Cited by 386Essential Oils and Antimicrobial ActivityPhytochemicals and Antioxidant ActivitiesPhytochemistry and Biological Activities

Antioxidant activities of the essential oils and methanol extracts from myrtle (Myrtus communis var. italica L.) leaf, stem and flower

Aidi Wannes, Wissem, Mhamdi, Baya, Sriti, Jazia, Ben Jemia, Mariem, Ouchikh, Olfa, Hamdaoui, Ghaith, Kchouk, Mohamed Elyes, Marzouk, Brahim·2010·Food and Chemical Toxicology

Abstract

This study was designed to examine the chemical composition and antioxidant activity of the essential oils and methanol extracts of Myrtus communis var. italica L. leaf, stem and flower. Myrtle leaf and flower were the valuable organs for the essential oil production representing a yield of 0.61% and 0.30% (w/w), respectively. The essential oil composition of myrtle leaf and flower was characterized by high proportions of alpha-pinene, the main compound of monoterpene hydrocarbon class, with 58.05% for leaf and 17.53% for flower. Stem was rich in oxygenated monoterpenes, largely due to 1,8-cineole with 32.84%. The total phenol contents varied between different myrtle parts; leaf extract had higher total phenol content (33.67 mg GAE/g) than flower (15.70 mg GAE/g) and stem (11.11 mg GAE/g) extracts. Significant differences were also found in total tannin contents among different myrtle parts, representing 26.55 mg GAE/g in leaf, 11.95 mg GAE/g in flower, 3.33 mg GAE/g in stem. The highest contents of total flavonoids and condensed tannins were observed in stem (5.17 and 1.99 mg CE/g, respectively) and leaf (3 and 1.22 mg CE/g, respectively) extracts. The HPLC analysis indicated that the main phenolic class was hydrolysable tannins (gallotannins) in leaf (79.39%, 8.90 mg/g) and flower (60.00%, 3.50mg/g) while the stem was characterized by the predominance of flavonoid class (61.38%, 1.86 mg/g) due to the high presence of catechin (36.91%, 1.12 mg/g). Antioxidant activities of the essential oil and the methanolic extract from different myrtle parts were evaluated by using DPPH radical scavenging, beta-carotene-linoleic acid bleaching, reducing power and metal chelating activity assays. In all tests, methanolic extracts of different myrtle parts showed better antioxidant activity than essential oils.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.fct.2010.03.002

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Myrtus communis var. italica leaf and flower oils had the best antioxidant activities among the plant parts, but were inferior to BHT and BHA.

    “Leaf and flower oils had the best antixidant activities, nevertheless inferior to those of BHT and BHA.”
  • Essential oils of Myrtus communis, Thymus marschallianus and Thymus proximus generally did not present chelating activity, except the essential oils of flowers of myrtle.

    “Essential oils of Myrtus communis, Thymus marschallianus and Thymus proximus generally did not present chelating activity [46,54]. The sole exception was the essential oils of flowers of myrtle.”
  • Methanolic fractions of Myrtus communis var. italica were always better antioxidants than the essential oils, independent of plant part and antioxidant method.

    “Independent of the plant part of Myrtus communis var. italica L. used and the antioxidant method used, the methanolic fractions were always better antioxidants than the essential oils [46].”
  • The chelating activity of myrtle flower oil is explained by eugenol and methyl eugenol, dihydroxylated compounds necessary to form chelated Fe2+; leaf and stem oils with 1,8-cineole and terpinen-4-ol, monohydroxylated, are unable to chelate ferrous ions.

    “The authors [46] explained this activity to the presence of eugenol and methyl eugenol in its essential oil, whereas these two components only belong to a minor fraction of leaf and stem essential oils. These dihydroxylated compounds would be necessary to form chelated Fe2+. Leaf and stem oils had as main components 1,8-cineole and terpinen-4-ol, monohydroxylated compounds that would be unable to”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 77 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aidi Wannes, W., Mhamdi, B., Sriti, J., Ben Jemia, M., Ouchikh, O., Hamdaoui, G., Kchouk, M. E., & Marzouk, B.
Affiliations
Center of Biotechnogy of Borj Cédria (TN)
Venue
Food and Chemical Toxicology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-05
Volume
48
Issue
5
Pages
1362-1370
ISSN
0278-6915 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2044927249
Cited by
386
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 14
FWCI
27.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Food and Chemical Toxicology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Biochemistry › Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Phytochemistry and Biological Activities
Keywords
Myrtus communis, essential oils, methanol extract, antioxidant activity, chemical composition, α-pinene, 1,8-cineole, monoterpenes, total phenolic content, tannins, flavonoids, proanthocyanidins, hydrolysable tannins, catechins, DPPH radical scavenging, reducing power, metal chelating activity
MeSH terms
Bicyclic Monoterpenes, Flavonoids, Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry, Oils, Volatile, Phenols, Plant Oils, Tannins, Free Radical Scavengers, Spectrometry, Mass, Electrospray Ionization, Myrtus, Plant Components, Aerial, Monoterpenes, Polyphenols

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review