J. Serb. Chem. Soc. 75 (11) 15031513 (2010) UDC 635.71+66.048+66.

061+
JSCS4072 543.544.3:665.52/.54
Original scientific paper
1503
The chemical composition and antioxidant activities of basil
from Thailand using retention indices and comprehensive
two-dimensional gas chromatography
PATCHAREE PRIPDEEVECH
1
*
, WATCHARAPONG CHUMPOLSRI
2
,
PANAWAN SUTTIARPORN
2
and SUGUNYA WONGPORNCHAI
2

1
School of Science, Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, 57100 and
2
Department Center
of Excellence for Innovation in Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science,
Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, 50200, Thailand
(Received 3 February, revised 12 June 2010)
Abstract: The chemical compositions of essential oils obtained from Ocimum
basilicum var. thyrsiflora (1.39 % dry weight) and Ocimum basilicum (0.61 %)
were analyzed by GCMS. Seventy-three constituents representing 99.64 % of
the chromatographic peak area were obtained in the O. basilicum var. thyrsi-
flora oil, whereas 80 constituents representing 91.11 % observed in the essen-
tial oil of O. basilicum were obtained. Methyl chavicol (81.82 %), -(E)-oci-
mene (2.93 %) and -(E)-bergamotene (2.45 %) were found to be the dominant
constituents in O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora oil while O. basilicum contained
predominantly linalool (43.78 %), eugenol (13.66 %) and 1,8-cineole (10.18
%). The clear separation of the volatiles in all samples, demonstrated by the
application of GCGC, resulted in significantly different fingerprints for the
two types of basil. The O. basilicum oil showed strong antioxidant activity
while the oil of O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora exhibited very low activity, which
was attributed to the significant differences in linalool and eugenol contents in
these essential oils.
Keywords: O. basilicum; O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora; DPPH radical scaveng-
ing activity; simultaneous distillation and extraction (SDE); comprehensive
two-dimensional gas chromatography; GCGC.
INTRODUCTION
Basil (Ocimum basilicum), belonging to the Lamiaceae family, is one of the
most popular plants grown extensively in many continents around the world,
especially in Asia, Europe and North America. Basil is believed to have origina-
ted in Iran and/or India. At least 150 species of the genus Ocimum are widely

* Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
doi: 10.2298/JSC100203125P
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Available online at www.shd.org.rs/JSCS/
2010 Copyright (CC) SCS
1504 PRIPDEEVECH et al.
cultivated in other countries of Asia.
1
Although several basil species are found in
many regions, the species O. basilicum is the most cultivated variety in the
world.
24
Basil has been planted as a popular culinary and medicinal herb from
ancient time until now and the leaves and flowers have been used for the treat-
ment of headaches, coughs, diarrhea, worms and kidney malfunctions, as well as
for its carminative, galactagogue, stomachic and antispasmodic properties.
1,57

Basil contains a wide range of phenolic compounds displaying various antioxi-
dant activities, depending on the basil species and cultivars.
811
The extracts of
basil obtained by different methods are considered to be antimicrobial,
1214

insecticidal
15
and useful in a number of medical treatments.
1618
The essential
oils of basil are used in the flavoring of food and in perfumery because of their
aromatic properties.
19
There are significant differences in the chemical com-
position and amounts and kinds of aromatic components in the essential oils of
basil depending on the species and environmental conditions of the cultivation
location. For instance, basil having dark green leaves and white flowers, the
popular cultivars for the fresh market and garden, possesses a rich spicy pungent
aroma due to the presence of linalool, methyl chavicol and 1,8-cineole.
19
Lesser
cultivars vary in growth habit, size, and color, and can display a wide range of
aromas including, lemon, rose, camphor, licorice, wood and fruit.
19
The dark
opal cultivar with purple color in all parts contains linalool and 1,8-cineole as the
major components while camphor is dominant in the basil camphor cultivars.
19

The basil cultivars of India, Pakistan and Guatemala exhibit methyl cinnamate as
the dominant component.
20,21
Basil essential oils include mainly the group of
terpenoid components, which includes monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes as well
as their oxygenated derivatives.
22,23

