Chemical Characterization and Antioxidant Activity of Froriepia Subpinnata and Eryngium Campestre from Iran

Chemical characterization and antioxidant activity of Froriepia subpinnata and Eryngium campestre from Iran

Hassan nikkhah-kouchaksaraei1* and Mojtaba Ranjbar2

1-Faculty member of Department of Agronomy, Qaemshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qaemshahr, Iran

2-Faculty of Biotechnology, Amol University of Special Modern Technologies, Amol, Iran [email protected] Abstract

This study is outlined to define the chemical composition, total phenols, flavonoids, flavonols, Reducing power and in vitro antioxidant activity of the extracts of Froriepia subpinnata and Er- yngium campestre from Iran. The chemical compositions of F. subpinnata and E. campestre were analysed by GC–MS. Sixteen and ten compounds were detected in the leaves essential oils of F. subpinnata and E. campestre at the first vegetative phase. The major compound of the essential oils of F.subpinnata and E. campestre were terpinolene(34%) and limonene(62.73%), respectively. Total flavonoid and flavonol contents were calculated as quercetin equivalents from a calibration curve. The highest total phenolic and flavonoid contents were observed in F. subpinnata in the second vegetative phase. Antioxidant activity was determined by DPPH assay. The highest radical scavenging activity was observed in F.subpinnata -2(86.1±0.89% inhibition), followed by E. campestre-2(83.61±0.73%), F. subpinnata-1(77.41±0.85%) and E. campestre-1(76.72±0.93%).

Keywords: Froriepia subpinnata, Eryngium campestre, DPPH, antioxidant activity, Monoterpene hydrocarbons.

Introduction Free radicals are produced while cells use oxygen to generate energy and they are named Reactive Oxygen Species(ROS) such as singlet oxygen, superoxide ion, hydroxyl ion and hydrogen peroxide that are result of cellular redox process. ROS illustrates beneficial effects on cellular responses and immune function at low or moderate concentrations. But high levels of ROS can cause damage to proteins, lipids, enzymes and DNA and have also been linked to pathogenesis of

oxidative diseases(Singh et al. 2009: 642–645 and Halliwell 1997: 44-52). Normally, alive cells possess an excellent scavenging mechanism to avoid excess ROS-induced cellular injury; however, with ageing and under influence of external stresses, these mechanisms become inefficient leading to metabolic distress such as heart diseases, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, diabetes mellitus, arthritis, cancer, aging, liver disorder etc. Hence, dietary supplementation with synthetic antioxidants is required(Eshwarappa1 et al. 2014: 101-107). In recent years, due to toxicological concerns associated with the use of synthetic substances in food and increasing awareness about natural foods, there has been an increased interest in the use of natural substances as food preservatives and antioxidants. In this context, plants have been valuable source of natural products for maintaining human health(Bhattacharjee et al. 2006: 645-648). According to World Health Organization(WHO), medicinal plants would be the best source to obtain a variety of drugs and the World Health Organization estimated that 80% of the population of developing countries rely on traditional medicines, mostly plant drugs, for their primary health care needs. Also, modern pharmacopoeia still contains at least 25% drugs derived from plants and many others which are synthetic analogues built on prototype compounds isolated from plants(Gossell-Williams et al. 2006: 217–218 and Ahmad et al. 2012: 629-631). Phenols and polyphenolic compounds are secondary metabolites present in plants and they have physiologic properties including anti allergic, anti-microbial, anti-coagulant, anti-inflammation and conservation effect. Phenol compounds also have a beneficial role for coronary disease management as well as cancer and neurodegenerative diseases prevention(Asgharpour et al. 2013: 169- 176; Kay et al. 2002: 389-98 and Morton et al. 2000: 152-159). Studies have demonstrated the beneficial effects of phenolic compounds in human health due to their antioxidant activity(Walter et al. 2011: 371- 377; Manach et al. 2005: 77-84). Globally, plant extracts are employed for their antibacterial, antifungal, antiviral and antioxidant activities(Singh et al. 2009: 642–645; Gossell-Williams et al. 2006: 217–218; Nebija et al. 2009: 22 – 32; Bajpai 2009: 1127–1133 and Karamoddini et al. 2011: 63-68). The Froriepia subpinnata and Eryngium campestre belonging are two endemic species of Apiaceae family, that have been distributed in the northern parts of Iran(Gilan, Golestan and Mazandaran Provinces of Iran). Their young leaves are used as a cooked vegetable and for flavoring in preparation of few local foods (Akhani 2003: 369-85; Hashemabadi and Kaviani 2011: 693 – 698; Khoshbakht et al. 2007: 445-448). In recent years, there are some reports regarding the main effects of two endemic species(Hashemabad and Kaviani 2011: 693 – 698; Morteza-Semnani et al. 2009: 127-128; Rustaiyan et al. 2001: 405-406; Nabavi et al. 2008: 19-25; Nabavi et al. 2012: 81-87). According to previous studies, secondary metabolites are highly variable and depend on several factors, such as climatic conditions, growing stage in harvesting, plant genotype and plant chemotype( Hashemabadi and Kaviani 2011: 693 – 698; Morteza-Semnani et al. 2003: 43-48). The aim of the present study was the determine of essential oils content and antioxidant properties of F. subpinnata

