Next Article in Journal
Simple, Fast and Efficient Methods for Analysing the Structural, Ultrastructural and Cellular Components of the Cell Wall
Previous Article in Journal
The Balance between Different ROS on Tobacco Stigma during Flowering and Its Role in Pollen Germination
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Phytochemical Profile and Anticancer Activity of Anthemis tinctoria and Angelica sylvestris Used in Estonian Ethnomedicine

1
Institute of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tartu, 50411 Tartu, Estonia
2
Department of Veterinary Biomedicine and Food Hygiene, Estonian University of Life Sciences, 51014 Tartu, Estonia
3
Institute of Pharmaceutical Technologies, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, 44307 Kaunas, Lithuania
4
Pharmacognosy Department, The National University of Pharmacy, 61002 Kharkiv, Ukraine
5
Faculty of Pharmacy, Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University, Hue City 52000, Vietnam
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2022, 11(7), 994; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11070994
Submission received: 22 March 2022 / Revised: 1 April 2022 / Accepted: 2 April 2022 / Published: 5 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Topic Natural Compounds in Plants)

Abstract

:
The aerial parts of Anthemis tinctoria L. and Angelica sylvestris L. and the roots of A. sylvestris have been used as traditional anticancer remedies in Estonian ethnomedicine. The aim of this study was to investigate content of essential oils (by gas chromatography) and polyphenolic compounds (using two different methods of high performance liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (HPLC–MS)) of both plant species, as well as the in vitro anti-cancer effects of their essential oils and methanolic extracts. The average (n = 5 samples) yield of essential oils was 0.15%, 0.13%, and 0.17%, respectively. The principal compounds of the essential oil from the aerial parts of A. tinctoria were palmitic acid (15.3%), p-cymene (12.6%), and α-muurolene (12.5%), and α-pinene (45.4%), p-cymene (15.5%), and β-myrcene (13.3%) in aerial parts of A. sylvestris, while isocaryophyllene oxide (31.9%), α-bisabolol (17.5%), and α-pinene (12.4%) were the main constituents in the roots. The most abundant phenolic compounds in aerial parts were the derivatives of caffeic acid, quinic acid, and quercetin; the main compounds in roots of A. sylvestris were chlorogenic acid, quinic acid, and naringenin. The strongest anticancer effects were observed in essential oils of A. sylvestris roots and aerial parts on human carcinoma in the mouth cells (KB, IC50 19.73 μg/mL and 19.84 μg/mL, respectively). The essential oil of A. tinctoria showed a strong effect on KB and LNCaP cells (27.75–29.96 μg/mL). The methanolic extracts of both plants had no effect on the cancer cells studied.

1. Introduction

According to the estimation of the World Health Organization, the approximately 12.7 million new cancer cases that occurred globally in 2008 will increase to 21.3 million by 2030 [1]. When plants with expressed anticancer activity used in Estonian ethnomedicine were studied [2], 44 species with potential anticancer properties were elicited, five of which Anthemis tinctoria L., Angelica sylvestris L., Pinus sylvestris L., Sorbus aucuparia L. and Prunus padus L. had not been previously described with respect to their tumoricidal activities in the scientific literature. Later, the anticancer activity of essential oil and methanolic extract from needles of P. sylvestris and bark of S. aucuparia were studied [3,4].
The focus of this study was on A. tinctoria (golden marguerite) and A. sylvestris (wild angelica). Both species, which grow naturally in Estonia, have been used only in local and neighboring folk medicine. Only a few studies have been published on their chemical composition, mainly on the composition of essential oils and polyphenols.
The content of essential oil in the A. tinctoria herb is about 0.1% [5]. The main compounds found in the essential oil are α-eudesmol, γ-cadinol, γ-cadinene, decanoic acid, T-muurolol, 1,8-cineole, and β-pinene [6,7]. Chlorogenic acid, gentisic acid, and rosmarinic acid, as well as the flavonoids apigenin-7-glucoside, patuletin, and quercetin, have been found in the aerial parts of A. tinctoria [8,9]. A new flavonoid, tinctosid, has been identified [10]. Fifteen flavonoid aglycones, twelve glycosides, and one caffeoyl-O-flavonoid were identified in the extracts of A. tinctoria [11].
The roots of A. sylvestris contain 0.16% of essential oil, flowers 0.52%, leaves 0.08%, and seeds of A. sylvestris contain 1.1% of essential oil with the main components being limonene, α-pinene, myrcene, β-fellandrene, α-hamrigren, and β-sesquifellandrene [12,13,14]. The essential oil of roots contains mostly sesquiterpenoids, while the essential oil of seeds contains monoterpenoids [13,15]. Moderate amounts of phenolic compounds, and a small amount of flavonoids, have been found in the herb of A. sylvestris [16], but their exact composition is unknown.
The aim of this study was to investigate the chemical composition of A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris, as well as the anti-cancer effects of essential oils and methanolic extracts.

2. Results

2.1. Chemical Composition

2.1.1. Content and Chemical Composition of Essential Oils

The average (n = 5 samples) yield of essential oils in the aerial parts of A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris, and in the roots of A. sylvestris was 0.15%, 0.13%, and 0.17%, respectively.The main components of the essential oil from the aerial parts of A. tinctoria were palmitic acid (15.3%), p-cymene (12.6%), and α-muurolene (12.5%), while the content of other compounds was less than 10% (Table 1). Ocimenes (Z and E), isoborneol, crysanthenyl acetate, humulene epoxide, 2-pentadecanone, and nerolidon acetate were found in the essential oil of A. tinctoria for the first time. The principal compounds in the essential oil from aerial parts were α-pinene (45.4%), p-cymene (15.5%), and β-myrcene (13.3%), while isocaryophyllene oxide (31.9%), α-bisabolol (17.5%), and α-pinene (12.4%) were the main constituents in root oil of the same plant. The essential oil of aerial parts of A. sylvestris contained more monoterpenes and cyclic monoterpenes but less sesquiterpenes and bicyclic sesquiterpenes than the oil hydrodistilled from the roots of A. sylvestris (Table 2).

