Next Article in Journal
Elucidation of Differential Accumulation of 1-Phenylethanol in Flowers and Leaves of Tea (Camellia sinensis) Plants
Previous Article in Journal
DNA Three Way Junction Core Decorated with Amino Acids-Like Residues-Synthesis and Characterization
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Plant Cell Cancer: May Natural Phenolic Compounds Prevent Onset and Development of Plant Cell Malignancy? A Literature Review

by
Hassan Rasouli
1,†,
Mohammad Hosein Farzaei
1,2,†,
Kamran Mansouri
1,
Sara Mohammadzadeh
1 and
Reza Khodarahmi
1,3,*
1
Medical Biology Research Center, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah 6714967346, Iran
2
Pharmaceutical Sciences Research Center, Faculty of Pharmacy, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah 6714967346, Iran
3
Nano Drug Delivery Research Center, Faculty of Pharmacy, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah 6714967346, Iran
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Molecules 2016, 21(9), 1104; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules21091104
Submission received: 11 July 2016 / Revised: 3 August 2016 / Accepted: 8 August 2016 / Published: 23 August 2016
(This article belongs to the Section Natural Products Chemistry)

Abstract

:
Phenolic compounds (PCs) are known as a chemically diverse category of secondary and reactive metabolites which are produced in plants via the shikimate-phenylpropanoid pathways. These compounds—ubiquitous in plants—are an essential part of the human diet, and are of considerable interest due to their antioxidant properties. Phenolic compounds are essential for plant functions, because they are involved in oxidative stress reactions, defensive systems, growth, and development. A large body of cellular and animal evidence carried out in recent decades has confirmed the anticancer role of PCs. Phytohormones—especially auxins and cytokinins—are key contributors to uncontrolled growth and tumor formation. Phenolic compounds can prevent plant growth by the endogenous regulation of auxin transport and enzymatic performance, resulting in the prevention of tumorigenesis. To conclude, polyphenols can reduce plant over-growth rate and the development of tumors in plant cells by regulating phytohormones. Future mechanistic studies are necessary to reveal intracellular transcription and transduction agents associated with the preventive role of phenolics versus plant pathological malignancy cascades.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Phenolic compounds (PCs) are secondary metabolites ubiquitously present in the plant kingdom [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13]. PCs have characteristic aromatic rings with some hydroxyl groups affixed [8,11,14,15,16]. Recently, researchers have suggested that secondary metabolites are not only extended commodities of primary metabolism, but that they also contribute to plants’ survival in the environment [8,11,14,15,16]. Mounting evidence suggests that PCs are responsible for the beneficial effects of natural agents, and their biological activity has been investigated in various in vitro and in vivo models [6,8,16,17]. It has been found that PCs possess a wide range of biological activities, including antioxidant properties [11,12,14], fighting against free radicals [18,19], chelating metal ions [9,18], antimicrobial activity [7,9,20], anticancer characteristics [19,21], anti-inflammatory activity [6,8,10,16,19], etc.—indicating the crucial role of PCs for the maintenance of human health [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21]. In recent years, the food industry has applied them for the improvement of food quality [9]. Several PCs, such as hydroxybenzoic acids, catechins, and curcuminoids have major preventive impacts on the growth of cancer cells [22]. Regarding the ubiquitous distribution of PCs in fruits, vegetables, and cereal grains, their presence in a balanced, healthy diet can inhibit the progression of some types of cancers [6,11,17]. Some reports indicate that oxidative stress is a critical factor for cell damage [23]. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reactive nitrogen species (RNS) may be generated in oxidative stress reactions [24,25]. Subsequent to the interaction of plant cells with oxidation factors, antioxidant substances (i.e., PCs) are produced, which react with ROS and free radicals [11]. PCs can protect the cells against any chemical injuries, such as those caused by free radicals [26]. There are some reports showing an increase in ROS in cancer cells compared to healthy cells [3,14,21,22]. A decrease in the concentration of antioxidants has a pivotal role in the generation of ROS and other oxidative products, resulting in the destruction of whole cell systems [3,7]. This condition occurs in different pathological conditions, such as in malignancies [21]. The aim of the current study is to highlight the role of PCs in plant defensive mechanisms against pathological conditions such as malignancies.

2. Structure and Synthesis

2.1. Classification of PCs

PCs encompass a wide range of chemical structures, with a variety extending to the presence of polymerization and substitutions of the PC basic skeleton, along with the degree of oxidation [11,12,14,15,16,19,20,21,25,26]. In recent years, phytochemicals have been categorized as fundamental or secondary factors, depending on their positions in plant metabolism [27]. Essential factors include the ordinary sugars, amino acids, proteins, purines, and pyrimidines of nucleic acids, chlorophylls, etc. [28]. Secondary elements are non-essential plant chemical substances; for example, plant steroids, terpenes, alkaloids, flavonoids, lignans, saponins, curcuminoids, phenolics, and glucosides [7,9,11,12,20,25,28]. Previous studies have indicated that PCs include abundant and structurally broad-spectrum phytochemicals [27]. PCs can be divided in to four main groups: (1) Phenolic acids, (2) Flavonoids, (3) Tannins, and (4) Stilbenes (Table 1) [26].

2.2. Production of PCs

The biosynthetic pathway of PCs is well known [9]. Although a wide variety of phenolic compounds are present in plants, most of them are generated by aromatic amino acids, including phenylalanine, tyrosine, and tryptophan [8,12,23,29]. Aromatic amino acids are the primary components in the synthesis of polyphenols [7]. Phenylpropanoids and shikimic acid routes are the main pathways in the generation of these ubiquitous compounds [13,30]. Flavonoids are also able to be synthesized from the malonic acid route, but its role in the biosynthesis of PCs is rather minimal [29]. The enzyme phenylalanine ammonia-lyase (PAL) (EC 4.3.1.5) has a major role in the biosynthesis of these ubiquitous compounds [7,13,31]. Inhibition of the PAL enzyme reduces the formation of these compounds [31]. Including the role of PAL in the production of phenolic compounds, it seems that the factors associated with the regulation and control of the quality and quantity of phenols in plant tissues still remain controversial. Much of this controversy arises from the many factors involved in the interaction between genotype and environment. This has led to a wide variation in plant phenol production among and within species over time [13].

2.3. Storage Sites of PCs

The synthesis of PCs happens in the chloroplast, the endoplasmic reticulum membrane, and the cytoplasm [32]. PCs are normally placed in the vacuoles of the epidermal cells, guard cells, and sub-epidermal cells of leaves, the aerial regions of monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous plants [30], cortex parenchyma cells, vascular parenchyma cells, and cell walls [33]. The accumulation of PCs in a specific tissue reflects its biological ability or indicates its participation in plant-environment interactions [33,34]. These compounds are also stored in the gymnosperm of the rhizome [34]. The concentration of a specific phenolic compound within a plant tissue is dependent on the season, and may also vary at different stages of growth and development [35]. Several internal and external factors—including trauma, wounding, drought, and pathogen attack—affect the synthesis and accumulation of PCs [30,35,36].

3. Role of PCs in Plant Defense Mechanisms

3.1. Plant-Environment Interactions and Functions of PCs

Ubiquitous PCs have critical functions in plant-environment interactions [37]. Plants are constantly exposed to attacks by pathogens, insects, and herbivores [38]. When a pathogen attacks a plant, in certain conditions a component of the pathogen may infect the plant [37,38,39]. To cope with the pathogen, the infected plant applies a rapid and strong defensive response, called the hypersensitive response (HR) [39].
HR is a rapid defensive mechanism against any stressful state in plants, including biotic and abiotic stimuli [40]. In this mechanism, highly localized cell death may occur [38,40]. Similar to animals, programmed cell death is a necessary mechanism for growth, development, and defense against diseases in plants [40,41,42]. When a plant is exposed to UV radiation [43], chemical toxins [44] and hypoxia [45] are arisen in the damaged cells [44,46], the involved tissue responds to these environmental stresses, actively. In the HR, plant cells die, and their cell walls deposit PCs to strengthen themselves [37]. When HR is activated inside the plant, structural alterations occur in plant cells that are submitted to stress (for example, a biotic stress) [40,47]. These alterations will immobilize the cytoplasm, separate protoplasts, and break down DNA [46,47]. In the end, this process is capable of destroying infected tissues, and necrosis may be observed on the surface of plants, thus preventing plants from becoming cancerous [46].
If the plant cannot limit the spread of pathogens, it is susceptible; if the opposite is true, it will be resistant [48]. Plant responses to pathogens or other stressful conditions create a defense reaction [37,48]. During HR in plants, PCs are placed in the infected tissues, and their chemical structure is altered; for example, the accumulation of PCs in injured tomato tissues [49] and the deposition of lignin polymers [50,51]. For the restriction of pathogens in local sites, cells adjacent to the injured tissues are triggered and increase the synthesis of PCs [52]. Some plants respond to pathogen attacks by accumulating phytoalexins, such as hydroxycoumarins and hydroxycinnamate conjugates [35,53]. On the other hand, when Botrytis cinerea (a fungal pathogen) attacks grapevine berries, an accumulation of stilbene (resveratrol) is observed in the infected region [54].
Abiotic tensions can also stimulate the production of PCs in plants [55]. Several investigations have shown that temperature may be positively or negatively related to the accumulation of PCs in vascular plants [55]. Xu and colleagues documented that temperature and light elevate PCs in winter berries when compared to summer berries [56]. Several studies observed that when HR occurs in plants, the injured cells became brown, suggesting the biosynthesis of PCs in the affected region [37,56]. PCs influence membrane perturbation, which is followed by a cascade of physiological effects that include improvement of plant-water relationships, stomatal function, and the rate of photosynthesis and respiration [13]. During HR in maize, it has been shown that the lls1 gene encodes an aromatic ring-hydroxylating enzyme that is an intermediate factor in cell death in plants [48]. In general, most known effects of polyphenols on pathogens are negative [12]. Some reports show that when a plant is infected by fungal pathogens and HR is activated, the total amount of PCs is increased (Table 2). The synthesis, release, and accumulation of phenolics are central to many defense strategies employed by plants against microbial invaders [35]. Phenolics are synthesized when plant pattern recognition receptors recognize potential pathogens via the conserved pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs), leading to PAMP-triggered immunity [35,53]. As a result, the progress of the infection is restricted long before the pathogen gains complete hold of the plant [53,57].
Another example of PCs is lignin, which is incorporated in plants’ response mechanisms [71]. Lignin is a phenolic polymer which plays a critical role in solute conductance, mechanical support, and disease resistance [59,72]. In response to abiotic stress, injuries, or pathogenic infection, the deposition of lignins, lignin polymers, and other phenolic substances associated with the cell wall are seen [72].
Lignin not only acts as a physical barrier against pathogenic invasion [72], but it also decreases the diffusion of enzymes and toxins released by the pathogen to facilitate host tissue colonization [73]. Lignin also restricts the access of pathogens to plant water and nutrients essential to their proliferation [72,73]. There are other mechanisms showing the activities of PCs in the prevention of tissue injuries—e.g., dityrosine-mediated cell wall cross-linking [59].
When these responses happen in a rapid and coordinated way, they result in resistance against pathogens [74]. Resistance or susceptibility in the plant’s defense responses differ qualitatively and quantitatively, depending on leaf age, type of inoculation (single or multiple), and on the interactions between the plant and the pathogen [48].

3.2. Antioxidant Properties of PCs in Plants

Antioxidants are substances that can prevent the oxidation of oxidizable substances by quenching free radicals and reducing oxidative stress [75]. Reactive oxygen species are produced by living organisms as a result of normal cellular metabolism and environmental factors, such as oxidative stress [76]. ROS are highly reactive molecules and can damage cell structures such as carbohydrates, nucleic acids, lipids, and proteins and alter their function [77]. Oxidative stress is considered to be a basic factor in the increase of persistent degenerative ailments, such as coronary heart disorders, cancer, and aging [11,22]. PCs act as free radical acceptors and chain breakers [14,78]. They interfere with the oxidation of lipids and other molecules via the speedy donation of a hydrogen atom to radicals (R) [78,79]:
R + POH → RH + PO•
The phenoxyl radical (PO•) is reasonably stable, due to resonance; for the same reason, a new chain reaction is not easily started [79,80]. Moreover, the PO• act as propagation terminators by reacting with different free radicals [78,79]:
PO• + R• → POR
In plants, ROS substances are very dangerous for cells, and scavenge host enzyme systems and non-enzymatic antioxidants [80,81]. In plants, non-enzymatic detoxification procedures include morphological features such as waxy surfaces and leaf or chloroplast movement, non-photochemical quenching processes by various compounds (e.g., the violaxanthin-zeaxanthin cycle), and photorespiration [81,82]. Non-enzymatic antioxidants include flavonones, anthocyanins, α-tocopherol, ascorbate glutathione, carotenoids, phenolics, and polyols [80]. Botanical sources of these antioxidants not only play important roles in plant stress adaptation, but also retard aging and diseases related to oxidative damage in animals [83].

3.3. Role of PCs in HR

Some studies have indicated that during HR activity, some enzymes—such as PAL, polyphenol oxidase (PPO), and peroxidase (POX)—are elevated [84,85]. As described above, PAL is a main enzyme involved in the production of PCs [7]. In plant–pathogen interactions, phenol converts to lignins via the POX enzyme [86]. Thus, the accumulation of PCs and their oxidation through enhanced PPO and POX activity could be related to plant protection [87].
It is well documented that H2O2 is a signal molecule during the HR [88]. The HR is accompanied by a set of defense reactions, including the activation of defense genes [88]—especially genes encoding pathogenesis-related proteins [88]. The death of infected and stressed cells in order to prevent the systemic spread of a pathogen appears to be a conserved strategy in both plants and animals, and recent studies indicate that HR cell death could be considered programmed cell death (PCD), in which a limited number of cells die at the site of infection [39].
In some systems, H2O2 has been characterized as a diffusible PCD-mediating signal during HR [89], in which it is associated with a systemic signaling network, giving rise to HR in leaves of plants injured by virulent bacteria [90]. However, recent investigations of transgenic catalase- and peroxidase-deficient tobacco (i.e., in which endogenous H2O2 will not be readily catabolized) indicated that such plants have a hypersensitivity responsive to pathogenic injuries [89,90], therefore providing a direct role for H2O2 in HR cell death [89,90]. It has been shown that H2O2 induces PCD in soybean and Arabidopsis thaliana cell cultures [91]; however, recent evidence also suggests that cell death and the induction of defense genes are activated by the same signal but are regulated by separate mechanisms [91]. It is clear that both H2O2 and nitric oxide (NO) may mediate the transcription of specific genes; however, the mechanism by which this process occurs is not yet clarified [92]. It may be mediated by the activation of transcription factors through a phosphorylation cascade similar to the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) cascade [93].

3.4. Plant-Plant Interactions and the Accumulation of PCs

Allelopathy is defined as any direct or indirect effect of one plant on another that is mediated by the production of chemical compounds released into the environment [94]. Commonly, this term is most used to describe the chemical interaction between two plants [95,96]. In plants, allelochemicals can cooperate in leaves, bark, roots, root exudates, flowers, and fruits [96,97,98]. The delivery of allelochemicals into the rhizosphere is often thought to happen via leaching from leaves and other aerial plant regions, by volatile emissions, through root exudation, and by the breakdown of bark and leaf litter [96,98]. Phenolics have been classified by some as allelochemicals since the beginning of allelopathy studies [99,100]. In fact, many references about the physiological effects of phenolics exist, both alone and in combination with others. Phenolics have been shown to affect photosynthesis, respiration, water relationships, germination, growth, development, and many other physiological parameters [100]. Depending on the concentration, effects can be positive or negative for the plant receiving the phenolics, although some authors highlight the phytotoxicity of these molecules [96,99]. A list of the most relevant allelochemical compounds is displayed in Table 3.
Allelochemical compounds are found in all plant parts. Figure 1 shows the most relevant release procedures in plants.
Phenolic compounds are a very significant group of allelochemicals, and most of them have inhibitory effects on the seed germination and seedling growth parameters of plants [104]. Low-molecular-weight phenolic compounds—released by plants and soil microbes—also represent an important group of compounds having major ecological functions [105,106]. However, many PCs containing monomers and polymers are allelopathically important, and may pose a serious threat to forest renewal [106]. However, little information is available as to what chemical properties of soils are affected by phenolic compounds, and how they influence soil processes [105].

4. PCs and Plant Tumors

4.1. Anti-Tumor Effect of PCs

Nowadays, the development of phytotherapies aiming at the inhibition of angiogenesis, in combination with classical anti-cancer therapies, is among the most intensively studied approaches for the treatment of cancer [107]. In vivo and in vitro studies have documented that PCs (especially flavonoid families) have anticancer activities [107]. Flavonoids quench ROS, induce apoptosis or caspase activities, prevent the proliferation of cancer cells and/or cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) activities, and also block different cell cycles from cell lines [22]. Quercetin has been shown to reduce cell proliferation, cause cell cycle arrest in the G0/G1 phase, the G2/M-phase, and the S-phase, and induce caspase-3 activity and apoptosis in a concentration range of 10–100 μmol/L in in vitro experiments with various cell lines [108]. Resveratrol decreased proliferation and induced apoptosis and cell cycle arrest in the S-phase or G2/M phase [108].
Since these compounds are present in vegetables and some other foods [20], they may thus be used in treatment or as complementary agents in cancer treatment [22]. Today, interestingly, phytotherapy programs are being used alongside classical cancer treatments for cancer therapy [16]. Table 4 presents a comprehensive list of PCs and their mechanisms in the prevention of cancer cell line activity.

4.2. Tumor in Plant Cells

Cancer is identified as unconquerable cell growth and attainment of metastatic potentiality [3,21,22,107,112,115,118,119,121,124]. In animals, tumorigenesis refers to a process wherein a normal cell enters into uncontrolled division [22,107]. Tumorigenesis is a multi-step process characterized by the deregulation of various vital cellular functions, including proliferation, cell motility, adhesion, immortality, as well as proteolytic activity [22,107,112,115,117].
Neoplasms or tumors can develop in plant organs, wherein the plant cells divide uncontrollably to form hard outgrowths [125]. By far the most common example of this is crown gall disease, which is caused by Agrobacterium tumefaciens [126]. Agrobacterium is able to inject a piece of its genetic material into a plant’s genome, and this piece of bacterial genetic material carries genes that code for growth factors [126] which can cause the out-of-control growth of plant cells [125,126]. However, the formation of tumors in plants may be caused by several factors, including environmental (such as bacteria, viruses, insects, and worms) and genetic reasons [127]. Several studies have reported that genetic tumors occurred in Melitotus alba Desr, Raphanun sativus, Pisum sativum L., and other species [127]. The habituation of a plant’s callus to hormones in in vitro cultures may be attributed to genetic tumors [127]. This occurrence was first shown by Gautheret in 1942 for carrot cultivars growing in vitro in the absence of exogenous auxin [127]. Later, auxin habituation was described for Nicotiana tabacum, Vitis vinifera, Helianthus annus, Lolium longiflorum, Glycine max, and Zea mays [127]. In addition to auxin habituation, cytokinin habituation was shown in several studies [128]. Today, mounting evidence suggests that plant hormones have an essential role in uncontrolled growth and tumor formation [128]. Among phytohormones, auxins are a specific contributor to tumor formation [127]. An increase in auxin levels in a N. glauca × N. langsdorfii hybrid, as compared to wild-type species, caused the formation of a small tumorous structure [127]. Further, there was a positive correlation between auxin concentration and the tumor formation rate and size [127]. Matveeva and co-workers demonstrated that sensitivity to auxin in plant cells can lead to tumor initiation [127]. Cytokinins also play a crucial role in tumor induction [128]. For example, in maize, cytokinins accumulate in leaves infected by the basidiomycete fungus Ustilago maydis, leading to common corn smut-characterized by the production of tumors in susceptible aboveground plant tissues [128]. In general, it is thought that auxins and other hormones may have specific activity in different tissues at different time points during the development of tumors [127].

4.3. Roles of PCs during Plant Growth and Plant Tissue Culture

PCs are internal physiological modulators or chemical messengers within the intact plant [129]. Natural growth inhibitors are regulating substances which retard processes such as root and stem elongation, seed germination, and bud opening [130]. Many PCs inhibit the growth of plants or plant tissues which produce them [130,131]. Moreover, as mentioned in Section 3.4, some phenolics inhibit the growth of other plants or plant seeds when released into the environment [30,131]. Among the physiological responses of plants to phenolic compounds, the effect on energy metabolism—including respiration and oxidative phosphorylation—has been studied in only a few instances [130,131]. Table 5 presents the importance of the most relevant PCs to plant growth.
Plant tissue culture is known as the science or art of growing plant cells, tissues, or organs on artificial media by separating them from the mother plant [132]. Plant tissue culture techniques can complete new plants from different explants by direct or indirect morphogenesis and by somatic embryogenesis [133,134]. It is a replacement plant propagation technique, and is being applied widely for the commercial propagation of a number of plant species, such as some medicinal plants [135]. The oxidation of exuded PCs causes darkening or browning of media, which prevents the intake of nutrients and ultimately causes the death of explants [134]. Their exudation is minimized through the application of different absorbents and antioxidants (Figure 2).
Table 6 summarizes the use of phenolic compounds in plant tissue culture. Mounting evidence suggests that phenolic compounds are unstable in media and that they may destroy explants [134]. Thus, for the prevention of killing effects (i.e., browning), it is necessary that antioxidant compounds (activated charcoal [134], PVP [132], ascorbic acid [135], citric acid [134], l-cysteine [134], or mercaptoethanol [134]) be added to media.

4.4. PCs as Inhibitor of Seed Germination

Phenolic compounds have a crucial role in plant seed germination [101,146]. Their presence and accumulation in soil can reach a threshold level, preventing pre-emergence seed germination or post-germination, growth, and other plant roles [139]. Different phenolic contents have been shown to prevent seed germination and seedling growth in plants (Table 5).
It has been documented that the prevention of seed germination in fruit was not generally related to a single component, but was due to the synergistic function of several components [147,148]. Some phenolic components existed in both seed coats and embryos that influence seed germination and dormancy [147]. Hydroxycinnamic acids, coumarins, tannins, and ferulic acid have been some of the usual preventers of seed germination [149]. It has been shown that phenolics can be active as germination preventers by preventing the transport of amino acids and the synthesis of proteins in seeds [148,149].
Another possible role of phenolic acids in seed germination can be their function in the production and decomposition of indoleacetic acid (IAA) [148]. In peach seeds, products of amygdalin decomposition (mandelonitrile, benzaldehyde, and cyanide) do not seem directly associated with the breaking of peach seed dormancy [148]. Bewley and Black [149] showed that the testa of the seed protects the embryo, and contains some phenolics. There are some external applications of PCs for seed germination as well [149]. In addition, some flavonoids are also able to inhibit coleoptile section elongation, stems and bud opening, and seed germination [130].

4.5. Do PCs Suppress Tumors in Plants?

The growth and development of plants is conducted by chemical substances (i.e., hormones) [146]. Plant growth regulators (or hormones) are small organic molecules that act inside plant cells and alter the growth and development of plants [150]. There are five groups of hormones which are involved in the growth and development of plants by different mechanisms; these include auxins, cytokinins, gibberellins, abscisic acid, and ethylene [151]. Growth promoters are involved in cell division, cell enlargement, pattern formation, tropic growth, flowering, fruiting, and seed formation [150]. Growth is defined as an irreversible increase in cell size along with protoplasm increase, which includes cell division and elongation [152]. Development is known as the form-changing of cells derived from zygotes or individual cells to cells with different biochemical and biophysical properties, having the same genetic contents [151]. Morphogenesis is the process wherein the origin of morphological characteristics and the main form of the cell takes shape [152].
Cytokinins and auxins seem to have a greater impact on the growth and development of plants [134,151]. Auxin is one of the most known hormonal plant growth regulators (identified by Charles Darwin’s experiments in 1880 and later coming to be known as a plant growth regulator [134]), and is characterized by its ability to induce cell elongation in stems and leaves and to increase photosynthetic activities in plants [150,153]. Auxin acts in the morphogenesis of cells by loosening the primary cell wall [153]. It increases the flexibility of the coleoptile cell wall, as well as the young and developing parts of the stem [151]. Cytokinins have been shown to participate in the regulation of numerous aspects of plant development—including the initiation of buds, flowering, abscission, and yield—by enhancing cell expansion [154].
The cell wall is the most important restricting factor for plant growth; thus, the action of auxin on the cell wall can result in the increase of cell size and growth [155]. The cell pumps protons into the cell wall environment in response to auxin, resulting in a decrease of pH and activation of cell wall-loosening enzymes (i.e., endoglucanases, pectinases, and xyloglucan endotransglycosylase) which subsequently lead to cell development (Figure 3) [156].
Petrasek and Friml determined that auxin has an important role in embryogenesis, root and shoot development, tissue development, and tropisms (phototropism, gravitropism) [156]. Under controlled conditions (i.e., in vitro plant tissue culture), it is possible to have the creation of tumor-like unorganized cell masses (or callus) by the regulation of auxin and cytokinin levels and callus induction [157] (Figure 4). Moreno et al. accomplished this using MS medium supplemented with NAA (0.5 mg/L) + 2,4-D (0.5 mg/L) + BA (2.0 mg/L) and culture at 25 °C for at least 2 weeks [158]. Additionally, through optimum growth media and the removal of morphogenesis ability, callus can be sustained for longer times [159].
Auxin transportation by PIN families (PIN1-7), ABCBs1, 4, 19, and auxin transporter protein 1 (AUX1)/auxin transporter-like protein (LAX) provides growth and development by two routes: the long route (via mature phloem) and the short route (via vascular cambium) [160]. It is well-known that plant development is performed by the distribution of auxin in different tissues [160]. Auxin efflux transporters (e.g., ABCB1, ABCB19, and ABCB4) are directly inhibited by aglycone flavonols [161]. PCs inhibit auxin transference through protein phosphorylation, protein-protein interaction, and the prevention of ATPase activity or allosteric binding to them [162]. It is also suggested that these compounds are capable of inhibiting PIN transporters (Figure 5) [156,161]. Santelia and colleagues showed that PCs, in addition to preventing efflux transport of auxin, are also capable of inhibiting the polar transport of auxin [161].
PCs are endogenous plant compounds that are able to negatively regulate auxin transport and set tropic responses [163,164,165,166]. Environmental regulators (i.e., light, UV irradiation [167], pathogenic factors [168], soil type, and irrigation type [169]) affect PC biosynthesis [164,165,169,170]. A change in endogenous PCs is paralleled with a change in the transport of auxin hormone. Regarding the positive correlation between sites of PC accumulation (i.e., leaves and fresh parts of the plant) and auxin hormone (fresh tissues and meristematic regions), it is reasonable to conclude that PCs act as endogenous regulators of auxin hormone (Figure 6) [163,164,165].
Jacobs and Rubery showed that some PCs (e.g., quercetin, apigenin, and kaempferol) are able to inhibit auxin transport in vitro [171]. Brown et al. confirmed previous findings [171], and also showed that under in vivo conditions in Arabidopsis, endogenous phenolics regulate auxin transporting in various tissues [164].
Red light stimulates kaempferol synthesis (an enzyme co-factor of IAA oxidase), and also promotes quercetin synthesis (the inhibitor of IAA enzyme in leaves) [151,152]. However, it is worth note that when auxin transport sites are inhibited by PCs, additional IAA does not affect plant growth. Considering PCs in young and fresh parts of the plant and the presence of auxin in the same areas, it seems that these compounds control minimum auxin concentration and prevent over-growth of cells [151,152,172,173].
Environmental stress increases the activity of the peroxidase III enzyme, which may induce a morphogenic response to stress and also regulates auxin concentration in special tissues via the antioxidant activity of some PCs (i.e., quercetin) [173,174].
As demonstrated in Figure 5, PIN5 is the only protein present in the endoplasmic reticulum (flavonoids synthesis site), and its presence confirms the role of PCs as internal regulators of cell growth [156]. In general, these compounds depress the growth of plant sections and act as antagonists to plant hormones such as auxin, gibberellin, and cytokinin [130]. These effects on plant growth are well described in many studies [130,163,166].

5. Concluding Remarks

PCs are a major biologically and chemically diverse category of secondary metabolites with a remarkable physiological role in plant metabolism and resistance. Additionally, regarding their numerous biological effects in the prevention and treatment of illnesses, a large body of evidence supports the beneficial health properties of dietary polyphenols in humans. In addition to their antioxidant action, these compounds are capable of inhibiting plant growth by regulating the transport of phytohormones in plant tissues. A large body of cellular and animal evidence carried out in recent decades has confirmed the anticancer role of PCs. The accumulation and distribution of PCs can affect plant growth. Under normal conditions, it seems that PCs may prevent the over-growth of plants by the endogenous regulation of auxin transport, resulting in the prevention of cell wall development, and subsequently the prevention of tumorigenesis.
Regarding the key role of cell division in cell growth, the role of auxin and cytokinins in cell division, and the over-sensitivity of plant cells to auxin hormone, it can be concluded that PCs regulate the auxin concentration gradient (by inhibiting polar transport) and local auxin concentration (through inhibition of IAA oxidase in tissues), resulting in growth delay. Thus, PCs can reduce growth rate and the development of tumors in plant cells by regulating phytohormones. It is suggested that future study focus on perfect intracellular mechanisms of PCs in the prevention of plant tumorigenesis.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Eng. Bahman Fazeli-Nasab from Center of Agricultural Biotechnology and Center of Agricultural University of Zabol, Iran, for his technical assistances. We also thank the Research Council of Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences (KUMS) for financial support of this investigation (Grant No. 95300). Effective, instructive and invaluable comments, provided by the respectful academic editor are gratefully acknowledged.

Author Contributions

H.R. and R.K. conceived the main idea of this manuscript; H.R. wrote the paper. M.H.F. and K.M. and S.M. edited the manuscript. Final revision was done by R.K.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors certify that no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article exists.

Abbreviations

PCsPhenolic compounds
EGFREpidermal Growth Factor Receptor
EGFEpidermal Growth Factor
Her2/neuHuman Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2
HRHypersensitive response
PCDProgramed cell death
PALPhenylalanine ammonia-lyase
PPOPolyphenol oxidase
POHPolyphenolic antioxidants
POXPeroxidase
ROSReactive Oxygen Species
RNSReactive Nitrogen Species
H2O2Hydrogen Peroxide
OHHydroxyl Radicals
SASalicylic acid
NPANephthylphtalamic acid
IAAIndoleacetic acid
ABAAbscisic acid
PVPPolyvinylpyrrolidone
NAANaphthaleneacetic acid
MAPKmitogen-activated protein kinase
CDKsCyclin-dependent kinases
5HTMF5-hydroxy-6,7,8,3′,4′-pentamethoxyflavone
PO•Phenoxyl radical
ABCBsATP-binding cassette subfamily B

References

  1. Balasundram, N.; Sundram, K.; Samman, S. Phenolic compounds in plants and agri-industrial by-products: Antioxidant activity, occurrence, and potential uses. Food Chem. 2006, 99, 191–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Boudet, A. Evolution and current status of research in phenolic compounds. Phytochemistry 2007, 68, 2722–2735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Carocho, M.; Ferreira, I.C.F.R. The role of phenolic compounds in the fight against cancer—A review. Anticancer Agents Med. Chem. 2013, 13, 1236–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. D’Archivio, M.; Filesi, C.; di Benedetto, R.; Gargiulo, R.; Giovannini, C.; Masella, R. Polyphenols, dietary sources and bioavailability. Ann. Ist. Super. Sanita 2007, 43, 348–361. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  5. Fraga, C.G. (Ed.) Plant Phenolics and Human Health: Biochemistry, Nutrition and Pharmacology, 1st ed.; John Whiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009.
  6. Bahramsoltani, R.; Farzaei, M.H.; Rahimi, R. Medicinal plants and their natural components as future drugs for the treatment of burn wounds: An integrative review. Arch. Dermatol. Res. 2014, 306, 601–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Ghasemzadeh, A.; Ghasemzadeh, N. Flavonoids and phenolic acids: Role and biochemical activity in plants and human. J. Med. Plants Res. 2011, 5, 6697–6703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Farzaei, M.H.; Rahimi, R.; Abdollahi, M. The role of dietary polyphenols in the management of inflammatory bowel disease. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 2015, 16, 196–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Ozcan, T.; Akpinar-Bayizit, A.; Ylimaz-Ersan, L.; Delikanli, B. Phenolics in human health. Int. J. Chem. Eng. Appl. 2014, 5, 393–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Siah, M.; Farzaei, M.H.; Ashrafi-Kooshk, M.R.; Adibi, H.; Arab, S.S.; Rashidi, M.R.; Khodarahmi, R. Inhibition of guinea pig aldehyde oxidase activity by different flavonoid compounds: An in vitro study. Bioorg. Chem. 2016, 64, 74–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Umeno, A.; Masanori, H.; Murotomi, K.; Nakajima, Y.; Yoshida, Y. Antioxidative and antidiabetic effects of natural polyphenols and isoflavones. Molecules 2016, 21, 708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Ferrazzano, G.F.; Amato, I.; Ingenito, A.; Zarrelli, A.; Pinto, G.; Pollio, A. Plant polyphenols and their anti-cariogenic properties: A review. Molecules 2011, 16, 1486–1507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Ertani, A.; Pizzeghello, D.; Francioso, O.; Tinti, A.; Nardi, S. Biological activity of vegetal extracts containing phenols on plant metabolism. Molecules 2016, 21, 205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Libro, R.; Giacoppo, S.; Soundara Rajan, T.; Bramanti, P.; Mazzon, E. Natural phytochemicals in the treatment and prevention of dementia: An overview. Molecules 2016, 21, 518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Serna, D.M.O.; Martínez, J.H.I. Phenolics and polyphenolics from melastomataceae species. Molecules 2015, 20, 17818–17847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Farzaei, M.H.; Bahramsoltani, R.; Rahimi, R. Phytochemicals as adjunctive with conventional anticancer therapies. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2016, 22, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Sodagari, H.R.; Farzaei, M.H.; Bahramsoltani, R.; Abdolghaffari, A.H.; Mahmoudi, M.; Rezaei, N. Dietary anthocyanins as a complementary medicinal approach for management of inflammatory bowel disease. Expert Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2015, 9, 807–820. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  18. Cartea, M.E.; Francisco, M.; Soengas, P.; Velasco, P. Phenolic compounds in brassica vegetables. Molecules 2011, 16, 251–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Kurek-Górecka, A.; Rzepecka-Stojko, A.; Górecki, M.; Stojko, J.; Sosada, M.; Świerczek-Zięba, G. Structure and antioxidant activity of polyphenols derived from propolis. Molecules 2014, 19, 78–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Ozkan, G.; Kamiloglu, S.; Ozdal, T.; Boyacioglu, D.; Capanoglu, E. Potential use of turkish medicinal plants in the treatment of various diseases. Molecules 2016, 21, 257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Chinembiri, T.N.; du Plessis, L.H.; Gerber, M.; Hamman, J.H.; du Plessis, J. Review of natural compounds for potential skin cancer treatment. Molecules 2014, 19, 11679–11721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Wahle, W.J.K.; Rotondo, D.; Brown, I.; Heys, D.S. Plant phenolics in the prevention and treatment of cancer. In Bio-Farms for Nutraceuticals; Springer US: New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 36–51. [Google Scholar]
  23. Valentão, P.; Fernandes, E.; Carvalho, F.; Andrade, P.B.; Seabra, R.M.; Bastos, M.L. Antioxidative properties of cardoon (Cynara cardunculus L.) infusion against superoxide radical, hydroxyl radical and hypochlorous acid. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 4989–4993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Hamed, A.I.; Said, R.B.; Kontek, B.; Al-Ayed, A.S.; Kowalczyk, M.; Moldoch, J.; Stochmal, A.; Olas, B. LC-ESI-MS/MS profile of phenolic and glucosinolate compounds in samh flour (Mesembryanthemum forsskalei Hochst. ex Boiss) and the inhibition of oxidative stress by these compounds in human plasma. Food Res. Int. 2016, 85, 282–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Thipyapong, P.; Stout, M.J.; Attajarusit, J. Functional analysis of polyphenol oxidases by antisense/sense technology. Molecules 2007, 12, 1569–1595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Pereira, D.M.; Valentão, P.; Pereira, J.A.; Andrade, P.B. Phenolics: From chemistry to biology. Molecules 2009, 14, 2202–2211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Borges, A.; Abreu, A.C.; Dias, C.; Saavedra, M.J.; Simões, M.; Borges, F. New perspectives on the use of phytochemicals as an emergent strategy to control bacterial infections including biofilm. Molecules 2016, 21, 877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Ibrahim, M.H.; Jaafar, H.Z.E. Primary, secondary metabolites, H2O2, malondialdehyde and photosynthetic responses of Orthosiphon stimaneus benth. to different irradiance levels. Molecules 2012, 17, 1159–1176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Gross, G.G. From lignins to tannins: Forty years of enzyme studies on the biosynthesis of phenolic compounds. Phytochemistry 2008, 69, 3018–3031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Kefeli, V.I.; Kalevitch, M.; Borsari, B. Phenolic cycle in plants and environment. J. Cell Mol. Biol. 2003, 2, 13–18. [Google Scholar]
  31. Jørgensen, K.; Rasmussen, A.V.; Morant, M.; Nielsen, A.H.; Bjarnholt, N.; Zagrobelny, M.; Bak, S.; Møller, B.L. Metabolon formation and metabolic channeling in the biosynthesis of plant natural products. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2005, 8, 280–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Chang, S.K.; Alasalvar, C.; Shahidi, F. Review of dried fruits: Phytochemicals, antioxidant efficacies, and health benefit. J. Funct. Foods 2016, 21, 113–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hutzler, P.; Fischbach, R.; Heller, W.; Jungblut, T.P.; Reuber, S.; Schmitz, R.; Veit, M.; Weissenbo, G.; Schnitzler, J.P. Tissue localization of phenolic compounds in plants by confocal laser scanningmicroscopy. J. Exp. Bot. 1998, 49, 953–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Li, Z.; Tang, T.; Liang, S.; Ning, X.; Bai, M.; Wu, H. The synthesis and storage sites of phenolic compounds in the root and rhizome of echinacea purpurea. Am. J. Plant Sci. 2012, 3, 551–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Bhattacharya, A.; Sood, P.; Citovsky, V. The roles of plant phenolics in defence and communication during agrobacterium and rhizobium infection. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2010, 11, 705–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Zapprometv, M. The formation of phenolic compounds in plant cell and tissue cultures and possibility of regulation. Adv. Cell Cult. 1989, 7, 240–245. [Google Scholar]
  37. Iakimova, E.T.; Lech, M.; Woltering, J.E. Hypersensitive cell death in plants—Its mechanism and role in plant defence against pathogens. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res. 2005, 13, 135–158. [Google Scholar]
  38. War, A.R.; Paulraj, M.G.; Ahmad, T.; Buhroo, A.A.; Hussain, B.; Ignacimuthu, S.I.; Sharma, H.C. Mechanisms of plant defense against insect herbivores. Plant Signal. Behav. 2012, 7, 1306–1320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Lam, E.L. Controlled cell death, plant survival and development. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2004, 5, 305–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Coll, N.S.; Epple, P.; Dangl, J.L. Programmed cell death in the plant immune system. Cell Death Differ. 2011, 18, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Reape, T.J.; McCabe, P.F. Apoptotic-like programmed cell death in plants. New Phytol. 2008, 180, 13–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Danon, A.; Delorme, D.; Mailhac, N.; Gallois, P.G. Plant programmed cell death: A common way to die. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2000, 38, 647–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Lois, R.; Buchanan, B.B. Severe sensitivity to ultraviolet radiation in an arabidopsis mutant deficient in flavonoid accumulation. Planta 1994, 194, 504–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Iriti, M.; Faoro, F. Chemical diversity and defence metabolism: How plants cope with pathogens and ozone pollution. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2009, 10, 3371–3399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Ellis, M.H.; Dennis, E.S.; Peacock, J.W. Arabidopsis roots and shoots have different mechanisms for hypoxic stress tolerance. Plant Physiol. 1999, 119, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Van Doorn, W.G.; Woltering, J.E. Many ways to exit? Cell death categories in plants. Trends Plant Sci. 2005, 10, 117–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Lam, E.; Kato, N.; Lawton, M. Programmed cell death, mitochondria and the plant hypersensitive response. Nature 2001, 411, 848–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Buckner, B.; Janick-Buckner, D.; Gray, J.; Johal, G.S. Cell-death mechanisms in maize. Trends Plant Sci. 1998, 3, 218–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zhu, H.H.; Yao, Q. Localized and systemic increase of phenols in tomato roots induced by glomus versiforme inhibits ralstonia solanacearum. J. Phytopathol. 2004, 152, 537–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Mandal, S.; Mitra, A. Reinforcement of cell wall in roots of lycopersicon esculentum through induction of phenolic compounds and lignin by elicitors. Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2007, 71, 201–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Panina, Y.; Fravel, D.R.; Baker, C.J.; Shcherbakova, L.A. Biocontrol and plant pathogenic fusarium oxysporum-induced changes in phenolic compounds in tomato leaves and roots. J. Phytopathol. 2007, 155, 475–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ferreira, R.B.; Monteiro, S.; Freitas, R.; Santos, C.N.; Chen, Z.; Batista, L.M.; Duarte, J.; Borges, A.; Teixeira, A.R. The role of plant defence proteins in fungal pathogenesis. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2007, 8, 677–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Zipfel, C. Pattern-recognition receptors in plant innate immunity. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 2008, 20, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Adrian, M.; Jeandet, P.; Douillet-Breuil, A.C.; Tesson, L.; Bessis, R. Stilbene content of mature Vitis vinifera berries in response to UV-C elicitation. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2000, 48, 6103–6105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Treutter, D. Managing phenol contents in crop plants by phytochemical farming and breeding—Visions and constraints. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11, 807–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Xu, C.; Zhang, Y.; Zhu, L.; Huang, Y.; Lu, J. Influence of growing season on phenolic compounds and antioxidant properties of grape berries from vines grown in subtropical climate. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2011, 59, 1078–1086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Bittel, P.; Robatzek, S. Microbe-associated molecular patterns (MAMPs) probe plant immunity. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2007, 10, 335–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Del Rı́o, J.A.; Báidez, A.G.; Botı́a, J.M.; Ortuño, A. Enhancement of phenolic compounds in olive plants (Olea europaea L.) and their influence on resistance against phytophthora sp. Food Chem. 2003, 83, 75–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Lattanzio, V.; Lattanzio, V.M.T.; Cardinali, A. Role of phenolics in the resistance mechanisms of plants against fungal pathogens and insects. In Phytochemistry: Advances in Research; Imperato, F., Ed.; Research Signpost: Kerala, India, 2006; pp. 23–67. [Google Scholar]
  60. Gómez-Caravaca, A.M.; Verardo, V.; Segura-Carretero, A.; Fernández-Gutiérrez, A.; Fiorenza, C. Phenolic compounds and saponins in plants grown under different irrigation regimes. In Polyphenols in Plants: Isolation, Purification and Extract Preparation; Watson, R.R., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  61. Faria, N.C.G.; Kim, J.H.; Gonçalves, L.A.P.; de L. Martins, M.; Chan, K.L.; Campbell, B.C. Enhanced activity of antifungal drugs using natural phenolics against yeast strains of candida and cryptococcus. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2011, 52, 506–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Kim, J.; Campbell, B.; Mahoney, N.; Chan, K.; Molyneux, R.; May, G. Chemosensitization prevents tolerance of Aspergillus fumigatus to antimycotic drugs. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2008, 372, 266–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Qi, P.F.; Johnston, A.; Balcerzak, M.; Rocheleau, H.; Harris, L.J.; Long, X.Y.; Wei, Y.M.; Zheng, Y.L.; Ouellet, T. Effect of salicylic acid on Fusarium graminearum, the major causal agent of fusarium head blight in wheat. Fungal Biol. 2012, 116, 413–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Da Rocha Neto, A.C.; Maraschin, M.; di Piero, R.M. Antifungal activity of salicylic acid against Penicillium expansum and its possiblemechanisms of action. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2015, 215, 64–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Báidez, A.G.; del Río, J.A.; Gómez, P.; Ortuño, A. Antifungal capacity of major phenolic compounds of Olea europaea L. against Phytophthora megasperma drechsler and Cylindrocarpon destructans (Zinssm.) scholten. Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2006, 69, 224–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Lattanzio, V.; Venere, D.D.; Linsalata, V.; Lima, G.; Ippolito, A.; Salerno, M. Antifungal activity of 2,5-dimethoxybenzoic acid on postharvest pathogens of strawberry fruits. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 1996, 9, 325–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Wang, Y.H.; Dong, H.H.; Zhao, F.; Wang, J.; Yan, F.; Jiang, Y.Y.; Jin, Y.S. The synthesis and synergistic antifungal effects of chalcones against drug resistant candida albicans. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2016, 26, 3098–3102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Kocaçalışkan, I.; Talan, I.; Terzi, I. Antimicrobial activity of catechol and pyrogallol as allelochemicals. Z. Naturforsch. C 2006, 61, 639–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Kakkar, S.; Bais, S. A review on protocatechuic acid and its pharmacological potential. Int. Sch. Res. Notices 2014, 2014, 952943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Syafni, N.; Putra, D.P.; Arbain, A. 3,4-Dihydroxybenzoic acid and 3,4-dihydroxybenzaldehyde from the fern Trichomanes hinense L.; Isolation, antimicrobial and antioxidant properties. Indones. J. Chem. 2012, 12, 273–278. [Google Scholar]
  71. Mendgen, K.; Hahn, M.; Deising, H. Morphogenesis and mechanisms of penetration by plant pathogenic fungi. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 1996, 34, 367–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Hématy, K.; Cherk, C.; Somerville, S. Host-pathogen warfare at the plant cell wall. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2009, 12, 406–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Nicholson, R.L. Phenolic compounds and their role in disease resistance. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 1992, 30, 369–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Fritig, B.; Kauffmann, S.; Dumas, B.; Geoffroy, P.; Kopp, M.; Legrand, M. Mechanism of the hypersensitivity reaction of plants. Novartis Found. Symp. 1987, 133, 92–108. [Google Scholar]
  75. Mierziak, J.; Kostyn, K.; Kulma, A. Flavonoids as important molecules of plant interactions with the environment. Molecules 2014, 19, 16240–16265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Tamang, B.G.; Fukao, T. Plant adaptation to multiple stresses during submergence and following desubmergence. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2015, 16, 30164–30180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Møller, I.M.; Jensen, P.E.; Hansson, A. Oxidative modifications to cellular components in plants. Annu. Rev. Plant. Biol. 2007, 58, 459–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Dai, J.; Mumper, R.J. Plant phenolics: Extraction, analysis and their antioxidant and anticancer properties. Molecules 2010, 15, 7313–7352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Cotelle, N. Role of flavonoids in oxidative stress. Curr. Trends Med. Chem. 2001, 1, 569–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Devasagayam, T.P.A.; Tilak, J.C.; Boloor, K.K.; Sane, K.S.; Ghaskadbi, S.S.; Lele, R.D. Free radicals and antioxidants in human health: Current status and future prospects. J. Assoc. Phys. India 2004, 52, 794–804. [Google Scholar]
  81. Gill, S.S.; Tuteja, N. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2010, 48, 909–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Alscher, R.G.; Donahue, J.L.; Cramer, C.L. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidants: Relationships in green cells. Physiol. Plant 1997, 100, 224–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Shen, B.; Jensen, R.G.; Bohnert, H.J. Increased resistance to oxidative stress in transgenic plants by targeting mannitol biosynthesis to chloroplasts. Plant Physiol. 1997, 113, 1177–1183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Dicko, M.H.; Gruppen, H.; Barro, C.; Traore, A.S.; van Berkel, W.J.H.; Voragen, A.G.J. Impact of phenolic compounds and related enzymes in sorghum varieties for resistance and susceptibility to biotic and abiotic stresses. J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 2671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Sandoval-Chávez, R.A.; Martínez-Peniche, R.Á.; Hernández-Iturriaga, M.; Teixidó-Espasa, N.; UsallRodié, J.; Viñas-Almenar, I.; Torres-Sanchis, R. Mechanisms of resistance in postharvest fruit-pathogen interaction. Rev. Chapingo Ser. Hortic. 2015, 21, 185–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Kavitha, R.; Umesha, S. Regulation of defense-related enzymes associated with bacterial spot resistance in tomato. Phytoparasitica 2008, 36, 144–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Poiatti, V.A.D.; Dalmas, F.R.; Astarita, L.V. Defense mechanisms of Solanum tuberosum L. in response to attack by plant-pathogenic bacteria. Biol. Res. 2009, 42, 205–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Saxena, I.; Srikanth, S.; Chen, Z. Cross talk between H2O2 and interacting signal molecules under plant stress response. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Kwon, S.I.; Cho, H.J.; Kim, S.R.; Park, O.K. The Rab GTPase RabG3b positively regulates autophagy and immunity-associated hypersensitive cell death in arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2013, 161, 1722–1736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Pieterse, C.M.J.; Zamioudis, C.; Berendsen, R.L.; Weller, D.M.; van Wees, S.C.M.; Bakker, P.A.H.M. Induced systemic resistance by beneficial microbes. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2014, 52, 16–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Houot, V.; Etienne, P.; Petitot, A.S.; Barbier, S.; Blein, J.P.; Lydie, S. Hydrogen peroxide induces programmed cell death features in cultured tobacco BY-2 cells, in a dose-dependent manner. J. Exp. Bot. 2001, 52, 1721–1730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Hofius, D.; Munch, D.; Bressendorff, S.; Mundy, J.; Petersen, M. Role of autophagy in disease resistance and hypersensitive response-associated cell death. Cell Death Differ. 2011, 18, 1257–1262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Hatsugai, N.; Kuroyanagi, M.; Nishimura, M.; Nishimura, H. A cellular suicide strategy of plants: Vacuole-mediated cell death. Apoptosis 2006, 11, 905–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Iannucci, A.; Fragasso, M.; Platani, C.; Narducci, A.; Miullo, V.; Papa, R. Dynamics of release of allelochemical compounds from roots of wild oat (Avena fatua L.). Agrochimica 2012, 56, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  95. Jabran, K.; Mahajan, G.; Sardana, V.; Chauhan, B.S. Allelopathy for weed control in agricultural systems. Crop Prot. 2015, 72, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Li, Z.H.; Wang, Q.; Ruan, X.; Pan, C.D.; Jiang, D.A. Phenolics and plant allelopathy. Molecules 2010, 15, 8933–8952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Blanco, J.A. The representation of allelopathy in ecosystem-level forest models. Ecol. Model. 2007, 209, 65–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Fabbro, C.D.; Prati, D. The relative importance of immediate allelopathy and allelopathic legacy in invasive plant species. Basic Appl. Ecol. 2015, 16, 28–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Iftikhar Hussain, M.; Gonzalez-Rodriguez, L.; Reigosa Roger, M. Germination and growth response of four plant species to different allelochemicals and herbicides. Allelopath. J. 2009, 22, 101–110. [Google Scholar]
  100. Reigosa, M.J.; Sánchez-Moreiras, A.M. Role of phenolics in allelopathy in the soil. In Soil Phenols; Muscolo, A., Sidari, M., Eds.; Nova Science Publishers: New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 87–115. [Google Scholar]
  101. Weir, L.T.; Park, W.S.; Vivanco, M.J. Biochemical and physiological mechanisms mediated by allelochemicals. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2004, 7, 472–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Kruse, M.; Strandberg, M.; Strandberg, B. Ecological Effects of Allelopathic Plants—A Review; National Environmental Research Institute: Silkeborg, Denmark, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  103. Zeinali, A.; Esmaeili, M.; Heidarzade, A. Salicylic acid and abiotic stress influence allelochemicals and inhibitory potential of root exudates of two rice(Oryza sativa) cultivars against barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli L.). Int. J. Farm. Allied Sci. 2013, 2, 779–784. [Google Scholar]
  104. Esmaeili, M.; Heidarzadeh, A.; Pirdashti, H.; Esmaeili, F. Inhibitory activity of pure allelochemicals on barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli L.) seed and seedling parameters. Int. J. Farm. Allied Sci. 2012, 4, 274–279. [Google Scholar]
  105. Nardi, S.; Pizzeghello, D.; Bragazza, L.; Gerdol, R. Low-molecular-weight organic acids and hormone-like activity of dissolved organic matter in two forest soils in N italy. J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1549–1564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Inderjit; Mallik, A.U. Effect of phenolic compounds on selected soil properties. For. Ecol. Manag. 1997, 92, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Ting, Y.; Chiou, Y.; Pan, M.H.; Ho, C.T.; Huang, Q. In vitro and in vivo anti-cancer activity of tangeretin against colorectal cancer was enhanced by emulsion-based delivery system. J. Funct. Foods 2015, 15, 264–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Mertens-Talcott, S.U.; Percival, S.S. Ellagic acid and quercetin interact synergistically with resveratrol in the induction of apoptosis and cause transient cell cycle arrest in human leukemia cells. Cancer Lett. 2005, 218, 141–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Yin, F.; Giuliano, A.E.; van Herle, A.J. Growth inhibitory effects of flavonoids in human thyroid cancer cell lines. Thyroid 1999, 9, 369–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Wu, X.; Song, M.; Rakariyatham, K.; Zheng, J.; Guo, S.; Tang, Z.; Zhou, S.; Xiao, H. Anti-inflammatory effects of 4′-demethylnobiletin, a major metabolite of nobiletin. J. Funct. Foods 2015, 19, 278–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Malik, S.; Bhatia, J.; Suchal, K.; Gamad, N.; Dinda, A.K. Nobiletin ameliorates cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury due to its anti-oxidant, anti-inflammatory and anti-apoptotic effects. Exp. Toxicol. Pathol. 2015, 67, 427–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Ren, W.; Qiao, Z.; Wang, H.; Zhu, L.; Zhang, L. Flavonoids: Promising anticancer agents. Med. Res. Rev. 2003, 23, 519–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Takahashi, M.; Takara, K.; Toyozato, T.; Wada, K. A novel bioactive chalcone of morus australis inhibits tyrosinase activity and melanin biosynthesis in b16 melanoma cells. J. Oleo Sci. 2012, 61, 582–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Kaur, G.; Kathariya, R.; Bansal, S.; Singh, A.; Shahkar, D. Dietary antioxidants and their indispensable role in periodontal health. J. Food Drug Anal. 2016, 24, 239–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Nath, R.; Roy, S.; De, B.; Choudhury, M.D. Anticancer and antioxidant activity of croton: A review. Int. J. Pharm. Pharm. Sci. 2013, 5, 63–70. [Google Scholar]
  116. Pietta, P.G. Flavonoids as antioxidants. J. Nat. Prod. 2000, 63, 1035–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Adjakly, M.; Ngollo, M.; Boiteux, J.P.; Bignon, Y.J.; Guy, L.; Bernard-Gallon, D. Genistein and daidzein: Different molecular effects on prostate cancer. Anticancer Res. 2013, 33, 39–44. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  118. Wang, L.; Wang, J.; Fang, L.; Zheng, Z.; Zhi, D.; Wang, S.; Li, S.; Ho, C.T.; Zhao, H. Anticancer activities of citrus peel polymethoxyflavones related to angiogenesis and others. BioMed Res. Int. 2014, 2014, 453972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Xie, F.; Lang, Q.; Zhou, M.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, Y.; Wan, B.; Huang, Q.; Yu, L. The dietary flavonoid luteolin inhibits aurora b kinase activity and blocks proliferation of cancer cells. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2012, 45, 388–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. Li, Q.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, L.; Chen, L.; Du, Y.; Ye, T.; Shi, X. Naringenin exerts anti-angiogenic effects in human endothelial cells: Involvement of ERRα/VEGF/KDR signaling pathway. Fitoterapia 2016, 11, 78–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Yoon, H.; Kim, T.W.; Shin, S.Y.; Park, M.J.; Yong, Y.; Kim, D.W.; Islam, T.; Lee, Y.H.; Jung, K.Y.; Lim, Y. Design, synthesis and inhibitory activities of naringenin derivatives on human colon cancer cells. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2013, 23, 232–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Szymanowska, U.; Złotek, U.; Karaś, M.; Baraniak, B. Anti-inflammatory and antioxidative activity of anthocyanins from purple basil leaves induced by selected abiotic elicitors. Food Chem. 2015, 172, 71–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Marković, S.; Tošović, J. Comparative study of the antioxidative activities of caffeoylquinic and caffeic acids. Food Chem. 2016, 210, 585–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Fresco, P.; Borges, F.; Diniz, C.; Marques, M.P.M. New insights on the anticancer properties of dietary polyphenols. Med. Res. Rev. 2006, 26, 747–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Yajko, D.M.; Hegeman, G.D. Tumor induction by Agrobacterium tumefaciens: Specific transfer of bacterial deoxyribonucleic acid to plant tissue. J. Bacteriol. 1971, 108, 973–979. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  126. Lee, C.W.; Efetova, M.; Engelmann, J.C.; Kramell, R.; Wasternack, C.; Ludwig-Muller, J.; Hedrich, R.; Deeken, R. Agrobacterium tumefaciens promotes tumor induction by modulating pathogen defense in arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell 2009, 21, 2948–2962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Matveeva, T.V.; Lutova, L.A.; Nester, Y. Tumor formation in plants. Russ. J. Genet. 2001, 37, 993–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Bruce, A.S.; Saville, J.B.; N, E. Ustilago maydis produces cytokinins and abscisic acid for potential regulation of tumor formation in maize. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2011, 30, 51–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Macoy, M.D.; Kim, W.Y.; Lee, Y.S.; Kim, G.M. Biosynthesis, physiology, and functions of hydroxycinnamic acid amides in plants. Plant Biotechnol. Rep. 2015, 9, 269–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Kefeli, V.I.; Kadyrov, C.S. Natural growth inhibitors, their chemical and physiological properties. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1971, 22, 185–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Demos, E.K.; Woolwine, M.; Wilson, R.H.; McMillan, C. The effects of ten phenolic compounds on hypocotyl growth and mitochondrial metabolism of mung bean. Am. J. Bot. 1975, 62, 97–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Da Silva, T.J.A.; Dobránszki, J.; Ross, S. Phloroglucinol in plant tissue culture. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2013, 49, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Sarker, D.; Naik, P.S. Phloroglucinol enhances growth and rate of axillary shoot proliferation in potato shoot tip cultures in vitro. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2000, 60, 139–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. George, E.F. Plant Propagation by Tissue Culture: In Practice Pt.2; Exegetics Ltd.: Edington, UK, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  135. Ndakidemi, C.F.; Mneney, E.; Ndakidemi, P.A. Effects of ascorbic acid in controlling lethal browning in in vitro culture of brahylaena huillensis using nodal segments. Am. J. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 187–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Lichtenthale, H.K.; Schweiger, J. Cell wal bound ferulic acid, the major substance of the blue-green fluorescence emission of plants. J. Plant Phys. 1998, 152, 272–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Metwally, A.; Finkemeier, I.; Georgi, M.; Dietz, K.J. Salicylic acid alleviates the cadmium toxicity in barley seedlings. Plant Physiol. 2003, 132, 272–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  138. Michalak, A. Phenolic compounds and their antioxidant activity in plants growing under heavy metal stress. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2006, 15, 523–530. [Google Scholar]
  139. Ozeker, E. Phenolic compounds and their importance. Anadolu. J. AARI 1999, 9, 114–124. [Google Scholar]
  140. Arora, A.; Byrem, T.M.; Nari, M.G.; Strasburg, G.M. Modulation of liposomal membranes fluidity by fla vonoids and isoflavonoids. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2000, 373, 102–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  141. Lavola, A.; Julkunen-Tiitto, R.; de la Rosa, T.M.; Aphalo, P.J. Allocation of carbon to growth and secondary metabolites in birch seedlings under UV-B radiation and CO2 exposure. Physiol. Plant 2000, 109, 260–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Ozyigit, I.I. Phenolic changes during in vitro organogenesis of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) shoot tips. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2008, 7, 1145–1150. [Google Scholar]
  143. Ibañez, M.; Amo-Marco, J.B. Promotion by phloroglucinol of micropropagation of minuartia valentina, an endangered and endemic spanish plant. Plant Growth Regul. 1998, 26, 49–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Coppede, J.S.; Pina, E.S.; Paz, T.A.; Fachin, A.L.; Marins, M.A.; Bertoni, B.W.; França, S.C.; Pereira, A.M.S. Cell cultures of Maytenus ilicifolia Mart. are richer sources of quinone-methide triterpenoids than plant roots in natura. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2014, 118, 33–43. [Google Scholar]
  145. Rasouli, H.; Fazeli-Nasab, B. Production of callus structure from different cultivars of wheat and medical plants. Ilam University: Ilam, Pazhohesh Blvd, Iran, Unpublished Project. 2012. [Google Scholar]
  146. Smith, D.L.; Miransari, M. Plant hormones and seed germination. Env. Exp. Botany 2014, 99, 110–121. [Google Scholar]
  147. Mohamadi, N.; Rajaie, P. Effects of aqueous eucalyptus (E. camadulensis Labill) extracts on seed germination, seedling growth and physiological responses of phaseolus vulgaris and sorghum bicolor. Res. J. Biol. Sci. 2009, 4, 1292–1296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Sulusoglu, M. Phenolic compounds and uses in fruit growing. Turk. J. Agric. Nat. Sci. 2014, 1, 947–956. [Google Scholar]
  149. Bewley, J.D.; Bradford, K.; Hilhorst, H.; Nonogaki, H. Seeds: Physiology of Development and Germination, 3rd ed.; Springer-Verlag: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  150. Giannakoula, A.E.; Ilias, I.F.; Maksimović, J.J.D.; Maksimović, V.M.; Živanović, B.D. The effects of plant growth regulators on growth, yield, and phenolic profile of lentil plants. J. Food Compost. Anal. 2012, 28, 46–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Arteca, R.N. Plant growth substances, principles and application; Springer US: New York, NY, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  152. Moore, T.C. Biochemistry and Physiology of Plant Hormones, 2nd ed.; Springer-Verlag: New York, NY, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  153. McCann, M.C.; Roberts, K.; Carpita, N.C. Plant cell growth and elongation. Encycl. Life Sci. 2001, 1, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  154. Morris, J.W.; Doumas, P.; Marris, O.R.; Zaerr, J.P. Cytokinins in vegetative and reproductive buds of Pseudotsuga menziesii. Plant Physiol. 1990, 93, 67–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  155. Kenneth, K. Plant cell walls. Plant Physiol. 2010, 154, 483–486. [Google Scholar]
  156. Petrášek, J.; Friml, J. Auxin transport routes in plant development. Development 2009, 136, 2675–2688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  157. Häsler, J.; Wüest, J.; Gaspar, T.; Crèvecoeur, M. Long term in vitro-cultured plant cells show typical neoplastic features at the cytological level. Biol. Cell 2003, 95, 357–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Moreno, P.R.H.; van der heijden, R.; Verpoorte, R. Cell and tissue cultures of catharanthus roseus: A literature survey. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 1995, 42, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Gaspar, T. Plants can get cancer. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 1998, 36, 203–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Vieten, A.; Sauer, M.; Brewer, P.B.; Friml, J. Molecular and cellular aspects of auxin-transport-mediated development. Trends Plant Sci 2007, 12, 160–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  161. Santelia, D.; Henrichs, S.; Vincenzetti, V.; Sauer, M.; Bigler, L.; Kelin, M.; Bailly, A.; Lee, Y.; Friml, J.; Geisler, M.; et al. Flavonoids redirect pin-mediated polar auxin fluxes during root gravitropic response. J. Biol. Chem. 2008, 283, 31218–31226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  162. Blakeslee, J.J.; Bandyopadhyay, A.; Lee, O.R.; Mravec, J.; Titapiwatanakun, B.; Sauer, M.; Makam, S.N.; Cheng, Y.; Bouchard, R.; Adamec, J.; et al. Interactions among PIN-FORMED and P-glycoprotein auxin transporters in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 2007, 19, 131–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  163. Murphy, A.; Peer, W.A.; Taiz, L. Regulation of auxin transport by aminopeptidases and endogenous flavonoids. Planta 2000, 211, 315–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  164. Brown, D.E.; Rashotte, M.A.; Murphy, S.A.; Normanly, J.; Tague, W.B.; Peer, A.W.; Taiz, L.; Muday, G.K. Flavonoids act as negative regulators of auxin transport in vivo in arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2001, 126, 524–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  165. Woodward, A.W.; Bartel, B. Auxin: Regulation, action, and interaction. Ann. Bot. 2005, 95, 707–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  166. Wu, H.C.; du Toit, E.S.; Reinhardt, C.F.; Rimando, A.M.; van der Kooy, F.; Meyer, J.J.M. The phenolic, 3,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid, is an endogenous regulator of rooting in protea cynaroides. Plant Growth Regul. 2007, 52, 207–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Younis, M.E.B.; Hasaneen, M.N.A.G.; Abdel-Aziz, H.M.M. An enhancing effect of visible light and UV radiation on phenolic compounds and various antioxidants in broad bean seedlings. Plant Signal. Behav. 2010, 5, 1197–1203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Shalaby, S.; Horwitz, B.A. Plant phenolic compounds and oxidative stress: Integrated signals in fungal-plant interactions. Curr. Genet. 2015, 61, 347–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  169. Bernstein, N.; Chaimovitch, D.; Dudai, N. Effect of irrigation with secondary treated effluent on essential oil, antioxidant activity, and phenolic compounds in oregano and rosemary. Agron. J. 2009, 101, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Min, K.; Freeman, C.; Kang, H.; Choi, S.U. The regulation by phenolic compounds of soil organic matter dynamics under a changing environment. BioMed Res. Int. 2015, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  171. Jacobs, M.; Rubery, P.H. Naturally occurring auxin transport regulators. Science 1988, 241, 346–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  172. Peer, W.A.; Brown, D.E.; Tague, B.W.; Muday, G.K.; Taiz, L.; Murphy, A.S. Flavonoid accumulation patterns of transparent testa mutants of arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2001, 126, 536–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  173. Agati, G.; Azzarello, E.; Pollastri, S.; Tattini, M. Flavonoids as antioxidants in plants: Location and functional significance. Plant Sci. 2012, 196, 67–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  174. Caverzan, A.; Passaia, G.; Rosa, B.S.; Ribeiro, W.C.; Lazzarotto, F.; Margis-Pinheiro, M. Plant responses to stresses: Role of ascorbate peroxidase in the antioxidant protection. Genet. Mol. Biol. 2012, 35, 1011–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Distribution of the most relevant allelochemicals in the plant.
Figure 1. Distribution of the most relevant allelochemicals in the plant.
Molecules 21 01104 g001
Figure 2. (A) Lethal browning effect of PC exudation; (B) Normal callus growth (in presence of ascorbic acid); (C) Normal wheat callus (in presence of PVP) [145].
Figure 2. (A) Lethal browning effect of PC exudation; (B) Normal callus growth (in presence of ascorbic acid); (C) Normal wheat callus (in presence of PVP) [145].
Molecules 21 01104 g002
Figure 3. Simplified model for the entrance auxin into cell and response of cell to it. ABCB: ATP-binding cassette subfamily B; PIN: PIN-formed protein; AUX1: Auxin transporter protein 1.
Figure 3. Simplified model for the entrance auxin into cell and response of cell to it. ABCB: ATP-binding cassette subfamily B; PIN: PIN-formed protein; AUX1: Auxin transporter protein 1.
Molecules 21 01104 g003
Figure 4. Callus structure and its similarity to tumor cells [145].
Figure 4. Callus structure and its similarity to tumor cells [145].
Molecules 21 01104 g004
Figure 5. Prevention of auxin transport by PCs.
Figure 5. Prevention of auxin transport by PCs.
Molecules 21 01104 g005
Figure 6. PCs (e.g., flavonoids) as endogenous regulators of auxin concentration.
Figure 6. PCs (e.g., flavonoids) as endogenous regulators of auxin concentration.
Molecules 21 01104 g006
Table 1. Main classes of phenolic compounds (PCs).
Table 1. Main classes of phenolic compounds (PCs).
PolyphenolsBasic structureExamples
Phenolic acidsHydroxybenzoic acidsVanillic acidGallic acidSyringic acid
Molecules 21 01104 i001 Molecules 21 01104 i002 Molecules 21 01104 i003 Molecules 21 01104 i004
Hydroxycinnamic acidsCaffeic acidFerulic acidp-Coumaric acid
Molecules 21 01104 i005 Molecules 21 01104 i006 Molecules 21 01104 i007 Molecules 21 01104 i008
FlavonoidsFlavonesChrysinLuteolinApigenin
Molecules 21 01104 i009 Molecules 21 01104 i010 Molecules 21 01104 i011 Molecules 21 01104 i012
FlavonoidsFlavonolsGalanginKaempferolQuercetin
Molecules 21 01104 i013 Molecules 21 01104 i014 Molecules 21 01104 i015 Molecules 21 01104 i016
FlavanonesNaringeninHesperetinEriodictyol
Molecules 21 01104 i017 Molecules 21 01104 i018 Molecules 21 01104 i019 Molecules 21 01104 i020
Flavan-3-olsCatechinEpicatechinEpigallocatechin (EGC)
Molecules 21 01104 i021 Molecules 21 01104 i022 Molecules 21 01104 i023 Molecules 21 01104 i024
IsoflavonesGenisteinDaidzeinNeobavaisoflavone
Molecules 21 01104 i025 Molecules 21 01104 i026 Molecules 21 01104 i027 Molecules 21 01104 i028
FlavonoidsAnthocyanidinsCyanidinDelphinidinPelargonidin
Molecules 21 01104 i029 Molecules 21 01104 i030 Molecules 21 01104 i031 Molecules 21 01104 i032
Lignans Molecules 21 01104 i033Pinoresinol
Molecules 21 01104 i034
Stilbenes Molecules 21 01104 i035ResveratrolPolydatin
Molecules 21 01104 i036 Molecules 21 01104 i037
Table 2. The most relevant PCs with anti-fungal activity.
Table 2. The most relevant PCs with anti-fungal activity.
SubstancePathogenRef.
OleuropeinPhytophthora spp.[58]
NobilietinPhoma tracheiphila[59]
GenisteinMonilinia fructicola[60]
BiochaninMonilinia fructicola[60]
5,8-Dihydroxy-6,7-dimethoxyflavanFusarium oxysporum[60]
ThymolCryptococcus neoformans, Candida albicans, Rhyzopus sp., Aspergillus sp.[61,62]
HispidulinCladosporium sphaerospermum[59]
FlavoneAspergillus sp.[59]
FlavanoneAspergillus sp.[59]
PhloretinVenturiaina equalis[59]
KaempferolPyriclaria oryzae[59]
3-and 7-HydroxyflavonePenicillium glabrum[59]
p-Coumaric acidGelosporium perennas[59]
RutinFusarium oxysporum[59]
Vanillic acidPhytophthora infestans[59]
Salicylic Acid (SA)Eutypa lata, Penicillium expansum, Fusarium graminearum[63,64,65]
2,5-Dimethoxybenzoic acidBotrytis cinerea[59,66]
CatecholColletotrichum circinans, Candida albicans[67,68]
Protocatehuic acidColletotrichum circinans[69]
3,4-DihydroxybenzaldehydeGloesporium musarum[70]
Table 3. The most abundant allelochemical compounds and their mechanisms.
Table 3. The most abundant allelochemical compounds and their mechanisms.
AllelochemicalDistributionMechanismRef.
p-Hydroxybenzoic acidLeavesInhibiting enzymatic activity[101]
p-Coumaric acidLeavesGrowth inhibitor[101]
QuercetinLeaves, Root, BarkAnti-insect (Aphis craccivora Koch)[59]
2,4-Dihydroxy-1,4(2H) benzoxazin-3-oneLeaves, Root, BarkVarious actions[59]
(−)-CatechinRootInducing stress responses[101]
SorgoleoneRootPhotosystem II inhibitor, hydroxyphenyl pyruvate dioxygenase inhibitor[101]
Phenolic acidRootInhibiting seedling growth[102]
FlavonoidsRootInhibiting seedling growth[102]
SARootRelease of other allelochemicals[103]
Cinnamic acidLeavesInhibiting chlorophyll biosynthesis[104]
Ferulic acidLeaves, RootInhibiting of seed germination[104]
Table 4. Anticancer activity of the most relevant PCs.
Table 4. Anticancer activity of the most relevant PCs.
CompoundMechanismType of CancerRef.
SophoranoneInhibits cell growth, induces apoptosisHuman stomach cancer MKN7 cells, human leukemia U937 cells[16,22,78]
Kaempferol 3-O-rutinosideAnti-inflammatoryGastric cancer[22]
KaempferolAnti-inflammatory, induces apoptosisGastric cancer, prostate cancer, thyroid cancer (ARO, NPA, WRO cells)[109]
Isoflavonoids (general)Induces apoptosisBreast cancer lines, lung cancer lines,[22]
NobiletinCell cycle arrest (G1 phase), inhibits angiogenic differentiation by Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and fibroblast growth factor (FGF), down-regulation of ERK1/2 and c-Jun N-terminal kinases (c-JNK), induces caspase pathwayBreast cancer cell lines[110,111]
QuercetinInhibits cancer metastasis, inhibits MAPK phosphorylation, induces differentiation of HL-60 cells into granulocytes and monocytesGastric cancer, lung cancer (SK-LU1, SW900, H441, H661, haGo-K-1, A549 cells)[112]
ChalconesInhibits cell growthB16 mouse melanoma[22,113]
ApigeninInhibits cancer metastasis, inhibits MAPK phosphorylation, induces apoptosis, induces differentiation of HL-60 cells into granulocytes and monocytesLeukemia (HL-60, K562, Jurkat cells)[114]
FlavoneInhibits proliferation, induces apoptosisColon cancer (Caco-2, HT-29, IEC-6, HCT-15 cells)[22,115]
GenisteinInhibits proliferation, induces apoptosisProstate cancer (LNCaP, PC3, DU145 cells)[116]
DaidzeinInhibits proliferation, induces apoptosisBreast cancer (MCF-7 cells)[117]
CourcuminInhibits proliferation, induces apoptosisOral cancer (HSC-2, HSG, SCC-25 cells)[112]
CatechinInhibits tumor-invasive activity, inhibits cell shedding, hepatocyte growth factor signaling, cell arrest in S phase, modulates NO signaling, induces killer caspases, inhibits NF-κB signalingSame effect as genistein[112]
FlavopiridolInhibits CDKs, induces cell cycle arrest during G1 or G2/M, induces apoptosisProstate, colon, and gastric cancers[118]
LuteolinInduces differentiation of HL-60 cells into granulocytes and monocytesColon cancer cells[118,119]
HesperetinRepresses CDK2, CDK4, and cyclin D, Induces p21 and p27 expression, blocks cell cycle in G1 phase , promotes apoptosis, suppresses proliferation, increases expression of caspase-3, caspase-8, caspase-9, p53, Bax, FasLiver cancer (HepG2 cells), cervical cancer (SiHa cells), leukemia (NALM-6 cells), breast cancer (MCF-7 cells)[118]
5HTMFInduces G0/G1 arrest, changes p21and p53 statusColon cancer cells[118]
TangeretinInduces caspase-3 activity, Cell cycle arrest (inhibit G1 phase), suppresses proliferation, inhibits cancer metastasis, Scavenging of ROSColon cancer cells, liver cancer (HepG2 cell), cervical cancer (SiHa cell)[118]
NaringeninBlocks cells in the G0/G1 and G2/M phases, induces metastasis, decreased ROS generation, induces TNF-αLiver cancer (HepG2 cell), cervical cancer (SiHa cell)[107,120,121]
SinensetinAntiangiogenesis, blocks G0/G1 phase, regulates expression of angiogenesis genes flt1, kdrl, and hrasGeneral anticancer substances[107]
AnthocyaninsReduces inflammatory and tumor initiation, suppresses angiogenesis, minimizes cancer-induced DNA damage (in animal disease model)General anticancer substances[122]
FlavonolsDirect cellular proliferation inhibitorLeukemia and pancreatic, breast, cervical, prostate, uterine, and urinary tract cancers.[22]
Caffeoylquinic acidsAntioxidant activityLimit LDL oxidation, general effect on cancer cell lines[22]
IsoflavonoidsGeneral protective activitybreast and prostate cancers[123]
Resveratrol Skin cancer, tumors of the gastrointestinal tract[124]
CDK: cyclin-dependent kinase; LDL: low-density lipoprotein; MAPK: mitogen-activated protein kinase; NO: nitric oxide; TNF-α: tumor necrosis factor-α; ERK: extracellular signal-regulated kinase; NPA: UCLA NPA-87-1.
Table 5. Roles of the most relevant PCs in plant growth.
Table 5. Roles of the most relevant PCs in plant growth.
PCsRoles during Plant GrowthRef.
p-Coumaric acidCell wall development, seed germination, and dormancy[129]
SAEffect on accumulation of ABA and IAA, regulation of growth, ion uptake, photosynthetic performance, membrane permeability, response to drought, salt stress, heavy metals, and multiple-stress tolerance.[132]
Ferulic acidCell wall development, Allelopathy (germination inhibitors), effect on accumulation of ABA, IAA, response to abiotic stress[129]
Caffeic acidAntioxidant, light absorption[136]
Cinnamic acidEffect on accumulation of ABA, IAA, response to abiotic stress[136]
TyramineReduce cell count and dwarfing[129]
Hydroxycinnamic acidsDecrease of lignification during abiotic stress, response to water tension, seed germination, and dormancy[129]
Hydroxycinnamoylquinic acidsResponse to water stress[129]
Hydroxycinnamic acid glucosidesResponse to water stress[129]
SA glucosideResponse to water stress[137]
Conjugated flavonols (with disaccharides)Response to water stress[129]
CaffeoylputrescineResponse to water stress[129]
IsoflavonoidsPhytoalexins[129]
TanninsDefensive properties by binding to proteins, Tolerant to heavy metal[138]
Flavons and FlavonolsPlant growth development by absorb light, protect cells from excessive UV radiation, legume nodulations and nitrogen-fixing, membrane stabilizer during stresses[138]
AnthocyaninAttracting pollinators[139]
FlavonoidsFlower pigmentation, UV-protection, plant defense, legume nodulations, membranes stabilizer during stress, scavenging of reactive species (ROS, H2O2, etc.)[140]
LigninXylogenesis, defensive response to pathogen, cell wall formation[139]
ApigeninCompete with IAA and inhibit polar auxin transport[59]
Gallic acid 4-O-(β-d-glucopyranosyl-6′-sulfate)Control of nyctinastic movement in leaves[59]
Gentisic acid 5-O-β-d-glucopyranosideControl of nyctinastic movement in leaves[59]
KaempferolCompete with IAA and inhibit polar auxin transport[59]
Ascorbic acidAntioxidant activity and protection of cells[138]
IsoflavoneResponse to environmental tensions[141]
o-Dihydroxy phenolicsAnti-herbivore activity[138]
Simple PhenolicsPlant–environment interactions and allelopathy[139]
PhenylpropanoidLignin biosynthesis[139]
Monohydroxy B-ring FlavonoidsDecompose IAA hormone, prevent of IAA transport by binding to NPA[59]
Dihydroxy B-ring FlavonoidsPreventers of the IAA action, preventers of IAA transport by binding to NPA[59]
ABA: abscisic acid; IAA: indoleacetic acid; NPA: nephthylphtalamic acid; ROS: reactive oxygen species.
Table 6. Use of PCs in plant tissue culture.
Table 6. Use of PCs in plant tissue culture.
CompoundActivityRef.
Phloroglucinol (1,3,5-trihydroxybenzene)Increase growth and axillary shoot generation, prevention of vitrification, increase somatic embryogenesis, control of hyperhydricity in lignification[132]
Phloroglucinol + NAAHigher levels of somatic embryogenesis[135]
Phloroglucinol + BAImprove number of shoots[134]
Phloroglucinol + any cytokinins100% regeneration[135]
Phloretic acidIncrease shoot and root[135]
Phloroglucinol + IAAIncrease rooting[142]
Chlorogenic acidStimulate callus growth[143]
Glycoside phloridzinSame effect as phloroglucinol[132]
QuinoneNegative effect on cell growth (by death/necrosis)[144]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Rasouli, H.; Farzaei, M.H.; Mansouri, K.; Mohammadzadeh, S.; Khodarahmi, R. Plant Cell Cancer: May Natural Phenolic Compounds Prevent Onset and Development of Plant Cell Malignancy? A Literature Review. Molecules 2016, 21, 1104. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules21091104

AMA Style

Rasouli H, Farzaei MH, Mansouri K, Mohammadzadeh S, Khodarahmi R. Plant Cell Cancer: May Natural Phenolic Compounds Prevent Onset and Development of Plant Cell Malignancy? A Literature Review. Molecules. 2016; 21(9):1104. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules21091104

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rasouli, Hassan, Mohammad Hosein Farzaei, Kamran Mansouri, Sara Mohammadzadeh, and Reza Khodarahmi. 2016. "Plant Cell Cancer: May Natural Phenolic Compounds Prevent Onset and Development of Plant Cell Malignancy? A Literature Review" Molecules 21, no. 9: 1104. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules21091104

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop