US EPA

7744447 

Journal Article 

A Comparative Study of Juniperus communis and Juniperus virginiana Extracts The Influence of method, solvent, and provenience 

Branic, AG; Plesa, CM; Hadaruga, NG; Ardelean, A; Hadaruga, DI; Ordodi, VL; Gruia, AT; Lupea, AX 

2011 

1 

Revista de Chimie
ISSN: 0034-7752
EISSN: 2668-8212 

Syscom 18 SRL 

62 

5 

508-513 

English 

WOS:000291275700006 

The paper presents a comparative study of the Juniperus communis andJuniperus virginiana hydrophobic extracts from the method, solvent, and source influence point of view. Hydrophobic solvents (such as hexane and ethyl acetate) were used for obtaining of J. communis and J. virginiana extracts. Two extraction methods (solvent reflux and sonication) were used for obtaining hydrophobic extracts by using different plant parts (branches, needles, and berries) collected from autochthonous area and other zones from Austria and Syria. Fifteen main compounds were identified and quantified in all hydrophobic extracts by using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis (such as α- and β-pinene, P-phellandrene, caryophyllene, and β-cubebene). The highest amount of β-pinene is identified in the Syrian J. communis branches hexane extract, while β-phellandrene is identified in higher content in the J. virginiana ethyl acetate extract from "Macea" Botanical Garden (Arad, Romania). Principal component analysis of the gas chromatographic data (relative concentration of the main volatile compounds) revealed that the Juniperus species can be classified according to the mono- and sesquiterpene concentrations (limonene, a-pinene, humulene, caryophyllene, cubebene); the provenience of these samples can also be classified by this procedure, but the biologically active compounds concentrations had no significance on the classification according to the extraction method and solvent type. 

Juniperus communis; Juniperus virginiana; sonication extraction; refluxing extraction; principal component analysis