The similarity of the structures of the constituents has obstructed component
identification. To date, gas chromatographymass spectrometry (GCMS) has
played the most important role in the identification of the chemical composition
of basil essential oils. Nevertheless, incomplete identification was achieved by
the use of GCMS due to the complex nature of the constituents of the essential
oil. Comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GCGC) is a power-
ful technique that has been successfully used for the separation of the volatile
constituents in highly complex samples, especially essential oils.
2426
This tech-
nique is a combination of two columns with different separation mechanisms
coupled via a cryogenic modulator interface. Many co-eluting components on the
first column are separated in the second column. This rapid technique displays
significant differences between samples, making it a valuable technique for ap-
plication in qualitative analysis. The application of comprehensive two-dimensio-
nal gas chromatography coupled to time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GCGC
TOFMS) has been employed to analyze the aromatic compounds of basil samp-
les.
27
Linalool, methyl chavicol, eugenol, and 1,8-cineole were the dominant com-
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Available online at www.shd.org.rs/JSCS/
2010 Copyright (CC) SCS
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND ANTIOXIDANT ACTIVITY OF BASIL 1505
pounds identified in these samples. The relative abundances of the different con-
stituents allowed differentiation between the examined cultivars.
In the present study, O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora and O. basilicum plants
were grown in northern Thailand. The chemical compositions of the essential oils
of the leaves of both cultivars were identified by using GCMS and confirmed by
the linear retention indices. The use of GCGC with a longitudinally modulated
cryogenic system (LMCS) was also employed to clearly differentiate between the
fingerprints of these oil samples. Additionally, the analyses of the volatile cons-
tituents of all oils were completed by an evaluation and determination of the anti-
oxidant activities of the essential oil samples.
EXPERIMENTAL
Plant materials and chemicals
Aerial parts of two varieties of basil, O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora and O. basilicum, were
collected at flowering stage in the Chiang Rai province located in the northern part of
Thailand (altitude 390 m) in June 2008. Voucher herbarium specimens (QBG No. 41462 and
QBG No. 41463) of O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora and O. basilicum plant, respectively, were
identified and deposited at the Queen Sirikit Botanic Garden, Mae Rim, Chiang Mai, Thai-
land. The morphology of O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora and O. basilicum plants differ signi-
ficantly. O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora plant has narrow green leaves, purplered stems and
violet pink flowers, whereas O. basilicum plant has light-green stems, ellipticovate leaves
and white flowers. The leaves were separated by hand and then dried in the shade for 10 days
before being subjected to simultaneous distillationextraction (SDE). All basil essential oil
samples obtained were diluted 1:10 v/v with n-hexane prior to injection into the GCMS and
GCGC instruments. All chemicals were of analytical grade and consisted of dichlorome-
thane, anhydrous sodium sulfate, mixtures of C
8
to C
22
n-alkanes and 2,2-diphenyl-1-pic-
rylhydrazyl (DPPH) which were purchased from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany), and gallic
acid, purchased from SigmaAldrich GmbH. (Steinheim, Germany).
Gas chromatographyMass spectrometry (GCMS)
The volatile constituents of basil leaf oils were analyzed using a Hewlett Packard model
HP6890 gas chromatograph (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA) equipped with an
HP-5MS (5 % phenyl-polymethylsiloxane) capillary column (30 m0.25 mm i.d., film thick-
ness 0.25 m; Agilent Technologies, USA) interfaced to an HP model 5973 mass-selective
detector. The oven temperature was initially held at 100 C and then increased at 2 C min
-1
to
220 C. The injector and detector temperatures were 250 and 280 C, respectively. Purified
helium was used as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 1 mL min
-1
. The EI mass spectra were
collected at an ionization voltage of 70 eV over the m/z range 29300. The electron multiplier
voltage was 1150 V. The ion source and quadrupole temperatures were set at 230 and 150 C,
respectively. Identification of volatile components was performed by comparison of their
Kovts retention indices, relative to C
8
C
22
n-alkanes, and comparison of the mass spectra of
individual components with the reference mass spectra in the Wiley 275 and NIST 98 data-
bases and with the corresponding data for components in basil.
10,19,28,29

Comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GCGC)
A gas chromatograph, model HP 6890, equipped with an FID detector and an HP 6890
series auto sampler was used for the GCGCFID experiments and was operated at 100 Hz
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Available online at www.shd.org.rs/JSCS/
2010 Copyright (CC) SCS
1506 PRIPDEEVECH et al.
data acquisition. The GC was retrofitted with a longitudinally modulated cryogenic system,
LMCS (Chromatography Concepts, Doncaster, Australia). CO
2
was employed as the cryogen,
which was thermostatically controlled at about 20 C for the duration of each run. The in-
jection temperature was 250 C with an injection volume of 1.0 L in the split mode with a
split ratio of 100:1. The injection and detector temperature were operated at 250 C. Hydrogen
gas was used as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 1.5 mL min
-1
. The GC was operated in the
constant flow mode. The column set for GCGC analysis consisted of two capillary columns
which were serially coupled by a zero-dead-volume fitting. The column sets and operation
conditions used in this experiment are listed in Table I. The columns are available from SGE
International (Ringwood, Australia). The GCGC column set BPX5/BP20 (Column set 1) was
5 % phenyl polysilphenylene-siloxane connected to a polyethylene glycol phase, which sepa-
rates most components according to boiling point rather than polarity, while the separation
polar/non-polar was obtained using the column set Solgel wax/BP1 (Column set 2) which is
the combination of an inverse phase of poly(ethylene glycol) and 100 % dimethylpolysi-
loxane. Both column sets were selected to investigate the basil volatiles in all samples due to
the different properties of these column sets.
TABLE I. GCGC column sets and temperature programs
Condition
Set 1 Set 2
1
D
2
D
1
D
2
D
Stationary phase BPX5 BP20 Solgel Wax BP1
Length, m 30 2.0 30 2.0
Diameter, mm 0.25 0.10 0.25 0.1
Film thickness, m 0.25 0.10 0.25 0.10
Modulation period, s 6 6
Temperature program from 120 to 180 C at 1 C min
-1
from 80 to 250 C at 2 C min
-1

Antioxidant activity
DPPH radical scavenging assay. The radical scavenging abilities of O. basilicum var.
thyrsiflora and O. basilicum essential oils based on reaction with the 2,2-diphenyl-2-picryl-
hydrazyl radical (DPPH) were evaluated by a spectrophotometric method based on the re-
duction of a methanol solution of DPPH according to a modified method of Blois.
30
One
milliliter of various concentrations of the each oil in methanol was added to 1 mL of a 0.003 %
methanol solution of DPPH and the reaction mixture was shaken vigorously. The tubes were
allowed to stand at room temperature (27 C) for 30 min. Each reaction mixture was then
placed in the cuvette holder of a Perkin Elmer-Lambda 25 UV/Vis spectrophotometer and
monitored at 517 nm against a methanol blank. The scavenging ability was calculated as fol-
lows: scavenging ability = 100(absorbance of control absorbance of sample/absorbance of
control). The antioxidant activity of all essential oils is expressed as IC
50
, which is defined as
the concentration (in g mL
-1
) of oil required to inhibit the formation of DPPH radicals by 50 %.
The experiment was performed in triplicate.
Determination of the total phenolic contents. Total phenolic content of the essential oils
obtained from O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora and O. basilicum leaves was determined using
FolinCiocalteu reagent according to a modified method of Singleton and Rossi
31
using gallic
acid as the standard. The oil solution (0.2 mL) was mixed with 1.0 mL of FolinCiocalteu
reagent, 1.0 mL of a 7 % aqueous solution of Na
2
CO
3
and 5.0 mL of distilled water. Then, the
mixture was vigorously vortexed. The reaction mixtures were allowed to stand for 30 min
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Available online at www.shd.org.rs/JSCS/
2010 Copyright (CC) SCS
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND ANTIOXIDANT ACTIVITY OF BASIL 1507
before the absorbance at 765 nm was measured. The concentration of both essential oils was
set to 5 mg mL
-1
. The same procedure was also applied to standard solutions of gallic acid.
The calibration equation for gallic acid was:
y = 0.00515x 0.00400 (R
2
= 0.999)
where y is the absorbance and x is the concentration of gallic acid in mg mL
-1
.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The essential oil of the leaves of O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora and O. basi-
licum were extracted using a modified LikensNickerson apparatus and appeared
as viscous yellow liquids with a percentage yield of 1.39 and 0.61 (w/w), respec-
tively. These essential oils were subjected to detailed GCMS analysis in order to
determine the volatile constituents. Overall, 81 volatile constituents were identi-
fied among the two basil leaf oil samples. The GCMS chromatograms of all
samples are shown in Fig. 1. The structures of the volatile components identified
by GCMS, their relative area percentages and their retention indices are sum-
marized in Table II. Although the oils of the two O. basilicum species contained
high percentages of the same group of monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes, the dif-
ferent varieties presented significant variability in their chemical compositions. A to-
tal of 73 constituents representing 99.64 % of the O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora leaf
oil were established. The dominant components were methyl chavicol (81.82 %),
-(E)-ocimene (2.93 %), -(E)-bergamotene (2.45 %), -epi-cadinol (2.08 %),
1,8-cineole (1.62 %), methyl eugenol (1.10 %) and camphor (1.09 %). As indi-
cated, pentyl butanoate was distinguished only in O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora es-
sential oil. The present studies are similar to the published research of Simon et
al.,
19
who reported methyl chavicol (60 %) and linalool (12 %) as the major con-
stituents in the essential oil of O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora; Thai (Richters).

Fig. 1. GC-MS chromatogram of volatile component profiles of (1.1 above) O. basilicum
essential oil, (1.2) O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora essential oil.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Available online at www.shd.org.rs/JSCS/
2010 Copyright (CC) SCS
1508 PRIPDEEVECH et al.
TABLE II. Structural assignment and relative peak area percent of the volatile components of
the essential oil obtained from of O. basilicum (A) and O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora (B) leaves
Component LTPRI
a

Relative peak
area, %

Component

LTPRI

Relative peak
area, %
A B A B
(E)-2-Hexenol 849 0.06 0.03 Methyl chavicol 1196 0.21 81.82
-Thujene 924 0.01 t Geraniol 1253 0.03 0.01
-Pinene 932 0.19 0.07 Chavicol 1259 0.07 0.09
Camphene 949 0.03 0.06 iso-Bornyl acetate 1283 0.65 0.11
Sabinene 971 0.33 0.08 Carquejol acetate 1295 0.05 t
Amyl vinyl carbinol 974 0.04 0.02 -Cubebene 1344 0.03 0.02
-Pinene 978 0.57 0.16 Eugenol 1355 13.66 0.02
-Myrcene 988 0.76 0.49 exo-2-Hydroxyci-
neole acetate
1358 0.04
Dehydro-1,8-cineole 991 0.02 0.01 -Ylangene 1373 0.08 0.02
para-Mentha-1(7),8-
-diene
1007 t 0.01 -Bourbonene 1380 0.10 0.03
-Terpinene 1017 0.02 0.01 iso-Longifolene 1385 0.06 0.03
ortho-Cymene 1024 0.01 0.01 -Elemene 1387 0.47 0.31
Limonene 1028 0.23 0.15 Cyperene 1391 0.05 0.02
1,8-Cineole 1033 10.18 1.62 Methyl eugenol 1400 0.09 1.10
- (E)-Ocimene 1044 0.57 2.93 -Cedrene 1410 0.09 0.04
-Terpinene 1056 0.06 t
b
(E)-Caryophyllene 1416 0.08 0.06
(Z)-Sabinene hydrate 1071 0.23 0.03 -Cedrene 1420 0.04 0.02
Caprylyl acetate 1078 0.08 t -Copaene 1426 t
Terpinolene 1084 0.06 0.15 -(E)-Bergamotene 1431 0.10 2.45
Linalool oxide 1087 0.07 -(Z)-Farnesene 1438 0.05 0.05
Pentyl butanoate 1095 0.01 (Z)-Muurola-3,5-
-diene
1442 0.05 0.03
Linalool 1099 43.78 0.43 -Humulene 1451 0.36 0.18
(E)-Sabinene hydrate 1099 0.17 -(E)-Farnesene 1454 0.20 0.08
(Z)-Myroxide 1138 0.01 (Z)-Muurola-
-4(14),5-diene
1458 0.35 0.13
Camphor 1146 0.20 1.09 -Acoradiene 1462 0.04 0.02
iso-Menthone 1162 0.03 0.03 -Gurjunene 1471 0.06 0.02
-Terpineol 1170 0.28 -Muurolene 1477 1.35 0.60
Borneol 1172 0.36 0.32 -Himachalene 1481 0.47 0.18
Terpinen-4-ol 1179 0.18 0.06 -Selinene 1485 0.04 0.04
-Terpineol 1195 1.75 Bicyclogermacrene 1491 0.04 0.18
-(E)-Guaiene 1498 0.59 0.27 1,10-Di-epi-cubenol 1611 0.76 0.29
-Patchoulene 1503 0.51 0.35 -Acorenol 1629 0.05 0.01
-Bisabolene 1505 0.09 0.04 -Epi-cadinol 1640 5.76 2.08
-Cadinene 1509 1.99 0.57 -Eudesmol 1650 0.11 0.09
(E)-Calamenene 1516 0.35 0.06 -Cadinol 1652 0.32 0.14
(Z)-Nerolidol 1521 0.30 0.11 -Epi-bisabolol 1683 0.06 0.03

