Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract: Two seasons pots trials were carried out in the open field at the
Experimental Farm of National Research Centre, Dokki, Egypt, During 2005/2006
and 2006/2007, in order to investigate the impact of yeast, EM, Azotobacter (A.
chroococcum), provided from Rhizobacterin, (107 – 108 cfu/g) at the rate of 2 g/L,
compost at the rate of 1 kg/pot and 2 g NPK (2: 1: 1) fertilizers, individually or
combined with half the dose of NPK, on vegetative growth, flowers yield, oil
production and oil constituents, phenolic compounds and antioxidant activity in rue
(Ruta graveolens L.).
The obtained resulted revealed that fertilization treatments significantly
stimulated most of the studied characters compared to the control. Yeast combined
with half dose of NPK significantly resulted the highest values of plant height, fresh
and dry weight of herb and flowers per plant and feddan (an Egyptian measure of
area, equals 4200 m2), oil percent and oil yield of herb and flowers.
The major components of phenolic compound in herb or flowers were: rutin,
salycilic acid, ferulic acid, caffic acid pyrogallic acid, amounting to 89.1 and 77.8% of
phenolic compounds in herb and flowers, respectively.
Yeast combined with NPK gave the highest antioxidant activity at 100 µl
extractions in both herb and flowers, while compost plus NPK and azotobacter plus
NPK led to the highest antioxidant activity in herb and flowers, respectively at 150 or
200 µl extractions.
EM + NPK resulted the highest percentage of rutin or cumarin in rue leaves
the yeast combined with NPK treatment produced the largest production of the two
compounds/ plant, as compared to other fertilizer treatments, since yeast + NPK gave
the highest yield of herb.
Twenty eight compounds were detected in herb oil, comprised 98.26% of the
oil, seven of them was hydrocarbons but 21 were oxygenated. Whereas in the oil of
flowers, 25 compounds were detected constituting 99.40%, nine of them were
hydrocarbons against 16 oxygenated. The major constuents of the oils, in descending
order were: 2-Undecanone, 1-Undecene and 2-Nonene. They amounted to about 78.4
and 80.9% of herb and flowers oil, consecutively. However, the 2-Undecanone
compound for more than half of the oils.
Keywords: rue (Ruta graveolens L.); Yeast; EM; Azotobacter.
INTRODUCTION
Rue (Ruta graveolens L.), a member of family rutaceae, is an annual
medicinal herb, native to the temperate zone (Bradly, 1998). The genus Ruta acquired
its same from its main constituent rutin, responsible for bitter taste of rue, a
polyphenolic flavonole glycoside containing the disaccharide rutinase as sugar
component (Migud, 2003 and Kugovkina et al, 2004).
It has a widespread reputation as a popular folk medicine in various countries.
In China, the leaves are applied to reduce inflammation from snake bites, insect bites,
strains and sprains and antispasmodic for smooth muscles. Unani medicine of India
recommends rue to treat various physical conditions and to improve mental clarity
and as an aphrodisiac. In Latin America rue is well-known as cold, menstrual cramp
remedy, where an ointment is applied for gout and rheumatic pains, and strong rue tea
compresses are placed on the chest for bronchitis, and it is used to kill intestine
parasites. Arabs add rue to suspect water to counteract any ill effect in South Africa,
women use rue to promote menstruation (Pino et al, 1997; Atta and Alkofahi, 1980;
Miguel, 2003; Chavez et al, 2003 and Steenkampt, 2003).
Recent research works indicated many beneficial uses of rue. The medicinal
action of common rue would be abortificient, anthilimintic, antiseptic, antispasmodic,
carminative, irritant and stomachic. Rue was once officially recognized treatment for
hypertension, diabetes and allergic reaction (Browner, 1985).
Atta and Alkofahi (1980) and Chavez et al, 2003 reported that main uses were
to relive gaiety and rheumatic pains and to treat nervous heart problems. Chiu and
Fung (1997) indicated that rue contained cardiac vascular active substances that had a
direct effect on cardiovascular system. Miguel (2003) concluded that rue oil was a
central nervous system depressant and at high doses a narcotic poison and eliminate
worms.
Pathak et al (2003) found that rue in combination with Co3(PO4)2 could be
used for treating brain cancers particularly glioma. Lauk et al (2004) confirmed the
anti-inflammatory properties of rue. Not only human effect, but also rue extract had
an inhibitory effect on vitro germination of radish seeds a radical growth (Aliotta et
al, 1994 and 1996) and several seeds (Vincenzo et al, 2002).
Plant growth and production are greatly affected by nutrient supply: organic
and biofertilizers are recently recommended to ensure safety for human health as well
as the surrounding environment (Abd El-Gawad, 1999).
Active dry yeast is a natural safety biofertilizer that is rich in protein, B-
vitamins and natural plant growth substances as cytokinins. It also releases CO2 that
improve net photosynthesis. Many researchers gained good growth flowering and
production of several plants when applied yeast, as Naguib and Khalil (2002) on black
cumin, and El-Sherbeny et al (2007a) on Ruta graveolens.
Azotobacter chroococcum bacteria are famous nitrogen fixer that had
beneficial effect on different plants as Agamy (2004) on fennel and Khalil (2006) on
Plantago afra.
Compost provide show release of nutrients, improve soil structure, aeration,
water holding capacity and availability of soil micro-organisms (Herrera et al, 1997).
Many investigators had good results when using compost for Tagetes erecta (Khalil et
al, 2002), German chamomile (Naguib, 2003), Sideritis montana (El-Sherbeny et al,
2005) and Ruta graveolens El-Sherbeny et al (2007b)
The present work was designated to find out the effect of different mineral,
organic and biofertilizers on growth, flowering, oil production and chemical
constituents of rue (Ruta graveolens L.) under Egyptian condition.
Yeast was dissolved in distilled water and activated with a spoonful of black
honey. Compost was a product of El-Obor Company, having the following properties
in Table (b).
Physical-chemical properties of the organic compost:
Moisture pH EC Total Organic Ash C/N P K Fe Mn Cu Zn
% (N%) matter % ratio % % ppm ppm ppm ppm
%
27-46 7.2-7.6 3-4 1.4-1.7 38-50 41-43 13.6:1 0.47 1.2-1.6 800 190 40 70
7
Azotobacter chroococcum bacteria was provided from Rhizobacterin (10 –
108 cfu/g) obtained from Agricultural Microbiology Dept., Agriculture Research
Center, (ARC) as a peat-based inoculums. Azotobacter or EM were inculcated to the
seeds using aqueous solution of arabic gum as an adhesive, then the seeds were dried
in shade as suggested by Barakat et al (2004). NPK treatment was supplied from
ammonium sulphate (21.5% N), calcium superphosphate (15.5% P2O5) and potassium
sulphate (48.0% K2O) to achieve the ratio of 2: 1:1.
The fertilizers were applied at two times, the first one month after sowing and
the other one month later.
The study comprised 10 treatments as the following: control, yeast, EM,
azotobacter, compost, NPK, yeast + ½ dose of NPK, EM + ½ dose of NPK,
Azotobacter + ½ dose of NPK and compost + ½ dose of NPK. Treatments were
replicated three times.
Before sowing each pot was supplied with 2.0 g of calcium super phosphate
(15.5% P2O5) and potassium sulphate (48.0% K2O). All routine agriculture practices
as watering, weeding, pest control………..etc were conducted whenever required.
At the full flowering stage, which occurred at 25th May, 2006 in the first
season and 30th May, 2007 in the second ones plants were collected and the following
data were recorded:
1-Vegetative growth characters:
Plant height (cm), number of branches/plant, fresh and dry weight of herb and
flowers (g/plant) and yield per feddan was assessed (Feddan: is an Egyptian measure
for area that equals 4200 m2).
2- Essential oil production:
The essential oil of fresh herb and flowers was extracted from each treatment,
by hydrodistillation using Clevenger-type apparatus according to AOAC (1995).
- Percentage of oil (v/w): was calculated based on herb or flower fresh weight.
- Oil yield: ml/plant and kg/feddan were calculated.
3- Essential oil components:
Oil samples for the treatments were analyzed by GLC apparatus. Separation of
the resulted volatile oil was accomplished on a Varian Gas Chromatography (Thermo
Inst., USA) mass spectrometer and a 30 cm x 0.25 mm. DB-5 capillary column film
thickness (J & W Scientific, USA). The column temperature was programmed from 50
0
C (constant for 3 min.) at a rat of 7 0C / min to 250 0C with 10 min. isothermal hold.
The injector temperature was 2200 and transition time temperature was 250 0C. The
carrier gas was helium and the column head pressure was 10 – 15 psi. The
identification of the constituents was determined by comparing the spectrum with the
other stored in Wiley Mass Spectral Library containing over 147000 volatile
compounds.
4- Phenolic compounds:
Samples of the collected fresh herb and flowers of rue (Ruta graveolens L.)
were cleaned and immediately stored at –20oC until lyophilized (Delta, condenser
temperature -45oC pressure 0.01 m bar). After lyophilization, the freeze-dried tissues
were ground to pass a 0.5 mm sieve and allowed to equilibrate in open air.
The phenolic compounds were extracted according to Hertog et al. (1992). Extracts
were prepared as follows: 40 ml of 62.5% aqueous methanol [2 g/L of antioxidant tert.
Butylhyroquinone (TBHQ)] was added to 0.5 g of freeze-dried sample material. 10ml
of 6 M HCl was added to this extract with careful mixing. The extraction solution thus
obtained consisted of 1.2 M HCl in 50% aqueous methanol (v/v). After refluxing at 90
o
C for 2h with regular swirling, the extract was allowed to cool and was subsequently
made up to 100ml with methanol and sonicated for 5 min. approximately 2ml was
filtered through a 0.45- μm filter for organic solvents prior to injection.
Identification of individual phenolic compounds of the plant extracts was performed
on a Hewlett-Packard HPLC (Model 1100). Using a hypersil C18 reversed-phase
column (250 x 4.6 mm) with 5 urn particle size. Injection by means of a Rheodyne
injection valve (Model 7125). A constant flow rate of 1 ml min’1 was used with two
mobile phases: (A) 0.5% acetic acid in distilled water at pH 2.65; and solvent (B) 0.5%
acetic acid in 99.5% acetonitrile. The elution gradient was linear starting with (A) and
ending with (B) over 35 min, using an UV detector set at wavelength 254 nm (Ben-
Hammouda et al. 1995). Phenolic compounds of each sample were identified by
comparing their relative retention times with those of the standards mixture
chromatogram. The concentration of an individual compound was calculated on the
basis of peak area measurements, and then converted to mg phenolic/100g dry weight.
All chemical and solvents used were HPLC spectral grade. Standard phenolic
compounds were obtained from Sigma (St. Louis, USA) and Rom Merck-Shcuchrdt
(Munich, Germany Chemical Companies).
5- Antioxidant activity in a linoleic acid system:
Antioxidant activity assay was carried out by using the linoleic acid system.
Linoleic acid emulsion (0.02 M) was prepared with linoleic acid (0.2804 mg) and
Tween 20 (0.2804 g) in phosphate buffer (50 ml, 0.05 M, pH 7.4). A reaction
solution, containing extracts (50 µl – 200 µl). Linoleic acid emulsion (2.5 ml), and
phosphate buffer (2.3 ml, 0.2 m, pH 7.0) were mixed with a homogenizer. The
reaction mixture was incubated at 37 oC in the dark, and the degree of oxidation was
measured according to the thiocyanate method (0.1 ml, 30%), and sample solution
(0.1 ml). After the mixture was stirred for 3 min, the peroxide value was determined
by reading the absorbance at 500 nm, and the inhibition percentage of linoleic acid
peroxidation was calculated as (%) inhibition = [ 1- (absorbance of sample at 500
nm) / (absorbance of control at 500 nm)] x 100. All tests were run in duplicate, and
analysis of all samples was done in triplicate.
6- Rutin and Coumarin percentage:
The percentage of rutin and coumarin were determined in dried leaves using
the methods prescribed by Zhuang et al (1992) and Harbone (1998), respectively.
Statistical analysis: the layout of the experiment was complete randomized blocks
with three replications. Analysis of variance was done according to Snedecor and
Cochran (1990), Comparison between treatments was carried out by L.S.D. at 0.05
level.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Vegetative growth parameters:
Data in Table (1) indicated that all fertilization treatments significantly
improved plant height (cm) and herb fresh and dry weight (g) of rue (Ruta graveolens
L.) plants, in comparison with control.
The findings coincide with those obtained by many researchers on various
plants: Khalil (2002) on Rosmarinus officinalis, Naguib (2003) on Chamomilla
racutita, Naguib et al (2003) on some radish cultivars, El-Sherbeny et al (2005) on
Sideritis montana and El-Sherbeny et al (2007a, b and c) on Ruta graveolens L.
Table (1): Effect of various fertilizer treatments on plant height, number of branches,
herb fresh and dry weight of Ruta graveolens plant, during two seasons
2005 / 2006 and 2006 / 2007
Characters Plant Branches Herb fresh weight Herb dry weight
height No /plant
(cm) g/plant Kg/fed. g/plant Kg/fed.
Treatments
First season 2005 /2006
Control 32.60 6.00 68.79 1031.85 15.82 237.30
Yeast 38.10 7.33 109.68 1645.20 25.77 386.55
EM 35.70 6.30 92.43 1386.45 21.33 319.95
Azotobacter 36.00 6.50 100.67 1510.05 23.67 355.05
Compost 34.50 6.22 89.92 1348.80 20.72 310.80
NPK 37.67 7.33 106.17 1592.55 24.95 374.25
Yeast + ½ NPK 46.10 9.21 155.50 2332.50 36.54 548.10
EM + ½ NPK 43.67 8.73 139.67 2095.05 32.82 492.30
Azotobacter + ½NPK 44.72 8.94 143.33 2149.95 33.50 502.50
Compost + ½NPK 43.08 8.61 120.33 1804.95 28.28 424.20
LSD at 5% level 1.02 N.S. 3.11 16.33 2.01 11.33
Second season 2006 / 2007
Control 31.00 5.00 69.51 1042.65 16.20 243.00
Yeast 39.33 6.73 112.33 1684.95 25.85 387.75
EM 37.00 5.65 93.07 1396.05 21.69 325.36
Azotobacter 37.78 5.68 102.00 1530.00 23.46 315.90
Compost 36.25 5.56 87.18 1307.70 20.32 304.80
NPK 38.12 6.00 107.50 1612.50 25.05 375.75
Yeast + ½ NPK 48.33 8.00 143.50 2152.50 33.14 497.10
EM + ½ NPK 44.50 7.00 120.33 1804.95 27.80 417.00
Azotobacter + ½NPK 46.67 7.33 126.67 1900.05 29.25 438.75
Compost + ½NPK 42.50 6.80 117.67 1765.05 27.09 406.35
LSD at 5% level 1.12 N.S. 2.30 12.50 1.01 12.37
Table (2): Effect of some fertilizer treatments on fresh and dry weight of flowers of
Ruta graveolens plant during two seasons 2005/2006 and 2006/2007.
Characters Flowers fresh weight Flowers dry weight
Table (5): Antioxidant activity of ethanol extracted Ruta graveolens L. flowering stage
(mg/100g D.W.)
(%) Inhibition of peroxidation
µl extract 100 µl extract 150 µl extract 200
Control 56.91 ± 3.25 65.33 ± 2.21 72.15 ± 2.34
Yeast + NPK 82.45 ± 1.36 77.90 ± 3.47 80.88 ± 3.08
Herb
Table (6): Effect of some fertilizer treatments on herb essential oil constituents
of Ruta graveolenus L. plants
1 2 3 4 5 Mean
Hydrocarbon compound
Limonene 2.00 2.25 4.12 1.22 1.03 2.12
Geyrene 1.17 0.81 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.02
Nonene 1.90 2.55 3.52 3.32 0.88 2.43
Undecene 14.00 10.15 9.60 19.76 9.68 12.64
Anthracene 1.62 2.00 1.00 0.88 0.75 1.25
Neophytadiene 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.18 0.05 0.08
3,4-Dihydrobenzo[b]fluoranthene 0.33 1.12 0.78 0.11 0.20 0.51
Total hydrocarbon 21.13 18.91 20.10 26.52 13.59 20.05
Oxygenated compound
2-Octanone 0.30 0.26 0.11 0.27 0.12 0.21
2-Nonanone 20.00 16.11 10.60 6.37 13.23 12.46
Teteradecanal 0.18 1.00 0.51 0.92 1.96 0.91
Dodecanal 0.95 1.00 1.19 0.40 0.58 0.82
2-Docanone 0.66 0.27 1.88 0.09 0.31 0.64
2-Undecanone 49.44 51.15 55.90 53.05 57.09 53.33
2-dodecanone 1.00 2.00 1.14 2.24 3.43 1.96
1-Dodecanol, 3.7.11-trimethyl 0.08 0.17 0.05 0.12 0.31 0.15
2-Tridecanone 2.82 1.99 3.71 2.10 1.05 2.33
Epiglobulol 0.20 0.36 0.17 0.33 0.25 0.26
Elemol 1.10 0.77 0.50 0.81 0.30 0.70
2-Tetradecanone 0.13 0.50 0.32 0.15 0.22 0.26
Nepetalactol 0.47 0.31 0.28 0.97 0.65 0.54
Ascaridole 0.77 0.48 0.36 0.04 1.00 0.53
Guaiol 0.29 0.30 0.34 0.20 0.12 0.25
Eudesmol 0.13 0.22 0.41 0.11 0.03 0.18
Hexadecanal 0.14 0.18 0.09 0.03 0.12 0.11
9,12,15-Octadecatrienal 0.32 0.76 0.55 0.17 0.58 0.48
Hexadecanoic acid 0.45 0.82 0.23 0.16 0.09 0.35
3-Ethoxy-4-hydroxy-4-(4- 0.11 0.21 0.10 -- 0.04 0.09
methoxyphenyl)cyclopent-2-enone
9,12,15-Octadecatrienoic acid methyl ester 1.10 1.96 1.10 0.93 3.11 1.64
Total oxygenated 76.64 80.82 79.54 69.46 84.59 78.21
Total identified 97.77 99.73 99.64 95.98 98.18 98.26
1 = Control 2 = Yeast + NPK 3 = EM + NPK
4 = Azotobacter + NPK 5 = Compost + NPK
Table (7): Effect of some fertilizer treatments on flowers essential oil constituents
of Ruta graveolenus L. plants
Compounds 1 2 3 4 5 Mean
Hydrocarbon compound
Limonene 1.88 3.24 5.91 1.65 2.29 2.99
Geyrene 0.96 0.49 1.23 2.50 1.83 1.40
1-Nonene 1.54 1.21 1.16 0.96 2.00 1.37
2-Nonene 1.97 2.29 1.84 1.22 2.65 1.99
1-Undecene 5.9 4.55 2.94 6.36 3.87 4.72
Anthracene 0.34 0.27 0.35 0.40 0.40 0.35
Neophytadiene 0.08 0.65 0.27 0.35 0.55 0.38
3,4-Dihydrobenzo[b]fluoranthene 0.16 1.92 1.02 0.80 1.74 1.13
Pentacosane 0.47 0.24 0.15 0.14 0.33 0.27
Total hydrocarbon 13.30 14.86 14.87 14.38 15.66 14.61
Oxygenated compound
2-Nonanone 11.3 12.26 8.26 6.91 8.02 9.35
Cyclotridecanone 0.19 0.08 0.31 0.17 0.22 0.19
2-Docanone 1.50 1.93 2.55 2.77 3.98 2.55
2-Undecanone 67.69 63.11 67.00 70.10 66.45 66.87
2-Dodecanone 2.95 4.02 2.99 2.18 3.10 3.05
2-Tridecanone 0.41 0.27 0.24 0.13 0.35 0.28
1-Dodecanol, 3,7,11-trimethyl 0.22 0.19 0.12 0.07 0.09 0.14
2-Tridecanone 0.55 0.69 0.84 0.86 0.85 0.76
Epiglobulol 0.07 0.22 0.15 0.07 0.08 0.12
Elemol 0.12 0.10 0.20 0.06 0.09 0.11
2-Tetradecanone 0.10 0.03 0.09 0.04 0.05 0.06
Cycloundecanone 0.09 0.03 0.12 0.06 0.06 0.07
Guaiol 0.08 0.11 0.29 0.05 0.08 0.12
Eudesmol 0.10 0.21 0.41 0.22 0.11 0.21
9,12,15-Octadecatrienal 0.08 0.11 0.07 0.09 0.12 0.09
Hexadecanoic acid 0.02 0.06 0.05 0.02 0.09 0.05
9,12,15-Octadecatrienoic acid methyl ester 0.92 1.00 0.99 0.81 0.07 0.76
Total oxygenated 86.39 84.42 84.68 84.61 83.81 84.78
Total identified 99.69 99.28 99.55 98.99 99.47 99.40
1 = Control 2 = Yeast + NPK 3 = EM + NPK
4 = Azotobacter + NPK 5 = Compost + NPK
Table (8): Effect of some fertilizer treatments on rutin and cumarin content in Ruta
plant during two seasons 2005 / 2006 and 2006/2007.
Characters Rutin Cumarin
Leaves ml/plant Leaves ml/plant
Treatments % %
First season 2005 / 2006
Control 2.02 0.11 0.034 0.0018
Yeast 2.08 0.21 0.032 0.0033
EM 2.11 0.15 0.035 0.0026
Azotobacter 2.10 0.18 0.035 0.0030
Compost 2.10 0.14 0.034 0.0023
NPK 2.10 0.19 0.036 0.0033
Yeast + ½ NPK 2.08 0.30 0.036 0.0052
EM + ½ NPK 2.13 0.27 0.036 0.0046
Azotobacter + ½NPK 2.10 0.27 0.035 0.0046
Compost + ½NPK 2.12 0.25 0.035 0.0042
LSD at 5% level