Abstract
The therapeutic potential of medicinal plants is noted because of the presence of varieties of biochemicals. The monoterpenes, like nerol, estragole, and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol, have been reported for antimicrobial, antifungal, anthelmintic, and antioxidant activities. This study evaluated the toxic, cytotoxic, and oxidant/antioxidant effects of these compounds by several in vitro (DPPH and ABTS radical scavenging, and ferric reducing potential), ex vivo (hemolysis), and in vivo (Artemia Salina and Saccharomyces cerevisiae) assays. Results suggest that estragole and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol at 31.25–500 μg/mL did not exhibit significant cytotoxic effects in the A. Salina and hemolysis tests. Nerol showed significant cytotoxic effects on these test systems at all test concentrations. The monoterpenes showed radical (ABTS•+ and DPPH•) scavenging capacities in a concentration-dependent manner in vitro tests. However, they did not oxidize the genetic material of S. cerevisiae (SODWT, Sod1Δ, Sod2Δ, Sod1/Sod2Δ, Cat1Δ, and Cat1Δ/Sod1Δ) lines. Among the three monoterpenes, nerol may be a good candidate for antioxidant and anti-tumor therapies.
1. Introduction
At present, many studies have focused on finding alternatives to traditional treatments for many diseases in plants [1–3]. Active compounds extracted from plants show their efficacy in many pathologies [4–10], even cancers [11, 12], but their application in the clinic is many times limited by low availability in the target organs [13, 14]. The evolution of nanomedicine has tried to solve some of these bioavailability problems of natural bioactive compounds [15], but things are still in the testing step due to the potential toxicity of these nanoformulations [16–19]. Aromatherapy is part of phytotherapy, which uses essential oils extracted from aromatic plants for the treatment or as an adjuvant in the traditional treatment of several clinical pathologies [20–22]. The composition of essential oils is complex and depends on a series of factors, like the species of plant from which they are extracted, the technique used for the extraction, the geographic location where the plant is growing, and also the harvest time [23, 24]. The main components of essential oils are terpenoids and phenylpropanoids [25, 26]. Monoterpenes are chemical compounds found in medicional plant-derived essential oils. They have a pleasant aroma and are used commercially as flavorings, fragrances, and cleaning agents. They are also well-known for their significant biological functions, including their analgesic, antispasmodic, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, antifungal, and schistosomicidal properties [27]. Nerol, estragole, and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol (Figure 1) are monoterpenes that exist in essential oils extracted from various plant species, such as Croton zehntneri, Cymbopogon citrates, Cymbopogon nardus, Citrus bergamani, Zingiber officinalle, and Lavandulasp., and have sedative effects, stimulatory effects on appetite, and beneficial effects on intestinal disorders. They are also known for their attractive, repellent, and toxic effects on insects and microorganisms [10, 28].
Figure 1.
The chemical structure of (a) nerol; (b) estragole, (c) 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol.
Nerol has been noted for its antispasmodic, anthelmintic, antifungal, and antioxidant activities [27, 29]. Estragole was associated with antioxidant and antibacterial activities [30], while 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol showed antischistosomal [31] and antifungal [32] activity.
Oxidative stress is involved in the onset and/or development of many chronic diseases. Certain defence mechanisms act to maintain the levels of reactive species (e.g., oxygen/nitrogen; ROS/RNS) under normal conditions and to prevent oxidative damage as the action of antioxidant enzymes: superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), glutathione peroxidase (GPx), and glutathione (GSH). Many natural compounds have been investigated for their antioxidant effects through inhibiting free radicals/chemicals that could inhibit oxidative damage [33, 34].
This study evaluated the toxic effects of the monoterpenes nerol (cis-3,7-dimethyl-2,6-octadien-1), estragole, and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol in Artemia salina and mouse erythrocytes, along with their antioxidant properties in vitro test systems as ABTS•+ and DPPH• radical scavenging and ferric reduction potential. Additionally, an in vivo test on Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains was also conducted in one wild-type (SODWT), three single-mutant (Sod1Δ, Sod2Δ, and Cat1Δ), and two-double mutant (Sod1/Sod2Δ and Cat1Δ/Sod1Δ) strains.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Reagents and Chemicals
We used 0.05% tween-80 dissolved in isosaline (0.9% NaCl solution) as the vehicle. Trolox (6-hydroxy-2, 5, 7, and 8-tetramethylchroman-2-carboxylic acid) was dissolved in this vehicle. Trolox, potassium dichromate (K2Cr2O7), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), Triton X-100, and all the necessary reagents and chemicals, including the test substances (nerol (W277002; purity: ≥97%), estragole (W241105; purity: ≥98%), 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol (W305774; purity: ≥98%) were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA).
2.2. Test Systems
Artemia salina and mouse (Mus musculus) erythrocytes were used for the cytotoxicity test. 1, 1-diphenyl-2-picrylhidrazyl (DPPH), 2, 2-azobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonate (ABTS), and ferric reduction assays were carried out as in vitro antioxidant capacity test. Six S. cerevisiae strains (SODWT, Sod1Δ, Sod2Δ, Cat1Δ, Sod1/Sod2Δ, and Cat1Δ/Sod1Δ) were used for in vivo oxidant and antioxidant assays.
2.3. Preparation of Test Compounds
The tested monoterpenes (nerol, estragole, and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol) and standards (trolox and K2Cr2O7) were dissolved in the above-mentioned vehicle to obtain the desired concentration for each assay.
2.4. Artemia salina Bioassay
This test was carried out with a slight modification, as described by Amaral et al. [35]. Briefly, shrimp cysts were incubated in a small aquarium containing a brine solution (50 mg of cysts and 300 mL of brine) for 48 h with direct lighting. Test samples (nerol, 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol, and estragole) were diluted in the brine solution to get a concentration in the range of 31.25 to 500 μg/mL with a final volume of 5 mL. Ten larvae were added to each tube, and after 24 h, manual observation was done to count the number of live naupli. In the negative (NC) and positive (PC) control groups, saline solution and potassium dichromate (K2Cr2O7) were added, respectively. The concentration range used in the case of the PC group was 31.25 to 500 μg/mL.