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Available online at www.shd.org.rs/JSCS/
2010 Copyright (CC) SCS
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND ANTIOXIDANT ACTIVITY OF BASIL 1509
TABLE II. Continued
Component LTPRI
a

Relative peak
area, %

Component

LTPRI

Relative peak
area, %
A B A B
-Cadinene 1533 0.03 0.01 -Bisabolol 1685 0.10 0.04
Longicamphenylone 1560 0.08 0.02 Zierone 1698 0.03 t
Spathulenol 1573 0.25 0.03 -(Z)-Santalol 1713 0.12 0.03
(E)-Sesquisabinene
hydrate
1579 0.01 (E)-3-Tetradecen-5-
-yne
1889 0.24 0.05
-(Z)-Elemenone 1580 0.06 0.03
a
Linear temperature program retention index;
b
trace amount, < 0.005 %
Individually, O. basilicum leaf oil yielded 80 identified constituents repre-
senting 91.11 % with dominant components consisting of linalool (43.78 %)
followed by eugenol (13.66 %), 1,8-cineole (10.18 %), -epi-cadinol (5.76 %),
-cadinene (1.99 %), -terpineol (1.75 %) and -muurolene (1.35 %), respecti-
vely. As can be observed, eight components (linalool oxide, (E)-sabinene hydrate,
(Z)-myroxide, -terpineol, -terpineol, exo-2-hydroxycineole acetate, -copaene
and (E)-sesquisabinene hydrate) were detected only in the essential oil of O.
basilicum. These results are in a good agreement with those of most published
studies on the chemical composition of O. basilicum essential oil in which lina-
lool was found to be the predominant constituent: Kita et al.
14
(69 %), Akgl
32

(45.7 %) and Gurbuz et al.
33
(41.2 %). In other studies, methyl chavicol (estra-
gole) was represented as the major constituent in the O. basilicum leaf oils as can
be seen in the study of Khatri et al.,
34
Telci et al.
10
and Chalchat et al.
28
Ad-
ditionally, methyl eugenol was detected as the main component in O. basilicum
leaf oil in Thailand by Suppakul et al.
29
These differences indicate that the che-
mical composition of the essential oils of O. basilicum varieties may be corre-
lated with different environmental and ecological conditions, as well as by gene-
tic factors.
The overall volatile constituents of the basil leaf oil samples were analyzed
using the GCGC technique. In this study, the conventional combination of co-
lumns BPX5/BP20 (Column set 1) and columns Solgel wax/BP1 (Column set 2)
were also employed (Table I). The essential oil of O. basilicum leaves was used
for the optimization of the conditions in both column sets due to the higher num-
ber of components identified by GCMS than for the oil obtained from O. ba-
silicum var. thyrsiflora. The resulting GCGCFID contour plots obtained by the
two column sets for all samples are shown in Fig. 2. The component separation in
the Column set 1 was based on boiling point and polarity in first and second co-
lumns, respectively, but the separation was the reverse in the Column set 2. As
seen in the contour plots in Fig. 2, at least 101 and 87 individual components of
O. basilicum leaf oils were resolved by the use of Column set 1 and 2 as shown in
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Available online at www.shd.org.rs/JSCS/
2010 Copyright (CC) SCS
1510 PRIPDEEVECH et al.

Fig. 2. The contour plots of the volatile component profiles of: 1) O. basilicum essential oil
with the polarnon-polar column set, 2) O. basilicum essential oil with the non-polar-polar
column set and 3) O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora essential oil with non-polarpolar column set.
The components are grouped into 3 groups: monoterpenes (A), sesquiterpenes (B)
and oxygenated sesquiterpenes (C).
Figs. 2(1) and 2(2), respectively. This indicates that a better resolution was
achieved by the use of Column set 1, in which many overlapping peaks were
resolved in the 2
nd
dimension, allowing additional volatile components to be de-
tected. The differentiations of the chemical composition among two varieties by
the Column set 1 are present as contour plots shown in Fig. 2(2) and 2(3), respec-
tively. At least 92 and 101 volatile components were detected in O. basilicum
var. thyrsiflora and O. basilicum leaf essential oil, respectively. Nevertheless,
using GCGC, more compounds were found and separated compared to those
obtained by GCMS. Grouping of the various components are highlighted in the
circled areas: A includes the monoterpenes, B includes the sesquiterpenes, and C
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Available online at www.shd.org.rs/JSCS/
2010 Copyright (CC) SCS
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND ANTIOXIDANT ACTIVITY OF BASIL 1511
includes the oxygenated sesquiterpenes. Although similar fingerprint patterns were
exhibited in both essential oil profiles, the number of oxygenated monoterpenes
(region A) of O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora essential oil was found to be signifi-
cantly higher compared to that of the O. basilicum essential oil profile. The si-
milar profiles of volatile sesquiterpenes (region B) in both essential oils are shown
in Fig. 2(2) and 2(3), while numbers of oxygenated sesquiterpenes (region C) of
O. basilicum essential oil were higher than that obtained from the essential oil of
O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora.
The antioxidant activities of the essential oils of O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora
and O. basilicum leaves were tested by DPPH radical scavenging. The violet co-
lor of the radical disappeared when mixed with the substances in the essential oil
solution that can donate a hydrogen atom. The antioxidant activities of all the
essential oils and eugenol are presented in Table III, in which lower IC
50
values
indicate higher antioxidant activity. The O. basilicum essential oil (IC
50
=
= 26.530.94 g mL
1
) exhibited a higher scavenging ability for DPPH radicals
than the essential oil of O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora (IC
50
= 98.332.08 g mL
1
).
The other results show that a stronger antioxidant activity was found with standard
linalool (IC
50
= 0.610.05 g mL
1
) and eugenol (IC
50
= 2.830.08 g mL
1
)
than with either of the essential oils. Thus an essential oil containing a higher le-
vel of linalool and eugenol should provide a stronger antioxidant activity as was
found by Jilisni and Simon
35
who reported that a stronger antioxidant activity
was found in the essential oil containing a higher level of linalool. As a result, the
O. basilicum essential oil was evaluated to be the stronger antioxidant than the
essential oil of O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora according to the higher level of lina-
lool and eugenol. The different levels of linalool and eugenol found between O.
basilicum and O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora may be related to ecological con-
ditions and genetic factors.
TABLE III. Antioxidant activities of basil essential oils, standard linalool and eugenol
Material IC
50
/ g mL
-1
(DPPH)
a
Total phenolic content
a

mg mL
-1
O. basilicum leaf oil 26.530.94 0.1020.009
O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora leaf oil 98.332.08 0.0700.004
Linalool 0.610.05
b

Eugenol 2.830.08
a
Values represent averagesstandard deviations for triplicate experiments;
b
not studied
The amounts of total phenolic compounds in both the essential oils were in-
vestigated spectrometrically according to the FolinCiocalteu procedure, calcu-
lated as gallic acid equivalents. The essential oil of O. basilicum leaves contained
higher amounts of total phenolic than that of O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora leaf oil,
as can be seen in Table III. The total phenols of O. basilicum and O. basilicum
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Available online at www.shd.org.rs/JSCS/
2010 Copyright (CC) SCS
1512 PRIPDEEVECH et al.
var. thyrsiflora essential oil are 0.1020.009 and 0.0700.004 mg mL
1
, respec-
tively, at the same concentration of 5 mg mL
1
. In the present study, linalool
(43.78 %) and eugenol (13.66 %), the major components in the essential oil of O.
basilicum, would play an important role in the antioxidant activity. The low
amounts of linalool (0.43 %) and eugenol (0.02 %) in O. basilicum var. thyrsi-
flora oil are reflected in its relatively low antioxidant activity.
CONCLUSIONS
Although the chemical compositions of the essential oils of O. basilicum var.
thyrsiflora and O. basilicum leaves were similar, both oil samples had significant
differences in their major constituents, as determined by GCMS. In addition,
GCGC separation was utilized to monitor the profiles of both samples and good
resolution was exhibited using a combination of non-polar and polar columns.
Thus, this technique could be very useful for quality control during the industrial
production of these essential oils. Finally, the high amount of linalool and euge-
nol in O. basilicum compared to O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora is likely respon-
sible for the higher antioxidant activity of the former oil.
Acknowledgements. Great appreciation is given to the Thai Royal Project for providing
sweet basil (O. basilicum) and Queen Sirikit Botanic Garden for helpful collecting and
identification of O. basilicum and O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora plant. Mae Fah Luang Uni-
versity is acknowledged for instrument support of the GCMS and funding. The Center of
Excellence for Innovation in Chemistry (PERCH-CIC), Commission on Higher Education,
Ministry of Education, is also acknowledged for its support of the GCGC system.




PATCHAREE PRIPDEEVECH
1
, WATCHARAPONG CHUMPOLSRI
2
, PANAWAN SUTTIARPORN
2

SUGUNYA WONGPORNCHAI
2
1
School of Science, Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, 57100
2
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of
Science, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, 50200, Thailand
Ocimum basilicum var. thyrsiflora (1,39 % -
) Ocimum basilicum (0,61 %) GCMS.
, 99,64% ,
O. basilicum var. thyrsiflora (91,11 %) O. basilicum.
(81,82 %), -(E)- (2,93 %) -(E)- (2,45 %) O.
basilicum var. thyrsiflora, O. basilicum (43,78 %),
(13,66 %) 1,8- (10,18 %). ,
GCGC, .
O. basilicum , O. basilicum
var. thyrsiflora .
.
( 3. , 12. 2010)
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Available online at www.shd.org.rs/JSCS/
2010 Copyright (CC) SCS
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND ANTIOXIDANT ACTIVITY OF BASIL 1513
REFERENCES
1. S. E. Sajjadi, Daru 14 (2006) 128
2. E. Bravo, S. Amrani, M. Aziz, H. Harnafi, M. Napolitano, Fitoterapia 79 (2008) 515
3. M. Ziaei, J. Tahsili, M. Sharifi, M. Behmanesh, K. Razavi, J. Biotechnol. 136 (2008) S55
4. P. Fandohan, B. Gnonlonfin, A. Laleye, J. D. Gbenou, R. Darboux, M. Moudachirou,
Food Chem. Toxicol. 46 (2008) 2493
5. R. J. Grayer, R. F. Vieira, A. M. Price, G. C. Kite, J. E. Simon, A. J. Paton, Biochem.
Syst. Ecol. 32 (2004) 901
6. M. zcan, D. Arslan, A. nver, J. Food Eng. 69 (2005) 375
7. H. B. Heath, Source book of flavor, Avi Publications, Westport, CT, 1981
8. A. I. Hussain, F. Anwar, S. T. H. Sherazi, R. Przybylski, Food Chem. 108 (2008) 986
9. O. Politeo, M. Jukic, M. Milos, Food Chem. 101 (2007) 379
10. I. Telci, E. Bayram, G. Ylmaz, B. Avc, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 34 (2006) 489
11. S. Lee, K. Umano, T. Shibamoto, K. Lee, Food Chem. 91 (2005) 131
12. G. Opalchenova, D. Obreshkova, J. Microbiol. Meth. 54 (2003) 105
13. M. J. Pascual-Villalobos, M. C. Ballesta-Acosta, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 31 (2003) 673
14. S. M. Kita, C. Vincent, J. Schmit, J. T. Arnason, A. Blanger, J. Stored Prod. Res. 37
(2001) 339
15. S. C. Umerie, H. U. Anaso, L. J. C. Anyasoro, Bioresour. Technol. 64 (1998) 237
16. E. Werker, E. Putievsky, U. Ravid, N. Dudai, I. Katzir, Ann. Bot. 71 (1993) 43
17. T. Dasgupta, A. R. Rao, P. K. Yadava, Phytomedicine 11 (2004) 139
18. T. Beri, B. Nikoli, J. Stanojevi, B. Vukovi-Gai, J. Kneevi-Vukevi, Food Chem.
Toxicol. 46 (2008) 724
19. J. E. Simon, M. R. Morales, W. B. Phippen, R. F. Vieira, Z. Hao, Perspectives on new
crops and new uses, J. Janick, Ed., ASHS Press, Alexandria, VA, 1999, p. 499
20. G. Vernin, J. Metzger, Perfum. Flavor. 9 (1984) 71
21. J. E. Simon, J. Quinn, R. G. Murray, in Advances in New Crops, J. Janick, J. E. Simon,
Eds., Timber Press, Portland, OR, 1999, p. 484
22. M. C. Diaz-Maroto, M. S. Perz-Coello, M. D. Cabezudo, Chromatographia 55 (2002) 723
23. M. E. Lucchesi, F. Chemat, J. Smadja, J. Chromatogr. A 1043 (2004) 323
24. P. Marriott, R. Shellie, J. Fergeus, R. Ong, P. Morrison, Flavour Fragr. J. 15 (2000) 225
25. J. Wu, X. Lu, W. Tang, H. Kong, S. Zhou, G. Xu, J. Chromatogr. A. 1034 (2004) 199
26. S. Zhu, X. Lu, L. Dong, J. Xing, X. Su, H. Kong, G. Xu, C. Wu, J. Chromatogr. A. 1086
(2005) 107
27. E. Klimnkov, K. Holadov, J. Hajlov, T. ajka, J. Poustka, M. Koudela, Food Chem.
107 (2008) 464
28. J. Chalchat, M. M. zcan, Food Chem. 110 (2008) 501
29. P. Suppakul, J. Miltz, K. Sonneveld, S. W. Bigger, J. Agric. Food Chem. 51 (2003) 3197
30. M.S. Blois, Nature 181 (1958) 1199
31. V. L. Singleton, J. A. Rossi, Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 16 (1965) 144
32. A. Akgl, Spice science and technology, Turkish Association Food Technologists Publ.
No. 15, Ankara, 1993 (in Turkish)
33. B. Gurbuz, A. Ipek, D. Basalma, E. O. Sarihan, C. Sancak, S. zcan, Asian J. Chem. 18
(2006) 285
34. L. M. Khatri, M. K. A. Nasir, R. Saleem, F. Noor, Pak. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 38 (1995) 281
35. H. R. Julisni, J. E. Simon, Trends in new crops and new uses, J. Janick, Ed., ASHS Press,
Alexandria, VA, 2002, p. 575.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Available online at www.shd.org.rs/JSCS/
2010 Copyright (CC) SCS