2.1.2. Identification of Polyphenolic Compounds

By two methods, 41 phenolic compounds were identified in A. tinctoria herb, 21–23 in A. sylvestris, and 10 compounds in roots of A. sylvestris. The most abundant were derivatives of caffeic acid, quinic acid, and quercetin (Table 3 and Table 4). In contrast, 10 polyphenolic compounds were detected in A. sylvestris root extract, the most abundant of which were chlorogenic acid, quinic acid, and naringenin. Substances common for analyzed herbs and roots were naringenin, chlorogenic acid, quercetin, and coumarylquinic acids.
Roots of A. sylvestris contain a number of phenolic compounds in remarkable quantities that remain unidentified. Some of these have a UV absorption maximum near 306 nm that refers to hydroxystilbenes such as resveratrol or piceatannol and six compounds have a negative collision fragment with m/z = 201 (Figures S1–S3).
The principal polyphenols in the aerial parts of A. tinctoria were caffeoylquinic (chlorogenic) and dicaffeoylquinic acids as well as several glycosides of quercetin and patuletin, in the aerial parts of A. sylvestris there were also chlorogenic and caffeoylquinic acids and different glycosides of quercetin. The principal polyphenols of A. sylvestris roots were neo-chlorogenic acid, caffeic acid glucosides, feruloylquinic acid, and naringenin together with naringenin chalcone. However, the total polyphenol content (TPC) of aerial parts of A.tinctoria was about 3.1 and 4.5 times higher than the TPC of aerial parts of A. tinctoria and roots of A. sylvestris, respectively, estimated by comparison of UV chromatogram areas at 280 nm. Total content of flavonol glycosides (TCF) of aerial parts of A. tinctoria was about 4 and 8 times higher than TCF of aerial parts of A. tinctoria and roots of A. sylvestris, respectively, estimated by comparison of UV chromatogram areas at 360 nm, the maximum of UV spectra of flavonols. Consequently, the TPC and, particularly, the TCF of the methanol extract of both aerial parts and especially of roots of A. sylvestris was too low to expect remarkable effects on cancer cells.
Phenolic compounds were identified using the selected MRM transition detection method and inhouse database. It was found that aerial parts accumulated most of phenolic compounds while in root samples some compounds were not detected and others were found in lower abundance. The most abundant compounds were phenolic acids (chlorogenic and dicaffeoylquinic acids). Flavonoid aglycones and their glycosides were detected in lower abundance. Qualitative profiles of selected phenolic compounds were similar between samples, although naringenin was detected only in A. sylvestris samples, and luteolin was detected only in A. tinctoria samples. It should be emphasized that soem of the phenolic compounds, such as neochlorogenic, and chlorogenic acids, rutin, and dicaffeoylquinic acids were confirmed by both LC–MS methods. The presence of caffeic acid, ferulic acid, quercetin, isorhamnetin (detected in the aerial parts of tested species), luteolin, naringenin (found in samples of A. sylvestris), and diosmetine derivatives was also confirmed by both methods. The inequality of methods used and the selected methodological conditions was the basis for supplementing the data obtained. The UPLC–MS/MS method provided more detailed data on luteolin derivatives. Luteolin-7-rutinoside was detected in all samples tested by UPLC–MS/MS, while other luteolin derivatives (luteolin-7-glucoside, luteolin-4-glucoside, and luteolin aglycone) were detected only in A. tinctoria aerial parts. The UPLC-based triple quadrupole MRM transitions were more abundant for detection of aglycone monomers as free ferulic acid, caffeic acid, and chlorogenic acid (which was detected in all samples), as well as quercetin and isorhamnetin aglycones (which were detected in aerial parts of A. sylvestris), and apigenin aglycone (found in all samples). The quercetin derivative quercitrin (quercetin 3-rhamnoside) was detected in all samples by UPLC–MS/MS as against flavone isorhamnetin-3-rutinoside, which was characterized only in the aerial parts of A. sylvestris.
Altogether, ion trap enabled us to identify and semi-quantify 47, and triple quadrupole 22, substances at least in one of the studied plant extracts. This difference between results can be explained by the greater versatility of ion trap, but triple quadrupole is in turn more sensitive, allowing lower concentrations of substances to be determined. It is therefore advisable to analyze any plant extract using two different types of mass spectrometry.

2.1.3. Total Content of Different Compounds

Quantitative analysis of polyphenols was performed mainly, with the exception of chlorogenic acid, by substance groups. As can be seen from Table 5 and Table 6, most of the phenolic compounds in the three studied plant materials were quinic acid derivatives (chlorogenic acids, di- and caffeoylquinic acids, and feruloylquinic acid). The second biggest group, which is completely absent in the roots of A. sylvestris, were glycosides of different flavonols (quercetin, myricetin, isorhamnetin, kaempferol, and patuletin). Phenolic acid glycosides (caffeic and coumaric acid), flavanons (naringenin and eriodictyol), flavones (luteolin), and stilbenols(pinosylvin) were also represented, mostly in small quantities. In particular, the herb of A. tinctoria was distinguished by its abundance in polyphenols both qualitatively and quantitatively. The aerial parts of A. tinctoria contain much more total phenolics, total chlorogenic acids, and total flavonols than the herb of A. sylvestris whose roots showed the lowest concentrations of the mentioned compounds (Table 5). A similar result was estimated when we analyzed total quinic acid derivatives; the roots studied did not contain flavonols (Table 6). The total phenolics and chlorogenic acids were calculated where the ratio between plant material and solvent was 1:10.

2.1.4. Anticancer Activity of Essential Oils and Methanolic Extracts

The strongest anticancer effects were observed with A. sylvestris roots’ and aerial parts’ essential oils on KB cells (IC50 19.73 μg/mL and 19.84 μg/mL, respectively) (Table 7). The same samples showed strong to moderate effects on other cell lines with IC50 range of 24.69–38.06 μg/mL. The essential oil of A. tinctoria showed a strong effect on KB and LNCaP cells (IC50 between 27.75 μg/mL and 29.96 μg/mL, respectively), and a moderate effect on the other cells (IC50 ranged from 43.04 μg/mL to 55.45 μg/mL). The methanolic extract of both plants had no effect on cancer cells (IC50 > 100 μg/mL). The methanolic extract of A. sylvestris roots had a moderate effect on all cancer cells (IC50 range: 40.08–66.06 μg/mL).

