INTRODUCTION:

Medicinal plants have been traditionally used for their therapeutic properties in various cultures around the world. These plants contain bioactive compounds that can have beneficial effects on human health¹. Many pharmaceutical drugs have their origins in compounds derived from medicinal plants. At this time these secondary metabolites become more popular due to their countless medicinal uses ^2,3.

Aromatic plants are those that produce and release fragrant compounds, often referred to as essential oils. These plants are valued for their pleasant scents and are commonly used in perfumes, culinary applications, aromatherapy, and traditional medicine. Several recent reviews have highlighted the underutilized potential of plant species and natural products as sources of antimicrobial drugs. Plant-derived antimicrobial compounds belong to exceptionally wide diversity of classes, such as alkaloids, terpenoids, peptides, and phenolics ⁴.

In general, pure essential oils can be subdivided into two distinct groups of chemical constituents; the hydrocarbons which are made up almost exclusively of terpenes (monoterpenes, sesquiterpenes, and diterpenes), and the oxygenated compounds which are mainly esters, aldehydes, ketones, alcohols, phenols, and oxides. They are secreted in special structures of plants namely ducts, cells, schizogenous and lysigenous glands, trichomes, hairs etc. They may be found in entire plant or specific part of the plant ⁵.

Many families of plants contain species with therapeutic properties, among these families we find The Lamiaceae family, formerly known as Labiatae, is a large family of flowering plants commonly referred to as the mint or deadnettle family. This family is known for its aromatic herbs, many of which are widely used in culinary, medicinal, and ornamental applications and It is medicinally used in case of diarrhea as well as hypoglycemic, anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, antioxidant, immune-stimulatory ⁶.

Many members of the Lamiaceae family produce essential oils and polyphenols which manifest a valuable pharmacological activity and contributing to the characteristic fragrances associated with these plants ⁷.

Here are some important genera and representative species within the Lamiaceae family that we have choose 3 of them:

Thymus vulgaris is a genus of aromatic perennial herbs in the Lamiaceae family, commonly known as thymes. These plants are known for their small, fragrant leaves and are often used as culinary herbs, in medicinal preparations, and as ornamental ground covers. Thyme is native to southern Europe, North Africa, and Asia, and there are several species and varieties within the genus. Thyme has a long history of use in traditional medicine. It is believed to have antiseptic, antibacterial, and expectorant properties. Thyme oil has a strong, herbal aroma and is used for its potential antimicrobial properties ⁸.

Salvia officinalis commonly known as common sage or garden sage is a perennial herb belonging to the Lamiaceae family. It is native to the Mediterranean region and is widely cultivated for its aromatic leaves, which are used in culinary, medicinal, and ornamental applications. It is defined as very powerful aromatic plant and its essential oil possess antimicrobial, antiviral, antifungal, antioxidant, hepatoprotective and anticarcinogenic properties ⁹.

Lavandula angustifolia belong to the Lamiaceae family. These plants are known for their fragrant flowers and are cultivated for various purposes, including ornamental landscaping, culinary uses, and the essential oils extracted from many of these plants are used in perfumes, flavorings, and aromatherapy. Additionally, several members of the family have a long history of use in traditional medicine for various health benefits. It is rich in natural antioxidants and has been used to treat amenorrhea, depression, analgesia, sleeplessnessLavender essential oil contains sterzoaldehyde ketone, linalool alcohol, which help to reduce pain and inflammation ¹⁰.

In this context, the aim of this work was to qualitatively analyze Eos from Lamiacaes plants collected in Morocco by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and Head-sapce GC-MS, and investigate antioxidant effects and antimicrobial test of Eos.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Plant Material:

Fresh herbs of Thymus vulgaris L., Lavandula angustifolia L., and Salvia officinalis L. were obtained from a local producer in Rif Mountains, northern Morocco. All plants were air dried in the shade for two weeks at room temperature 20-25° C, then were dried in an oven at 40° C for 15 minutes every day for a week until the stability of weight and then were grinded to a fine powder in a mechanic grinder.

Essential Oil and Hydrolat Extraction:

Samples of 50 g of the plants dried leaves, were subjected to hydrodistillation using 500 ml of distilled water for each, the process was obtained by Clevenger-type apparatus for 4 hours, the yield was recorded and the pure oil was saved in sealed glass vials at 4-5 Cº until analysis ⁹.

Chemical Composition of EOs and HDs Determined by GC-MS:

GC/MS/MS analysis:

GC/MS analysis was performed on a Thermo GC Trace 1300 fitted with a TG-5 fused silica capillary column (30m×0.25 mm ID, film thickness 0.25μm) coupled with a 8000 Evo triple Quadruple mass detector under the following conditions: injection volume 1 μL (sample diluted 1/10).The used carrier gas was Helium at 1.5 mL/min constant flow mode, injector temperature 200°C, oven temperature 40°C for 2 min to 180 °C for 0min at 4°C/min, to 300°C for 2 min at 20°C/min. Mass spectra: electron impact (EI+) mode, 70 ev and ion source temperature 200°C. Mass spectra were recorded over 30-500 amu range.

GC-Head space-MS:

The HS-GC–MS analyses were performed was performed in 20 ml glass vials equipped with screw caps and PTFE/silicone septa, using a Perkin Elmer Clarus 680 GC coupled with Perkin Elmer SQ8T mass spectrometer and a turbo matrix 110 head space sampler.

High-purity helium was used as the carrier gas at a constant pressure rate of 16psi. injector temperature was 110°C and the oven temperature started at 35°C for 2 min, increased to 100 °C at 2°C/min and hold for 5 min, then to 150°C at 2°C/min and hold for 5 min, and finally to 200°C at 2°C/min and hold for 5 min.

The mass spectrometer was operated with electron ionization (70 eV) in full mass scan mode 30-500 amu range. The ion source temperature and quadrupole temperature were set at 200◦C. Data acquisition and processing was performed using Turbomass software.

Antioxidant Activity:

The protocol of the free radical scavenging effect of DPPH was carried out with slight modifications ¹¹. First, put 20 μl of samples (T. vulgaris, and L. angustifolia and S. officinalis essential oils) at concentrations ranging from 25 to 300µg/mL into the microplate. Next, 200 μL of DPPH solution (0.2mM) was added.

Blank was 200 μl of methanol and 20 μl of samples ranging in same previous concentrations. In addition, 200 μl of DPPH solution and 20 μl of methanol were added as control and trolox was the positive control.

This experiment was repeated three times. The micro plate was then left in a dark area for half an hour. The microplate was then put into the micro-plate reading device.

Absorbance was then measured at 517 nm and the free radical scavenging activity was determined according to the following equation:

RSA%= (Abs positive control-Abs sample)/(Abs positive control ) ×100

The sample concentration providing 50% inhibition (IC50) was calculated by plotting inhibition percentages against concentrations of the sample.

Antimicrobial Activity:

This activity consists of discovering the antimicrobial effect of EO components on 7 pathogenic bacterial strains (Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp, Staphylococcus saprophytoculis and Staphylococcus epedrmidis, Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii).Was carried out by the well diffusion technique using Mueller Hinton medium as a layer. The activity is determined by measuring the diameter of the inhibition zone produced around the wells after 24 hours at 37°C.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

Chemical Composition of Essential Oils and Hydrolats:

Table 1 presents the chemical composition of the three Eos and their corresponding concentrated HDs resulting from the same distillation process. In total, 86 compounds were identified, of which 60 were specific to the EOs, 10 were commonly found in both Eos and HDs, and 23 were found exclusively in HDs.

Comparing the chemical profiles of the EOs and HDs resulting from the same distillation batch for different plants, showed that both products had common compounds in different ratios. However, they both contained unique compounds and should be considered independent products. The compositions are rich in monoterpene (bicyclic, monocyclic and cyclic), terpene hydrocarbon, sesquiterpenoids, and unsaturated terpoinde.

Table 1: Chemical compositions of the Eos and HDs of T. vulgaris (T.v), L. angustifolia, and S. officinalis.

Compound Name	Eo T.v	HD T.v	Eo L.a	HD L.a	Eo S.o	HD S.o
(-)-Borneol	-	-	-	4,22	-	-
(-)-Thujol	-	-	-	-	0.25	-
(-)-β-Pinene	-	1,54	-	1,59	-	0,07
Camphor	-	-	-	17,89	18	22,45
(+)-3-Carene	-	15,23	-	30,55	-	-
(+)-Ledene	-	-	-	-	0.11	-
(+-)-Pulegone	-	-	-	-	0.09	-
1,10-Dichlorodecane	-	-	1.35	-	-	-
1, 3,8-p-Menthatriene	-	0,68	-	-	-	-
Humulene	-	-	-	-	3.12	-
1,5-Decadiyne	0.28	-	-	-	-	-
1-Cyclohexyl-2-buten-1-ol (c,t)	-	-	0.35	-	-	-
1-Naphthalenepropanol,alp	-	-	-	-	2.68	-
1-Octen-3-ol	0.07	4,41	-	-	-	-
1-Propyl-1-cyclopentanol	-	-	0.40	-	-	-
2,3-Dimethylanisole	10.81	-	-	-	-	-
2,6-Dimethyl-1,3,5,7-octatetraene, E,E	-	-	-	4,25	-	-
2,6-Octadien-1-ol, 3,7-dimethyl-,(Z)-	-	-	0.98	-	0.05	-
2,6-Octadien-1-ol, 3,7-dimethyl-,propanoate, (Z)-	-	-	1.42	-	-	-
2-Nonynoic acid, methyl ester	-	-	0.55	-	-	-
3-Carene	-	-	-	0,07	-	0,63
3-Cyclohexene-1-methanol,à,à,4-trimethyl-, ®-	-	-	-	-	0.91	-
3-Octanone	-	-	-	0,61	-	-
3-Thujanone	-	-	-	-	-	19,30
4(10)-Thujadiene	-	-	-	0,95	-	-
4(10)-Thujene	-	20,56	-	-	-	-
4-Terpinenyl acetate	-	3,15	-	1,04	-	0,02
α-Gurjunene	-	-	-	-	0.09	-
α-terpinene	1.27	-	-	-	-	-
α-Thujone	-	-	-	-	14.85	-
α-Myrcene	0.91	-	1.11	-	2.98	-
α-Phellandrene	0.35	-	-	-	0.21	-
α-Terpineol	0.30	-	6.07	-	-	-
1,3,5-Triisopropylbenzene	-	-	3.98	-	-	-
4-Vinyl-o-xylene	0.12	-	-	-	-	-
β -Pinene	0.10	-	20.47	-	2,23	-
β -Terpineol	-	-	-	-	0.20	-
Bicyclo[2.2.1]heptan-2-ol,1,7,7-trimethyl-, acetate,(1S-endo)-	-	-	-	-	0.75	-
Bicyclo[3.1.0]hex-2-ene,4-methyl-1-(1-methylethyl)-	-	-	-	-	0.47	-
Butanoic acid, octyl ester	-	-	0.32	-	-	-
Camphene	-	1,10	-	2,26	5.32	0,25
6-Camphenol,	-	-	-	-	0.11	-
Carvacrol	-	-	-	-	0.15	-
Caryophyllene	-	-	-	-	3.94	-
cis-Linalool oxide	-	-	-	0,34	-	-
β -Muurolene	-	-	-	-	0.18	-
Cockroach Myoactive Peptide I	-	-	-	-	0.46	-
β -Terpinene	-	-	-	-	1.36	-
Cyclohexane,1,3-dimethyl-2- trans-methylene,	-	-	-	-	0.12	-
D-Limonene	0.13	3,64	-	0,25	4.45	-
endo-Borneol	0.16	-	10.19	-	-	-
Eucalyptol	0.11	-	3.06	30,56	11.20	50,37
Geraniol	-	-	2.72	-	-	-
Geranyl formate	-	-	2.63	-	-	-
Hexane, 1-chloro-5-methyl-	1.43	-	-	-	-	-
Hexyl isobutyrate	-	-	-	0,07	-	-
Humulene epoxide II	-	-	-	-	1.04	-
Humulenol-II	-	-	-	-	0.23	-
Isoaromadendrene epoxide	-	-	-	-	0.14	-
Isoborneol	-	-	-	-	17.54	0,58
Isobornyl acetate	-	-	0.35	-	-	-
Isocaryophillene	-	7,19	-	-	-	-
Isopulegol	0.55	-	0.43	-	-	-
Isopulegol acetate	0.11	-	-	-	-	-
Viridiflorol	-	-	-	-	8.25	-
Linalool	1.14	-	27.69	-	0.58	-
Linalool oxide	-	-	-	0,62	-	-
m-tert-butyl-Phenol	-	-	1.75	-	-	-
Myrtenal	-	-	-	0,08	-	-
Myrtenyl acetate	-	-	-	-	0.09	-
Nerolidol	-	-	1.77	-	-	-
Octadiene	-	-	-	0,38	-	-
Octanal	-	-	0.25	-	-	-
O-Cymene	4.61	-	-	-	-	-
Phenol, 2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-	9.31	-	-	-	-	-
Terpinolene	0.08	5,97	-	0,49	0.67	0,04
Thujone	-	-	-	-	6.06	5,45
Thymol	67,63	13,15	-	-	0.03	-
Thymyl methyl ether	-	0,87	-	-	-	-
α-Phellandrene	-	10,38	-	0,94	-	-
α-Pinene	-	8,21	-	-	2,46	0,03
α-Terpineol	-	-	-	1,57	-	0,14
β-Ocimene	-	-	-	0,40	-	-
γ-Terpinene	-	3,93	-	0,10	-	0,07

The figure 1 compare the chemical compositions of the EO and HD for T. vulgaris, we determined the ratios of found compounds in both samples for EO and HD the results showed that the thymol is the majority compound with a percentage of 67% in the EO while in the HD is just 13% , followed by 2.3-dimethylanisole 10% and o-Cymene 4% which they are present just in the EO beside other components, we have notice the presence of some compounds especially in the HD such as thyjene 20% as the majority component, followed by carene 15%, phellandrene 15%, alpha pinene 8%, as well as isocaryophillene 7%.

Figure 1: Chemical compositions of the EO and HD for T. vulgaris

From Figure 2 which represents EO and HD of L. angustifolia we can notice that the majority compounds found just in the OE of lavender are the linalool 27%, followed by beta-pinene 20%, endo-borneol 10%, compared to the composition of HD the major compounds are careen 30%, bornanone17%, and a common compounds like the eucalyptol with 30% in HD and 3% in EO, beside other compounds found exclusively in one of them and other common components.

Figure 2: Chemical compositions of the EO and HD for L. angustifolia

For the last plant S. Officinalis the results of the GC-MS for OE and HD represented in figure 3, show that we have the presence of compounds with different concentrations especially in OE Oxygenated monoterpenes are the dominant constituents, followed by monoterpene hydrocarbons, and sesquiterpene. Camphor 18%, Thujone 16%, Viridiflorol 8%, camphene 5%, Caryophyllene 4%, D-Limonene 4%, Humulene 3%, α-Pinene 3% , and others present just in HD like, 3-Thujanone 19% and common compounds such as Eucalyptol (HD 50% , EO 11%), Isoborneol (0.58% HD, 17% EO), Thujone 5% HD.

Figure 3: Chemical compositions of the EO and HD for S. officinalis

Figure 4 et 5 represent the difference of chemical composition of the EOs and HDs of different plants from the lamiacaee family, as we can see that each plant has its particularity of chemical composition such as the presence of thymol for thymus, Linalyl acetate, Linalool, β-caryophyllène , Acétate de lavandulyl, Z-β-ocimene, terpinène-4-ol for lavanda, and borneol, camphor, caryophyllene, cineole, elemene, humulene, ledene, pinene, and thujone for salvia officinalis, beside other volatiles components that can be found in EOs and HDs with different ratio.

Figure 4: Chemical compositions of HDs

Figure 5: Chemical compositions of EOs

Antioxidant activity of Eos:

Table 2: Inhibition percentage of essential oils using DPPH assay

Sample

T. vulgaris

L. angustifolia

S. officinalis

TROLOX

IC 50 (µg/mL)

41.54 ± 1.12

53.76 ±1.15

32.33±1.20

18.34 ±0.30

The intricate, hierarchically arranged structure of plants is made up of interdependent parts that work together to stop the formation of free radicals. Plants have intricate networks of overlapping antioxidants that keep free radical scavenging and hydrogen abstraction from occurring.

Results showed important antioxidant activity of essential oils tested (Table 2). 50% of inhibition was recorded using a dosage of 41.54± 1.12 µg/mL, T. vulgaris essential oil has shown the highest antioxidant activity followed by L. angustifolia essential oil with an IC50 of 53.76 ±1.15 µg/mL and the last one was S. officinalis with an IC50 32.33±1.20 µg/mL but still less effective when compared to standard Trolox which has an IC50 of 18.34 ±0.30 µg/mL.

Previous studies have confirmed significant free radical scavenging activity of these essential oils. For T. vulgaris essential oil, in Tunisia, IC50 was about 437 ±5.46 µg/mL ¹². In Italy, IC50 was ranging from 28.95 ±1.11 µg/mL to 64.93 ± 1.30 µg/mL ¹³ and in Turkey, IC50 was between 93.77 ±13.00 µg/mL and 159.59 ± 12.79 µg/mL ¹⁴.

Concerning free radical scavenging activity of L. angustifolia essential oil, in Italy, IC50 was about 7.75 ±0.10 µg/mL ¹⁵. In Morocco, 50% of inhibition was reached while using a concentration of 197.69 ± 9.22 μg/mL ¹⁶ and finally in Algeria, IC50 was between 246,29±0,71 µg/mL to 372,83±0,97 µg/mL ¹⁷.

The antioxidant properties were investigated For S. officinalis EO from Tunisia, an IC50 value of 8.31 mg/L was reported against DPPH radicals ¹⁸. This result was comparable with another Turkish sage EO previously analyzed by Bouaziz et al ¹⁹ that found an IC50 value of 7.70 mg/L. The capacity to scavenge DPPH radicals was also demonstrated for sage leaves collected in Morocco ²⁰ with an IC50 of 309.42 mg/mL.

In DPPH test, the order of activity was: camphor > bornyl acetate > p-cymene > 3-carene > o-cymene > α-pinene > terpinen-4-ol > camphene > linalool oxide acetate > β-pinene > α-bisabolene. Authors speculated that in DPPH test, a carbonyl group and a double bond conjugated to the carbonyl group seem to play an important role in the antioxidant activity. Instead, in ABTS test, the cyclic ether group is important for the founded activity.

These variations in findings across many research can be attributed to a number of variables, including area, chemical composition, harvest time, and meteorological and edaphic circumstances, etc.

Antibacterial activity:

The results shown in table 3 remarkable activity of the three Eos, especially T. vulgaris which inhibited 90% of the strains tested.

Staphylococci (Staphylococcus saprophytoculis, Staphylococcus epedrmidis, Staphylococcus aureus resistant to methicillin) were the most sensitive to the products, especially product T. vulgaris (average inhibition diameter of 30.25mm), Pseudomonas aeruginosa was resistant. Staphylococcus aureus presented the largest diameter of inhibition (40mm). Enterobacteriaceae come in second place with an average diameter of 26.75 mm Knowing that Salmonella spp and Staphylococcus aureus are among the bacteria responsible for food poisoning.

In general, the products were very active against strains responsible for food poisoning (Salmonella spp and staphylococcus aureus), resistant strains responsible for urinary infections (E.coli ESBL (extended spectrum beta-lactamase) and K pneumoniae ESBL) and treatment-resistant nosocomial strains (Acinetobacter baumannii and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus).

Table 3: Antibacterial activity of Eos

Bacteries	L.angustifolia ID (mm)	S.officinalis ID (mm)	T. vulgaris ID (mm)
Acinetobacter baumannii	12	23	32
Pseudomonas aeruginosa	0	14	0
Escherichia coli	17	23	26
Salmonella spp	18	18	35
Proteus mirabilis	0	-	25
Klebsiella pneumoniae	0	15	21
Staphylococcus meticilline resistant	15	0	30
Staphylococcus aureus	0	15	40
Staphylococcus saprophytoculis	22	25	25
Staphylococcus epedrmidis	0	-	26

CONCLUSION:

The results obtained from essential oils of different species of the Lamiaceae family to evaluate their antioxidant activity and their antimicrobial activity showed that EOs could be considered as good sources of natural compounds having significant antioxidant activity and showed antimicrobial activity against most of the microorganisms tested. We conclude that even if the species belong to the same family, each plant has a particular and typical composition.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT:

This study was carried with the experiments out with the use of scientific equipment of the National Center for Scientific and Technical Research, Mohammed V University, Rabat. Morocco.

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS:

The authors declare no conflict of interests.

REFERENCES:

1. S. Pradhan, S. Pattnaik. Phytochemical Screening of Components Present Floral Essential oil of an Indigenous Variety of Lantana camara, Linn (Verbenaceae). Res. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 2017; 9: 203–209. https://doi.org/10.5958/0975-4385.2017.00037.1.

2. C. Madhu, J. Swapna, K. Neelima, M.V. Shah. A Comparative Evaluation of the Antioxidant Activity of Some Medicinal Plants Popularly Used in India. Asian J. Res. Pharm. Sci. 2012; 2: 98–100.

3. Mariyappan M., Bharathidasan R., Mahalingam R., Madhanraj P., Panneerselvam A. , Ambikapathy V. Antibacterial Activity of Cardiospermum halicacabum and Melothria heterophylla. Asian J. Pharm. Res. 2011; 1(4): 111-113.

4. M. Zohra, A. Fawzia. Chemical Composition and Antioxidant Activity of Essential Oil from Smyrnium olusatrum L. Asian J. Res. Chem. 2011; 4: 217–220.

5. Suganya S., Bharathidasan R., Senthilkumar G., Madhanraj P., Panneerselvam A. Antibacterial activity of essential oil extracted from Coriandrum sativam (L.) and GC-MS analysis. Research J. Science and Tech. 2012; 4(5): 203-207.

6. M. Shanaida. Determination of Triterpenoids in Some Lamiaceae Species. Res. J. Pharm. Technol. 2018; 11: 3113–3118. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-360X.2018.00571.1.

7. P. Dongare, S. Dhande, V. Kadam. A Review on Pogostemon patchouli. Res. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 2014; 6: 41–47.

8. R.K. Joshi. Essential oil composition of Thymus linearis (Benth) from western Himalaya of Uttrakhand, India. Asian J. Pharm. Technol. 2016; 6: 199–201. https://doi.org/10.5958/2231-5713.2016.00029.5.

9. R.M. Harfouch, M. Darwish, W. Al-Asadi, A.F. Mohammad, N.M. Gharib, M. Haroun. Antibacterial Activity of Essential Oils of Rosmarinus officinalis, Salvia officinalis and Anthemis nobilis Widespread in the Syrian Coast. Res. J. Pharm. Technol. 2019; 12: 3410–3412. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-360X.2019.00576.6.

10. Punasiya R, Dindorkar G, Pillai S. Antibacterial and Antifungal Activity of Flower extract of Murraya paniculata L. Asian J. Res. Pharm. Sci. 2020; 10(1):17-20. doi: 10.5958/2231-5659.2020.00004.1

11. R. Malathi, S.A. John, A. Cholarajan. Antioxidant Activity of Extract from the Leaves of Tylophora asthmatica.Asian J. Res. Pharm. Sci. 2012; 2: 80–82.

12. H. Miladi, R.B. Slama, D. Mili, S. Zouari, A. Bakhrouf, E. Ammar. Essential oil of Thymus vulgaris L. and Rosmarinus officinalis L.: Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis, cytotoxicity and antioxidant properties and antibacterial activities against foodborne pathogens. 2013 (2013). https://doi.org/10.4236/ns.2013.56090.

13. E. Mancini, F. Senatore, D. Del Monte, L. De Martino, D. Grulova, M. Scognamiglio, M. Snoussi, V. De Feo. Studies on Chemical Composition, Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Activities of Five Thymus vulgaris L. Essential Oils, Molecules. 2015; 20: 12016–12028. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules200712016.

14. A. Gedikoğlu, M. Sökmen. A. Çivit. Evaluation of Thymus vulgaris and Thymbra spicata essential oils and plant extracts for chemical composition, antioxidant, and antimicrobial properties. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019; 7: 1704–1714. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.1007.

15. S. Garzoli, V. Laghezza Masci, S. Franceschi, A. Tiezzi, P. Giacomello, E. Ovidi. Headspace/GC–MS analysis and investigation of antibacterial, antioxidant and cytotoxic activity of essential oils and hydrolates from Rosmarinus officinalis L. and Lavandula angustifolia Miller. Foods. 2021; 10: 1768.

16. M. Jeddi, N. El Hachlafi, M. El Fadili, N. Benkhaira, S. al-mijalli, F. Kandsi, E. Abdallah, Z. Ouaritini, A. Bouyahya, L.-H. Lee, G. Zengin, H. Naceiri Mrabti, K. Fikri Benbrahim. Antimicrobial, Antioxidant, α-Amylase and α-Glucosidase Inhibitory Activities of a chemically characterized Essential oil from Lavandula angustifolia Mill. In vitro and In silico investigations. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bse.2023.104731.

17. A. Latreche, A. Rouibi, F. Saidi, Étude. Comparative DE LA Composition Chimique ET DE L’activité Antioxydante DE L’HUILE Essentielle DE Lavandula Angustifolia Miller Cultivée Dans Deux Régions Différentes DE L’algérie (Blida Et Chlef), Agrobiologia 12 (2022) 3244–3253.

18. S. Kammoun El Euch, D. Ben Hassine, S. Cazaux, N. Bouzouita, J. Bouajila. Salvia officinalis essential oil: Chemical analysis and evaluation of anti-enzymatic and antioxidant bioactivities. South Afr. J. Bot. 2018; 120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2018.07.010.

19. M. Bouaziz, T. Yangui, S. Sayadi, A. Dhouib, Disinfectant properties of essential oils from Salvia officinalis L. cultivated in Tunisia. Food Chem. Toxicol. Int. J. Publ. Br. Ind. Biol. Res. Assoc. 2009; 47: 2755–2760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2009.08.005.

20. Z. Khiya, M. Hayani, A. Gamar, S. Kharchouf, S. Amine, F. Berrekhis, A. Bouzoubae, Z. Touria, F. Elhilali, Valorization of the Salvia officinalis L of the Morocco bioactive extracts: Phytochemistry, antioxidant and anticorrosive activities. J. King Saud Univ. - Sci. 2018; 31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksus.2018.11.008.

Received on 04.03.2024 Revised on 14.09.2024

Accepted on 10.02.2025 Published on 02.05.2025

Available online from May 07, 2025

Research J. Pharmacy and Technology. 2025;18(5):2213-2219.

DOI: 10.52711/0974-360X.2025.00317

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License.