N Compounds 5%-phenyl-methylpolysiloxane polyethylene glycol
LRIa LRIb % σ Reference LRIa LRIb % σ Reference
1 α-Pinene 933 932 4.4 1.62 18 1016 1017 4.9 1.05 19
2 Sabinene 975 969 trace – 18 1114 1112 0.1 0.03 19
3 β-Pinene 979 974 2.4 0.45 18 1102 1097 2.3 0.38 19
4 Myrcene 993 988 0.6 0.17 18 1159 1157 0.5 0.11 19
5 2-Pentyl furan 995 984 0.3 0.05 18 1229 1229 0.1 0.02 20
6 6-Methyl-5-hepten-2-one 999 981 0.1 0.01 18 1334 1335 0.1 0.01 21
7 α-Phellandrene 1009 1002 1.2 0.22 18 1154 1158 0.8 0.16 19
8 (2E,4E)-Heptadienal 1014 1005 0.1 0.05 18 1459 1454 0.2 0.04 19
9 α-Terpinene 1020 1014 0.4 0.04 18 1169 1167 0.1 0.03 19
10 p-Cymene 1030 1020 0.8 0.14 18 1261 1265 0.6 0.13 22
11 Limonene 1032 1024 0.1 0.04 18 1189 1191 0.1 0.01 19
12 β-Phellandrene 1034 1025 0.1 0.02 18 1199 1195 0.3 0.03 19
13 (E)-β-Ocimene 1051 1044 0.1 0.03 18 1248 1244 0.1 0.01 19
14 1-Octanol 1086 1063 0.1 0.01 18 1559 1558 0.1 0.01 20
15 Linalool 1110 1096 0.1 0.02 18 1551 1554 0.1 0.01 22
16 n-Nonanal 1116 1100 1.3 0.10 18 1388 1389 0.9 0.06 23
17 Terpinen-4-ol 1191 1174 0.1 0.02 18 1592 1591 0.1 0.01 24
18 (2E,4Z)-Decadienal 1309 1292 0.1 0.01 18 1755 1752 0.1 0.01 25
19 p-Vinyl guaiacol 1327 1309 1.9 0.25 18 2187 2187 1.7 0.05 26
20 (2E,4E)-Decadienal 1335 1315 0.3 0.02 18 1797 1780 0.1 0.10 27
21 α-Copaene 1377 1374 1.1 0.06 18 1472 1472 0.8 0.03 24
22 β-Bourbonene 1385 1387 0.7 0.25 18 1498 1502 0.4 0.07 19
23 Longifolene 1407 1407 0.8 0.21 18 1620 1623 0.7 0.20 28
24 (E)-β-Caryophyllene 1421 1417 3.3 1.67 18 1574 1575 4.3 0.35 29
25 (E)-β-Farnesene 1456 1454 1.4 0.15 18 1662 1660 0.1 0.01 19
26 α-Humulene 1459 1452 18 1645 1650 1.2 0.10 19
27 9-epi-(E)-Caryophyllene 1463 1464 0.1 0.01 18 1574 1572 0.1 0.01 30
28 4,5-di-epi-Aristolochene 1473 1471 0.4 0.01 18 1770 – 0.1 0.01 §
29 Germacrene D 1485 1480 21.6 1.86 18 1686 1690 19.2 2.05 19
30 cis-β-Guaiene 1491 1492 2.6 0.98 18 1669 1667 3.0 1.01 31
31 α-Zingiberene 1495 1493 0.4 0.06 18 1723 1721 0.3 0.05 32
32 Bicyclogermacrene 1500 1500 1.4 0.25 18 1710 1706 1.0 0.38 33
33 α-Muurolene 1503 1500 18 1706 1706 0.3 0.04 34
34 (E,E)-α-Farnesene 1509 1505 1.9 0.34 18 1744 1740 4.1 1.35 19
35 γ-Cadinene 1518 1513 0.3 0.05 18 1737 1738 35
36 δ-Cadinene 1523 1522 1.5 0.28 18 1739 1738 36
37 Germacrene D-4-ol 1586 1574 0.8 0.33 18 2032 2038 0.9 0.15 37
38 Spathulenol 1588 1577 1.4 0.50 18 2104 2106 1.3 0.07 35
39 Caryophyllene oxide 1592 1582 1.8 0.47 18 1951 1953 1.3 0.08 38
40 Ledol 1615 1602 0.7 0.14 18 2003 2007 0.4 0.06 39
41 epi-α-Cadinol 1654 1638 1.0 0.12 18 2155 2154 0.8 0.04 40
42 epi-α-Muurolol 1657 1640 1.5 0.35 18 2171 2171 1.6 0.40 31
43 α-Cadinol 1669 1652 2.8 0.56 18 2216 2221 3.1 0.06 39
44 Amorpha-4,9-dien-2-ol 1705 1700 0.6 0.06 18 2345 – 0.4 0.06 §
45 n-Pentadecanal 1727 1724 0.7 0.05 18 2020 2020 0.7 0.07 41
46 14-Hydroxy-δ-cadinene 1808 1803 0.2 0.07 18 2587 2607 0.2 0.05 36
47 1-Nonadecene 1895 1895 0.3 0.04 42 1946 1943 0.5 0.05 43
48 n-Nonadecane 1900 1900 0.7 0.06 18 1900 1900 0.6 0.06 –
49 n-Heptadecanal 1933 1930 0.2 0.01 44 2238 2247 0.5 0.03 45
50 1-Eicosene 1995 1993 0.7 0.07 42 2047 2047 0.9 0.08 46
51 n-Eicosane 2000 2000 0.4 0.04 18 2000 2000 0.3 0.03 –
52 1-Heneicosene 2095 2094 1.6 0.16 47 2150 2167 1.4 0.13 46
53 n-Heneicosane 2100 2100 2.7 0.18 18 2100 2100 2.5 0.22 –
54 1-Docosene 2195 2196 3.2 0.79 42 2256 – 2.8 0.29 §
55 n-Docosane 2200 2200 1.1 0.10 18 2200 2200 1.4 0.24 –
56 1-Tricosene 2296 2294 2.2 0.27 47 2356 – 1.8 0.13 §
57 n-Tricosane 2300 2300 4.3 1.19 18 2300 2300 4.3 0.24 –
58 1-Tetracosene 2396 2396 1.5 0.34 42 2454 – 1.8 0.16 §
59 n-Tetracosane 2400 2400 0.4 0.08 18 2400 2400 0.5 0.05 –
60 1-Pentacosene 2496 2496 0.3 0.21 42 2553 – 0.7 0.07 §
61 n-Pentacosane 2500 2500 1.1 0.54 18 2500 2500 1.5 0.49 –
62 1-Hexacosene 2597 2596 1.5 0.99 48 2650 – 1.4 0.40 §
63 n-Hexacosane 2600 2600 0.4 0.06 18 2600 2600 0.3 0.05 –
64 n-Heptacosane – – – – 2700 2700 1.3 0.50 –
Monoterpenes 10.1 9.8
Oxygenated monoterpenoids 0.2 0.2
Sesquiterpenes 37.5 35.6
Oxygenated sesquterpenoids 10.8 10.0
Others 27.5 28.5
Total 86.1 84.1
Open in a new tab

acalculated linear retention index (LRI); b reference linear retention index (LRI); % = percent by weight of EO; σ = standard deviation; § = identification by MS only.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

GC–MS profile of G. szyszylowiczii EO on a 5%-phenyl-methylpolysiloxane stationary phase. The peak numbers refer to Table 1. Black numbers: major terpenes and terpenoids (≥ 3.0%); green numbers: heavy n-alkanes; red numbers: heavy 1-alkenes.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

GC–MS profile of G. szyszylowiczii EO on a polyethylene glycol stationary phase. The peak numbers refer to Table 1. Black numbers: major terpenes and terpenoids (≥ 3.0%); green numbers: heavy n-alkanes; red numbers: heavy 1-alkenes.

Enantioselective analysis

The enantioselective analysis permitted to determine the distribution and enantiomeric excess (ee) of height chiral terpenes. Among them, (S)-( +)-α-phellandrene, (S)-( +)-β-phellandrene, and (1S,2R,6R,7R,8R)-( +)-α-copaene were enantiomerically pure, linalool was practically racemic, whereas α-pinene, terpinen-4-ol, and germacrene D were present as scalemic mixtures. The analysis was based on two enantioselective columns to ensure the enantiomer separation of all the detected chiral compounds. As usual, the enantioselective analysis is limited to the chiral components for which enantiomerically pure standards were available. The results of the enantioselective analysis are detailed in Table 2.

Table 2.

Enantioselective analysis of some chiral terpenes from G. szyszylowiczii EO.

Enantiomers 2,3-diethyl-6-tert-butyldimethylsilyl-β-cyclodextrin 2,3-diacethyl-6-tert-butyldimethylsilyl-β-cyclodextrin
LRI Composition (%) ee (%) LRI Composition (%) ee (%)
(1S,5S)-(-)-α-pinene Unresolved 925 23.9§ 52.2
(1R,5R)-( +)-α-pinene 927 76.1§
(1S,5S)-(-)-β-pinene 960 5.7 88.7 Unresolved
(1R,5R)-( +)-β-pinene 949 94.3
(S)-( +)-α-phellandrene 1023 100.0 100.0 1022 100.0 100.0
(R)-(-)-α-phellandrene 1020 – 1024 –
(S)-( +)-β-phellandrene 1062 100.0 100.0 1071 100.0 100.0
(R)-(-)-β-phellandrene 1051 – 1073 –
(R)-(-)-linalool 1182 49.1 1.8 1274 48.7 2.6
(S)-( +)-linalool 1195 50.9 1280 51.3
(1R,2S,6S,7S,8S)-(-)-α-copaene 1320 – 100.0 Unresolved
(1S,2R,6R,7R,8R)-( +)-α-copaene 1323 100.0
(R)-(-)-terpinen-4-ol Unresolved 1293 42.2* 15.6
(S)-( +)-terpinen-4-ol 1297 57.8*
(R)-( +)-germacrene D 1466 98.8 97.6 Unresolved
(S)-(-)-germacrene D 1472 1.2
Open in a new tab

LRI = calculated linear retention index; ee = enantiomeric excess; § partially resolved peaks; * extracting ion 111 m/z.

Discussion

The EO from the leaves of G. szyszylowiczii presented a GC pattern similar to the one of other already known Gynoxys EOs10–13. In fact, we can observe in Figs. 1 and 2, that three main fractions were evident: a minoritarian monoterpene fraction, a majoritarian sesquiterpene fraction, and an important heavy aliphatic fraction. The compared chemical compositions of major components in G. buxifolia, G. laurifolia, G. rugulosa, G. miniphylla, and G. szyszylowiczii EOs are plot in Fig. 3 where compounds, whose abundance is ≥ 3.0% in at least one EO, are represented.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Percent abundance of major components in G. buxifolia, G. laurifolia, G. rugulosa, G. miniphylla, and G. szyszylowiczii EOs. The values correspond to constituents whose abundance is ≥ 3.0% in at least one plant EO, as a mean value between the two GC columns.

According to Fig. 3, it can be observed that G. buxifolia EO was completely different from the others, from both the qualitative and quantitative points of view. On the other hand, G. laurifolia, G. rugulosa, G. miniphylla, and G. szyszylowiczii produced more similar volatile fractions. In fact, in all the species other than G. buxifolia, germacrene D, α-pinene, (E)-β-caryophyllene, β-pinene, α-humulene, δ-cadinene, and α-cadinol were main components, common to all the EOs in a quite similar amount. For what concerns the heavy aliphatic fraction, G. szyszylowiczii was similar to G. rugulosa, despite the relative abundances differed. Only in G. miniphylla EO, δ-3-carene and trans-myrtanol acetate were among the main compounds. The potential anti-inflammatory and cholinergic activities of these EOs, among many others based on their chemical analyses and according to literature, were discussed in our previous studies. These properties could speculatively be extended also to G. szyszylowiczii, due to their similar compositions11,13. Finally, the enantioselective analysis of and G. szyszylowiczii EO can also be compared with those conducted on G. buxifolia, G. laurifolia, G. rugulosa, and G. miniphylla, as indicated in Table 3.

Table 3.

Compared enantiomeric distributions of some chiral compounds in the EOs of G. buxifolia, G. laurifolia, G. rugulosa, G. miniphylla, and G. szyszylowiczii.

Enantiomers Enantiomeric distribution (%)
G. buxifolia G. laurifolia G. rugulosa G. miniphylla G. szyszylowiczii
(1S,5S)-(-)-α-pinene 100.0 64.8 62.9 99.1 23.9
(1R,5R)-( +)-α-pinene – 35.2 37.1 0.9 76.1
(1S,5S)-(-)-β-pinene 100.0 100.0 – 55.9 5.7
(1R,5R)-( +)-β-pinene – – 100.0 44.1 94.3
(1S,5S)-( −)-sabinene 84.6 50.2 27.8 43.0 –
(1R,5R)-( +)-sabinene 15.4 49.8 72.2 57.0 –
(R)-( −)-α-phellandrene – 100.0 40.9 100.0 –
(S)-( +)-α-phellandrene 100.0 – 59.1 – 100.0
(R)-(-)-β-phellandrene – 100.0 – 100.0 –
(S)-( +)-β-phellandrene 100.0 – 100.0 – 100.0
(R)-(-)-linalyl acetate – – – – –
(S)-( +)-linalyl acetate – 100.0 – – –
(R)-(-)-linalool – 62.3 52.4 – 48.9
(S)-( +)-linalool – 37.7 47.6 – 51.1
(1R,2S,6S,7S,8S)-(-)-α-copaene – – 4.3 – –
(1S,2R,6R,7R,8R)-( +)-α-copaene – – 95.7 – 100.0
(R)-(-)-terpinen-4-ol – 53.0 42.6 – 42.2
(S)-( +)-terpinen-4-ol 100.0 47.0 57.4 – 57.8
(S)-( −)-α-terpineol – 66.3 50.1 – –
(R)-( +)-α-terpineol – 33.7 49.9 – –
(S)-(-)-germacrene D – 100.0 4.5 95.5 1.2
(R)-( +)-germacrene D – – 95.5 4.5 98.8
Open in a new tab

As we can observe, the EOs did not apparently shared a common distribution pattern. In fact, in different volatile fractions, different enantiomers of the same compound could be detected in an enantiomerically pure form. In other cases, where scalemic mixtures were observed, the dominant enantiomer was not always the same. On the other hand, β-phellandrene always appeared as a pure enantiomer, whereas β-pinene, sabinene, α-phellandrene, linalool, terpinen-4-ol, and α-terpineol were sometimes observed as almost racemic. As usual, the presence of different enantiomers in a natural source can be justified by the different biological properties that they exert in living organisms, due to the chiral character of enzymes and receptors49,50. About G. szyszylowiczii EO, we could observe the presence of α-copaene as an abundant compound (about 1%). This sesquiterpene is not common in this botanical genus and has been observed so far only in G. rugulosa, where it is present in his almost enantiomerically pure dextrorotatory form. This enantiomer has been described for being a chemical rendezvous cue for the Mediterranean fruit fly Ceratitis capitata51. Furthermore, according to literature, (1S, 2R, 6R, 7R, 8R)-( +)-α-copaene affected C. capitata virgin females, inducing “pseudomale” courtship behaviour in a short-range bioassay.

Another issue is the different enantiomeric excess of α-pinene and β-pinene within the same species (see Table 3). In fact, both α-pinene and β-pinene derive from the same pinyl cation, by effect of the same enzyme pinene synthase52. Since the final stereochemistry of pinenes depends on the configuration of the common carbocation, the same enantiomeric excess is expected to be observed, for the same enantiomer, in both pinenes. However, a different experimental evidence is reported in the present study. This phenomenon could theoretically be explained, for example through the enantiospecific transformation of only one enantiomer into another unidentified compound.

Methods

Plant material

The leaves of G. szyszylowiczii were collected on 9 March 2020 in the province of Loja (Ecuador), from different trees and treelets located within the distance of 200 m from a central point, whose coordinates were 03° 40′ 52'' S and 79° 15′ 57'' W. The taxonomic identification was carried out by one of the authors (N.C.), and a botanical specimen is conserved at the herbarium of the Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja (HUTPL), with voucher 14,670. The plant was collected at the same collection place of a reference specimen, conserved at the Missouri Botanical Garden (St. Louis, MO, USA) with code 5,167,495, that was used for identification. After collection, the plant material was dried at 35 °C for 48 h and stored in a fresh dark place until use. Both collection and investigation were conducted under permission of the Ministry of Environment, Water and Ecological Transition of Ecuador, as reported in the policy statement about plant investigation.

Distillation and sample preparation

Four amounts of dry leaves (80.7 g, 81.5 g, 80.7 g, and 80.8 g respectively) were analytically steam distilled for four hours each, as previously described in literature, in a modified Dean-Stark apparatus11. The volatile fraction, after condensation, was extracted in situ through 2 mL of cyclohexane, previously spiked with n-nonane as internal standard (0.7 mg/mL). An internal standard was necessary because the EO was obtained as a solvent solution of unknown concentration. The four repetitions, obtained in this way, were directly injectable into GC and they were stored at -15 °C until use. Both cyclohexane and n-nonane were analytical grade and purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA).

Qualitative (GC–MS) and quantitative (GC-FID) chemical analyses

Both qualitative and quantitative analyses were conducted on two different columns (30 m long, 0.25 mm internal diameter and 0.25 μm film thickness), purchased from Agilent Technology (Santa Clara, CA, USA). One column was based on 5%-phenyl-methylpolysiloxane (HP-5) as a non-polar stationary phase and the other one was based on polyethylene glycol (HP-INNOWax) as a polar stationary phase. For the qualitative analysis, the columns were installed in a gas chromatograph (GC) model Trace 1310, coupled to a simple quadrupole detector (MS) model ISQ 7000 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Walthan, MA, USA). The ion source was an electron ionization (EI) device, with 70 eV ionization energy. The MS was operated in SCAN mode, with the mass analyser set at the mass range of 40–400 m/z. Both ion source and transfer line were heated at 230 °C. For the quantitative analysis, the same GC as the qualitative one was used. However, a flame ionization detector (FID), set at 230 °C, was employed instead of MS. In both qualitative and quantitative analyses, the injection volume (1 μL), injector conditions, carrier gas, and thermal program were the same. The injector was operated in split mode (40:1 for GC–MS and 10:1 for GC-FID) and it was heated at 230 °C, whereas the carrier gas was helium (purchased from Indura, Guayaquil, Ecuador), that was set at the constant flow of 1 mL/min. In the qualitative analysis, the EO components were identified by comparison of each MS spectrum and linear retention index (LRI) with data from literature (see Table 1). The LRIs were calculated according to Van den Dool and Kratz, based on a mixture of homologues n-alkanes in the range C9–C27 (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA)53. In the quantitative analysis, each constituent was quantified through a six-point calibration curve, using n-nonane (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) as internal standard and isopropyl caproate as calibration standard, as previously described in literature54. Isopropyl caproate was synthetised in one of the authors’ laboratories (G.G.) and purified until 98.8% (GC-FID purity). Both calibration curves afforded a correlation coefficient of 0.999. The EO components were quantified calculating each relative response factor versus isopropyl caproate, based on its combustion enthalpy, according to literature55,56.

Enantioselective analysis

The enantioselective analysis was conducted on two different GC columns, whose stationary phases were based on β-cyclodextrins (2,3-diacetyl-6-tert-butyldimethylsilyl-β-cyclodextrin and 2,3-diethyl-6-tert-butyldimethylsilyl-β-cyclodextrin), purchased from MEGA S.r.l., Legnano (MI), Italy. The columns were 25 m long, 0.25 mm internal diameter and 0.25 μm phase thickness, installed in the same GC–MS instrument described for the qualitative analysis. The analytical method was based on the following thermal program: 50 °C for 1 min, a thermal gradient of 2 °C/min until 220 °C, that were maintained for 10 min. The carrier gas (He) was set at the constant pressure of 70 kPa. Sample volumes, injector temperature, transfer line temperature, and MS parameters were the same as the qualitative analyses, whereas split ratio was 20:1 in order to significantly increase sensitivity. The enantiomers of the main chiral components were identified by mass spectrum and injection of enantiomerically pure standards (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA).

Policy statement about plant investigation

The authors declare that all experimental research and field studies on plants (either cultivated or wild), including the collection of plant material, were carried out in accordance with relevant institutional, national, and international guidelines and legislation. Furthermore, this study was conducted under permission of the Ministry of Environment, Water and Ecological Transition of Ecuador, with MAATE registry number MAE-DNB-CM-2016–0048. Finally, the authors declare that a minimal quantity of plant material was collected to carry on the present investigation, avoiding any injury to the shrubs at the collection site.

Conclusions

The dry leaves of Gynoxys szyszylowiczii Hieron. produce an EO, with a yield of 0.03% by weight. On the one hand, the chemical profile is consistent with the ones previously described for G. laurifolia, G. rugulosa, and G. miniphylla, but very different from G. buxifolia. The chemical profile showed a volatile fraction dominated by sesquiterpenes and heavy aliphatic compounds (hydrocarbons and alkenes). On the other hand, the enantiomeric composition of the Gynoxys spp. studied so far did not apparently present a common pattern. For a more objective interpretation of Gynoxys metabolism, a statistical comparison of all the EOs will be the object of a future study (Supplementary Information file 1).

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figures. (445.3KB, docx)

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja (UTPL) for supporting this investigation and open access publication. We are also grateful to Prof. Carlo Bicchi (University of Turin, Italy) and Dr. Stefano Galli (MEGA S.r.l., Legnano, Italy) for their support with enantioselective columns.

Author contributions

Investigation Y.E.M. and N.C.; data elaboration Y.E.M.; manuscript revision and editing O.M.; conceptualization, supervision, and original manuscript writing G.G. All authors reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41598-024-67482-z.

References

  • 1.UNEP-WCMC Megadiverse Countries. https://www.biodiversitya-z.org/content/megadiverse-countries (accessed on 13 November 2023).
  • 2.Malagón O, et al. Phytochemistry and ethnopharmacology of the Ecuadorian flora. A review. Nat. Prod. Commun. 2016;11:297–314. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Armijos C, Ramírez J, Salinas M, Vidari G, Suárez AI. Pharmacology and phytochemistry of Ecuadorian medicinal plants: An update and perspectives. Pharmaceuticals. 2021;14:1145. doi: 10.3390/ph14111145. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Chiriboga X, Gilardoni G, Magnaghi I, Vita Finzi P, Zanoni G, Vidari G. New anthracene derivatives from Coussarea macrophylla. J. Nat. Prod. 2003;66:905–909. doi: 10.1021/np030066i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Gilardoni G, Chiriboga X, Finzi PV, Vidari G. New 3,4-secocycloartane and 3,4-secodammarane triterpenes from the Ecuadorian plant Coussarea macrophylla. Chem. Biodivers. 2015;12:946–954. doi: 10.1002/cbdv.201400182. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Vivanco K, Montesinos JV, Cumbicus N, Malagón O, Gilardoni G. The essential oil from leaves of Mauria heterophylla Kunth (Anacardiaceae): Chemical and enantioselective analyses. J. Essent. Oil. Res. 2023 doi: 10.1080/10412905.2023.2266430. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Maldonado YE, Malagón O, Cumbicus N, Gilardoni G. A new essential oil from the native Ecuadorian species Steiractinia sodiroi (Hieron.) S.F. Blake (Asteraceae): Chemical and enantioselective analyses. Sci. Rep. 2023;13:17180. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-44524-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Gilardoni G, Montalván M, Ortiz M, Vinueza D, Montesinos JV. The flower essential oil of Dalea mutisii Kunth (Fabaceae) from Ecuador chemical, enantioselective, and olfactometric analyses. Plants. 2020;9:1403. doi: 10.3390/plants9101403. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ramírez J, et al. Chemical composition, enantiomeric analysis, AEDA sensorial evaluation and antifungal activity of the essential oil from the Ecuadorian plant Lepechinia mutica Benth (Lamiaceae) Chem. Biodivers. 2017;14:e1700292. doi: 10.1002/cbdv.201700292. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Malagón O, Cartuche P, Montaño A, Cumbicus N, Gilardoni G. A new essential oil from the leaves of the endemic Andean species Gynoxys miniphylla Cuatrec. (Asteraceae): Chemical and enantioselective analyses. Plants. 2022;11:398. doi: 10.3390/plants11030398. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Maldonado YE, Malagón O, Cumbicus N, Gilardoni G. A new essential oil from the leaves of Gynoxys rugulosa Muschl. (Asteraceae) growing in southern Ecuador: Chemical and enantioselective analyses. Plants. 2023;12:849. doi: 10.3390/plants12040849. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Cumbicus C, Malagón O, Cumbicus N, Gilardoni G. The leaf essential oil of Gynoxys buxifolia (Kunth) Cass. (Asteraceae): A good source of furanoeremophilane and bakkenolide A. Plants. 2023;12:1323. doi: 10.3390/plants12061323. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Gilardoni G, Lara LR, Cumbicus N, Malagón O. A new leaf essential oil from endemic Gynoxys laurifolia (Kunth) Cass. of southern Ecuador: Chemical and enantioselective analyses. Plants. 2023;12:2878. doi: 10.3390/plants12152878. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.WFO Plant List: https://wfoplantlist.org/plant-list/taxon/wfo-0000088383-2023-06?page=1 (accessed on 13 November 2023).
  • 15.Tropicos.org. Missouri Botanical Garden. Available online: https://www.tropicos.org (accessed on 13 November 2023).
  • 16.Jorgensen, P., Leon-Yanez, S. Catalogue of the Vascular Plants of Ecuador 309 (Missouri Botanical Garden Press, 1999).
  • 17.Hieronymus GH. Plantae peruvianae a claro Constantino de Jelski collectae. Compositae. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 1905;36:505. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Adams RP. Identification of Essential Oil Components by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry. 4. Allured Publishing Corporation; 2007. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Gancel A-L, Ollitrault P, Froelicher Y, Jacquemond C, Luro F, Brillouet J-M. Leaf volatile compounds of six citrus somatic allotetraploid hybrids originating from various combinations of lime, lemon, citron, sweet orange, and grapefruit. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005;53(6):2224–2230. doi: 10.1021/jf048315b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Fernandez-Segovia I, Escriche I, Gomez-Sintes M, Fuentes A, Serra JA. Influence of different preservation treatments on the volatile fraction of desalted cod. Food Chem. 2006;98(3):473–482. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.06.021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Duque C, Bonilla A, Bautista E, Zea S. Exudation of low molecular weight compounds (thiobismethane, methyl isocyanide, and methyl isothiocyanate) as a possible chemical defense mechanism in the marine sponge Ircinia felix. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2001;59(5):459–467. doi: 10.1016/S0305-1978(00)00081-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Rega B, Fournier N, Nicklaus S, Guichard E. Role of pulp in flavor release and sensory perception in orange juice. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004;52(12):4204–4212. doi: 10.1021/jf035361n. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Vichi S, Pizzale L, Conte LS, Buxaderas S, López-Tamames E. Solid-phase microextraction in the analysis of virgin olive oil volatile fraction: characterization of virgin olive oils from two distinct geographical areas of Northern Italy. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003;51(22):6572–6577. doi: 10.1021/jf030269c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Zheng CH, Kim KH, Kim TH, Lee HJ. Analysis and characterization of aroma-active compounds of Schizandra chinensis (omija) leaves. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2005;85(1):161–166. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.1975. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Mahajan SS, Goddik L, Qian MC. Aroma compounds in sweet why powder. J. Dairy Sci. 2004;87(12):4057–4063. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73547-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Kotseridis Y, Baumes R. Identification of impact odorants in Bordeaux red grape juice, in the commercial yeast used for its fermentation, and in the produced wine. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2000;48(2):400–406. doi: 10.1021/jf990565i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Chen C-C, Kuo M-C, Lui S-E, Wu C-M. Volatile components of salted and pickled prunes (Prunus mume Sieb. et Zucc) J. Agric. Food Chem. 1986;34(1):140–144. doi: 10.1021/jf00067a038. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Vinogradov, B.A. Production, composition, properties and application of essential oils. http://viness.narod.ru (2004).
  • 29.Kim TH, Thuy NT, Shin JH, Beak HH, Lee HJ. Aroma-active compounds of miniature beefsteak plant (Mosla dianthera Maxim.) J. Agric. Food Chem. 2000;48(7):2877–2881. doi: 10.1021/jf000219x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Paniandy J-C, Chane-Ming J, Pierbattesti J-C. Chemical composition of the essential oil and headspace solid-phase microextraction of the guava fruit (Psidium guajava L.) J. Essent. Oil Res. 2000;22(12):153–158. doi: 10.1080/14786410802055568. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Ferretti G, Maggi F, Tirillini B. Essential oil composition of Hypericum richeri Vill. from Italy. Flavour Fragr. J. 2005;20(3):295–398. doi: 10.1002/ffj.1412. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Bortolomeazzi R, Berno P, Pizzale L, Conte LS. Sesquiterpene, alkene, and alkane hydrocarbons in virgin olive oils of different varieties and geographical origins. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2001;49(7):3278–3283. doi: 10.1021/jf001271w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Bendiabdellah A, El Anime Dib M, Djabou N, Allali H, Tabti B, Costa J, Muselli A. Biological activities and volatile constituents of Daucus muricatus L. from Algeria. Chem. Centr. J. 2012;6(48):1–22. doi: 10.1186/1752-153X-6-48. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Ferhat MA, Meklati BY, Chemat F. Comparison of different isolation methods of essential oil from Citrus fruits: Cold pressing, hydrodistillation and microwave dry distillation. Flavour Fragr. J. 2007;22(6):494–504. doi: 10.1002/ffj.1829. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Yu EJ, Kim TH, Kim KH, Lee HJ. Characterization of aroma-active compounds of Abies nephrolepis (Khingan fir) needles using aroma extract dilution analysis. Flavour Fragr. J. 2004;19(1):74–79. doi: 10.1002/ffj.1314. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Baser KHC, Özek G, Özek T, Duran A, Duman H. Composition of the essential oils of Rhabdosciadium oligocarpum (Post ex Boiss.) Hedge et Lamond and Rhabdosciadium microcalycinum Hand. - Mazz. Flavour Fragr. J. 2006;21(4):650–655. doi: 10.1002/ffj.1639. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Merle H, Verdeguer M, Blázquez MA, Boira H. Chemical composition of the essential oils from Eriocephalus africanus L. var. Africanus populations growing in Spain. Flavour Fragr. J. 2007;22(6):461–464. doi: 10.1002/ffj.1821. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Vichi S, Riu-Aumatell M, Mora-Pons M, Guadayol JM, Buxaderas S, López-Tamames E. HS-SPME coupled to GC/MS for quality control of Juniperus communis L. berries used for gin aromatization. Food Chem. 2007;105(4):1748–1754. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.03.026. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Hachicha SF, Skanji T, Barrek S, Ghrabi ZG, Zarrouk H. Composition of the essential oil of Teucrium ramosissimum Desf. (Lamiaceae) from Tunisia. Flavour Fragr. J. 2007;22(2):101–104. doi: 10.1002/ffj.1764. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Neves A, Rosa S, Goncalves J, Rufino A, Judas F, Salgueiro L, Lopes MC, Cavaleiro C, Mendes AF. Screening of five essential oils for identification of potential inhibitors of IL-1-unduced Nf-kB activation and NO production in human clondrocytes: Characterization of the inhibitory activity of alpha-pinene. Plante Med. 2010;76(03):303–308. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1186085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Bendimerad N, Bendiab SAT. Composition and antibacterial activity of Pseudocytisus integrifolius (Salisb.) essential oil from Algeria. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005;53(8):2947–2952. doi: 10.1021/jf047937u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Zaikin VG, Borisov RS. Chromatographic-mass spectrometric analysis of Fishcer-Tropsch synthesis products. J. Anal. Chem. 2002;57(6):544–551. doi: 10.1023/A:1015754120136. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Mastelic J, Jerkovic I, Mesic M. Volatile constituents from flowers, leaves, bark and wood of Prunus mahaleb L. Flavour Fragr. J. 2006;21(2):306–313. doi: 10.1002/ffj.1596. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Madruga MS, Arruda SGB, Narain N, Souza JG. Castration and slaughter age effects on panel assessment and aroma compounds of the mestico goat meat. Meat Sci. 2000;56(2):117–125. doi: 10.1016/S0309-1740(00)00025-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Choi H-S. Headspace analyses of fresh leaves and stems of Angelica gigas Nakai, a Korean medicinal herb. Flavour Fragr. J. 2006;21(4):604–608. doi: 10.1002/ffj.1602. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Condurso C, Verzera A, Romeo V, Ziino M, Trozzi A, Ragusa S. The leaf volatile constituents of Isatis tinctoria by solid phase microextraction and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Planta Med. 2006;72(10):924–928. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-946679. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Utsunomia H, Kawata J, Chanoki W, Shirakawa N, Miyazawa M. Components of essential oil from woods of Prunus mume Sieb. at Zucc. J. Oleo Sci. 2005;54(11):609–612. doi: 10.5650/jos.54.609. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Radulovic N, Blagojevic P, Palic R. Comparative study of the leaf volatiles of Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (L.) Spreng and Vaccinium vitis-idaea L. (Ericaceae) Molecules. 2010;15(9):6168–6185. doi: 10.3390/molecules15096168. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Brenna E, Fuganti C, Serra S. Enantioselective perception of chiral odorants. Tetrahedron: Asymmetry. 2003;14:1–42. doi: 10.1016/S0957-4166(02)00713-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Lis-Balcnin M, Ochocka RJ, Deans SG, Asztemborska M, Hart S. Differences in bioactivity between the enantiomers of α-pinene. J. Essent. Oil Res. 1999;11:393–397. doi: 10.1080/10412905.1999.9701162. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Nishida R, Shelly TE, Whittier TS, Kaneshiro KY. α-Copaene, a potential rendezvous cue for the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis Capitata? J. Chem Ecol. 2000;26(1):87–100. doi: 10.1023/A:1005489411397. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Dewick PM. Medicinal Natural Products. A Biosynthetic Approach. 3. John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2009. [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Van Den Dool H, Kratz PD. A generalization of the retention index system including linear temperature programmed gas-liquid partition chromatography. J. Chromatogr. 1963;11:463–471. doi: 10.1016/S0021-9673(01)80947-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Gilardoni G, Matute Y, Ramírez J. Chemical and enantioselective analysis of the leaf essential oil from Piper coruscans Kunth (Piperaceae), a costal and Amazonian native species of Ecuador. Plants. 2020;9:791. doi: 10.3390/plants9060791. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.De Saint Laumer JY, Cicchetti E, Merle P, Egger J, Chaintreau A. Quantification in gas chromatography: prediction of flame ionization detector response factors from combustion enthalpies and molecular structures. Anal. Chem. 2010;82:6457–6462. doi: 10.1021/ac1006574. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Tissot E, Rochat S, Debonneville C, Chaintreau A. Rapid GC-FID quantification technique without authentic samples using predicted response factors. Flavour Fragr. J. 2012;27:290–296. doi: 10.1002/ffj.3098. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Figures. (445.3KB, docx)

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Articles from Scientific Reports are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES