Download PDF
Planta Med 2003; 69(1): 50-55
DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-37026
Original Paper
Physiology
© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

Acute Drought Stress and Plant Age Effects on Alkamide and Phenolic Acid Content in Purple Coneflower Roots

Dean E. Gray1 , Stephen G. Pallardy2 , H. E. Garrett2 , George E. Rottinghaus3
  • 1Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, Missouri, USA
  • 2Center for Agroforestry, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA
  • 3College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA
Further Information

Publication History

Received: May 22, 2002

Accepted: July 31, 2002

Publication Date:
04 February 2003 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The effects of acute periods of drought stress on dry weight, and alkamide and phenolic acid content in purple coneflower [Echinacea purpurea (L.) Moench, Asteraceae] roots are described. Plants subjected to brief drought stress periods for two seasons during the initial flowering stage (D-F2) produced fall-harvested roots with significantly greater cichoric acid concentration (mg/g) than corresponding well-watered controls of the same age (C-2). Total alkamide, including the tetraenoic acid isomers, and chlorogenic acid concentrations from fall-harvested roots were largely unaffected by drought stress, regardless of when the stress occurred developmentally. The alkamide concentration in three-year roots was significantly less than that in two-year roots, with an average decrease of 50.5 %. Conversely, total phenolic acids increased an average of 67.1 % for all treatments from two to three years of age. Root dry weight increased significantly by an average of 70.0 % for all drought-stressed plants from two to three years of age, compared to an increase of 35.2 % for well-watered controls. The results suggest that controlled drought stress can stimulate increased root dry weight and root cichoric acid content, and that root age is the predominant factor determining overall phytochemical content variation.

Abbreviations

D-F1:Plants that received drought stress during the flowering period for one season (Season 1)

D-F2:Plants that received drought stress during the flowering period for two consecutive seasons (Season 1 and Season 2)

D-S1:Plants that received drought stress during the seed production period for one season (Season 1)

D-S2:Plants that received drought stress during the seed production period for two consecutive seasons (Season 1 and Season 2)

D-FS1:Plants that received drought stress during both flowering and seed production periods for one season (Season 1)

D-FS2:Plants that received drought stress during both flowering and seed production periods for two consecutive seasons (Season 1 and Season 2)

C-1:Control plants that received adequate water for one season (Season 1)

C-2:Control plants that received adequate water for two consecutive seasons (Season 1 and Season 2)

CCA:Cichoric acid (2,3-O-di-caffeoyl-tartaric acid)

CTA:Caftaric acid (2-O-caffeoyl-tartaric acid)

CGA:Chlorogenic acid (3-O-caffeoyl-quinic acid)

AMD:The sum of six alkamides (undeca-3E,4Z-dien-8,10-diynoic acid isobutylamide; undeca-2Z,4E-dien-8,10-diynoic acid isobutylamide; dodeca-2E,4Z-dien-8,10-diynoic acid isobutylamide; undeca-2E,4Z-dien-8,10-diynoic acid 2-methylbutylamide; dodeca-2E,4E,10E-trien-8-ynoic acid isobutylamide; dodeca-2E,4Z-dien-8,10-diynoic acid 2-methylbutylamide)

TET:The sum of two tetraenoic acid isomers (dodeca-2E,4E,8Z,10E-tetraenoic acid isobutylamide and dodeca-2E,4E,8Z,10Z-tetraenoic acid isobutylamide)

ψpd:Predawn water potential

Key words

Echinacea purpurea - Asteraceae - purple coneflower - water potential - alkamides - cichoric acid

References

  • 1 Brevoort P. The booming U.S. botanical market: A new overview.  HerbalGram. 1998;  44 33-48
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Barrett B, Vohmann M, Calabrese C. Echinacea for upper respiratory infection.  J Fam Pract. 1999;  48 628-35
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Bauer R. Echinacea: Biological effects and active principles.  ACS Symp Ser. 1998;  691 140-57
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Bergeron C, Livesey J F, Awang D, Arnason J, Rana J, Baum B, Letchamo W. A quantitative HPLC method for the quality assurance of Echinacea products on the North American market.  Phytochem Anal. 2000;  4 207-15
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Edwards P. Pests and pathogens: Plants responses to foliar attack. Resistance and defense: The role of secondary plant substances. In: Ayres P, editor BIOS Scientific Publishers Limited Oxford; 1992: P. 69-84
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 6 Flesch V, Jacques M, Cosson L, Teng B, Petiard V, Balz J. Relative importance of growth and light level on terpene concentration of Ginkgo biloba .  Phytochemistry. 1992;  31 1941-5
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Muzika R, Pregitzer K. Effect of nitrogen fertilization on leaf phenolic production of grand fir seedlings.  Trees. 1992;  6 241-4
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Buta J, Spaulding D. Endogenous levels of phenolics in tomato fruit during growth and maturation.  J Plant Growth Regul. 1997;  16 43-6
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Charles D, Simon J, Shock C, Feibert E, Smith R. Effect of water stress and post-harvest handling on artemisinin concentration in the leaves of Artemesia annua L. In: Janick J, Simon J, editors New Crops. John Wiley and Sons New York; 1993: 628-31
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 10 Proebsting E, Middleton J. The behavior of peach and pear trees under extreme drought stress.  J Am Soc Hortic Sci. 1980;  105 380-5
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Zinselmeier C, Westgate M, Schussler J, Jones R. Low water potential disrupts carbohydrate metabolism in maize (Zea mays L.) ovaries.  Plant Physiol. 1995;  107 385-91
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Sharp R, Davies W. Solute regulation and growth by roots and shoots of water-stressed maize plants.  Planta. 1979;  147 43-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Gershenzon J, Lincoln D, Langenheim J. The effect of moisture stress on monoterpenoid yield and composition in Satureja douglasii .  Biochem Syst Ecol. 1978;  6 33-43
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Sgherri C, Navari-Izzo F. Sunflower seedlings subjected to increasing water deficit stress: Oxidative stress and defense mechanisms.  Physiol Plant. 1995:;  93 25-30
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Boyer J. Leaf water potentials measured with a pressure chamber.  Plant Physiol. 1967;  42 133-7
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Bauer R, Wagner H. Echinacea species as potential immunostimulatory drugs. Economic and Medicinal Plant Research, Volume 5. In: Wagner H, Farnsworth N, editors Academic Press London; 1991: 253-321
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 17 Chapman D, Auge R. Physiological mechanisms of drought resistance in four native ornamental perennials.  J Am Soc Hortic Sci. 1994;  119 299-306
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Perry N, van Klink J, Burgess E, Parmenter G. Alkamide levels in Echinacea purpurea: Effects of processing, drying and storage.  Planta Med. 2000;  66 54-6
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Nüsslein B; Kurzmann M, Bauer R, Kreis W. Enzymatic degradation of cichoric acid in Echinacea purpurea preparations.  J Nat Prod. 2000;  63 1615-18
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Kreis W, Sussner U, Nüsslein B. Purification and characterization of a polyphenol oxidase from the herbal drug Echinaceae purpureae herba (purple cone flower herb).  J App Bot . 2000;  74 106-12
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Harborne J B, Baxter H, Moss G P. editors. Phytochemical Dictionary. A Handbook of Bioactive Compounds from Plants. Second edition. Taylor & Francis Ltd London; 1999: 522-3
    Search in Google Scholar

Dr. Dean Gray

Life Sciences Division, Agricultural Sciences

Midwest Research Institute

425 Volker Boulevard

Kansas City, Missouri 64110

USA

Email: dgray@mriresearch.org

Fax: +1-816-753-1014