Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 0Plant chemical constituents analysisEssential Oils and Antimicrobial ActivityPhytochemical Studies and Bioactivities

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 79 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 2 are not checked yet; none of the 74 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Maceration, Soxhlet Extraction, and Steam Hydrodistillation of Anethum graveolens Seeds: Phytochemical Profiles and Cytotoxic Effects

Open access

Abstract

Dill, Anethum graveolens L., is a culinary plant used in traditional medicine to treat gastrointestinal conditions; its seeds have been previously reported to exhibit antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, hypolipidemic, anticancer and antioxidant activities. This study aimed to assess dill seed extracts and essential oil in terms of chemical composition and cytotoxic effects, combined with an exploration of the potential underlying mechanisms. Four hydroethanolic seed extracts were prepared using Soxhlet extraction or maceration and the essential oil (AGEO) was prepared by steam distillation. Extracts were physicochemically analysed via LC-MS and spectrophotometry while the AGEO composition was determined through GC-MS. Their cytotoxic effects were assessed in A375, PANC-1 and SK-OV-3 cancer cells, while HaCaT keratinocytes were used as non-cancerous control. The mechanistic investigations included immunofluorescence assay, high-resolution respirometry, network pharmacology and molecular docking. Ferulic acid and fisetin were identified as major components of the hydroethanolic extracts, while D-limonene and carvotanacetone were the main compounds in the AGEO. All tested products were revealed to induce dose-dependent cytotoxicity (with IC50 values ranging between 619.8 and 810.2 μg/mL), diminished OXPHOS efficiency and a mitochondrial uncoupling effect. Morphological changes consistent with apoptosis were recorded, particularly in PANC-1 and A375 cells. Network pharmacology suggested a multitarget mechanism for EO that involved STAT3 and HSP90AA1, while the molecular docking calculations indicated that D-limonene and carvotanacetone could be accommodated within the ATP-binding pocket of Hsp90α.

Checked 2026-11-12 · 2 references not checked yet

Overview

CoChat Summary

Written by AI from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Hydroethanolic extracts and essential oil from *Anethum graveolens* seeds showed dose-dependent cytotoxicity in A375, PANC-1, and SK-OV-3 cancer cells, with AGEO generally strongest and PANC-1 most sensitive. Mechanistic assays indicated reduced OXPHOS efficiency, mitochondrial uncoupling/depolarization, apoptosis-like morphology, and computational support for HSP90α as a candidate AGEO target.

Key findings

  • Extraction yields for hydroethanolic extracts ranged from 8.8% to 9.4%; AGEO yield was much lower. LC-MS showed A2 (maceration, 60% ethanol) had the highest total targeted polyphenolics (~6.03 µg/mg d.e.), while A3 (Soxhlet, 40% ethanol) was highest for sinapic acid (~3.27 µg/mg d.e.) and A4 (Soxhlet, 60% ethanol) for chlorogenic acid (1.99 µg/mg d.e.).
  • Spectrophotometric contents ranged from 169.4 ± 0.5 to 177.3 ± 0.5 mg GAE/g extract for TPC, 5.91 ± 0.02 to 12.85 ± 0.05 mg QE/g extract for TFC, and 4.43 ± 0.03 to 9.05 ± 0.06 mg CE/g extract for CTC; A4 had the highest TPC, TFC, and CTC.
  • AGEO contained carvotanacetone (60.41%) and D-limonene (38.70%), cumulatively 99.11% of the chromatographic area. Cytotoxicity was dose-dependent; IC50 values ranged from 619.8 to 810.2 µg/mL, with PANC-1 A2 IC50 = 619.8 µg/mL, A1 = 763.1 µg/mL, A4 = 810.2 µg/mL, and SK-OV-3 A2 = 776.1 µg/mL. Highest selectivity indices were PANC-1 A2 (3.138), A1 (3.117), and A4 (2.613).
  • Mechanistic assays showed decreased OXPHOS and increased State 2/State 4 respiration consistent with mitochondrial uncoupling; JC-1 indicated depolarization, strongest in PANC-1 with AGEO (0.522 ± 0.06 vs. control 1). Network pharmacology identified 35 common targets and a 28-node PPI network with STAT3 and HSP90AA1 as key; docking gave D-limonene and carvotanacetone −7.2 kcal/mol each versus co-crystallised EOR −8.6 kcal/mol.

Methods

  • Four hydroethanolic seed extracts were prepared by maceration or Soxhlet extraction using 40% or 60% ethanol (A1–A4), and AGEO was obtained by steam hydrodistillation from a single authenticated batch of dried *A. graveolens* seeds collected in Timiș county in September 2024.
  • Phytochemical profiling used LC-MS for 18 polyphenols, spectrophotometric assays for TPC/TFC/CTC, and GC-MS for AGEO. Biological testing used A375, PANC-1, SK-OV-3 cancer cells and HaCaT keratinocytes with Alamar Blue viability, immunofluorescence, high-resolution respirometry, and JC-1 MMP assays.
  • Statistical analysis used one-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s test for viability and two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s post-test for respirometry; network pharmacology used GeneCards, SwissTargetPrediction, PharmMapper, STRING, Cytoscape/CytoHubba, and Metascape, followed by AutoDock Vina/PyRx docking against Hsp90α (PDB 6LR9).

Limitations

  • The paper states that variable chemical composition depending on plant origin, developmental stage, harvesting, processing, and storage limits extrapolation to other *A. graveolens* preparations; it also states that computational analyses are predictive and require experimental validation, that direct Hsp90α involvement was not experimentally demonstrated, and that apoptotic markers and comparisons of carvotanacetone/D-limonene with AGEO are still needed.
  • The text makes evident additional constraints: extractions were performed once, GC-MS identification/quantification did not use authentic reference standards, and AGEO concentrations were expressed as volume percentages, so they cannot be directly compared with mass concentrations of dry extracts.
  • The mechanistic mitochondrial experiments used 720 µg/mL for A2/A4 and 0.05% AGEO, doses near or above the observed IC50 range; the paper itself notes that lower doses should be tested to clarify dose–response and distinguish pharmacological mechanisms from high-dose toxicity.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/molecules31183337

Cites

77 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

113 Own result · 38 Check pending · 38 Own interpretation · 15 Own method · 10 No full text of the sources · 5 Not checked yet

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 67
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 50

Create a free account to see these claims.

Create a free account to see these assumptions.

107 more claims

Create a free account to see all 219 claims and to verify the 55 references still open.

See all claims — free account

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Chahal, 2017, Chemistry and Biological Activities of Anethum graveolens L. (Dill) Essential Oil: A Review, J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem., 6, 295
  2. Saji, 2022, A Review on Anethum graveolens: Its Role in Human Life, Pharma Innov. J., 11, 332
  3. Hegazy, 2026, Phytochemical Profiling, Antioxidant, Antitumor and Insecticidal Activities of Methanolic Extracts and Essential Oils of Coriander and Dill, Egypt J. Chem., 69, 131

Cited by

Still being checked.

Metadata

Authors
Goldiș, C., Racoviceanu, R., Negrea-Ghiulai, R., Mioc, A., Prodea, A., Atyim, E., Maksimovic, T., Lukinich-Gruia, A. T., Pricop, M.-A., & Șoica, C.
Affiliations
  • Victor Babeș University of Medicine and Pharmacy Timișoara (RO)
  • Faculty of Pharmacy, “Victor Babeș” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 2 Eftimie Murgu Square, 300041 Timisoara, Romania
  • Spitalul Clinic Judeţean de Urgenţă "Pius Brînzeu" Timişoara (RO)
  • Politehnica University of Timisoara (RO)
Corresponding author
Racoviceanu, Roxana
Venue
Molecules
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2026-09-20
Volume
31
Issue
18
Pages
3337
ISSN
1420-3049 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7213948843
Cited by
0
References
77
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecules (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
“Victor Babes” University of Medicine and Pharmacy Timisoara
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant chemical constituents analysis
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Organic Chemistry › Phytochemical Studies and Bioactivities
Keywords
dill, dill seeds, essential oils, cytotoxicity, ferulic acid, fisetin, D-limonene, mitochondrial uncoupling, apoptosis, STAT3, HSP90AA1, anticancer activity, phytochemical composition, cancer cell lines
MeSH terms
Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic, Humans, Oils, Volatile, Plant Extracts, Seeds, Steam, Apoptosis, Anethum graveolens, Cell Line, Tumor, Distillation, Molecular Docking Simulation, Phytochemicals

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-12, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-12 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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