and E. campestre in first and second vegetative phases, in suburb of Qaemshahr city, Mazandaran province, north of Iran. Materials and methods

Plant materials

The leaves of E. Campestre and F. subpinnata were collected during the first and second vegetative phases(April and August 2013, respectively), from the suburb of Qaemshahr city, Mazandaran province, North of Iran, in 2013.

Isolation of essential oil

In first vegetative phase, the samples were dried at room temperature and the dried leaves(50g) were hydro distillated for 3 hours by using a Clevenger-type apparatus. The extracted oils were dehydrated, using sodium sulfate, then were stored at 4ºC until future use(Baydar et al. 2004: 169–172).

Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

The gas chromatography analysis was carried out on an Agilent789, a gas chromatography with 5975C mass selective detector and a HP5M5 column(30m×0.25mm,film thickness 0.25µm). The operating conditions were as follows: a Helium carrier gas with a flow rate of 1ml/min with split ratio 1:40. The GC analysis was carried out in the oven, while temperature was held at 60ºC for 3min then programmed at 3ºC min-1 to 150ºC(held for 1min), after that programmed at 3ºC min-1 to 260ºC(held for 3min). The injector and the temperature of detector were at 230 and 250ºC, respectively. The components of oil were identified by their retention indices relative C8-C25 n- alkanes and commercial library(Willey)( Joulain and König 1998: 658; Thiem et al. 2011: 7115-7124).

Preparation of plant extracts

At the first and second vegetative phases, the extracts of both leaves were prepared base on the Ghimire et al.(2011) method. A two gram of powdered samples were extracted in 25ml of 80% methanol(V/V) and were kept for 1 day on a shaker at room temperature. The methanolic extracts were filtered using a Whatman N. 1 filter paper and rotary evaporator in a water bath at 40ºC. The yield of evaporated dried extracts was calculated based on dry weight basis from the following equation(Stanojevic et al. 2009: 5702-5714) Yield (g/100 g of dry plant material) = (W1 × 100) / W2 (1)

Where W1 is the weight of the extract after the solvent evaporation and W2 is the weight of the dry plant material.

Determination of Total Phenolic Compounds

Total phenolic constituents were determined by the Folin-Ciocalteanu method(Kim et al. 2007: 443– 450). The extract samples(1mg/ml,1000µl) were mixed with 50µl of 1m Folin-Ciocalteau reagent. A futher 1.85 ml of distilled deionized water were added to the mixture and mixed by vortexing. After 3 min, amount of 100µl of 20% Na2Co3 were added with mixing. The solutions were then immediately diluted to a volume of 4 ml with distilled deionized water and mixed thoroughly, after incubation for 90 min in the dark at room temperature. The absorbance was measured at 760nm and results were expressed as gallic acid equivalents.

Determination of flavonoid and flavonol Contents

Total flavonoids in the plant extracts were estimated using the method of Moreno et al.(2000) and Ghimire et al.(2011). Briefly, 500µl of each extract(1mg/ml) was mixed with 100µl of 10% aluminum chloride, 100ml of 1M potassium acetate, and 4.3ml of 80% ethanol, then the mixture was vortexed and allowed to stand for 40 min for reaction at room temperature. The absorbance of the reaction mixture was measured at 415nm and total flavonoid contents were calculated as quercetin from a calibration curve(Moreno et al. 2000: 109-114; Ghimire et al. 2011: 1884-1891)

Total flavonols were estimated as previously described(Loziene et al., 2007). To 2000µl of extract samples, 2000µl of 2% aluminum chloride and 6ml(50ml/L sodium acetate solutions were added. The absorbance was reed at 440nm after 2.5h at 20ºC and total flavonol contents were calculated as quercetin from a calibration curve(Lopez-Ochoa et al. 2007: 4397–4406).

DPPH Radical-Scavenging Activity

DDPH assay was performed following the procedure described by Sing et al.(2009) with minor modifications in different concentrations of extracted(150-800μg/ml), where the 1000µl amount was mixed with solution of 1000µl of 300µM DPPH in methanol, then the final volume was made to 4ml by methanol. The mixture was shaken and left for few minutes at room temperature in the dark then the absorbance of the solutions was measured at 517nm(Singh et al. 2009: 642–645).

Reducing Power Determination

The reducing power was determined according to the method of Yen and Chen(1995: 27-32) 2500µl of different concentration of extracted(200,400 and 600μg/ml) were mixed with 2500µl of 0.2M phosphate buffer(pH=6.6) and 2500µl of 1% potassium ferricyanide. The mixture was incubated at 50ºC for 20min. 2500µl of 10% trichloroacetic acid was added to the mixture to stop the reaction, which was then centrifuged at 3000rpm for 10min. 2500µl of upper layer was mixed with distilled water(2500µl) and 500µl of 0.1% Fecl3 and the absorbance of the solutions was measured at 700nm(Yen and Chen 1995: 27–32).

Results and discussion

Ten and sixteen compounds were detected in the leaves essential oils of E. campestre and F. subpinnata at the first vegetative phase(Table1). The volatile oil of F. subpinnata contained 8 monoterpene hydrocarbons(73.58%), 2 oxygenated monoterpenes(11.68%), 2 sesquiterpene hydrocarbons(7.71%), 2 alkane(0.51%), 1 fatty acid(0.3%) and 1 diterpene(0.99%)(Table 1). The major compounds of the essential oils of F.subpinnata were terpinolene(34%), limonene(14%), sabinene(13%) and camphor(9%). The essential oil components has been previously reported from the F.subpinnata that were grown in the around of Behshahr and Rasht( in Mazandaran and Gilan provinces, North of Iran)(Morteza-Semnani et al. 2009: 127-128; Rustaiyan et al. 2001: 405-406). In these reports have been shown that F. subpinnata is contained some differences in terms of chemical compounds. The major componenets of essential oil of F. subpinnata from Behshahr origin is contained P-cymene-8-ol(34.7%), terpinolene(12.5%) and limonene (10.5%). Also the major components of essential oil from Rasht origin is contained β-phellandrene(50%) and sabinene(25%)(Morteza-Semnani et al. 2009: 127-128; Rustaiyan et al. 2001: 405-406). In the present study, the β-phellandrene relative amount was 2.64%, whereas p-cymen-8-ol was not detected. As shown in table1, 93.5% of the compounds that were detected in the oil of E. campestre and the volatile oil were contained; 5 monoterpene hydrocarbons(78.1%), 2 oxygenated monoterpenes(11.68%), 4 sesquiterpene hydrocarbons(13.36%) and 1 oxygenated sesquiterpenes(1.8%)(Table 1). The major constituents of the oil were limonene(62.73%) and delta- 3-carene(10.6%). Quantitative and qualitative differences were also found between these results and previous reports(Morteza-Semnani et al. 2009: 127-128; Rustaiyan et al. 2001: 405-406; Capetanos et al. 2007: 961– 965). Essential oil analysis of two endemic Eryngium species from Serbia showed that major compounds of the essential oils of E. serbicum were contained germacrene D, β-elemene and spathulenol while the major compounds of the essential oils of E. palmatum were sesquicineole, caryophyllene oxide, spathulenol and sabinene(Merghache et al. 2014: 1-13). Merghache et al.(2014)

found α-bisabolol(32.6%) as the main constituent from aerial parts of the Algerian E. tricuspidatum(Merghache et al. 2014: 1-13). In addition to, Sefidkon et al.(2004) reported, the α- murolene was the main constituent in E. billardieri from Iran(Sefidkon et al. 2004: 42–44). In addition, investigations on the essential oils of leaves and stems of Eryngium caucasicum Trautv. in vegetative and generative growth phases from coastal and hill slope of northern areas of Iran revealed that 5-methyl-2-primidone, b-sesquiphellandrene, limonene, 1-limonene, b-bisabolene and 2,4-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-phenol are the dominant compounds(Hashemabadi and Kaviani 2011: 693 – 698). Thus, the differences between chemical compounds of oil of present study and previous research may be because of the collection time, chemotypes, drying conditions, mode of distillation, geographic and climatic factors. The yield of the extracts obtained per 100 g of dry plant material and the highest radical scavenging activity were observed in E. campestre-2 (13.75g/100 g of dry plant material), followed by F.subpinnata -2(12.8g/100 g of dry plant material), F. subpinnata-1(12.1g/100 g of dry plant material) and E. campestre-1 (11.6g/100 g of dry plant material). The results of determination of total phenolic contents in E. campestre and F. subpinnata are illustrated in Figure1. The highest total phenolic content was obtained in F. subpinnata(68.83±0.43 mg galic acid equivalent/g of extract powder) in the second vegetative phase whereas the least total content was obtained in E. campestre(44.65±0.39 mg galic acid equivalent/g of extract powder) in the first vegetative phase. The content of total flavonoids of E.campestre were 23.8±0.33 and 32±0.39 mg quercetin equivalent/g of extract powder respectively, in the first and second vegetative phase, while the content of total flavonoids of F. subpinnata were 31.5±0.57 and 43.5±0.69 mg QE/g extract in the first and second vegetative phases, respectively(Figure2). In this study, total of flavonol contents obtained two selected samples in first and second vegetative phases for E. campestre(17±0.82 and 19.5±0.74 mg QE/g extract) and F. subpinnata(16±0.88 and 17.5±0.85 mg QE/g extract)(Figure3). The evaluating of E. caucasicum leaves and F.subpinnata aerial parts from Mazandaran forest of Iran by Nabavi et al.(2008) showed that the total phenolic contents of E. caucasicum leaves and F. subpinnata aeial parts were 62.3±0.21 and 75.7±0.24 mg gallic acid equivalent/g of extract powder, respectively. Also the total flavonoid contents of E. caucasicum leaves and F. subpinnata aeial parts were 25.3±0.19 and 35.2±0.26 mg quercetin equivalent/g of extract powder, respectively(Nabavi et al. 2008: 19-25). Nebija et al.(2009) evaluated flavonoid contents of E. campestre from Kosovo. Their results showed a range of 0.12% to 0.14% as total quercetin(Nebija et al. 2009: 22 – 32). The contents of total phenolic content were lower in comparing with reviewed data but total flavonoids were higher than the previous reported by other researchers(Nabavi et al. 2008: 19-25). The results obtained in the present study showed that the variation in the quality and the quantity of

phenolic components may be linked in part to different developmental stages, harvesting times, environmental, climatic, geographic factors and extraction techniques(Kukric et al. 2012: 257-272).

The DDPH is a free radical which is widely used to evaluate antioxidant capacity and is reduced in the presence of an antioxidant molecule. The DPPH inhibition of E. campestre and F. subpinnata extracts are illustrated in Figure4. It was found that the radical-scavenging activities of E. campestre and F. subpinnata extracts increased by increasing concentration. The amount of IC50 for DPPH radical-scavenging activity was in order of F. subpinnata (386.9µg/ml at second vegetative phase) > E. campestre(429.89µg/ml at second vegetative phase) > F. subpinnata(484.76µg/ml at first vegetative phase) > E. campestre(518.25µg/ml at first vegetative phase), respectively. The more amount of phenol and flavonoid contents in F. subpinnata may lead to its very potent DPPH radical scavenging activity. Previous reports showed that phenols and polyphenolic compounds are widely found in food products of plant sources derived with significant antioxidant activities(Van Acker et al.1996: 331-342). In compared to previous data, E. campestre and F. sunpinnata were different in radical-scavenging activity. The results obtained by Nabavi et al.(2008) showed the amount 0.27mg/ml for E. caucasicum and 0.42mg/ml for F. subpinnata, respectively(Nabavi et al. 2008: 19-25). In a study conducted by Nebija et al.(2009), the ethanol extract of root of E. campestre was higher radical- scavenging activity compared to the extract of the aerial part of the plant. Whereas Nabavi et al.(2012) reported that IC50 for DPPH scavenging activity were 391.2±14.9, 706.6±22.3 and 779.7±16.7μg/ml for aqueous, ethyl acetate and n-hexane fractions, respectively(Nabavi et al. 2012: 81- 87; Nebija et al. 2009: 22 – 32). Reducing power is a mechanism for determination of electron donating ability of E. Campestre and F. subpinnata extracts. In the reducing power assay, the Fe(III) reduction is often used as an indicator of electron donating activity and the presence of antioxidants in the samples would result in the reducing of Fe3+ to Fe2+ by donating an electron. Increasing absorbance at 700 nm indicates an increase in reductive ability. Fig.5 shows dose-response for the reducing powers of the extract from E. campestre and F. subpinnata. It was found the reducing powers of all the extracts also increased with the increase of their concentrations. The F. subpinnata extract is showed better reducing power than E. caucasicum extract. Nabavi et al.(2008) reported that methanolic extracts of aerial parts of F. subpinnata had shown better reducing power than E. caucasicum extract(Nabavi et al. 2008: 19-25).

References

1. Singh H. P., Mittal S., Kaur S., Batish D. R., Kohli R. K., 1997. Chemical composition and antioxidant activity of essential oil from residues of Artemisia scoparia. Food Chemistry.114: 642– 645. 2. Halliwell B., 1997. Antioxidants and human disease: a general introduction. Nut Rev. 55: 44-52. 3. Eshwarappa1 R. S. B., Iyer R. S., Subbaramaiah S. R., Richard S. A., Dhananjaya B. L. 2014., Antioxidant activity of Syzygium cumini leaf gall extracts. BioImpacts. 4(2): 101-107. 4. Bhattacharjee I., Chatterjee S. K., Chatterjee S., Chandra G., 2006. Antibacterial potentiality of Argemone mexicana solvent extracts against some pathogenic bacteria. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz Rio de Janerio. 101: 645-648. 5. Gossell-Williams M., Simon O.R., West M.E. 2006., The past and present use of plants for medicines. West Indian Med J 55: 217–218.

6. Ahmad S., Sharma R., Mahajan S., Gupta A., 2012. Antibacterial activity of Celtis australis by in vitro study. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 4(2): 629-631. 7. Asgharpour F., Pouramir M., Khalilpour A., Asgharpour- Alamdari S., Rezaei M., 2013. Activity and Glucose Diffusion Relationship of Traditional Medicinal Antihyperglycemic Plant Extracts Int J Mol Cell Med Autumn 4(2): 169-176. 8. Kay C. D., Holub B. J. 2002, The effect of wild blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium) consumption on postprandial serum antioxidant status in human subjects. Br J Nutr 88: 389-98. 9. Loziene K, Venkutonis P R., Sipailiene A., Labokas J. 2007. Radical Scavenging and antibacterial properties of extracts from different Thymus pulegioides L. chemotypes. Food Chem. 103:546–559. 10. Morton L. W., Abu-Amsha C. R., Puddey I. B., 2000. Chemistry and biological effects of dietary phenolic compounds: relevance to cardiovascular disease. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 27: 152-159. 11. Walter M., Marchesan E., 2011. Phenolic Compounds and Antioxidant Activity of Rice. Braz. Arch. Biol. Technol 54(2): 371-377. 12. Manach C., Mazur A., Scalbert A., 2005. Polyphenols and prevention of cardiovascular diseases. Curr Opin Lipidol 16: 77-84.

13. Nebija F., Stefkov G., Karapandzova M., Stafilov T., Panovska T. K., Kulevanova S., 2009. Chemical characterization and antioxidant activity of Eryngium campestre L. Maced. pharm. bull 55 (1, 2): 22 – 32. 14. Bajpai V. K., Yoon J. I., Kang S. C., 2009. Antifungal potential of essential oil and various organic extracts of Nandina domestica Thunb. against skin infectious fungal. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 83: 1127–1133. 15. Karamoddini M. K., Emami S. A., Ghannad M. S., Alizadeh- Sani E., Sahebkar A., 2011. Antiproliferative effects of extracts from Iranian Artemisia species on cancer cell lines. Asian Biomedicine 5 (1): 63-68. 16. Akhani H., Two new records and synopsis of the new data onIranian Cruciferae since Flora Iranica Candollea. Candollea., 2003. 58(2): 369-85. 17. Hashemabadi D., Kaviani B., 2011. Chemical Constituents of Essential Oils Extracted from the Leaves and Stems of Eryngium caucasicum Trautv. from Iran. Jeobp. 14 (6): 693 – 698. 18. Khoshbakht K., Hammer K., Pistrick K., 2007. Eryngium caucasicum Trautv. cultivated as a vegetable in the Elburz Mountains (Northern Iran). Genetic resources and crop evolution 54(2): 445-448. 19. Morteza-Semnani K., Saeedi M., Akbarzadeh M., 2009. The Essential Oil Composition of Froriepia subpinnata (Ledeb.). Journal of Essential Oil Research 21(2): 127-128. 20. Rustaiyan A., Mojab R., Kazemie-Piersara M., Bigdeli M., Masoudi S., Yari M., Essential Oil of Froriepia subpinnata (Ledeb.)Baill. from Iran J. Essent. Oil Res. 13: 405-406. 21. Nabavi S. M., Ebrahimzadeh M. A., Nabavi S. F., Jafari M., 2008. Free radical scavenging activity and antioxidant capacity of Eryngium caucasicum Trautv and Froripia subpinata. Pharmacologyonline 3: 19-25.

22. Nabavi S.M., Nabavi S.F., Alinezhad H., Zare M., Azimi R., 2012. Biological activities of flavonoid-rich fraction of Eryngium caucasicum Trautv Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. Pharmacol Sci 16(3): 81-87. 23. Morteza -Semnani K., Azadbackt M., Hushmand A., 2003. Med. Sci. 1: 43-48. 24. Baydar H., Sagdic O., Ozcan G., Karadogan T., 2004. Antibacterial activity and composition of essential oils from Origanum, Thymbra and Satureja species with commercial importance in Turkey Food Control 15: 169–172.

25. Joulain D., König W.A., 1998. Atlas of Spectral Data of Sesquiterpene Hydrocarbons. Hamburg. 658

26. Thiem B., Kikowska M., Kurowska A., Kalemba D., 2011. Essential Oil Composition of the Different Parts and In Vitro Shoot Culture of Eryngium planum L Molecules 16: 7115-7124. 27. Stanojevic L., Stankovic M., Nikolic V., Nikolic L., Ristic D., 2009. Canadanovic-Brunet, V. Tumbas, Antioxidant Activity and Total Phenolic and Flavonoid Contents of Hieracium pilosella L. Canadanovic-Brunet J., Tumbas V., Extracts Sensors 9: 5702-5714. 28. Kim K. T., Yoo K. M., Lee J. W., Eom S. H., Hwang K., Lee C. Y., 2007. Protective effect of steamed American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius L.) on V79-4 cells induced by oxidative stress Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 111: 443–450. 29. Moreno M. I. N., Isla M. I., Sampietro A. R., Vattuone M. A., 2007. Comparison of the free radical-scavenging activity of propolis from several regions of Argentina J. Ethnopharmacol 71: 109-114. 30. Ghimire B. K., Seong E. S., Kim E. H., Ghimeray A. K., Yu C. Y., Ghimire B. K., Chung M., 2011. A comparative evaluation of the antioxidant activity of some medicinal plants popularly used in Nepal. Journal of Medicinal Plants Research. 5(10): 1884-1891. 31. Lopez-Ochoa L., Acevedo-Hernandez G., Martınez-Hernandez A., Arguello-Astorga G., 2007. Arguello-Astorga, Structural relationships between diverse cis-acting elements are critical for the functional properties of a rbcS minimal light regulatory unit Journal of Experimental Botany. 58: 4397–4406. 32. Yen GC., Chen H. Y., 1995. Antioxidant activity of various tea extracts in relation to their antimutagenicity Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 43: 27–32. 33. Capetanos C. , Saroglou V., Marin P., Simi A., Skaltsa H.D., 2007 Essential oil analysis of two endemic Eryngium species from Serbia J. Serb. Chem. Soc. 72(10): 961–965. 34. Merghache D., Boucherit-Otmani Z., Merghache S., Chikhi I., Selles C., Boucherit, K, 2014. Chemical composition, antibacterial, antifungal and antioxidant activities of Algerian Eryngium tricuspidatum L Natural Product Research. 1-13. 35. Sefidkon F., Dabiri M., Alamshahi A., 2004. Alamshahi, Chemical composition of the essential oil of Eryngium billardieri F. Delaroche from Iran J Essent Oil Res. 16: 42–44.

36. Nebija F., Stefkov G., Karapandzova M., Stafilov T., Panovska T. K., Kulevanova S., 2009. Chemical characterization and antioxidant activity of Eryngium campestre L., Apiaceae from Kosovo Macedonian pharmaceutical bulletin, 55 (1,2): 22 – 32. 37. Kukric Z. Z., Topalic-Trivunovic L. N., Kukavica B. M., Matos S. B., Pavicic S. S., Boroja M. M., Savic A. V. 2012., Characterization of antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of netile leaves(Uritica dioica L.) APTEFF. 43: 257-272.

38. Van Acker S. A., Van Den Berg D. J., Tromp M. N., Griffioen D. H., Bennekom V., Vijgh W. P., WJ A. 1996. Structural aspects of antioxidant activity of flavonoids. Bast, Free Radic. Biol. Med., 20(3): 331-342.

Table (1). Chemical composition of E. campestre and F. subpinnata oils

No Identification RI Area % Eyngium campestre Froriepia subpinnata 1 α-pinene 936 1.82 1.98 2 Camphene 945 - 1.76 3 Sabinene 971 - 13.66 4 β-Myrcene 990 2.22 2.42 5 α-Phellandrene 1004 0.71 - 6 delta-3-carene 1010 10.61 - 7 β-Phellandrene 1025 - 2.64 8 Limonene 1030 62.74 14.32 9 γ-terpinene 1064 - 2.64 10 α-terpinolene 1093 - 34.15

11 Linalool 1098 - 2.42 12 Camphor 1147 - 9.25 13 β-elemene 1389 - 4.85 14 Bergamotene 1428 0.75 - 15 β-Farnesene 1452 0.75 2.86 16 Bisabolene 1505 6.22 - 17 Sesquiphellandrene 1521 5.64 - 18 Caryophyllene oxide 1585 1.82 - 19 Hexadecane 1600 - 0.13 20 Tetradecanoic acid 1965 - 0.3 21 Phytol 2106 - 0.99 22 Docosane 2198 - 0.38 Monoterpene hydrocarbons 78.1 73.58 Oxygenated monoterpenes - 11.68 sesquiterpene hydrocarbons 13.36 7.71 Oxygenated sesquiterpenes 1.82 - Other - 1.8 Total 93.28 94.75

Figure (1). Total phenolic contents of E. campestre and F. subpinnata extraxts( 1 and 2 showed the first and second vegetative phases, respectively)

Figure (2). Total flavonoid contents of E. campestre and F. subpinnata extraxts( 1 and 2 showed the first and second vegetative phases, respectively)

Figure (3). Total flavonols contents of E. campestre and F. subpinnata extraxts( 1 and 2 showed the first and second vegetative phases, respectively)

radical radical scavenging activity(%)

1 5 0

Figure (4). Scavenging effect of methanolic extracts from E. campestre and F. subpinnata ( 1 and 2 showed the first and second vegetative phases, respectively)on DPPH radicals in different concentration(150,300,500 and 800 μg/ml)

at at

Absorbance 700

2 0 0

Figure (5). Reducing power of E. campestre and F. subpinnata extracts(1 and 2 showed the first and second vegetative phases, respectively) in different concentration(200,400 and 600 μg/ml)