Abstract
Orthosiphon aristatus (Blume) Miq. of the Lamiaceae family, called as kumis kucing in Indonesia, is a valuable medicinal plant for their pharmacological properties. The present study comprised of fifteen genotypes of O. aristatus was undertaken to evaluate the genotypes based on phytochemical content and pharmacological activities of leaves ethanol extract. Chemometric analysis (correlation and principal component analysis) was also used to investigate the genetic variability based on phytochemical content and pharmacological activities of O. aristatus genotypes. Results of phytochemical characterization showed that total phenolic ranged from 1.48 to 36.08 (maximum in A15) mg GAE/g DW, total flavonoid ranged from 0.10 to 3.07 (maximum in A15) mg QE/g DW, sinensetin ranged from 0.36 to 4.02 (maximum in A11) mg/g DW, and rosmarinic acid ranged 0.06 to 7.25 (maximum in A7) mg/g DW. Antioxidant activity was tested using DPPH and FRAP assay. Antioxidant results showed that DPPH ranged from 1.68 to 15.55 (maximum in A15) μmol TE/g DW and FRAP ranged from 0.07 to 1.60 (maximum in A1 and A7) μmol TE/g DW. The genotype A8 showed the highest cytotoxic activities against HeLa (66.25%) and MCF-7 (61.79%) cell lines. Maximum α-glucosidase inhibitory activity was recorded in genotype A2 with the value of 62.84%. The genotypes A1, A2, A7, A11, and A15 were identified as superior based on their phytochemicals content and pharmacological activities coupled with chemometric analysis. This finding is important for breeding studies and also the pharmaceutical perspective of O. aristatus.
Subject terms: Biochemistry, Chemical biology, Plant sciences
Introduction
Orthosiphon aristatus (Blume) Miq. known as kumis kucing in Indonesia belongs to the Lamiaceae family. It is a herb with many traditionally uses to treat several diseases such as bacterial and urinary tract infections, inflammation, rheumatism, influenza, angiogenesis, and jaundice1–3. O. aristatus is widely cultivated in tropical countries and Southeast Asia including Indonesia4. Asian and European people use the leaves of this plant as a herb tea that called as Java tea4. Several works related to pharmacological properties of O. aristatus have been carried out comprehensively, including antidiabetic5, anti-infective6, hypouricemic and diuretic 7, antiobesity and hypolipidemic8, antiosteoporotic9, antiangiogenic and anticancer10,11, antioxidant and protection of the intestine from oxidative stress12,13, osteoarthritis protection14, angiotensin I-converting enzyme and α-glucosidase inhibitory15,16. Phenolics, flavonoids, sinensetin, and rosmarinic acid are important constituents or components for pharmacological properties17–19. Therefore, the phytochemicals contents of O. aristatus is associated with their pharmacological activities. For this reason, it’s essential to select O. aristatus genotypes with high phytochemical levels and pharmacological activities, which can be used for a variety development through plant breeding programs.
The quality and yields of phytochemicals, leading to diversity of pharmacological activities in medicinal plants, can be influenced by environmental conditions and genotypes20,21. Therefore, in terms of the genotype selected under the particular environmental situation, the most appropriate varieties' development has become essential, which can increase their phytochemical and pharmacological activities. Plant varieties from a breeding program must have stability yield under various growing environmental conditions22. The assessment of genetic variability among various genotypes is the key requirement in the plant breeding program. Recently, breeders still use genetic and phenotypic performance to select important characters in the breeding program. Microsatellite markers have been used in genetic diversity analyses of twenty-eight samples of O. aristatus from Malaysia23. The diversity of morphological characters were identified in eighteen O. aristatus accessions from Indonesia24. Therefore, it is crucial to improve detailed comparative studies on plant chemicals' contents and their pharmacological activities of O. aristatus.
The present study was aimed to investigate the leaves phytochemical content and biological activities in ethanol extract of fifteen O. aristatus genotypes. Phytochemical analyses included the evaluation of phenolics, flavonoids, sinensetin, and rosmarinic acid, whereas the antioxidant, cytotoxicity and α-glucosidase inhibitory activities were performed for pharmacological activities. O. aristatus genotypes were grown under the same soil conditions and environment; therefore, the diversity of results was genetically reflected in the various genotypes which studied. O. aristatus genotypes were classified based on their phytochemical content and biological activities using correlation and principal component analysis (PCA). This result is significant in the identification of the elite genotypes for developing O. aristatus varieties at a commercial scale.
Results
Extraction yield
The results of ethanol extraction demonstrated the influence of genotypes on the extraction yield of O. aristatus leaves genotypes. The ethanol extraction yield of the studied genotypes varied from 1.73 to 16.91% DW (Table 1). The genotype A1 had the highest extraction yield, which not significantly different from A11 (16.64% DW) and A15 (16.67% DW) at p < 0.05, and the genotype A6 had the lowest.
Table 1.
Extraction yield, TPC, TFC, SC, and RAC of fifteen O. aristatus genotype in ethanolic extracts of leaves.
| Genotypes | EY | TPC | TFC | RAC | SC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (% DW) | (mg GAE/g DW) | mg QE/g DW | (mg/g DW) | (mg/g DW) | |
| A1 | 16.91a | 15.27d | 2.41b | 1.18i | 1.21e |
| A2 | 9.00e | 5.76j | 1.24f | 2.67e | 1.82d |
| A3 | 12.84c | 5.28j | 1.87d | 4.75c | 0.53fg |
| A4 | 15.35b | 5.09j | 1.99d | 2.06g | 0.73f |
| A5 | 15.25b | 16.82cd | 1.72c | 3.84d | 2.17c |
| A6 | 1.73h | 1.48k | 0.10i | 0.06k | 0.61fg |
| A7 | 14.98b | 17.62c | 0.84e | 7.25a | 1.45e |
| A8 | 13.34c | 14.84e | 1.72e | 6.27b | 0.36g |
| A9 | 10.75d | 7.10i | 0.89g | 2.40ef | 0.55fg |
| A10 | 11.53d | 12.79f | 1.13g | 2.24f | 0.87f |
| A11 | 16.64a | 25.95b | 2.13c | 1.98g | 4.02a |
| A12 | 9.11e | 10.44e | 0.38h | 0.63j | 0.88f |
| A13 | 7.86f | 9.25g | 0.41h | 1.66h | 0.20g |
| A14 | 5.34g | 8.02h | 0.76g | 0.56j | 0.40g |
| A15 | 16.67a | 36.08a | 3.07a | 0.90i | 3.31b |
DW dried weight, EY extraction yield, TPC total phenolic content, TFC total flavonoids content, SC sinensetin content, RAC rosmarinic acid content; different letters in the same column represent statistically different results at p < 0.05.
Phytochemical analysis
The results of the phytochemical analysis in ethanol extract of O. aristatus genotypes leaves are presented in Table 1. Total phenolic content (TPC), total flavonoid content (TFC), rosmarinic acid content (RAC), and sinensetin content (SC) have been evaluated in ethanol extract of 15 O. aristatus genotypes leaves. TPC varied significantly and ranged from 1.48 mg GAE/g DW to 36.08 mg GAE/g DW. The genotype A15 had the highest TPC, and the genotype A6 had lowest. TFC were observed statistically significant difference at p < 0.05, ranged from 0.10 mg QE/g DW to 3.07 mg QE/g DW among the O. aristatus genotypes. In this study, the maximum TFC was recorded with A15 and minimum was in A6. The highest RAC (7.25 mg/g DW) was found in genotype A7, meanwhile the lowest (0.06 mg/g DW) was observed in genotype A6. The SC ranged from 0.20 (A13) to 4.02 (A11) mg/g DW.
Pharmacological activities
Antioxidant activity in the studied genotypes were measured using DPPH and FRAP assays (Table 2). In the DPPH assay, the antioxidant properties ranged between 1.68 (A6) to 15.55 (A15) μmol TE/g DW. DPPH value of A15 showed not significantly different with A1 (15.43 μmol TE/g DW) at p < 0.05. In FRAP assay, the genotype A1 and A7 showed maximum antioxidant properties with the same value of 1.60 mmol TE/g DW. In comparison, genotype A6 exhibited the lowest activity with a value of 0.07 mmol TE/g DW.
Table 2.
Antioxidant activity, anticancer activity, and α-glucosidase inhibitory activity of fifteen O. aristatus genotype in ethanolic extracts of leaves.
| Genotypes | DPPH | FRAP | HeLa | MCF-7 | GIA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (μmol TE/g DW) | (μmol TE/g DW) | (%) | (%) | (%) | |
| A1 | 15.43a | 1.60a | 52.62c | 36.70e-h | 17.03i |
| A2 | 7.87ef | 0.42h | 57.49bc | 57.02ab | 62.84a |
| A3 | 12.37c | 1.28c | 52.43c | 50.90bc | 23.15gh |
| A4 | 14.28ab | 0.82f | 55.67bc | 41.46def | 15.41i |
| A5 | 13.75b | 0.91e | 53.88bc | 58.56ab | 6.28j |
| A6 | 1.68h | 0.07i | 50.76c | 46.84cd | 16.30i |
| A7 | 11.73c | 1.60a | 60.37ab | 31.00gh | 36.21e |
| A8 | 11.12d | 1.36c | 66.25a | 61.79a | 31.46f |
| A9 | 10.28d | 0.83f | 35.62e | 21.96i | 22.06h |
| A10 | 10.52d | 1.19d | 7.33f | 35.70fgh | 39.69d |
| A11 | 14.93a | 1.50b | 30.77e | 44.49cde | 43.95c |
| A12 | 8.83e | 0.50g | 34.66e | 30.44h | 52.64b |
| A13 | 7.25f | 0.80f | 43.30d | 38.96d-g | 25.15g |
| A14 | 5.07g | 0.44h | 28.85e | 56.41ab | 33.14f |
| A15 | 15.55a | 1.32c | 30.44e | 56.57ab | 43.24c |
DW dried weight, DPPH 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl, FRAP ferric reducing antioxidant power, HeLa anticancer activity of HeLa cancer cell line, MCF-7 anticancer activity of MCF-7 cancer cell line, GIA α-glucosidase inhibitory activity; different letters in the same column represent statistically different results at p < 0.05.
Cytotoxic activities against HeLa and MCF-7 cell lines of 15 genotypes of O. aristatus extracts are exhibited in Table 2. Cytotoxic activity of O. aristatus genotypes against the HeLa cell line ranged from 7.33 to 66.25%. In the MCF-7 cell line, the cytotoxic activity of O. aristatus genotypes ranged from 21.96 to 61.79%. For both cell lines studied, genotype A8 showed the highest cytotoxic activity. The antiproliferative activity of genotype A8 against the HeLa cell line presented not significantly different from genotype A7 (60.37%). Meanwhile, in MCF-7 cell lines, cytotoxic activity of genotype A8 showed no difference with A2 (57.02%), A5 (58.56%), A14 (56.41%), and A15 (56.57%).
The α-glucosidase inhibition is used to select the O. aristatus varieties with the most antidiabetic potential. The 15 extracts of O. aristatus leaves from different genotypes had a different activity to inhibit α-glucosidase (Table 2). The inhibition activity was varied from 6.28% to 62.84%. The highest inhibition found in genotypes of A2, whereas the lowest detected in A5.
Multivariate analysis
In this study, the correlation and principal component analysis (PCA) in O. aristatus studied genotypes were performed for multivariate data analysis.
Figure 1 shows the correlation matrix chart of phytochemical content and pharmacological activities from the ethanol extract of O. aristatus studied genotypes. Extraction yield showed a significantly positive correlation with TPC, TFC, SC, DPPH, and FRAP. TPC recorded considerably correlated with TFC, SC, DPPH, and FRAP. TFC significantly correlated with SC, DPPH, and FRAP. SC associated considerably with antioxidant activity (DPPH assay). Furthermore, two tests of antioxidant activities were used in this study, DPPH, and FRAP, which showed a strong correlation. Significant associations were also found between RAC & FRAP and RAC & HeLa. MCF-7 and GIA showed the lowest correlation with other parameter studied of phytochemical components, extraction yield, and biological activities.
Figure 1.
Correlation matrix chart of phytochemical content and pharmacological parameters. The upper panels show the Pearson’s correlation coefficients while the lower panels report the scatter plots. *, **, *** indicates significance at p < 0.05, < 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. For an explanation of parameter symbols, see Tables 1 and 2.
The principal component analysis was performed for phytochemical contents and pharmacological activities to evaluate any promising group within the O. aristatus genotypes. Result PCA analysis in the first five principal components presented in Table 3. The first five principal components resulted in 93.31% of the cumulative percent of the variance. PC1 and PC2 explained 46.34% and 19.67% of variance with eigenvalue 4.63 and 1.97, respectively. PC3 to PC5 having smaller eigenvalue, thus these not significantly explained the variance in datasets (27.31%). Thus, PC1 and PC2 selected for explaining the variance. Figure 2 shows the loading plot of phytochemical content and pharmacological parameters. EY, TPC, TFC, SC, DPPH, and FRAP parameters had the significant effects on the PC1. Meanwhile, RAC and HeLa parameters had strong influences on the PC2. Biplot analysis of phytochemicals and biological properties created from the comparison of component one-two PCs revealed three distinct clusters of O. aristatus genotypes (Fig. 3). Four groups resulted, as shown in Fig. 1. Cluster I comprised of six genotypes viz. A1, A3, A4, A5, A7, and A8 with characterized by high rosmarinic acid and cytotoxic (HeLa & MCF-7) activity, intermediary for other phytochemical and antioxidant activity, and lowly GIA. Cluster II has composed seven genotypes: A2, A6, A9, A10, A12, A13, and A14. These genotypes characterized by low phytochemical content and biological activities, except high for GIA. Cluster III composed two genotypes (A11 and A15) and characterized by high total phenolic content, total flavonoid content, sinensetin content, extraction yield, and antioxidant activity.
Table 3.
First five principle components and its eigenvalue and percent variation explained for phytochemical content and pharmacological activities of O. aristatus genotype.
| Parametersa | Dim. 1 | Dim. 2 | Dim. 3 | Dim. 4 | Dim. 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EY | 0.955 | 0.157 | − 0.170 | − 0.035 | 0.095 |
| TPC | 0.821 | − 0.393 | 0.085 | 0.063 | − 0.120 |
| RAC | 0.350 | 0.706 | 0.009 | 0.543 | − 0.197 |
| TFC | 0.885 | − 0.019 | 0.196 | − 0.297 | 0.005 |
| SC | 0.705 | − 0.488 | 0.250 | 0.040 | 0.257 |
| DPPH | 0.939 | 0.095 | − 0.189 | − 0.137 | 0.104 |
| FRAP | 0.857 | 0.209 | − 0.301 | 0.156 | − 0.219 |
| HeLa | 0.043 | 0.812 | 0.368 | 0.087 | 0.404 |
| MCF7 | 0.160 | 0.072 | 0.933 | − 0.121 | − 0.272 |
| GIA | 0.050 | − 0.578 | 0.184 | 0.730 | 0.122 |
| Eigen value | 4.63 | 1.97 | 1.30 | 0.99 | 0.44 |
| Percent of variance | 46.34 | 19.67 | 13.03 | 9.89 | 4.39 |
| Cumulative percent of variance | 46.34 | 66.01 | 79.04 | 88.92 | 93.31 |
Figure 2.

Loading plot of phytochemical content and pharmacological parameters. For an explanation of parameter symbols, see Tables 1 and 2.
Figure 3.

Score plot of 15 O. aristatus genotypes based on phytochemical content and pharmacological activities. For an explanation of parameter symbols, see Tables 1 and 2.
Discussion
The phytochemical content and pharmacological effects of a medicinal plant species will differ depending on the geographical conditions where the plant grows25,26. Therefore, to select medicinal plants that have superior performance for the plant breeding programs, limited environmental conditions are needed27,28. In this study, O. aristatus collected from Indonesia was investigated for the characterization of phytochemicals contents and pharmacological activities and obtained promising elite genotypes without environmental impacts. The phytochemical and pharmacological distinction of O. aristatus has economic significance as well as being accommodating in the development of pharmaceutical industries and plant breeding programs for new varieties. Fifteen genotypes of O. aristatus were assessed for the quality of phytochemicals and pharmacological activities in all records of this discussion.
Phenolic is a group metabolite associated with several pharmacological activities; therefore, the content of phenolics (TPC) in the plant needs to be determined29,30. TPC ranged 1.48 mg GAE/g DW (A6) to 36.08 (A15) mg GAE/g DW (Table 1). TPC found in the leaves of O. aristatus is varied based on the different solvent used in the extraction process, different extraction methods, different extraction time and different environments the plant as well as the different of genotypes. Farhan et al.31, found the total phenolic content in the leaves as 230 mg GAE/g DW using methanol for extraction, Abdelwahab et al.32, reported TPC as 52.10 mg GAE/g DW from 60% methanol extract, and the lowest TPC content found is 20.03 mg GAE/g DW for extraction using 40% ethanol for 120 min at 65 ℃33. The solvent for extraction used in this study is 70% ethanol, so the TPC of the extract in this study compares with the reports of Chew et al.33. The difference is our experiment without additional heat and Chew et al. using 65 ℃. Based on the dried weight of the leaves, the TPC of the genotype A15 is higher than reported by Chew et al.33. Phenolic compounds in O. aristatus leaves are from flavonoid groups, tannins, and simple phenolics. Simple phenolic compounds include rosmarinic acid (RAC) that is also determined in this study (Table 1). RAC ranged 0.06 mg/g DW (A6) to 7.25 mg/g DW (A7). There is no correlation between TPC and RAC (Fig. 1). It means the phenolic extracted by 70% ethanol is not only rosmarinic acid. Genotype A15 and A7 could be used to O. aristatus varieties development for high phenolics productivity in plant breeding program.
The O. aristatus leaves have a lot of types of flavonoids but the concentration is low. Methoxy flavonoid is the known type of flavonoids in this leaves. Sinensetin, salvigenin and eupatorine are methoxy-flavonoid groups in O. aristatus. The total flavonoid and sinensetin contents of all extracts are shown in Table 1. The report of Abdelwahab et al.32, showed that 60% methanolic extract of O. aristatus leaves had 17.46 mg RE/g extract. This report is equal to 8.69 mg QE/g extract. Different from the report of Chew et al.33, who reported TFC in dried leaves of O. aristatus is about 1611.9 mg CE/100 g DW which equal to 16.78 mg QE/g DW. Our best TFC content found in A15 is only about 3.07 mg QE/g DW. The sinensetin content in the dried materials of O. aristatus leaves, the highest was found on A11, while the lowest on A8. There is correlation between SC and TFC (Fig. 1). It means that the sinensetin is major flavonoid in studied extract genotypes. On the other hand, it was reported that sinensetin content will decrease when extraction was performed using polar solvent such as ethanol 70%34. This result indicated that the genotype A15 and A11 could be developed through a breeding program to get the high flavonoid and sinensetin contents of O. aristatus varieties.
Recently, an antioxidant is of particular concern, which played a critical role in preventing several human illnesses35. Thus, getting plant genotypes as a source of high antioxidant activities is essential36. In this study, DPPH and FRAP assays were used to evaluate the antioxidant activities in ethanol extract of O. aristatus studied genotypes. DPPH assay was used to analyses the scavenging capacities of extract, while the reducing power was determined by FRAP assay37. In present work, the O. aristatus genotypes studied showed variation for DPPH (1.68 to 15.55 μmol TE/g DW) and FRAP (0.07 to 1.60 µmol TEAC/g DW) (Table 2). The highest antioxidant activities in DPPH and FRAP were found on genotype A15 and A7, respectively. In DPPH assay, our O. aristatus genotypes had lower antioxidant capacity compared with reported by Chew et al.33 which about 21.81 µmol TEAC/g DW. Scavenging activity of genotype A15 recorded is not significantly different from A1, while genotype A7 and A1 were found not different in reducing power activities. This result indicated that the genotype A1 could be used to develop as O. aristatus plant producing high antioxidant properties. Furthermore, antioxidant activities strong correlated with TPC and TFC indicates that the polyphenol (phenolic and flavonoid) in O. aristatus genotypes are the major metabolites for antioxidant activity. Similarly, Saidan et al.38 while evaluating the different genotypes, reported that the correlation between TPC and DPPH activity was about 0.90 and FRAP 0.78, while between TFC and DPPH was 0.73 and FRAP 0.71. Our results show that the rosmarinic acid content on O. aristatus leaves has a positive correlation with the DPPH activity and with FRAP activity of the extracts. The R2 of the correlation between RAC and DPPH activity (0.30) is lower than with FRAP activity (0.54) (Fig. 1). This result is agreed with the report of Ho et al.39 which concludes that radical scavenging of O. aristatus is related to the high content of rosmarinic acid. Since the R2 is not higher than 70%, it means other compounds also responsible for the antioxidant activity. It can be understood that besides phenolic and flavonoid responsible to the antioxidant activity of O. aristatus, diterpene, triterpene, and saponin groups are also responsible for antioxidant activity38,40.
Cytotoxic activity of 15 O. aristatus genotypes against HeLa and MCF-7 cell lines is summarized in Table 2. In this work, the O. aristatus genotypes studied showed cytotoxic variation for HeLa (7.33 to 66.25%) and MCF-7 (21.96 to 61.79%). In both cell lines, genotype A8 recorded the highest in cytotoxic activity. The previous report on the cytotoxic study of O. aristatus leaves extracts concludes that this extract is toxic against breast cancer (MCF-7, 53.4% inhibition) and colon cancer (HCT116, 43.7% inhibition) cell lines38. Our results show better cytotoxicity compared with the previous report of Saidan et al.38. O. aristatus extract has also been reported to have cytotoxic activity against prostate cancer (DU145) with no harmful effect against normal fibroblast cell of HSFF 118434. Saidan et al.38 conclude that the cytotoxic activity of O. aristatus extract had a positive correlation with TPC and TFC. This phenomenon is not found in our results. There is no correlation between TPC and TFC with cytotoxic activity against MCF-7 and HeLa. However, MCF-7 presented weakly positive correlation with TFC and SC (Fig. 1). These indicate that the flavonoid and sinensetin compounds are responsible for cytotoxic activity in O. aristatus extract. Previous work has shown that methoxylated flavonoids (eupatorine and sinensetin) have contributed greatly to the cytotoxic activity of O. aristatus extract41,42. Our results also show that there is a correlation between cytotoxic activity and rosmarinic acid, which in line with the previous report of Suhaimi et al.34. Suhaimi et al.34 said that the highest content of rosmarinic acid showed an anti-proliferative effect against prostate cancer. Results indicated that the genotype A8 could be developed through a breeding program to get the high anticancer capacities of O. aristatus varieties.
The O. aristatus genotype namely A2 (62.84%) showed high α-glucosidase inhibitory activity. Sinensetin and 5-hydroxy-6, 7, 3′, 4′-tetramethoxyflavone together with diterpenes and triterpenes are reported responsible for α-glucosidase inhibition activity in O. aristatus40. Our results show that there is no correlation between α-glucosidase inhibition activity with TPC, TFC, RAC and also SC. As reported by Yuliana et al.40, other components such as diterpenes and triterpenoids are responsible for α-glucosidase inhibitory activity.
Multivariate analysis, namely chemometric, is the statistical procedure to enhance the understanding of metabolite information and to associate quality traits to data of analytical instrument. It has been used to study in the correlation of the phytochemical component with pharmacological activities in the plant20,28,43. In this study, we used two chemometric methods namely correlation and principal component analysis (PCA) to evaluate the phytochemical and pharmacological properties of the O. aristatus. Antioxidant activity (DPPH & FRAP) found a significantly positive correlation with total phenolic and total flavonoid contents (Fig. 1). These indicate that they are significant selections parameters in cultivating the O. aristatus. Furthermore, these results indicated that the polyphenols are the main compounds for antioxidant capacities in O. aristatus. The results are in line with previous reports in O. aristatus and other different crops38,44,45. Besides, several reports shows association between polyphenol contents and antioxidant properties, but no one highlighted the mechanism of the association between polyphenol compounds and antioxidants in O. aristatus. This work showed a strong correlation between rosmarinic acid & FRAP assay and sinensetin & DPPH assay. Results indicated that the antioxidant mechanism of rosmarinic acid from O. aristatus as reducing power while free radical scavenging mechanism found in the sinensetin compound. Interestingly, in PCA using phytochemical contents and pharmacological parameters, it was resulted three clusters. Two O. aristatus genotypes viz. A11 and A15 had high TPC, TFC, SC, EY, DPPH, and FRAP, indicating a correlation of high polyphenol in these genotypes with antioxidant activities and extraction yields. Six O. aristatus genotypes viz. A1, A3, A4, A5, A7, and A8 had high rosmarinic acid and cytotoxic activities (HeLa & MCF-7), indicating the correlation of high rosmarinic acid content in these genotypes with cytotoxic properties. In the future, combining with anticancer activities such as A8 genotype with high phytochemical contents such as A15 genotype will be the main goal for new varieties development as anticancer sources with valuable phytochemical-rich in O. aristatus.
Fifteen O. aristatus genotypes had phytochemical and biological activities diversity. Genotypes of A11 and A15 produced high total phenolic and flavonoid contents, genotype A7 produced high rosmarinic acid content, and genotype A11 produced high sinensetin content. The genotype A1 and A7 had the best antioxidant activity against FRAP, while genotype A15 had the highest antioxidant activity against DPPH assay. The genotype of A2 had the best cytotoxic and α-glucosidase inhibition activities. The selected genotypes with different purposes could be developed in plant breeding.
Methods
Plant materials and sample preparation
Plant materials consisted of 15 different O. aristatus genotypes, belonging to dissimilar plant height (short, medium and tall), anthocyanin coloration on stem (absent or very weak, weak, medium and strong), leaf shape (narrow elliptic, medium elliptic, and medium ovate), flower colour (white and purple), and maturity group (early and late) (Table 4). Fifteen types of O. aristatus were cultivated in the experimental fields of Tropical Biopharmaca Research Center, Bogor Agricultural University, West Java, Indonesia (6°32′25.47″ N, 106°42′53.22″ E, 142.60 m above the sea level) with the randomized complete block design in three replications. For the evaluation of phytochemicals and biological activities, leaves were harvested at three months after planting. After harvesting, the leaves of each genotype were dried in the oven (50 °C). The powder (100 mesh) samples were extracted in 70% ethanol using the maceration method described by Abdullah et al.46, with slight modification. Briefly, 15 g leaves samples were taken and their extraction was performed in 150 ml ethanol for 24 h at 150 rpm rotation speed (Eyela multi shaker MMS-Germany) and room temperature. The solution was filtered with Whatman no. 4. Then, rotary evaporator was applied to evaporate the extracts. To calculate the extraction yield, the extracts were gathered and weighed. Resulted extracts were kept at 4 °C until further usage.
Table 4.
Detailed description of the O. aristatus genotypes for plant, leaves and flower characters.
| Genotypes | Plant height | Anthocyanin coloration on stem | Leaf shape | Flower colour | Maturity group |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | Medium | Medium | Narrow elliptic | White | Early |
| A2 | Short | Weak | Medium elliptic | Purple | Early |
| A3 | Medium | Absent or very weak | Medium ovate | White | Early |
| A4 | Medium | Weak | Medium elliptic | White | Late |
| A5 | Medium | Strong | Medium elliptic | White | Late |
| A6 | Tall | Strong | Narrow elliptic | White | Late |
| A7 | Medium | Weak | Medium elliptic | White | Early |
| A8 | Medium | Medium | Narrow elliptic | White | Late |
| A9 | Medium | Medium | Narrow elliptic | White | Late |
| A10 | Short | Strong | Medium elliptic | White | Late |
| A11 | Medium | Strong | Medium ovate | White | Late |
| A12 | Medium | Strong | Medium elliptic | White | Late |
| A13 | Medium | Medium | Medium elliptic | White | Late |
| A14 | Tall | Absent or very weak | Medium elliptic | White | Late |
| A15 | Medium | Absent or very weak | Narrow elliptic | White | Late |
Characterization for plant height (≤ 30 cm: short, 30–60 cm: medium, ≥ 60 cm: tall); Anthocyanin coloration on stem, leaf shape and flower colour followed from UPOV57; days took to flower defined for maturity group ((≤ 34 day: early; ≥ 35 cm: late).
Determination of total phenolic and flavonoid content
Total phenolic and flavonoid content were determined using spectrophotometrically suggested by Khumaida et al.47. Total phenolic content in each extract was determined using the Folin-Ciocalteu reagent and gallic acid was used as an external standard. About 10 μl extract sample was mixed with distilled water (160 μl), 10% Folin-Ciocalteu reagent (10 μl), and 10% Na2CO3 (20 μl). After incubation at room temperature for 30 min, the absorbance was measured using the microplate reader (Epoch BioTek, USA) at 750 nm. The total phenolic content was expressed as gallic acid equivalent (mg GAE/ g DW). Total flavonoid content was measured using aluminium chloride reagent and quercetin was used as an external standard. In a 96-well microplate, a 10 μl extract sample was mixed with methanol (60 μl), 10 μl of 10% aluminium chloride, 10 μl of 1 M potassium acetate, and 120 μl of distilled water. Finally, after incubation at room temperature for 30 min, the absorbance was measured using the microplate reader (Epoch BioTek, USA) at 415 nm. Results expressed as quercetin equivalent (mg QE/ g DW).
Determination of sinensetin and rosmarinic acid content
Sinensetin and rosmarinic acid contents in ethanol extract of O. aristatus genotypes were measured by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) according to a previously reported method48 with modification. Standard solutions of rosmarinic acid and sinensetin, obtained from ChromaDex, were prepared separately in methanol at a range concentration of 1–100 μg/ml and 0.3–24 μg/ml, respectively. The Shimadzu HPLC (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan) was used to perform the analysis which was equipped with degassing unit (DGU-20A5R), pump (LC-20AB), autosampler (SIL-20A HT), column oven, (CTO-20AC), and UV–Vis detector (SPD-20A). The column used Shim-Pack VP ODS C18 Shimadzu (75 × 4.6 mm i.d., 3 μm pore size). The 0.1% formic acid in aqueous (A) and 0.1% formic acid in acetonitrile (B) were used as a mobile phase of elution. The gradient elution system used as follow: 0–7 min for 2–20% B, 7–10 min for 20–30% B, 10–18 min for 30–50% B, 18–20.5 min for 50–98% B, 20.5–23 min for 98% B, 23–26 min for 98–2% B, and the system was then balanced until 35 min before the next injection. Each genotype sample, the volume of injection was 10 µl, was analysed at 1 ml/min for the mobile phase flow rate and 320 nm for detector wavelength at 30 °C for 35 min. Results of rosmarinic acid and sinensetin content expressed as mg/g DW based on the calibration curve of rosmarinic acid and sinensetin standard, respectively.
Determination of antioxidant activity
Two in-vitro methods were applied to analyse antioxidant activities. DPPH and FRAP methods were used to evaluate the free radical scavenging and reducing power activities, respectively. Antioxidant activity was expressed as Trolox Equivalent with Trolox (vitamin E analogues) as an antioxidant standard. Trolox was frequently used as an α-tocopherol model compound49. Furthermore, Trolox is used to express the antioxidant capacities of food, chemical compounds and biological matrices, as a standard antioxidant compound in terms of Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEACH)50. For this reason, Trolox can be considered as the proper counterpart of Vitamin E to examine its actions in aqueous radical environments on its own and in combination with other antioxidant compounds.
For 2,2-diphenyl picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) method proposed by Nurcholis et al.51, with modification. Briefly, 100 µl O. aristatus ethanol extract was added to 100 µl of 125 µM DPPH in methanol at the 96-well microplate (Costar-USA). After incubation in darkroom temperature for 30 min, the absorbance was measured using the microplate reader (BMG Labtech, Germany) at 517 nm. Results expressed in µmol Trolox Equivalent (TE/g DW).
FRAP was determined according to the assay of Benzie and Strain52 with modification. FRAP reagent was prepared by mixing 300 mM acetate buffer pH 3.6, 10 mM TPTZ in 40 mmol HCl, and 20 mmol FeCl3 in the ratio of 10:1:1 (v/v/v). One hundred µl O. aristatus ethanol extract was added to 300 µl of FRAP reagent in the 96-well microplate (Costar-USA). After incubation at 37 °C, the absorbance was measured using the microplate reader (BMG Labtech, Germany) at 593 nm. Antioxidant activity was expressed as µmol Trolox Equivalent (TE/g DW).
Determination of cytotoxic activity
Cytotoxic activity was measured by the hemocytometer method according to previous reported by Fitria et al.53. MCF-7 and HeLa cancer cell lines, obtained from Veterinary Medicine Faculty, IPB University, were used cytotoxic evaluation. Cell lines were grown in medium which consist of 850 μl Dulbecco's minimum Eagle's medium (Gibco, Rockville, MD, USA), 30 μl fetal bovine serum (10%; Sigma–Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA), and 10 μl fungizone (Gibco, Rockville, MD, USA). In brief, 50 μl cell line were exposed to a sample of 100 μg/ml. Also included, the control group was an untreated cell line. The cell incubated at 37 °C in 5% CO2 for 3 days. After incubation, 100 μl cells were added to 5 μl trypan blue. After homogenized, 10 μl cells were placed in a hemocytometer for calculation number of cells. The cytotoxic activity was determined based on the treated cell and untreated cells in percentage inhibition.
Determination of α-glucosidase inhibitory activity
The α-glucosidase inhibitory activity in O. aristatus genotype was performed according to the assay previous reported54. The extract sample (10 μl) of concentration 1000 μg/ml was a mixed with 0.1 M phosphate buffer pH 7.0 (50 μl), 0.5 mM pNPG (25 μl), and 0.2 unit/ml α-glucosidase solution (25 μl). Then, the mixture incubated at 37 °C for 30 min. Finally, the reaction was stopped by 200 mM Na2CO3 (100 μl) and the absorbance was measured using the microplate reader (Epoch Biotech, USA). Results expressed as percentage inhibition of α-glucosidase activity. The percentage of α-glucosidase inhibition (GIA) was calculated using formula (1):
| 1 |
where the control reaction absorbance (with all reagents but one of its extract) is Acontrol and the extract absorbance tested in the reaction mixture is Asample.
Statistical analysis
Data were expressed as the mean ± SD from three replicates. ANOVA was analysed using SPSS version 25. R was used for multivariate analyses using correlation and principal component analysis. The Pearson correlation coefficients between phytochemical and pharmacological parameters were generated using PerformanceAnalytics packages in R55. The FactoMineR packages in R was used to create PCA analysis using data matrix of phytochemical and pharmacological variables56.
Acknowledgements
The work was supported by the Indonesian Research Collaboration Programme for Bogor Agricultural University, Sebelas Maret University, and Padjadjaran University with number of 0847/IT3.L1/PN/2019. Part of this research is also partially funded by the Indonesian Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education under World Class University (WCU) Program managed by Institut Teknologi Bandung.
Abbreviations
- DPPH
2,2-Diphenyl picrylhydrazyl
- FRAP
Ferric reducing antioxidant power
- TE
Trolox equivalent
- DW
Dry weight
- GAE
Gallic acid equivalent
- QE
Quercetin equivalent
- TPC
Total phenolic content
- TFC
Total flavonoid content
- RAC
Rosmarinic acid content
- SC
Sinensetin content
- EY
Extraction yield
- HeLa
Anticancer activity of HeLa cancer cell line
- MCF-7
Anticancer activity of MCF-7 cancer cell line
- GIA
α-Glucosidase inhibitory activity
- PCA
Principle component analysis
Author contributions
W.N. and I.B. wrote the main manuscript text and K.K. and A.S. prepared data. All authors reviewed the manuscript.
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.
References
- 1.Geng L, Chaudhuri A, Talmon G, Wisecarver JL, Wang J. TGF-beta suppresses VEGFA-mediated angiogenesis in colon cancer metastasis. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e59918–e59918. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0059918. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Ucuzian AA, Gassman AA, East AT, Greisler HP. Molecular mediators of angiogenesis. J. Burn Care Res. 2010;31:158–175. doi: 10.1097/BCR.0b013e3181c7ed82. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Al-Suede FSR, et al. Marked antitumor activity of cat’s whiskers tea (Orthosiphon stamineus) extract in orthotopic model of human colon tumor in nude mice. J. Biochem. Technol. 2014;3:S170–S176. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Ashraf, K., Sultan, S. & Adam, A. Orthosiphon stamineus Benth. is an outstanding food medicine: Review of phytochemical and pharmacological activities. J. Pharm. Bioallied Sci.10, 109–118 (2018). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 5.Lokman EF, Saparuddin F, Muhammad H, Omar MH, Zulkapli A. Orthosiphon stamineus as a potential antidiabetic drug in maternal hyperglycemia in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. Integr. Med. Res. 2019;8:173–179. doi: 10.1016/j.imr.2019.05.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Sarshar S, et al. Aqueous extract from Orthosiphon stamineus leaves prevents bladder and kidney infection in mice. Phytomedicine. 2017;28:1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.phymed.2017.02.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Arafat OM, et al. Studies on diuretic and hypouricemic effects of Orthosiphon stamineus methanol extracts in rats. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2008;118:354–360. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2008.04.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Seyedan A, Alshawsh MA, Alshagga MA, Mohamed Z. Antiobesity and lipid lowering effects of Orthosiphon stamineus in high-fat diet-induced obese mice. Planta Med. 2017;83:684–692. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-121754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Bokhari RA, Lau SF, Mohamed S. Orthosiphon stamineus (Misai Kucing) ameliorated postmenopausal osteoporosis in rat model. Menopause. 2018;25:202–210. doi: 10.1097/GME.0000000000000980. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Dolečková I, et al. Antiproliferative and antiangiogenic effects of flavone eupatorin, an active constituent of chloroform extract of Orthosiphon stamineus leaves. Fitoterapia. 2012;83:1000–1007. doi: 10.1016/j.fitote.2012.06.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Movahedi A, Basir R, Rahmat A, Charaffedine M, Othman F. Orthosiphon stamineus: An Asian tea with substantial anticancer properties. J. Nutr. Sci. Diet. 2015;1:44–52. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Akowuah GA, Ismail Z, Norhayati I, Sadikun A. The effects of different extraction solvents of varying polarities on polyphenols of Orthosiphon stamineus and evaluation of the free radical-scavenging activity. Food Chem. 2005;93:311–317. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2004.09.028. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Cai X, et al. A comparative study of the antioxidant and intestinal protective effects of extracts from different parts of Java tea (Orthosiphon stamineus) Food Sci. Nutr. 2018;6:579–584. doi: 10.1002/fsn3.584. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Bokhari RA, Tantowi NACA, Lau SF, Mohamed S. Java tea (Orthosiphon stamineus) protected against osteoarthritis by mitigating inflammation and cartilage degradation: A preclinical study. Inflammopharmacology. 2018;26:939–949. doi: 10.1007/s10787-017-0432-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Shafaei A, et al. Flavonoids-rich Orthosiphon stamineus extract as new candidate for angiotensin I-converting enzyme inhibition: A molecular docking study. Molecules. 2016;21:1500. doi: 10.3390/molecules21111500. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Mohamed EA, Ahmad M, Ang LF, Asmawi M, Yam MF. Evaluation of α-glucosidase inhibitory effect of 50% ethanolic standardized extract of Orthosiphon stamineus benth in normal and streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. Evidence-Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2015;2015:6. doi: 10.1155/2015/754931. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Akowuah GA, Zhari I, Norhayati I, Sadikun A, Khamsah SM. Sinensetin, eupatorin, 3′-hydroxy-5, 6, 7, 4′-tetramethoxyflavone and rosmarinic acid contents and antioxidative effect of Orthosiphon stamineus from Malaysia. Food Chem. 2004;87:559–566. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2004.01.008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Olah, N.-K., Radu, L., Mogoşan, C., Hanganu, D. & Gocan, S. Phytochemical and pharmacological studies on Orthosiphon stamineus Benth.(Lamiaceae) hydroalcoholic extracts. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal.33, 117–123 (2003). [DOI] [PubMed]
- 19.Tezuka Y, et al. Constituents of the Vietnamese medicinal plant Orthosiphon stamineus. Chem. Pharm. Bull. 2000;48:1711–1719. doi: 10.1248/cpb.48.1711. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Yaldiz, G. & Camlica, M. Variation in the fruit phytochemical and mineral composition, and phenolic content and antioxidant activity of the fruit extracts of different fennel (Foeniculum vulgare L.) genotypes. Ind. Crops Prod.142, 111852 (2019).
- 21.Mannino, G., Gentile, C. & Maffei, M. E. Chemical partitioning and DNA fingerprinting of some pistachio (Pistacia vera L.) varieties of different geographical origin. Phytochemistry160, 40–47 (2019). [DOI] [PubMed]
- 22.Carter A, Rajcan I, Woodrow L, Navabi A, Eskandari M. Genotype, environment, and genotype by environment interaction for seed isoflavone concentration in soybean grown in soybean cyst nematode infested and non-infested environments. F. Crop. Res. 2018;216:189–196. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.11.021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Tnah LH, Lee CT, Lee SL, Ng CH, Ng KKS. Development and characterization of microsatellites of an important medicinal plant Orthosiphon stamineus (misai kucing) Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2014;55:317–321. doi: 10.1016/j.bse.2014.02.018. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Febjislami S, Melati M, Kurniawati A, Wahyu Y. Agronomy character and sinensetin content of several Java’s tea plant accession (Orthosiphon stamineus) Indones. J. Hortic. 2018;9:206–215. doi: 10.29244/jhi.9.3.206-215. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Ahmadi, F., Samadi, A. & Rahimi, A. Improving growth properties and phytochemical compounds of Echinacea purpurea (L.) medicinal plant using novel nitrogen slow release fertilizer under greenhouse conditions. Sci. Rep.10, 13842 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 26.Kabtni S, et al. Influence of climate variation on phenolic composition and antioxidant capacity of Medicago minima populations. Sci. Rep. 2020;10:8293. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-65160-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Moghaddam M, Pirbalouti AG. Agro-morphological and phytochemical diversity of Iranian Cuminum cyminum accessions. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017;99:205–213. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.02.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Nurcholis W, Munshif AA, Ambarsari L. Xanthorrhizol contents, α-glucosidase inhibition, and cytotoxic activities in ethyl acetate fraction of Curcuma zanthorrhiza accessions from Indonesia. Rev. Bras. Farmacogn. 2018;28:44–49. doi: 10.1016/j.bjp.2017.11.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Han Z, et al. Identification of QTLs associated with p-coumaric acid and ferulic acid in barley. Euphytica. 2019;215:198. doi: 10.1007/s10681-019-2526-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Harakotr B, Suriharn B, Scott MP, Lertrat K. Genotypic variability in anthocyanins, total phenolics, and antioxidant activity among diverse waxy corn germplasm. Euphytica. 2015;203:237–248. doi: 10.1007/s10681-014-1240-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Farhan M, Razak S, Pin K, Chuah A. Antioxidant activity and phenolic content of different parts of Orthosiphon stamineus grown under different light intensities. J. Trop. For. Sci. 2012;24:173–177. [Google Scholar]
- 32.Abdelwahab SI, et al. Antiapoptotic and antioxidant properties of Orthosiphon stamineus benth (Cat’s Whiskers): Intervention in the Bcl-2-mediated apoptotic pathway. Evidence-Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2011;2011:11. doi: 10.1155/2011/156765. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
- 33.Chew KK, et al. Effect of ethanol concentration, extraction time and extraction temperature on the recovery of phenolic compounds and antioxidant capacity of Orthosiphon stamineus extracts. Int. Food Res. J. 2011;18:1427–1435. [Google Scholar]
- 34.Suhaimi SH, et al. Optimization of ultrasound-assisted extraction conditions followed by solid phase extraction fractionation from Orthosiphon stamineus Benth (Lamiace) leaves for antiproliferative effect on prostate cancer cells. Molecules. 2019;24:4183. doi: 10.3390/molecules24224183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Kouipou Toghueo RM, Boyom FF. Endophytes from ethno-pharmacological plants: Sources of novel antioxidants- A systematic review. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2019;22:101430. doi: 10.1016/j.bcab.2019.101430. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Singh S, et al. Cytoplasmic male sterile and doubled haploid lines with desirable combining ability enhances the concentration of important antioxidant attributes in Brassica oleracea. Euphytica. 2018;214:207. doi: 10.1007/s10681-018-2291-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Singh M, et al. Valorization of winged bean (Psophocarpus tetragonolobus (L) DC) by evaluation of its antioxidant activity through chemometric analysis. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2019;121:114–120. doi: 10.1016/j.sajb.2018.10.026. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Saidan NH, et al. Selected metabolites profiling of Orthosiphon stamineus Benth leaves extracts combined with chemometrics analysis and correlation with biological activities. BMC Complement. Altern. Med. 2015;15:350. doi: 10.1186/s12906-015-0884-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Ho, C.-H., Noryati, I., Sulaiman, S.-F. & Rosma, A. In vitro antibacterial and antioxidant activities of Orthosiphon stamineus Benth. extracts against food-borne bacteria. Food Chem.122, 1168–1172 (2010).
- 40.Yuliana ND, Budijanto S, Wijaya CH, Khatib A. Senyawa inhibitor α-glukosidase dan antioksidan dari kumis kucing dengan pendekatan metabolomik berbasis FTIR. J. Teknol. Dan Ind. Pangan. 2016;27:17–30. doi: 10.6066/jtip.2016.27.1.17. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Androutsopoulos V, Arroo RRJ, Hall JF, Surichan S, Potter GA. Antiproliferative and cytostatic effects of the natural product eupatorin on MDA-MB-468 human breast cancer cells due to CYP1-mediated metabolism. Breast Cancer Res. 2008;10:R39. doi: 10.1186/bcr2090. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Dong Y, et al. Effects of sinensetin on proliferation and apoptosis of human gastric cancer AGS cells. Zhongguo Zhongyao Zazhi. 2011;36:790–794. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Bhargav, V. et al. Diversity of flavonoids profile in China aster [Callistephus chinensis (L.) Nees.] genotypes. Ind. Crops Prod.111, 513–519 (2018).
- 44.Devi, J. et al. Variations in the total phenolics and antioxidant activities among garden pea (Pisum sativum L.) genotypes differing for maturity duration, seed and flower traits and their association with the yield. Sci. Hortic. (Amsterdam).244, 141–150 (2019).
- 45.Wang, Y. et al. Evaluation of biochemical components and antioxidant capacity of different kiwifruit (Actinidia spp.) genotypes grown in China. Biotechnol. Biotechnol. Equip.32, 558–565 (2018).
- 46.Abdullah S, Shaari AR, Azimi A. Effect of drying methods on metabolites composition of Misai Kucing (Orthosiphon stamineus) leaves. APCBEE Proc. 2012;2:178–182. doi: 10.1016/j.apcbee.2012.06.032. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Khumaida N, Syukur M, Bintang M, Nurcholis W. Phenolic and flavonoid content in ethanol extract and agro-morphological diversity of Curcuma aeruginosa accessions growing in West Java, Indonesia. Biodivers. J. Biol. Divers. 2019;20:656–663. doi: 10.13057/biodiv/d200306. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Hernadi E, et al. HPLC fingerprinting coupled with linear discriminant analysis for the detection of adulteration in Orthosiphon aristatus. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 2019;42:513–520. doi: 10.1080/10826076.2019.1629956. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Thomas, M. J. & Bielski, B. H. J. Oxidation and reaction of trolox c, a tocopherol analog, in aqueous solution. A pulse-radiolysis study. J. Am. Chem. Soc.111, 3315–3319 (1989).
- 50.Çelik EE, Rubio JMA, Andersen ML, Gökmen V. Interactions between macromolecule-bound antioxidants and Trolox during liposome autoxidation: A multivariate approach. Food Chem. 2017;237:989–996. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.06.034. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Nurcholis W, Khumaida N, Syukur M, Bintang M. Evaluation of free radical scavenging activity in ethanolic extract from promising accessions of Curcuma aeruginosa RoxB. Molekul. 2017;12:133–138. doi: 10.20884/1.jm.2017.12.2.350. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Benzie IFF, Strain JJ. The ferric reducing ability of plasma (FRAP) as a measure of “antioxidant power”: The FRAP assay. Anal. Biochem. 1996;239:70–76. doi: 10.1006/abio.1996.0292. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Fitria R, Seno DSH, Priosoeryanto BP, Nurcholis W. Volatile compound profiles and cytotoxicity in essential oils from rhizome of Curcuma aeruginosa and Curcuma zanthorrhiza. Biodivers. J. Biol. Divers. 2019;20:2943–2948. [Google Scholar]
- 54.Mayur B, Sandesh S, Shruti S, Sung-Yum S. Antioxidant and α-glucosidase inhibitory properties of Carpesium abrotanoides L. J. Med. Plants Res. 2010;4:1547–1553. [Google Scholar]
- 55.Peterson BG, et al. PerformanceAnalytics: Econometric tools for performance and risk analysis. R Packag. Vers. 2014;1:107. [Google Scholar]
- 56.Husson, F., Lê, S. & Pagès, J. Exploratory Multivariate Analysis by Example Using R. (CRC Press, 2017).
- 57.UPOV [International Union for The Protection of New Varieties of Plants]. Guidelines for the conduct of tests for distinctness, uniformity and stability: Basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). 1–25 (2016).