2.5. Determination of Hemolytic Activity in Mice Erythrocytes
This test was performed on adult Swiss albino mouse (Mus musculus) erythrocytes. The mouse was collected from the Central Animal House of the Federal University of Piaui, Brazil. It was allowed free access to standard food and water ad libitum and was kept under controlled lighting (12 h dark/light cycles) at 24 ± 2°C. Blood was collected from the retro-orbital plexus of the mouse (male, 24 gm body weight). Hemolytic activity in mouse erythrocytes was performed, according to Jamialahmadi et al. [36]. Briefly, 300 μL of erythrocyte suspension (10% suspension in PBS, pH 7.4) was mixed with 500 μL of each monoterpene (31.25–500 μg/mL) and placed in a water bath at 37°C for 2 h. After the reaction time, the reaction mixture was centrifuged at 2000 rpm for 5 min, and the absorbance of the supernatant was measured at 540 nm and the results were compared to the triton X-100 (31.25–500 μg/mL).
2.6. In Vitro Antioxidant Assays
2.6.1. DPPH• Radical Scavenging Capacity Assay
The DPPH assay was performed according to the method described by Abderrahim et al. [37]. Briefly, a solution containing 300 μL of monoterpenes (0.9–14.4 μg/mL) was added to 2.7 mL of DPPH• solution (0.5 mM in ethanol). After 30 min, the absorbance was measured using a spectrophotometer (Shimadzu, Japan) at 517 nm. A similar concentration of Trolox (TRO) served as the positive control group (PC), while only 0.3 mL of vehicle (0.05% Tween 80 dissolved in 0.9% NaCl solution) was added to the DPPH solution for the negative control (NC) group.
2.6.2. ABTS•+ Radical Scavenging Capacity Assay
The test was carried out as per the method of Carvalho [38]. Initially, the ABTS•+ was obtained from the reaction of 5 mL of a 7 mM ABTS•+ solution with 88 μL of a 2.45 mM potassium persulfate (K2S2O8) solution, which was then incubated at room temperature in the absence of light for 16 h. In the preparation of Trolox (PC), 30 μL of the sample was pipetted and completed with the saline solution. An ABTS solution of 1.960 μL was added to each tube containing monoterpenes (0.9–14.4 μg/mL) and left to stand for six minutes in the dark. The PC group contains the same concentrations of Trolox (as standard), while NC contains 0.05% tween-80 dissolved in a 0.9% NaCl solution (vehicle for monoterpenes). The absorbance was measured using a spectrophotometer at 515 nm.
2.6.3. Ferric Reducing Potential Assay
For this assay, the method described earlier by Singhal et al. [39] was followed. Briefly, a mixture of 500 μL of sodium phosphate buffer (0.2 M, pH 6.6) and 500 μL of 1% potassium ferricyanide was added to the tubes containing monoterpenes (0.9–14.4 μL/mL) and was subsequently placed in a water bath at 50°C for 20 min. After that, 500 μL of 10% trichloroacetic acid, 500 μL of distilled water, and 250 μL of 0.1% ferric chloride were added, followed by an absorbance measurement at 700 nm using a spectrophotometer. The NC and PC groups were carried out with the vehicle (0.05% tween-80 dissolved in 0.9% NaCl solution) and Trolox, respectively.
2.7. In Vivo Antioxidant (S. cerevisiae) Test
The central disc test was done according to the method presented by Islam et al. [40]. The S. cerevisiae strains used in the assay with their genotypes are shown in Table 1. Superoxide dismutase (CuZnSOD-Sod1) is a cytosolic enzyme that is faulty in strain EG118, whereas mitochondrial SOD is faulty in strain EG110 (MnSOD-Sod2). The strain EG133 has both Sod1 and Sod2 defects, while EG223 has a cytosolic catalase deficiency (Cat1). While EG103 is a competent strain that is identical to the wild-type (SODWT), EG is a dual isogenic strain for the Sod1 and Cat1 genes.
Table 1.
S. cerevisiae strains used in this study.
| Description | Genotype | Manufacturer |
|---|---|---|
| EG103 (SODWT) | MATa leu2-3,112 trp1-289 ura 3-52 GAL+ | Edith gralla, L angeles |
| EG118 (Sod1∆) | sod1::URA3 all other markers as EG103 | |
| EG110 (Sod2∆) | sod2::TRP1 all other markers as EG103 | |
| EG133 (Sod1∆Sod2∆) | sod1::URA3 sod2::TRP1 double mutant all other markers as EG103 | |
| EG223 (Cat1∆) | EG103, except cat1:: TRP1 | |
| EG (Sod1∆Cat1∆) | EG103, except sod1:: URA3 and cat1:: TRP1 |
The strains were cultured in YEPD medium (Yeast extract 0.5%, bacto-peptone 2% and dextrose 2%) at 28°C HYPERLINK [51]. Suspended cells were seeded in the center of a Petri dish in a continuous cycle. H2O2 (10 mM) was used as an inducer of oxidative stress and formed the positive control (PC) group. Saline 0.9% and DMSO 0.05% groups are the negative control (NC) groups.
2.8. Statistical Analysis
The results are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD). The results were evaluated by analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by a post hoc Newman-Keuls test using GraphPad Prism (version: 6.00; Windows, Graph Pad Software, San Diego California, USA). A P-value <0.05 was considered significant criterion.
3. Results
3.1. Brine Shrimp Lethality Bioassay
In the brine shrimp lethality bioassay (BSLB), all studied monoterpenes except nerol exhibited low toxicity in 24 hours (Figure 2(a)).
Figure 2.
Percentage of Artemia Salina mortality under the monoterpene's treatment. Notes: Values are mean ± SD of triplicate value. ∗p < 0.05 compared to the NC (vehicle) (ANOVA followed by post-hocNeuman-Keuls test). (a) 24 h and (b) 48 h of treatment with nerol, estragole, 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol and controls. Vehicles represented 0.0% mortality, therefore, omitted from the figure.
After 48 h of exposure, the nerol showed increased toxicity, more specifically, at the dose of 62.5 μg/mL the mortality was 100% similar to that of the positive control group (Figure 2(b)). Estragole toxicity increased in a dose-dependent manner from the concentration of 250 μg/mL, while 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol toxicity increased in a dose-dependent manner from the concentration of 125 μg/mL.
3.2. Determination of Hemolytic Activity in Mice Erythrocytes
In the hemolysis test, all the monoterpenes showed <25% hemolysis, up to a concentration of 250 μg/mL. However, nerol at 500 μg/mL exhibited hemolysis by 39.12% (Table 2).
Table 2.
Effects of treatment on hemolytic activity in mouse erythrocytes.
| Concentrations (μg/mL) | Hemolysis (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estragole | Nerol | 3,7-Dimethyl-1-octanol | Triton X-100 | NC | |
| 31.25 | 1.67 ± 0.35 | 2.67 ± 0.35 | 3.66 ± 0.64 | 100 ± 0.00∗ | 1.23 ± 0.78 |
| 62.5 | 3.49 ± 0.26 | 4.49 ± 0.26∗ | 4.53 ± 0.06∗ | 100 ± 0.00∗ | |
| 125 | 4.45 ± 0.47∗ | 5.12 ± 1.05∗ | 5.33 ± 0.75∗ | 100 ± 0.00∗ | |
| 250 | 8.21 ± 0.35∗ | 6.54 ± 1.78∗ | 5.64 ± 0.74∗ | 100 ± 0.00∗ | |
| 500 | 10.28 ± 1.35∗ | 34.95 ± 4.74∗ | 5.66 ± 0.56∗ | 100 ± 0.00∗ | |
Values are mean ± SD of triplicate value. ∗p < 0.05 vs. NC (ANOVA followed by t-Studentpost-hocNeuman-Keuls test).
3.3. In Vitro Antioxidant Assays
The radical scavenging capacity of the tested monoterpenes is shown in Figure 3 (DPPH•: Figure 3(a) and ABTS•+: Figure 3(b)).
Figure 3.
Effects of nerol, estragole, 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol and Trolox on the inhibition of DPPH (a) and ABTS (b) radicals. Notes: Values are mean ± SD of triplicate value. ∗p < 0.05 vs. trolox (ANOVA followed by t-Studentpost-hocNeuman-Keuls test). NC showed negligible DPPH (1.23 ± 0.58) and ABTS (1.08 ± 0.23) radical scavenging capacity, therefore, the values have not been shown in the figures.
The data presented in Figures 3(a) and 3(b) show a variation in the inhibition of DPPH and ABTS radicals in a concentration-dependent manner by the test samples. An increased dose was found to augment an increase in the scavenging capacity of the radicals. Although the activity of the monoterpenes was less than that of the standard drug, Trolox, nerol, and estragole showed the highest scavenging activity against ABTS•+ and DPPH•, respectively. The presence of allylic hydrogens (number: 13) in nerol (Figure 4(a)), which forms a resonance structure, may be responsible for its antioxidant capacity. Possible hydrogen abstraction and formation of R+ is shown in Figure 4(b).
Figure 4.
(a) Indication of allylic hydrogens in Nerol. (b) Possible antioxidant mechanism of nerol action in neutralizing R+.
In the ferric reduction assay, all the monoterpenes showed a low reduction capacity of iron (Fe+3 to Fe+2) compared with the standard drug, Trolox. In this test, all the monoterpenes had almost the same activity at all concentrations tested (Figure 5).
Figure 5.
Ferric reduction potential of estragole, nerol, 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol and Trolox. Notes: Values are mean ± SD of triplicate value. ∗p < 0.05 vs. NC (ANOVA followed by t-Studentpost-hocNeuman-Keuls test). NC showed negligible ferric reduction capacity (1.33 ± 0.78); therefore, the value has not shown in the figure.
3.4. In Vivo Antioxidant (S. cerevisiae) Test
Nerol, estragole, and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol did not induce oxidative damage at any concentration in any of the tested S. cerevisiae strains (Tables 3–5).
Table 3.
Evaluation of oxidative damage by nerol in proficient and deficient strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
| Treatments | Strains | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SODWT | Sod1∆ | Sod2∆ | Sod1∆Sod2∆ | Cat1∆ | Sod1∆Cat1∆ | |
| Saline 0.9% | 0.75 ± 0.47 | 1.75 ± 0.70 | 0.50 ± 0.28 | 2.75 ± 1.59 | 0.50 ± 0.37 | 1.25 ± 0.50 |
| DMSO 0.05% | 0.75 ± 0.47 | 0.75 ± 0.47 | 0.9 ± 0.28 | 0.8 ± 0.32 | 1.1 ± 0.54 | 0.5 ± 0.15 |
| H2O2 10 mM | 30.75 ± 5.0∗∗ | 25.50 ± 4.2∗∗ | 25.25 ± 6.18∗∗ | 27.00 ± 5.09∗∗ | 24.25 ± 4.03∗∗ | 22.25 ± 4.57∗∗ |
|
| ||||||
| Nerol | ||||||
| 0.9 μg/mL | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 1.00 ± 0.28 | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 2.10 |
| 1.8 μg/mL | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 |
| 3.6 mg/mL | 1.00 ± 0.28 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 4.00 ± 1.2 | 3.00 ± 1.41 |
| 7.2 μg/mL | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 1.41 |
| 14.4 μg/mL | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 3.00 ± 0.54 | 3.00 ± 0.54 | 3.00 ± 1.41 |
| 32 μg/mL | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 4.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 0.70 |
| 64 μg/mL | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 3.00 ± 1.41 |
| 128 μg/mL | 1.00 ± 0.28 | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 2.50 ± 0.70 |
| 256 mg/mL | 2.00 ± 0.24 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 1.41 |
| 500 mg/mL | 1.00 ± 0.28 | 2.00 ± 0.24 | 2.00 ± 0.24 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 |
Notes. Values are mean ± SD. Two-way ANOVA, Tukey post-hoc test. ∗∗p < 0.0001 compared to saline solution.
Table 4.
Evaluation of oxidative damage by estragole in proficient and deficient strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
| Treatments | Strains | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SODWT | Sod1∆ | Sod2∆ | Sod1∆Sod2∆ | Cat1∆ | Sod1∆Cat1∆ | |
| Saline 0.9% | 0.75 ± 0.47 | 1.75 ± 0.70 | 0.50 ± 0.28 | 2.75 ± 1.59 | 0.50 ± 0.37 | 1.25 ± 0.50 |
| DMSO 0.05% | 0.75 ± 0.47 | 0.75 ± 0.47 | 0.9 ± 0.28 | 0.8 ± 0.32 | 1.1 ± 0.54 | 0.5 ± 0.15 |
| H2O2 10 mM | 30.75 ± 5.0∗∗ | 25.50 ± 4.2∗∗ | 25.25 ± 6.18∗∗ | 27.00 ± 5.09∗∗ | 24.25 ± 4.03∗∗ | 22.2 ± 4.57∗∗ |
|
| ||||||
| Estragole | ||||||
| 0.9 μg/mL | 2.00 ± 0.54 | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 3.50 ± 0.70 |
| 1.8 μg/mL | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 4.50 ± 0.70 | 4.00 ± 2.82 |
| 3.6 mg/mL | 1.00 ± 1.41 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.00 ± 0.54 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 4.00 ± 1.41 | 4.00 ± 1.41 |
| 7.2 μg/mL | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 2.00 ± 0.54 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 1.50 ± 2.12 | 3.50 ± 0.70 |
| 14.4 μg/mL | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.00 ± 0.54 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 4.50 ± 2.12 | 5.00 ± 0.0 |
| 32 μg/mL | 2.00 ± 0.54 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.00 ± 0.54 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 4.50 ± 0.70 |
| 64 μg/mL | 2.00 ± 0.54 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 7.00 ± 1.41∗ | 3.00 ± 1.41 |
| 128 μg/mL | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 4.50 ± 2.12 |
| 256 mg/mL | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 2.12 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 3.00 ± 2.82 |
| 500 mg/mL | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 4.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 0.70 |
Notes. Values are mean ± SD. Two-way ANOVA, Tukey post-hoc test. ∗p < 0.05 and ∗∗p < 0.0001 compared to saline solution.
Table 5.
Evaluation of oxidative damage by 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol in proficient and deficient strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
| Treatments | Strains | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SODWT | Sod1∆ | Sod2∆ | Sod1∆Sod2∆ | Cat1∆ | Sod1∆Cat1∆ | |
| Saline 0.9% | 0.75 ± 0.47 | 1.75 ± 0.70 | 0.50 ± 0.28 | 2.75 ± 1.59 | 0.50 ± 0.37 | 1.25 ± 0.50 |
| DMSO 0.05% | 0.75 ± 0.47 | 0.75 ± 0.47 | 0.9 ± 0.28 | 0.8 ± 0.32 | 1.1 ± 0.54 | 0.5 ± 0.15 |
| H2O2 10 mM | 30.75 ± 5.0∗∗ | 25.5 ± 4.2∗∗ | 25.25 ± 6.18∗∗ | 27.00 ± 5.09∗∗ | 24.25 ± 4.03∗∗ | 22.25 ± 4.57∗∗ |
|
| ||||||
| 3,7-Dimethyl-1-octanol | ||||||
| 0.9 μg/mL | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 0.50 ± 0.70 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 |
| 1.8 μg/mL | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 2.00 ± 0.00 | 1.00 ± 1.41 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 0.00 |
| 3.6 mg/mL | 2.00 ± 0.00 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 4.00 ± 1.41 |
| 7.2 μg/mL | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 1.00 ± 0.00 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 4.00 ± 0.00 | 3.00 ± 1.41 |
| 14.4 μg/mL | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 1.00 ± 1.41 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 2.00 ± 0.00 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 2.00 ± 2.82 |
| 32 μg/mL | 2.00 ± 0.00 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 0.00 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 2.12 | 3.50 ± 0.70 |
| 64 μg/mL | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 0.00 | 1.00 ± 0.00 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 1.41 |
| 128 μg/mL | 1.00 ± 1.41 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 1.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 2.12 | 4.00 ± 1.41 |
| 256 mg/mL | 0.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 1.00 ± 1.41 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 2.50 ± 2.12 | 3.00 ± 0.00 |
| 500 mg/mL | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 0.00 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 2.50 ± 0.70 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 3.50 ± 0.70 |
Notes. Values are mean ± SD. Two-way ANOVA, Tukey post-hoc test. ∗∗p < 0.0001 compared to saline solution.
Data indicate that nerol (Figure 6), estragole (Figure 7), and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol (Figure 8) showed significant antioxidant activity in S. cerevisiae, as they inhibited oxidative damage caused by the stressor, H2O2 in all strains and concentrations tested. The percentage modulation of oxidative damage was found to be more than 60%.
Figure 6.
Modulatory effect of nerol in oxidative damage induced by hydrogen peroxide.
Figure 7.
Modulatory effect of estragole in oxidative damage induced by hydrogen peroxide.
Figure 8.
Modulatory effect of 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol in oxidative damage induced by hydrogen peroxide.
4. Discussion
BSLB is a cheap, rapid, and sensitive test to assay a wide variety of toxicants, including bioactive molecules [42, 43]. In our study, we found a dose-response relationship for all tested monoterpenes along with time-dependent cytotoxicity. The EC50 > 1000 μg/mL was classified as inactive (or nontoxic), while the EC50 < 100 μg/mL for highly active (very toxic) in the A. Salina test [44]. In our study, nerol showed prominent cytotoxicity, which is concurrent with an earlier study [45]. On the other hand, 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol has been noted for its higher cytotoxic potential compared with estragole.
According to Carvalho [38], toxicity tests should be considered indispensable in the biomonitoring of plant extracts. Another test for toxicological screening of xenobiotics is the in vitro evaluation of hemolytic capacity estimated by erythrocyte damage [46]. There are several variations of this test using human or animal erythrocytes such as rabbits and mice [46–49]. The hemolytic activity in the erythrocytes of mice has a great similarity to the human erythrocytes [44]. This test evaluates the potential of xenobiotics to cause damage to the plasma membrane of the cell, either by the formation of pores or a total rupture of the membrane. This test is very important and can serve as a preliminary test before preclinical and clinical studies [46]. In this study, we observed that of the three tested compounds, nerol has the highest potential to produce hemolysis in a dose-dependent manner, with the highest hemolysis appearing at a concentration of 500 μg/mL.
A persistent radical with a modest rate of deterioration and interactions with the majority of substances, DPPH•. Only powerful reducing chemicals can interact with DPPH to stabilize it in a stoichiometric phase [50, 51]. As opposed to this, 2, 2-azobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonate (ABTS) is oxidized in the presence of K2S2O8 solution and results in the ABTS•+ radical. It is very stable and soluble in polar and nonpolar solvents. It remains unaffected by the ionic strength of many solvents. Therefore, this radical is suitable for both polar and nonpolar extracts [44]. In a study, Oliveira [41] also reported a mild antioxidant capacity of estragole at concentrations from 7.83 to 500 μg/mL. In this study, we also observed a concentration-dependent (0.9–14.4 μg/mL) anti-radical activity against DPPH and ABTS radicals. However, the activity was not strong in comparison to the PC group. Estragole showed that scavenger propertied in a dose-dependent manner also in previous studies [30, 52]. In a previous study, we reported the inhibition of lipid peroxidation and protein oxidation by substances having anti-radical and strong reducing capacity [53]. That is why we use the ferric reducing potential technique for evaluating the antioxidant effects of our compounds. The reduction of iron ions (Fe3+/Fe2+) is influenced by the solubility of the reducing compounds, which in turn is guided by the presence of other acyclic, monocyclic, and bicyclic monoterpene components, derived from phenyl propane and sesquiterpene lactones [44, 54]. Thus, the reducing capacity of the tested monoterpenes may be affected by this consequence. In the case of our compounds, there were no differences between the 3 monoterpenes tested, but all showed low reduction capacity of iron.
S. cerevisiae is a popular test system to estimate the oxidative stress capacities of a wider number of biological components. The metabolism of S. cerevisiae is quite similar to that of higher eukaryotes, featuring the activation of cytochrome P450 and detoxification [55]. The yeasts, mainly the S. cerevisiae species, are widely used in the food and beverage industries and research laboratories [56]. Being a eukaryotic system, S. cerevisiae has similarities with mammalian cells at the level of its organelles and macromolecular components, and many of its proteins can be functionally interchangeable with homologous human proteins. Their genetic manipulation is also cheaper compared to other models. In addition, the antioxidant response of S. cerevisiae is similar to that of mammalian cells, and 30% of genes related to human diseases are their functional homologues, which makes this test system quite popular [57, 58]. Organisms, in general, are protected against damage caused by oxidative stress by endogenous enzymes such as SOD, CAT, GPx, and glutathione reductase (GR), which can remove free radicals and other oxidizing species and/or repair oxidative damage. These enzymes remove superoxide and peroxides before reacting with catalytic metals to form reactive compounds. However, this inhibition may promote an imbalance in the levels of free radicals, which thus causes DNA damage, protein denaturation, lipid peroxidation, and even cell death.
Medicinal plants rich in monoterpenes are commonly used to treat various diseases. In our study, estragole and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol showed low cytotoxicity in A. salina and mouse erythrocytes. However, nerol showed high cytotoxic effects at all the doses tested on these test systems. The studied monoterpenes showed a low antioxidant effect in the ferric reducing potential test, but significant inhibition of the oxidative damage caused by H2O2 in all the S. cerevisiae strains was seen at all concentrations of the tested monoterpenes. Regarding the scavenging properties of the monoterpenes, nerol showed a prominent anti-radical capacity in ABTS and DPPH assays, followed by estragole and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol.
Antioxidants are of two types, such as primary and secondary. Primary types scavenge free radicals, thereby inhibiting or slowing initiation and/or propagation steps by releasing electrons or hydrogen. This class of antioxidants can react with lipid and peroxyl radicals (e.g., ROO•, RO•, and R•) and convert them into more stable products (e.g., ROOH, ROH, and RH), for example, phenolic compounds, tocopherols, and synthetic antioxidants (e.g., PG, BHA, BHT, TBHQ). These are also responsible for dimerization processes to terminate the overall reactions. Terpenoids such as monoterpenes have potential antioxidant capacities. These are widely distributed and are able to scavenge almost all types of free radicals [59]. In this study, estragole and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol (phenolic monoterpenes) showed promising antioxidant capacity in various test models. Their antioxidant capacity might be responsible for the modulatory effects on hydrogen peroxide-induced oxidative damage in S. cerevisiae.
Terpenes, including monoterpenes, play vital roles in plants as they provide defense against various bacteria, fungi, and viruses [60]. These have promising cytotoxic effects against these kinds of pathogens. For example, linalool (a naturally occurring terpene alcohol) is known to exert significant cytotoxic effects by inducing oxidative stress and apoptotic mechanisms [61]. In this study, we also observed that the alcoholic monoterpene nerol exerted better cytotoxic effects on mouse erythrocytes and S. cerevisiae.
5. Conclusion
The monoterpenes estragole and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol did not exhibit significant cytotoxic effects on the test systems (A. Salina and mouse erythrocytes). Nerol exhibited significant cytotoxic effects on both test systems in a concentration-dependent manner. All the tested monoterpenes scavenged free radicals' concentration dependently. However, nerol showed a significantly higher antioxidant capacity than estragole and 3,7-dimethyl-1-octanol. The monoterpenes did not oxidize the genetic material of the proficient and deficient S. cerevisiae strains. Among the three monoterpenes, nerol may be a good candidate for antioxidant and anti-tumor therapies. Further research is necessary to evaluate the mechanism of action behind the antioxidant and cytotoxic effects in vivo test models.
Acknowledgments
The authors are thankful to the Northeast Biotechnology Network, RENORBIO, for funding this project. The authors gratefully acknowledge the research facilities provided by the Federal University of Piau, Brazil.
Contributor Information
Daniela Calina, Email: calinadaniela@gmail.com.
Javad Sharifi-Rad, Email: javad.sharifirad@gmail.com.
Data Availability
The datasets used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors upon request.
Ethical Approval
This research was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Piaui, Teresina (Paiui), Brazil (Approval No. 109/14).
Conflicts of Interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
Authors' Contributions
All authors made a significant contribution to the paper, whether it was in conceptualization, research design, execution, data collection, data processing, and data reporting, or in each of these areas. The final paper was read and approved by all authors.
References
- 1.Sharifi-Rad J., Quispe C., Rahavian A., et al. Bioactive compounds as potential agents for sexually transmitted diseases management: a review to explore molecular mechanisms of action. Frontiers in Pharmacology . 2021;12 doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.674682.674682 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Islam M. S., Quispe C., Hossain R., et al. Neuropharmacological effects of quercetin: a literature-based review. Frontiers in Pharmacology . 2021;12(1533) doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.665031.665031 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Islam M. T., Quispe C., El-Kersh D. M., et al. A literature-based update on Benincasa hispida (thunb.) cogn: traditional uses, nutraceutical, and phytopharmacological profiles. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity . 2021;2021:19. doi: 10.1155/2021/6349041.6349041 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Salehi B., Shivaprasad Shetty M., Anil Kumar N., et al. Veronicaplants-drifting from farm to traditional healing, food application, and phytopharmacology. Molecules . 2019;24(13):p. 2454. doi: 10.3390/molecules24132454. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Salehi B., Lopez-Jornet P., Pons-Fuster Lopez E., et al. Plant-derived bioactives in oral mucosal lesions: a key emphasis to curcumin, lycopene, chamomile, aloe vera, green tea and coffee properties. Biomolecules . 2019;9(3):p. 106. doi: 10.3390/biom9030106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Tsoukalas D., Fragkiadaki P., Docea A. O., et al. Discovery of potent telomerase activators: unfolding new therapeutic and anti-aging perspectives. Molecular Medicine Reports . 2019;20(4):3701–3708. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2019.10614. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Salehi B., Sestito S., Rapposelli S., et al. Epibatidine: a promising natural alkaloid in health. Biomolecules . 2018;9(1):6. doi: 10.3390/biom9010006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Salehi B., Rescigno A., Dettori T., et al. Avocado-soybean unsaponifiables: a panoply of potentialities to be exploited. Biomolecules . 2020;10(1):p. 130. doi: 10.3390/biom10010130. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Scheau C., Badarau I. A., Mihai L. G., et al. Cannabinoids in the pathophysiology of skin inflammation. Molecules . 2020;25(3):652. doi: 10.3390/molecules25030652. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Probst I. S. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências dos Alimentos, Lavras, Brazil: Universidade Federal de Lavras: São Paulo; 2012. Atividade antibacteriana de óleos essenciais e avaliação de potencial sinérgico; p. 102. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Semwal P., Painuli S., Abu-Izneid T., et al. Diosgenin: an updated pharmacological review and therapeutic perspectives. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity . 2022;2022:17. doi: 10.1155/2022/1035441.1035441 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Torequl Islam M., Quispe C., Herrera-Bravo J., et al. Activities and molecular mechanisms of diterpenes, diterpenoids, and their derivatives in rheumatoid arthritis. Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine . 2022;2022:20. doi: 10.1155/2022/4787643.4787643 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Liu W., Zhai Y., Heng X., et al. Oral bioavailability of curcumin: problems and advancements. Journal of Drug Targeting . 2016;24(8):694–702. doi: 10.3109/1061186x.2016.1157883. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Chimento A., De Amicis F., Sirianni R., et al. Progress to improve oral bioavailability and beneficial effects of resveratrol. International Journal of Molecular Sciences . 2019;20(6):1381. doi: 10.3390/ijms20061381. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Sharifi-Rad J., Quispe C., Patra J. K., et al. Paclitaxel: application in modern oncology and nanomedicine-based cancer therapy. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity . 2021;2021:24. doi: 10.1155/2021/3687700.3687700 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Engin A. B., Nikitovic D., Neagu M., et al. Mechanistic understanding of nanoparticles’ interactions with extracellular matrix: the cell and immune system. Particle and Fibre Toxicology . 2017;14(1):p. 22. doi: 10.1186/s12989-017-0199-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Henrich-Noack P., Nikitovic D., Neagu M., et al. The blood-brain barrier and beyond: nano-based neuropharmacology and the role of extracellular matrix. Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine . 2019;17:359–379. doi: 10.1016/j.nano.2019.01.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Neagu M., Piperigkou Z., Karamanou K., et al. Protein bio-corona: critical issue in immune nanotoxicology. Archives of Toxicology . 2017;91(3):1031–1048. doi: 10.1007/s00204-016-1797-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Piperigkou Z., Karamanou K., Engin A. B., et al. Emerging aspects of nanotoxicology in health and disease: from agriculture and food sector to cancer therapeutics. Food and Chemical Toxicology . 2016;91:42–57. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2016.03.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Sharifi-Rad J., Quispe C., Kumar M., et al. Hyssopus essential oil: an update of its phytochemistry, biological activities, and safety profile. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity . 2022;2022:10. doi: 10.1155/2022/8442734.8442734 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Sharifi-Rad J., Quispe C., Herrera-Bravo J., et al. Phytochemical constituents, biological activities, and health-promoting effects of the melissa officinalis. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity . 2021;2021:20. doi: 10.1155/2021/6584693.6584693 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
- 22.Quetglas-Llabrés M. M., Quispe C., Herrera-Bravo J., et al. Pharmacological properties of bergapten: mechanistic and therapeutic aspects. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity . 2022;2022:10. doi: 10.1155/2022/8615242.8615242 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
- 23.Dima C., Dima S. Essential oils in foods: extraction, stabilization, and toxicity. Current Opinion in Food Science . 2015;5:29–35. doi: 10.1016/j.cofs.2015.07.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Salehi B., Sharifi-Rad J., Capanoglu E., et al. Cucurbita plants: from farm to industry. Applied Sciences . 2019;9(16):p. 3387. doi: 10.3390/app9163387. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Nakatsu T. Biological activity of essential oils and their constituents. In: Atta ur R., editor. Studies in Natural Products Chemistry . Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 2000. pp. 571–631. [Google Scholar]
- 26.Sharifi-Rad J., Dey A., Koirala N., et al. Cinnamomum species: bridging phytochemistry knowledge, pharmacological properties and toxicological safety for health benefits. Frontiers in Pharmacology . 2021;12 doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.600139.600139 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Neto J. D. N. S., Freitas R. M. Avaliação do potential antioxidante in vitro do nerolidol. Revista de Ciências Farmacêuticas Básica e Aplicada. . 2012;4(6):125–130. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Knaak N. F. Potencial dos óleos essenciais de plantas no controle de insetos e microrganismo. São Leopoldo . 2010;5:120–123. [Google Scholar]
- 29.Tian J., Zeng X., Zeng H., Feng Z., Miao X., Peng X. Investigations on the antifungal effect of nerol against Aspergillus flavus causing food spoilage. The Scientific World Journal . 2013;2013:8. doi: 10.1155/2013/230795.230795 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.De Martino L., De Feo V., Fratianni F., Nazzaro F. Chemistry, antioxidant, antibacterial and antifungal activities of volatile oils and their components. Natural Product Communications . 2009;4(12) doi: 10.1177/1934578x0900401226. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Mafud A. C., Silva M. P., Monteiro D. C., et al. Structural parameters, molecular properties, and biological evaluation of some terpenes targeting Schistosoma mansoni parasite. Chemico-Biological Interactions . 2016;244:129–139. doi: 10.1016/j.cbi.2015.12.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Zhou L., Zhang Z., Wei M., et al. Evaluation of the antifungal activity of individual and combined monoterpenes against Rhizopus stolonifer and Absidia coerulea. Environmental Science and Pollution Research . 2019;26(8):7804–7809. doi: 10.1007/s11356-019-04278-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Islam M. T., Quispe C., Islam M. A., et al. Effects of nerol on paracetamol-induced liver damage in Wistar albino rats. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy . 2021;140 doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2021.111732.111732 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Islam M. T., Streck L., Da Silva-Junior A. A., De Carvalho Melo-Cavalcante A. A. Preparation and antioxidant capacity test of praziquantel nanoemulsion. Current Bioactive Compounds . 2018;14(1):48–53. doi: 10.2174/1573407213666161108125303. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Amaral E. N. S. Avaliação da toxidade aguda de angico (Anadenanthera falcata), pau-santo (Kilmeyera coreacea), aroeira (Myracrodruon urundeuva) e cipó-de-são-joão (Pyrostegia venusta), por meio do bioensaio com artemia salina. Revista Eletrônica da Pesquisa . 2008;5(5):1–16. [Google Scholar]
- 36.Jamialahmadi K., Arasteh O., Matbou Riahi M., Mehri S., Riahi-Zanjani B., Karimi G. Protective effects of glucosamine hydrochloride against free radical-induced erythrocytes damage. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology . 2014;38(1):212–219. doi: 10.1016/j.etap.2014.05.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Abderrahim F., Arribas S. M., Gonzalez M. C., Condezo-Hoyos L. Rapid high-throughput assay to assess scavenging capacity index using DPPH. Food Chemistry . 2013;141(2):788–794. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.04.055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Carvalho D. F. Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciências Farmacêuticas . Piauí: Universidade Federal do Piauí; 2012. Estudo do potencial antioxidante in vitro e in vivo do extrato aquoso das folhas de centratherumpunctatumssppunctatum Cass. (Asteraceae) p. p. 81. [Google Scholar]
- 39.Singhal M., Paul A., Singh H. P. Synthesis and reducing power assay of methyl semicarbazone derivatives. Journal of Saudi Chemical Society . 2014;18(2):121–127. doi: 10.1016/j.jscs.2011.06.004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Islam M. Preparation of phytol-loaded nanoemulsion and screening for antioxidant capacity. International Archives of Medicine . 2016;9 [Google Scholar]
- 41.Oliveira C. B. S. Mestrado Em Ciências Biológicas, Natal: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte; 2012. Avaliação das atividades anti-toxoplásmica, antioxidante e antiinflamatória dos momentos timol (lippiasidoides) e estragol (crotonzenhtneri) p. p. 95. [Google Scholar]
- 42.Wu C. An important player in brine shrimp lethality bioassay: the solvent. Journal of Advanced Pharmaceutical Technology & Research . 2014;5(1):57–58. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Zanon G. Mestrado Em Química . Santa Maria: Universidade Federal de Santa Maria; 2010. Análise fitoquímica e estudo das atividades antimicrobiana, antioxidante e de inibição da enzima acetilcolinesterase das espécies zanthoxylum rhoifolium e zanthoxylum hyemale. [Google Scholar]
- 44.Silva J. N. Ciências Farmacêuticas do Departamento de Bioquímica e Farmacologia . Teresina: Universidade Federal do Piauí; 2015. Atividade antioxidante e citotóxica de extratos de plantas do semiárido brasileiro com potencial para desenvolvimento de fitoterápicos; p. p. 167. [Google Scholar]
- 45.Kpoviessi S., Bero J., Agbani P., et al. Chemical composition, cytotoxicity and in vitro antitrypanosomal and antiplasmodial activity of the essential oils of four Cymbopogon species from Benin. Journal of Ethnopharmacology . 2014;151(1):652–659. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2013.11.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Pradhan D., Singh R., Tyagi A., Hm R., Batish V., Grover S. Assessing safety of Lactobacillus plantarum MTCC 5690 and Lactobacillus fermentum MTCC 5689 using in vitro approaches and an in vivo murine model. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology . 2019;101:1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2018.10.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.LaGrow A. L., Coburn P. S., Miller F. C., et al. A novel biomimetic nanosponge protects the retina from the Enterococcus faecalis cytolysin. MSphere . 2017;2(6):003355–003417. doi: 10.1128/msphere.00335-17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Holt D. S., Botto M., Bygrave A. E., Hanna S. M., Walport M. J., Morgan B. P. Targeted deletion of the CD59 gene causes spontaneous intravascular hemolysis and hemoglobinuria. Blood . 2001;98(2):442–449. doi: 10.1182/blood.v98.2.442. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Aranha E. S. P. Ciências Farmacêuticas, Manuas: Universidade Federal do Amazonas; 2014. Avaliação do potencial anticâncer in vitro de Óleos essenciais de Plantas do gênero eugeni; p. 82. [Google Scholar]
- 50.Arteaga J. F., Ruiz-Montoya M., Palma A., Alonso-Garrido G., Pintado S., Rodriguez-Mellado J. M. Comparison of the simple cyclic voltammetry (CV) and DPPH assays for the determination of antioxidant capacity of active principles. Molecules . 2012;17(5):5126–5138. doi: 10.3390/molecules17055126. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Santos M. H. D., Batista B. L., Duarte S. M. D. S., Abreu C. M. P. D., Gouvêa C. M. C. P. Influência do processamento e da torrefação sobre a atividade antioxidante do café (Coffea arabica) Quimica Nova . 2007;30(3):604–610. doi: 10.1590/s0100-40422007000300020. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Blázovics A., Szentmihalyi K., Lugasi A., et al. In vitro analysis of the properties of Beiqishen tea. Nutrition . 2003;19(10):869–875. doi: 10.1016/s0899-9007(03)00157-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Islam M. T., Streck L., Correia Jardim Paz M. F., et al. Preparation of phytol-loaded nanoemulsion and screening for antioxidant capacity. International Archives of Medicine . 2016;9 doi: 10.3823/1941. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Sánchez-González I., Jiménez-Escrig A., Saura-Calixto F. In vitro antioxidant activity of coffees brewed using different procedures (Italian, espresso and filter) Food Chemistry . 2005;90(1-2):133–139. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2004.03.037. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Stegeman J. J., Behrendt L., Woodin B. R., et al. Functional characterization of zebrafish cytochrome P450 1 family proteins expressed in yeast. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)-General Subjects . 2015;1850(11):2340–2352. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagen.2015.07.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Del Rio D. T. Mestrado em Agronomia, São Paulo: Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz, Universidade de São Paulo; 2004. Biossorção de cádmio por leveduras Saccharomyces cerevisiae; p. 54. [Google Scholar]
- 57.De La Torre Ruiz M. Editorial (Mini-Thematic issue: unraveling oxidative stress. From yeast to human therapy) Current Drug Targets . 2015;16(1):p. 1. doi: 10.2174/138945011601150119103715. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Yi D. G., Huh W. K. UDP-glucose pyrophosphorylase Ugp1 is involved in oxidative stress response and long-term survival during stationary phase in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications . 2015;467(4):657–663. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2015.10.090. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Gutiérrez-del-Río I., Lopez-Ibanez S., Magadan-Corpas P., et al. Terpenoids and polyphenols as natural antioxidant agents in food preservation. Antioxidants . 2021;10(8):p. 1264. doi: 10.3390/antiox10081264. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Ninkuu V., Zhang L., Yan J., Fu Z., Yang T., Zeng H. Biochemistry of terpenes and recent advances in plant protection. International Journal of Molecular Sciences . 2021;22(11):p. 5710. doi: 10.3390/ijms22115710. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Iwasaki K., Zheng Y. W., Murata S., et al. Anticancer effect of linalool via cancer-specific hydroxyl radical generation in human colon cancer. World Journal of Gastroenterology . 2016;22(44):p. 9765. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i44.9765. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Tiveron A. P. Mestre em Ciências. Área de concentração: Ciencias e Tecnologia de Alimentos, Piracicaba: Universidade de São Paulo; 2010. Atividade antioxidante e composição fenólica de legumes e leveduras consumidos no Brasil; p. 102. [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The datasets used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors upon request.