3. Discussion

In previous studies, the essential oil content of A. tinctoria inflorescences was 0.10% [5] and 0.10–0.14% [17]. The amount of essential oil obtained in the present study from the aerial parts was slightly higher (0.15%). The content of essential oil in the A. sylvestris leaves was 0.08%, in flowers 0.52%, in fruits 1.1%, and in roots 0.16% [15]. In the present study, the content of essential oil found in the herb was about 2 times higher than in the leaves and about 3.5 times lower than in the flowers and similar to the yield of essential oil measured in roots of A. sylvestris.
The three main compounds of the essential oil from A. tinctoria (palmitic acid, p-cymene, and α-muurolol (Table 1) were also found in our earlier study of the same species of Estonian origin [7]. They were not identified in the oil from flowerheads of A. tinctoria cultivated in the Slovak Republic [6] and were not mentioned among of principal compounds, which were 1,8-cineole (7.9%), β-pinene (7.3%), and decanoic acid (5.4%) [18]. Thus, A. tinctoria essential oil does not contain just one dominant component, rather, three major components have typically been found in all of these studies. A. tinctoria plants seems to be present in several essential-oil chemotypes.
The main compounds in the essential oil of aerial parts and seeds of A. sylvestris collected from Serbia were limonene (66.6 and 75.3%) and α-pinene (19.0 and 9.6%) [12,14]. In the present study, we did not found limonene, but the concentration of α-pinene (12.4%) was similar to that in the mentioned papers. The content of limonene was lower (5.6%) and the concentration of α-pinene higher (25.6%) in the fruits of A. sylvestris grown in Turkey. A study by Ağalar et al. (2020) [15] found that the content of limonene in leaves, flowers, fruits, and roots was 0.4–4.2%. The different results from several authors may depend on different varieties (var. vulgaris or var. elatior) [13]. Thus, the absence of limonene may be influenced by the specific chemotype of A. sylvestris growing in Estonia.
In the aerial parts of A. Tinctoria, 15 flavonoid aglycones were identified [11]. Similarly to the present study, caffeic acid, rutin, naringenin, chlorogenic acid, patuletin, and quercetin have been previously found in A. tinctoria inflorescences. However, apigenin-7-glucoside and rosmarinic acid were not detected in the current study although they were detected by previous authors [8,9].
Many studies report the multiple anticancer properties of plant-derived polyphenols, including inhibitory effects on the proliferation of cancer cells, tumor expansion, angiogenesis, inflammation, and metastasis. Overall, polyphenolic compounds are attractive molecules for cancer treatment [19]. Flavonols quercetin and kaempferol, that are represented mostly by various glycosides derivatives in the aerial parts of both A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris, have been shown to have various anticancer effects [19]. Quercetin has been reported to reduce both the risk and progression of cancer through free-radical scavenging activity, protecting cells from oxidative stress, inflammation, and DNA damage due to its antioxidant properties and modulating growth of many cancer cell lines by blocking cell-cycle progression and tumor-cell proliferation and by inducing apoptosis [20]. A group of polyphenols that includes apigenin, quercetin, curcumin, resveratrol, EGCG, and kaempferol has been shown to regulate signaling pathways that are central for cancer development, progression, and metastasis [21]. Chlorogenic acid has also shown anticancer activity [22]. The fact that these compounds did not demonstrate an anticancer effect in our tests can be explained by the fact that the extracts tested contained polyphenols, not chlorogenic acids, in various glycosidic forms, which usually have lower biological activities than the corresponding aglycones [23]. It will be necessary to repeat the experiments using enzymatically hydrolyzed plant extracts. Other explanations, for example differences in cancer cell lines, should also be considered.
The strongest anticancer effects, with IC50 less than 20 μg/mL, had the essential oils from aerial parts and roots of A. sylvestris on KB (human carcinoma in the mouth) cells. All other results showed moderate or weak activity to different cancer cells (Table 5). The same study of ethnomedicinal traditions in cancer therapy [2] also showed the use of chaga mushroom (Inonotus obliquus), chamomile (Chamomilla recutita), marigold (Calendula officinalis), and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris), which have been previously studied in the context of possible anti-cancer effects in vitro. The methanolic chaga muchroom extract exhibited the strongest cytotoxic effects against promyelocytic leukemia cells (HL-60) and lung adenocarcinoma (LU-1, 32.2 and 38.0 μg/mL, respectively), and modest cytotoxic effects against colon adenocarcinoma (SW480), liver hepatocellular carcinoma (HepG2), oral epidermoid carcinoma (KB), and prostate cancer (LNCaP, 41.3–57.7 μg/mL) [24]. The cytotoxic activity of methanolic extract of chamomile (Chamomilla recutita) flowers on SK-MEL-2 (melanoma cells, IC50 value 40.7 μg/mL) was approximately twofold higher than on KB cells (IC50 value 71.4 μg/mL). With the marigold (Calendula officinalis) flower extracts, the anticancer activity was more than 100 μg/mL in both cell lines studied [2]. The essential oil from the needles of P. sylvestris showed the stronger cytotoxic effect to both negative and positive breast cancer cell lines (MCF7 and MDA-MB231, both IC50 29 μg/mL) than pine methanolic extract (IC50 42 and 80 μg/mL, respectively) [4]. In this context, the potency of the anti-cancer activity of A. sylvestris against different cancer cell lines can be considered remarkable.
α-Pinene has a weak anti-cancer effect, but its use is limited due to its toxicity to normal body cells [25]. A study of liver carcinoma cells has shown moderate anti-cancer activity of pinene [26]. β-Myrcene has been shown to inhibit specific types of breast cancer cells [27]. In vitro experiments with α-bisabolol on pancreatic cancer cells showed strong anti-cancer activity [28]. The rather high concentration of these three terpenoids in the essential oil of A. sylvestris is interesting and could have an effect on other cancer cells not yet studied.
To the best of the author’s knowledge, there are no previous studies on the polyphenolic composition of A. sylvestris, which has been studied, by us, for the first time. The novelty of the study is also the detection of the anticancer activity of A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris. Ocimenes (Z and E), isoborneol, crysanthenyl acetate, humulene epoxide, 2-pentadecanone, and nerolidon acetate were found in the essential oil of A. tinctoria for the first time. Additionally, the MS analysis was performed by two distinctive methods.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Plant Material

The herbs from A. tinctoria were collected in July 2019 from Võrumaa, Estonia (57.41594°; 26.504845°). The herbs and roots from A. sylvestris were collected in July and September 2019 from Valgamaa, Estonia (57.992805°; 26.110812°) (Figure 1). The plant material was dried in a well-ventilated area at room temperature within 10 days. The stems were separated from the dried plant material, and the remaining mixture of flowers, leaves, and thinner stems was analyzed (195–200 g of each). Voucher specimens have been deposited in Herbarium collection of the Institute of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tartu under the acquisition numbers AstA.t.1 and ApiA.s.1.

4.2. Hydrodistillation of Essential Oil

The essential oils were isolated from dried aerial parts of A. tinctoria, as well as from aerial parts and roots of A. sylvestris by the modified hydrodistillation method described in the European Pharmacopoeia [29] using 20–45 g of plant material, a 500 mL round-bottomed flask, and 400 mL water as the distillation liquid, and 0.5 mL of xylene in the graduated tube was added to take up the essential oil. The distillation time was 3 h at a rate of 3–4 mL/min. To improve consecutive chromatographic analyses, hexane was used instead of xylene. Each plant material was distilled five times to obtain a sufficient amount of essential oil for anti-cancer studies.

4.3. Making of Methanolic Dry Extracts

The methanolic extracts of the plant materials were prepared by double maceration by adding 200 mL of methanol to 10 g of crushed sample, which was allowed to stand in the dark at room temperature for 72 h. After filtration, the remaining plant material was returned to the flask and poured into 100 mL of methanol and allowed to stand in the dark for 24 h. After filtration, the two methanolic extracts were combined. The solvent was evaporated on a rotary evaporator in a water bath at 60 °C with a flask rotation of 70 rpm. The pressure was initially reduced to 300 mmHg, then the pressure was slowly increased to 10 mmHg until all the methanol had evaporated. The resulting dry extracts were stored in the freezer, and redissolved in 5 mL of methanol before analysis.

4.4. Gas-Chromatografic Analysis of the Essential Oils

The GC analysis of main compounds of essential oil was performed using Agilent (Santa Clara, CA, USA) GC 7890a chromatograph with software Agilent Open Lab CDS Chem Station and with FID on two fused silica capillary columns with stationary phases DB-5 and HP-Innowax (both 30 m × 0.25 mm, Agilent,). The carrier gas was hydrogen with split ratio 1:150 and the flow rate of 30 mL/min was applied. The temperature program was from 50 to 250 °C at 2.92 °C/min, and the injector temperature was 250 °C.
The identification of the oil components was accomplished by comparing their retention indices using Agilent Open Lab CDS Chem Station software. The content (%) of the components in the essential oils was determined from the mean retention times and peak areas of four parallel chromatograms. Components were identified by DB-5 column retention indices compared to databases and literature data.

4.5. High-Performance Liquid Chromatography of Polyphenolic Compounds

4.5.1. Evaluation of Phenolic Profile of Plant Samples by MS Spectrum and MS/MS Fragment Analysis by LC–MS/MS Chromatography

Methanolic dry extract components were separated on Zorbax 300SB-C18 (2.1 × 150 mm; 5 µm, Agilent Technologies) reversed phase column (thermostated at +35 °C,). Mobile phase A: 0.1% formic acid in water; mobile phase B: acetonitrile. Flow rate 0.3 mL/min, sample size 5 µL and elution was performed according to stepwise gradient: 0–3 min B 1%; 3–40 min B 1–35%; 40–45 min B 35–95%; 45–50 min B 95%; 50.1 min B 1%.
Detection was performed by ion trap instrument (1100 series LC/MSD Trap-XCT, Agilent) with electrospray ionization in negative mode. Carrier gas was dry Helium (5.6 atm).
HPLC–MS/MS spectra were analyzed using HPLC-2D-ChemStation software. Polyphenolic components were identified by HPLC retention time and MS/MS fragments, comparing them with literature data and the inhouse database. More details are available in our previous paper (Rusalepp et al., 2017).

4.5.2. Reagents

The reagents and reference substances were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich, Steinheim, Germany. Purified de-ionized water was prepared with the Milli–Q® (Millipore, Bedford, MA, USA) water purification system.

4.5.3. Evaluation of Phenolic Compound Profile by UPLC–MS/MS Conditions

Chromatographic separation of plant samples was performed on an Aquity H-class UPLC system (Waters, Milford, MA, USA) under conditions described by González-Burgos et al. [30]. A YMC Triart C18 (100 × 2.0 mm 1.9 µm) column was used for separation of phenolic compounds. The column temperature was maintained at 40 °C. Gradient elution was performed with mobile phase consisting of 0.1% formic acid water solution (solvent A) and acetonitrile (solvent B) with the flow rate set to 0.5 mL/min. A linear gradient profile was applied with following proportions of solvent A: 0 to 1 min—95%, 5 min.—70%, 7 min. 50%, 7.5 to 8 min. 0%, 8.1 to 10 min. 95%. MS and MS/MS analyses of separated peaks of phenolic compounds were carried out with triple quadrupole tandem mass spectrometer (Xevo, Waters, USA). An electrospray ionisation source (ESI) was used to obtain negative ions. Electrospray ionization was applied for analysis with the following settings: capillary voltage—2 kV, source temperature—150 °C, desolvation temperature—400 °C, desolvation gas flow—700 L/h, cone gas flow—20 L/h. Waters (USA) IntelliStart software was used for development of a specific collision energy and cone voltage for each compound of interest.

4.6. Cytotoxicity

Human cancer cell lines including hepatocellular carcinoma HepG2, gastric carcinoma MKN7, colon carcinoma SW480, prostate carcinoma LNCaP, and carcinoma in the mouth KB cells were cultured in DMEM or RPMI-1640 cell culture medium, both supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum. Cells were cultivated at 37 °C in a humidified atmosphere containing 5% carbon dioxide.
The methanolic dry extracts were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) to prepare 4 mg/mL stock solutions that were later mixed with cell culture medium to achieve the desired concentrations. The final test concentrations were 0.8, 4, 20, and 100 μg/mL.
The effects of essential oils and extracts on viability of malignant cells were determined by sulforhodamine B cytotoxic assay [31]. Briefly, cells were grown in 96-well microtiter plates with each well containing 190 μL of medium. After 24 h, 10 μL of test samples dissolved in DMSO were added to each well. One plate with no samples served as a day 0 control. The cells were continuously cultured for an additional 48 h, fixed with trichloroacetic acid, and stained with sulforhodamine B, followed by the determination of optical densities at 515 nm using a Microplate Reader (BioRad, Hercules, CA, USA). The percentage of growth inhibition was calculated using the following equation:
%   Growth = OD   reagent OD   day   0 × 100 [ OD   negative   control   DMSO   10 % OD   Day   0 ]
where OD is optical density or absorbance values. The potent anticancer agent ellipticine was used as a positive control.

5. Conclusions

Z- and E-ocimenes, isoborneol, crysanthenyl acetate, humulene epoxide, 2-pentadecanone, and nerolidon acetate were found in the essential oil of A. tinctoria for the first time.
The total polyphenol content of aerial parts of A.tinctoria was about 3.1 and 4.5 times higher than of aerial parts of A. tinctoria and roots of A. sylvestris, respectively. Total content of flavonol glycosides of aerial parts of A. tinctoria was about 4 and 8 times higher than in aerial parts of A. tinctoria and roots of A. sylvestris.
The principal polyphenols in the aerial parts of both A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris were caffeoylquinic and dicaffeoylquinic acids as well as several glycosides of quercetin and patuletin. In the aerial parts of A. Sylvestris, chlorogenic and caffeoylquinic acids and different glycosides of quercetin were also found.
The strongest anticancer effects were found in A. sylvestris roots’ and aerial parts’ essential oils on KB cells (IC50 19.73 μg/mL and 19.84 μg/mL, respectively), and strong to moderate effects on other cell lines with IC50 ranges 24.69–38.06 μg/mL. The essential oil of A. tinctoria showed a strong effect on KB and LNCaP cells (IC50 between 27.75 μg/mL and 29.96 μg/mL, respectively). The methanolic extract of aerial parts of both plants had no effect on cancer cells (IC50 > 100 μg/mL). The essential oils of A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris may have some perspective in development of natural anticancer compounds.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/plants11070994/s1, Figure S1: HPLC-chromatograms of aerial parts of Anthemis tinctoria, Figure S2: HPLC-chromatograms of aerial parts of Angelica sylvestris, Figure S3: HPLC-chromatograms of roots of Angelica sylvestris.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.R., T.P., V.J., O.K. and H.T.N.; methodology, A.R., M.U., T.P., V.Ž., V.J. and H.T.N.; validation, M.J., M.U., T.P., V.Ž., V.J. and A.R.; formal analysis, M.J., T.P., V.Ž., V.J., K.V.N. and M.U.; investigation, M.J., T.P., V.Ž., V.J., K.V.N. and M.U; resources, A.R., M.J., T.P., V.J. and H.T.N.; data curation, A.R., T.P., V.J., O.K. and H.T.N.; writing—A.R., M.J., T.P., M.U., V.Ž., K.V.N., V.J. and O.K.; original draft preparation, A.R., M.J., T.P., V.J. and O.K.; writing—review and editing, A.R., T.P. and V.J.; supervision, A.R., M.U., T.P., V.J. and H.T.N.; project administration, A.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in article and Supplementary Materials.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Song, F.Q.; Liu, Y.; Kong, X.S.; Chang, W.; Song, G. Progress on understanding the anticancer mechanisms of medicinal mushroom: Inonotus obliquus. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2013, 14, 1571–1578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Sak, K.; Nguyen, T.H.; Ho, V.D.; Do, T.T.; Raal, A. Cytotoxic effect of chamomile (Matricaria recutita) and marigold (Calendula officinalis) extract on human melanoma SK-MEL-2 and epidermoid carcinoma KB cells. Cogent Med. 2017, 4, 1333218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Raal, A.; Püssa, T.; Hoai, N.T.; Duc, H.V.; Thao, D.T. Polyphenol composition and cytotoxic activity of Sorbus aucuparia L. bark extract on human cancer cells. In Proceedings of the Plants in Pharmacy and Nutrition. 2nd International Young Scientists Symposium, Wroclaw, Poland, 15–17 September 2016; Wroclaw Medical University: Wroclaw, Poland, 2016; p. 147. [Google Scholar]
  4. Raal, A.; Nguyen, T.H.; Ho, V.D.; Do, T.T. Selective cytotoxic action of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) needles extract in human cancer cell lines. Pharmacogn. Mag. 2015, 11, S290–S295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Saroglou, V.; Dorizas, N.; Kypriotakis, Z.; Skaltsa, H.D. Analysis of the essential oil composition of eight Anthemis species from Greece. J. Chromatogr. A 2006, 1104, 313–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Hollá, M.; Svajdlenka, E.; Vaverková, S.; Zibrunová, B.; Tekel, J.; Havránek, E. Composition of the oil from the flowerheads of Anthemis tinctoria L. Cultivated in Slovak Republic. J. Essent. Oil Res. 2000, 12, 714–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Raal, A.; Kaur, H.; Orav, A.; Arak, E.; Kailas, T.; Müürisepp, M. Content and composition of essential oils in some Asteraceae species. Proc. Estonian Acad. Sci. 2011, 60, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Boukhary, R.; Aboul-ElA, M.; El-Lakany, A. Review on chemical constituents and biological activities of genus anthemis. Pharmacogn. J. 2019, 11, 1155–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Eser, F.; Sahin Yaglioglu, A.; Dolarslan, M.; Aktas, E.; Onal, A. Dyeing, fastness, and cytotoxic properties, and phenolic constituents of Anthemis tinctoria var. tinctoria (Asteraceae). J. Textile Instit. 2017, 108, 1489–1495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Masterová, I.; Grancai, D.; Grancaiová, Z.; Pour, M.; Ubik, K. A new flavonoid: Tinctosid from Anthemis tinctoria L. Pharmazie 2005, 60, 956–957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Orlando, G.; Zengin, G.; Ferrante, C.; Ronci, M.; Recinella, L.; Senkardes, I.; Gevrenova, R.; Zheleva-Dimitrova, D.; Chiavaroli, A.; Leone, S.; et al. Comprehensive chemical profiling and multidirectional biological investigation of two wild Anthemis species (Anthemis tinctoria var. pallida and A. cretica subsp. tenuiloba): Focus on neuroprotective effects. Molecules 2019, 24, 2582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Acimovic, M.; Varga, A.; Cvetkovic, M.; Stankovic, J.; Cabarkapa, I. Chemical characterisation and antibacterial activity of the essential oil of wild Angelica seeds. Bot. Serbica 2018, 42, 217–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Özek, T.; Özek, G.; Duran, A.; Sagiroglu, M. Composition of the essential oils of Angelica sylvestris l. Var. Sylvestris isolated from the fruits by different isolation techniques. J. Essent. Oil Res. 2008, 20, 408–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Stankovic, N.; Mihajilov-Krstev, T.; Zlatkovic, B.; Stankov-Jovanovic, V.; Kocic, B.; Čomic, L. Antibacterial and antioxidant activity of wild-growing Angelica species (Apiaceae) from Balkan Peninsula against human pathogenic bacteria. J. Essent. Oil Res. 2020, 32, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ağalar, H.G.; Göger, F.; Demirci, B.; Malyer, H.; Kirimer, N. Angelica Sylvestris var. Sylvestris L.: Essential Oils and Antioxidant Activity Evaluation. EskisşEhir Tech. Univ. J. Sci. Technol. A Appl. Sci. Engin. 2020, 21, 39–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Orhan, I.E.; Tosun, F.; Skalicka-Woźniak, K. Cholinesterase and tyrosinase inhibitory, and antioxidant potential of randomly selected Umbelliferous plant species and the chromatographic profile of Heracleum platytaenium Boiss. and Angelica sylvestris L. var. sylvestris. J. Serbian Chem. Societ. 2016, 81, 357–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Pavlović, M.; Lakusšić, D.; Kovačević, N.; Tzakou, O.; Couladis, M. Comparative analysis of essential oils of six Anthemis taxa from Serbia and Montenegro. Chem. Biodivers. 2010, 7, 1231–1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Vaverková, S.; Hollá, M.; Mikulásová, M.; Habán, M.; Otepka, P.; Vozár, I. Qualitative properties and content of essential oil in the flowerheads of Anthemis tinctoria L. I International Symposium on Chamomile Research, Development and Production. Acta Horticult. 2007, 749, 283–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Bhosale, P.B.; Ha, S.E.; Vetrivel, P.; Kim, H.H.; Kim, S.M.; Kim, G.S. Functions of polyphenols and its anticancer properties in biomedical research: A narrative review. Translat. Cancer Res. 2020, 9, 7619–7631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Niedzwiecki, A.; Roomi, M.W.; Kalinovsky, T.; Rath, M. Anticancer efficacy of polyphenols and their combinations. Nutrients 2016, 8, 552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Cháirez-Ramírez, M.H.; de la Cruz-López, K.G.; García-Carrancá, A. Polyphenols as antitumor agents targeting key players in cancer-driving signaling pathways. Front. Pharmacol. 2021, 12, 710304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Huang, S.; Wang, L.-L.; Xue, N.-N.; Li, C.; Guo, H.-H.; Ren, T.-K.; Zhan, Y.; Li, W.-B.; Zhang, J.; Chen, X.-G.; et al. Chlorogenic acid effectively treats cancers through induction of cancer cell differentiation. Theranostics 2019, 9, 6745–6763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wang, J.; Fang, X.; Ge, L.; Cao, F.; Zhao, L.; Wang, Z.; Xiao, W. Antitumor, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activities of kaempferol and its corresponding glycosides and the enzymatic preparation of kaempferol. PLoS ONE 2017, 13, e0197563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Nguyen, H.T.; Ho, D.V.; Nguyen, P.D.Q.; Vo, H.Q.; Do, T.T.; Raal, A. Cytotoxic evaluation of compounds isolated from the aerial parts of Hedyotis pilulifera and methanol extract of Inonotus obliquus. Nat. Prod. Comm. 2018, 13, 939–941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Aydin, E.; Türkez, H.; Geyikoğlu, F. Antioxidative, anticancer and genotoxic properties of α-pinene on N2a neuroblastoma cells. Biologia 2013, 68, 1004–1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Chen, W.; Liu, Y.; Li, M.; Mao, J.; Zhang, L.; Huang, R.; Jin, X.; Ye, L. Anti-tumor effect of α-pinene on human hepatoma cell lines through inducing G2/M cell cycle arrest. J. Pharmacol. Sci. 2015, 127, 332–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Lee, J.H.; Lee, K.; Lee, D.H.; Shin, S.Y.; Yong, Y.; Lee, Y.H. Anti-invasive effect of β-myrcene, a component of the essential oil from Pinus koraiensis cones, in metastatic MDA-MB-231 human breast cancer cells. J. Korean Soc. Appl. Biol. Chem. 2015, 58, 563–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Seki, T.; Kokuryo, T.; Yokoyama, Y.; Suzuki, H.; Itatsu, K.; Nakagawa, A.; Mizutani, T.; Miyake, T.; Uno, M.; Yamauchi, K.; et al. Antitumor effects of α-bisabolol against pancreatic cancer. Cancer Sci. 2011, 102, 2199–2205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. European Pharmacopoeia Commission. European Pharmacopoeia, 10th ed.; Council of Europe: Strasbourg, France, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  30. González-Burgos, E.; Liaudanskas, M.; Viškelis, J.; Žvikas, V.; Janulis, V.; Gómez-Serranillos, M.P. Antioxidant activity, neuroprotective properties and bioactive constituents analysis of varying polarity extracts from Eucalyptus globulus leaves. Food Drug. Anal. 2018, 26, 1293–1302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Monks, A.; Scudiero, D.; Skehan, P.; Shoemaker, R.; Paull, K.; Vistica, D.; Hose, C.; Langley, J.; Cronise, P.; Vaigro-Wolff, A.; et al. Feasibility of a high-flux anticancer drug screen using a diverse panel of cultured human tumor cell lines. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1991, 83, 757–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Anthemis tinctoria (left) and Angelica sylvestris (right).
Figure 1. Anthemis tinctoria (left) and Angelica sylvestris (right).
Plants 11 00994 g001
Table 1. Essential oil content of aerial parts of Anthemis tinctoria.
Table 1. Essential oil content of aerial parts of Anthemis tinctoria.
CompoundRI *
(DB-5)
Content in Essential Oil (%)
Sabinene9720.7
β-Pinene9752.7
Myrcene9831.0
p-Cymene101912.6
(Z)-β-Ocimene10404.3
(E)-β-Ocimene10482.6
Isoborneol11472.1
Terpinen-4-ol11744.0
Crysanthenyl acetate12603.6
δ-Cadinene15201.6
Caryophyllene oxide15722.8
Isocaryophyllene oxide/caryophyllenol15773.9
Humulene epoxide16032.9
δ-Cadinol16386.6
α-Muurolene164812.5
2-Pentadecanone16802.5
Nerolidol acetate17202.5
n-Hexadecanal18142.5
Palmitic acid196715.3
Unknown253412.6
Total 99.3
Monoterpenes 15.5
Cyclic monoterpenes 5.5
Bicyclic sesquiterpenes 6.7
Sesquiterpenes 24.5
Other compounds 47.1
* RI, retention index.
Table 2. Essential oils content of aerial parts and roots of Angelica sylvestris.
Table 2. Essential oils content of aerial parts and roots of Angelica sylvestris.
CompoundRI *
(DB-5)
Content in Essential Oils (%)
Aerial PartsRoots
α-Pinene93345.412.4
Camphene9464.6nf
Sabinene9711.1nf
β-Pinene9742.0nf
β-Myrcene99013.3nf
α-Terpinen10140.40.7
p-Cymene101815.58.2
β-Phellandrene10301.3nf
(Z)-β-Ocimene10401.10.9
(E)-β-Ocimene10480.7nf
Terpinolene10851.2nf
n-Nonanal1108nf1.3
α-Terpineol1188nf1.2
(E)-Verbenyl acetate13011.4nf
β-Elemene1391nf1.2
(E)-β-Caryophyllene14160.8nf
β-Copaene1424nf2.7
α-Humulene14501.0nf
β-Farnesene1456nf2.2
Germacrene D14773.2nf
β-Bisabolene1501nf1.5
γ-Cadinene15070.8nf
Cadina-1,4-diene1536nf2.3
Elemol1546nf3.4
Caryophyllene oxide1573nf2.4
Isocaryophyllene oxide/caryophyllenol1582nf31.9
Epiglobulol/humulene epoxide1614nf1.4
α-Muurolene1648nf4.2
α-Cadinol1663nf1.7
α-Bisabolol16801.417.5
Nerolidol acetate1721nf1.3
Unknown1857nf1.5
Palmitic acid19653.3nf
Total 99.999.9
Monoterpenes 16.72.8
Cyclic monoterpenes 49.812.4
Bicyclic sesquiterpenes 0.834.3
Sesquiterpenes 6.436.7
Other compounds 24.813.7
* RI, retention index; nf, not found.
Table 3. Polyphenolic compounds identified in the methanolic extracts of A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris by HPLC-ion trap MS/MS.
Table 3. Polyphenolic compounds identified in the methanolic extracts of A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris by HPLC-ion trap MS/MS.
tR (min)[M-H]MS/MSPlant Material/Substance
Aerial Parts of A. tinctoriaAerial Parts of A. sylvestrisRoots of A. sylvestris
0.5341179, 161Caffeic acid glucosidesCaffeic acid glucosidesCaffeic acid glucosides
1.7315225, 153, 109Protocatechuic or gentisic acid glucosideProtocatechuic or gentisic acid glucosidenf
4.3325163; 119nfnfCoumaric acid glucoside
5.12991374-Hydroxybenzoic acid glucoside4-Hydroxybenzoic acid glucosidenf
10.3339281, 251, 177, 135Daphnin = daphnetin glucosidenfnf
12.5353191, 179, 173, 135Neochlorogenic acidNeochlorogenic acidNeochlorogenic acid
15.2385223, 179, 163Sinapinic acid glucoside nfnf
15.5353306, 191, 135nfChlorogenic acidnf
16.5639463, 301, 535Quercetin glucoside glucuronidenfnf
16.7337191, 163, 173nfCoumaroylquinic acidCoumaroylquinic acid
17.3625463, 301Quercetin
diglucoside
nfnf
17.8335179, 135Caffeoylshikimic acidnfnf
18.6367191, 1735-Feruloylquinic acid5-Feruloylquinic acid5-Feruloylquinic acid
19.8?479317Myricetin glucosidenfnf
20.9625301nfQuercetinlucoside-glucosidenf
21.3655493, 331Patuletin diglucosidenfnf
22.0449287, 151Eriodictyol glucosidenfnf
22.2741609, 475, 343, 301Quercetin rutinoside pentosidenfnf
22.6477301, 373Quercetin glucuronidenfnf
22.8463301, 179, 343Quercetin galactoside Quercetin galactosidenf
23.2609301, 343, 271RutinRutinRutin, traces
23.3463301Quercetin glucosideQuercetin glucosideQuercetin glucoside
24.0493331, 373Patuletin glucosidenfnf
24.9477315, 433Isorhamnetin glucosidenfnf
24.9505463, 301, 179, 151Quercetin acetyl glucosidenfnf
25.4515353, 191Dicaffeoylquinic acid 1Dicaffeoylquinic acid 1nf
26.4493331, 287Patuletin-7-glucosidenfnf
26.4373211, 193Pinosylvin glucosidenfnf
26.7477315, 357, 300Isorhamnetin glucosideIsorhamnetin glucoside nf
27.3607299, 284Diosmetin rutinoside = diosminDiosmetin rutinoside = diosminnf
27.4515191, 179, 255, 299, 3533,4-Dicaffeoylquinic acid-23,4-Dicaffeoylquinic acid-23,4-Caffeoylquinic acid
27.7489285Kaempferol acetylglucosidenfnf
29.1529353, 191Feruloylquinic acid glucosideFeryloylquinic acid glucosidenf
30.4535331, 316Patuletin acetylglucosidenfnf
31.0331316, 209Patuletin nfnf
31.8315300Iso-rhamnetinnfnf
32.6271151, 177, 119nfNaringeninNaringenin
32.8609285Kaempferol rutinosidenfnf
33.0345330, 315Spinacetinnfnf
34.1677515, 353, 255, 191Tricaffeoylquinic acidTricaffeoylquinic acidnf
34.3271107, 119, 151nfnfNaringenin chalcone
35.3299284Diosmetinnfnf
35.7315300, 251Nepetinnfnf
36.6329314, 171Jaceosidinnfnf
38.1359344, 329Jaceidinnfnf
38.3593447; 301nfQuercetin dirhamnosidenf
38.4593285nfLuteolin rutinosidenf
tR, retention time; [M-H], ion mass; MS/MS, mass of identified fragments; nf, not found.
Table 4. Polyphenolic compounds identified in the methanolic extract of A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris by the UPLC–triple quadrupole MS/MS (MRM) method.
Table 4. Polyphenolic compounds identified in the methanolic extract of A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris by the UPLC–triple quadrupole MS/MS (MRM) method.
tR (min)Precursor Ion (m/z)
[M-H]
Product Ion (m/z)
MS/MS
Aerial Parts of A. tinctoriaAerial Parts of A. sylvestrisRoots of A. sylvestris
0.4619185Quinic acidQuinic acidQuinic acid
2.80353191Neochlorogenic acidNeochlorogenic acidNeochlorogenic acid
3.75353191Chlorogenic acidChlorogenic acidChlorogenic acid
3.98179107Caffeic acidCaffeic acidnf
5.06609300RutinRutinnf
5.15593285Luteolin 7-rutinosideLuteolin 7-rutinosideLuteolin 7-rutinoside
5.18193134Ferulic acidFerulic acidFerulic acid
5.39/5.55/5.76515353Dicaffeoylquinic acidsDicaffeoylquinic acidsDicaffeoylquinic acids
5.22463301Hyperosidenfnf
5.26447285Luteolin-7-glucosidenfnf
5.28463301IsoquercitrinIsoquercitrinIsoquercitrin
5.52623315Isorhamnetin 3-rutinosidenfnf
5.70447300QuercitrinQuercitrinQuercitrin
5.70447285Luteolin 4-glucosidenfnf
6.79285133Luteolinnfnf
6.86301151nfQuercetinnf
7.22271151nfNaringeninNaringenin
7.38269117ApigeninApigeninApigenin
7.57299284nfDiosmetinDiosmetin
7.60315300nfIsorhamnetinnf
tR, retention time; [M-H], ion mass; MS/MS, mass of identified fragments; nf, not found.
Table 5. Total phenolics in mg/g of respective plant material, estimated by area under UV–chromatogram (AUC) at 280 nm and total chlorogenic acid and derivatives in mg/g, estimated by AUC at 330 nm, using chlorogenic acid as standard in both cases, and total flavonol content by area under the chromatogram at 360 nm which is specific for the flavonols absorption spectrum maximum.
Table 5. Total phenolics in mg/g of respective plant material, estimated by area under UV–chromatogram (AUC) at 280 nm and total chlorogenic acid and derivatives in mg/g, estimated by AUC at 330 nm, using chlorogenic acid as standard in both cases, and total flavonol content by area under the chromatogram at 360 nm which is specific for the flavonols absorption spectrum maximum.
Plant PartTotal PhenolicsTotal Chlorogenic AcidsTotal Flavonols, 360 nm
A. tinctoria, herb14.712.711,471
A. sylvestris, herb5.54.92629
A. sylvestris, root2.32.10
Table 6. Total quinic acid derivatives, estimated as total area of MS2 = 191 peaks on LC–MS chromatograms in MS count units.
Table 6. Total quinic acid derivatives, estimated as total area of MS2 = 191 peaks on LC–MS chromatograms in MS count units.
Plant PartTotal Quinic Acid Derivatives
A. tinctoria, herb320,218
A. sylvestris, herb259,839
A. sylvestris, root105,600
Table 7. Anticancer activity of essential oils and methanolic extracts of A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris.
Table 7. Anticancer activity of essential oils and methanolic extracts of A. tinctoria and A. sylvestris.
Concentration (µg/mL)% Inhibition
Essential oil of A. tinctoria (Aerial Parts)
HepG2MKN7SW480LNCaPKB
10091.8097.0781.1193.8596.32
2025.3328.4723.8538.5140.18
412.8819.9917.8128.3125.99
0.80.138.818.5912.2310.03
IC5044.98 ± 2.9643.04 ± 4.5055.45 ± 5.7029.96 ± 2.2527.75 ± 1.86
Concentration (µg/mL)Essential oil of A. sylvestris (aerial parts)
HepG2MKN7SW480LNCaPKB
10087.0888.79103.0390.2196.76
2033.1432.3138.4742.2352.30
411.6115.3413.3520.3518.36
0.8−2.021.934.457.214.92
IC5037.46 ± 2.3338.06 ± 2.0930.72 ± 1.8127.78 ± 1.2819.84 ± 2.35
Concentration (µg/mL)Essential oil of A. sylvestris (roots)
HepG2MKN7SW480LNCaPKB
10097.8299.3475.3595.0897.22
2044.1136.1440.7039.3449.19
420.3312.4427.6621.8628.60
0.85.146.0016.8510.5314.28
IC5024.69 ± 1.9634.09 ± 2.0833.36 ± 2.2530.37 ± 2.3519.73 ± 2.18
Concentration (µg/mL)Methanolic extract of A. tinctoria (aerial parts)
HepG2MKN7SW480LNCaPKB
10021.2930.5029.8929.8325.36
2014.288.765.098.8310.46
IC50>100>100>100>100>100
Concentration (µg/mL)Methanolic extract of A. sylvestris (aerial parts)
HepG2MKN7SW480LNCaPKB
10014.5029.6920.6136.3219.62
202.919.657.007.858.12
IC50>100>100>100>100>100
Concentration (µg/mL)Methanolic extract of A. sylvestris (roots)
HepG2MKN7SW480LNCaPKB
10067.4868.9463.4376.4873.07
2026.0125.7122.7334.8136.29
412.117.0911.7617.3319.60
0.8−0.600.66−1.114.578.14
IC5057.37 ± 3.5758.52 ± 3.5266.06 ± 2.7440.08 ± 2.2240.60 ± 1.85
Concentration (µg/mL)Ellipticine *
HepG2MKN7SW480LNCaPKB
10103.8097.2887.4493.8599.82
286.9088.5978.6880.0178.04
0.449.1747.0948.7649.3351.45
0.0822.0220.6621.1124.5728.34
IC500.38 ± 0.040.41 ± 0.050.48 ± 0.050.40 ± 0.040.35 ± 0.02
HepG2, human hepatocellular carcinoma; MKN7, human gastric carcinoma; SW480, human colon carcinoma; LNCaP, human prostate carcinoma; KB, human carcinoma in the mouth. Ellipticine: the positive control sample; * the positive control sample.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Raal, A.; Jaama, M.; Utt, M.; Püssa, T.; Žvikas, V.; Jakštas, V.; Koshovyi, O.; Nguyen, K.V.; Thi Nguyen, H. The Phytochemical Profile and Anticancer Activity of Anthemis tinctoria and Angelica sylvestris Used in Estonian Ethnomedicine. Plants 2022, 11, 994. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11070994

AMA Style

Raal A, Jaama M, Utt M, Püssa T, Žvikas V, Jakštas V, Koshovyi O, Nguyen KV, Thi Nguyen H. The Phytochemical Profile and Anticancer Activity of Anthemis tinctoria and Angelica sylvestris Used in Estonian Ethnomedicine. Plants. 2022; 11(7):994. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11070994

Chicago/Turabian Style

Raal, Ain, Marel Jaama, Meeme Utt, Tõnu Püssa, Vaidotas Žvikas, Valdas Jakštas, Oleh Koshovyi, Khan Viet Nguyen, and Hoai Thi Nguyen. 2022. "The Phytochemical Profile and Anticancer Activity of Anthemis tinctoria and Angelica sylvestris Used in Estonian Ethnomedicine" Plants 11, no. 7: 994. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11070994

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop