Next Article in Journal
Cell Cycle Reactivation, at the Start of Neurodegeneration, Induced by Forskolin and Aniline in Differentiated Neuroblastoma Cells
Next Article in Special Issue
Monoterpene Thiols: Synthesis and Modifications for Obtaining Biologically Active Substances
Previous Article in Journal
Evolution End Classification of tfd Gene Clusters Mediating Bacterial Degradation of 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (2,4-D)
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:

Five Different Artemisia L. Species Ethanol Extracts’ Phytochemical Composition and Their Antimicrobial and Nematocide Activity

A.E. Arbuzov Institute of Organic and Physical Chemistry, Kazan Scientific Center, Russian Academy of Sciences, Arbuzov Str. 8, 420088 Kazan, Russia
A.M. Butlerov Chemical Institute, Kazan Federal University, Kremlevskaya Str. 18, 420008 Kazan, Russia
Research Institute for Problems of Ecology and Mineral Wealth Use of Tatarstan Academy of Sciences, Daurskaya Str. 28, 420087 Kazan, Russia
Nikitsky Botanic Gardens, National Scientific Center of Russian Academy of Sciences, 298648 Yalta, Russia
Federal State Budgetary Scientific Institution «Federal Center for Toxicological, Radiation, and Biological Safety», Nauchny Gorodok-2, 420075 Kazan, Russia
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(18), 14372;
Submission received: 16 August 2023 / Revised: 4 September 2023 / Accepted: 14 September 2023 / Published: 21 September 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Antimicrobial Agents and Resistance Mechanisms)


Among the plants that exhibit significant or established pharmacological activity, the genus Artemisia L. deserves special attention. This genus comprises over 500 species belonging to the largest Asteraceae family. Our study aimed at providing a comprehensive evaluation of the phytochemical composition of the ethanol extracts of five different Artemisia L. species (collected from the southwest of the Russian Federation) and their antimicrobial and nematocide activity as follows: A. annua cv. Novichok., A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd, A. santonica cv. Citral, A. abrotanum cv. Euxin, and A. scoparia cv. Tavrida. The study of the ethanol extracts of the five different Artemisia L. species using the methods of gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS) and high-performance liquid chromatography–quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (HPLC–MS/MS) allowed establishing their phytochemical profile. The obtained data on the of five different Artemisia L. species ethanol extracts’ phytochemical composition were used to predict the antibacterial and antifungal activity against phytopathogenic microorganisms and nematocidal activity against the free-living soil nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. The major compounds found in the composition of the Artemisia L. ethanol extracts were monoterpenes, sesquiterpenes, flavonoids, flavonoid glycosides, coumarins, and phenolic acids. The antibacterial and antifungal activity of the extracts began to manifest at a concentration of 150 µg/mL. The A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd extract had a selective effect against Gram-positive R. iranicus and B. subtilis bacteria, whereas the A. scoparia cv. Tavrida extract had a selective effect against Gram-negative A. tumefaciens and X. arboricola bacteria and A. solani, R. solani and F. graminearum fungi. The A. annua cv. Novichok, A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd, and A. santonica cv. Citral extracts in the concentration range of 31.3–1000 µg/mL caused the death of nematodes. It was established that A. annua cv. Novichok affects the UNC-63 protein, the molecular target of which is the nicotine receptor of the N-subtype.

1. Introduction

Today, biologically active compounds for preventing and avoiding plant diseases hold great promise for organic farming. It is well known that the chemically made pesticides conventionally used in the integrated agricultural complex are more dangerous for humans and the environment than substances of natural origin used in organic agriculture. The advancement of technological innovations in production and utilization, coupled with the increasing demand for organic goods, encourages the establishment of higher standards for human health and well-being, environmental safeguarding, and biodiversity, thereby enhancing overall food security [1].
At present, the quantity of formulations derived from natural compounds utilized for organic food production is significantly lower in comparison to the formulations employed in conventional agriculture. Therefore, it is essential to search for and develop new bio-based products for organic crop farming. One of the current trends is to utilize environmentally friendly plant extracts or essential oils as they are biodegradable, do not produce any toxic metabolites, and possess a wide range of antibacterial properties. This approach can effectively address the issue of pathogen resistance to plant protection chemicals.
Among the plants that exhibit significant or established pharmacological activity, the genus Artemisia L. deserves special attention. It includes more than 500 species belonging to the largest Asteraceae family [2,3]. This genus covers a diverse range of plants, which are widely distributed in the temperate climatic zones of Europe, Asia, North and South Africa, as well as North America. It comprises varieties of perennial, biennial, and annual herbs or small shrubs [4,5]. The literature review indicated that various species of Artemisia L. possess an unprecedented range of biological activities and are used in conventional folk and academic medicine [6]. The current biological activity studies of numerous Artemisia species do not reveal the full extent of the inherent formidable biochemical potential of this plant. Based on extensive empirical evidence, this plant was initially employed in antimalarial [7,8] and antibacterial therapy [9,10] and, subsequently, as antifungal [9,10,11,12,13] and antihepatotoxic [14,15] agents, with notable anti-spasmatic, anti-inflammatory, and angioprotective properties [6,16,17,18]. Tu Youyou, a Chinese pharmaceutical chemist, was awarded the Noble Prize in Physiology and Medicine [19,20] in 2015 for her efforts in extracting the artemisinin from A. annua L. [21] and synthesizing its derivatives, namely dihydroartemisinin [22], artemeter [23], and artesunate [24]. Additionally, she conducted a study on their pharmacological activity against Plasmodium falciparum, demonstrating the high potency of these substances against tropical malaria.
The plants of Artemisia are a valuable source of antioxidants [25], which serve as versatile stabilizers for membranes. Flavonoids, including flavones (apigenin, luteolin, jaceosidine, eryodictiol, etc.), flavonols (isorhamnetin), flavone glycosides (vitexin, luteolin-7-glucoside), and flavonol glycosides (kempferol 3-glucoside, rutin, kempferol 3-ramnoside, quercitrin, kempferol 3-rutinozid, and quercetin 3-galactoside) predominate in various species of Artemisia [26,27,28,29]. The most-common source of flavonoids, such as luteolin and eryodictiol, is A. vulgaris L. In addition to the conventional application of Artemisia species, there exist data demonstrating the cytotoxic properties of artemisinin against malignant cells [30,31]. Dehydroleukodin (sesquiterpen lactone) and dehydroparishin-B (sesquiterpen acid-B of the guayanic type), which also serve as active cytotoxicants of malignant cells, were extracted from the above-ground plants of A. diffusa and A. douglassiana [32,33].
Since various extracts of Artemisia species, as well as artemisinin and its derivatives demonstrate significant antivirulent activity [34,35], they were subsequently regarded as advanced remedies against HBV and HBC, herpes viruses HSV-1 and HSV-2, human immunodeficiency virus HIV-1, and influenza A virus [36,37,38,39] and also as a promising medicine against the new coronavirus infection, SARS-CoV-2, due to their powerful anti-inflammatory, immunoregulatory, and antiviral properties [40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47].
The available research data indicate that the biologically active potential of the various Artemisia species is far from being fully studied, and their conventional applications do not utilize their properties fully. Therefore, the current investigations [48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55] of the chemical compositions and biological activity of the various Artemisia L. species hold particular significance and are experiencing a real surge as they are presently in the focus of bioorganic and bioanalytical chemistry. The chromatography–mass spectrometry technique is widely acknowledged as the most-appropriate and -informative approach for the analysis of extracts or essential oils, specifically their chemical compositions, due to its ability to combine high separation power with reliable mass spectrometry detection [56]. However, the volatile compounds of plant extracts or essential oils with no confirmed thermal decomposition at gas transition temperatures should be separated using the method of gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS) employing either electron or chemical ionization (EI or CI) techniques [57,58,59,60,61,62]. For polar and heavy components’ separation, it is advisable to use high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), which treats molecules leaving the chromatographic column with electrospray ionization (ESI) and, then, detects the generated particulates by a quadrupole time of flight mass spectrometer (HPLC–MS/MS-ESI) [63,64,65,66,67].
There are currently fourteen species of the Artemisia genus growing in the Aromatic and Medical Plants Collection of the Nikitsky Botanical Garden, having various ecological and geographical origins. Based on the introduction study, ten promising species were allocated for cultivated varieties, and five varieties were obtained for commercial cultivation in Crimea: A. annua cv. Novichok, A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd, A. santonica cv. Citral, A. abrotanum cv. Euxin, and A. scoparia cv. Tavrida.
The purpose of the present work was to study comprehensively the biochemical composition of five extracts of various Artemisia L. species selected by the Nikitsky Botanic Garden, specifically A. annua cv. Novichok, A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd, A. santonica cv. Citral, A. abrotanum cv. Euxin, and A. scoparia cv. Tavrida, utilizing the methods of GC–MS and HPLC–MS/MS-ESI, and to predict the antibacterial, fungicide, and nematocidal properties based on the identified chemical composition of these extracts.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Phytochemical Composition of Certain Species of Artemisia L. Extracts

Presently, a substantial quantity of information on the phytochemical properties has been accumulated for the plant extracts, resulting from the application of chromatography in conjunction with mass spectrometry detection and various methods of ionization [68,69,70]. The same applies to extracts and essential oils of various species of Artemisia L. The details of their phytochemical composition, derived from both qualitative and quantitative studies and given in [71,72,73,74,75], demonstrate the extensive array of bioactive compounds found in Artemisia L.
During the chromatographic analysis of five Artemisia L. species, the ethanol extracts were utilized in their native form without being diluted. The conditions of chromatographic fractionation were selected based on the literature data demonstrating that the extracts of various types of Artemisia L. have components that differ in their thermal stability, chromatographic lability, polarity, and boiling points. Hence, the examination of low-polar and volatile constituents of the prepared extracts was conducted by utilizing GC–MS with EI and CI. For the polar constituents, we utilized HPLC MS/MS (ESI+).
The results of GC-MC with different ionization types revealed a diverse range of major and minor constituents in the extracts of A. annua L., A. dracunculus L., A. santonicum L., A. abrotanum L., and A. scoparia L., as presented in Table 1. To identify the constituents, we used the relative match factor (RMF) generated by the NIST MS Search Program, on the automatic deconvolution of the mass spectra and their subsequent comparison with those in the reference digital libraries. The RMF of the compounds was largely within the range of 890–930 of the match factor, which proves the correct identification of the constituents found in the extracts. Only a third of the compounds had an RMF below 890. This is due to a weak peak intensity [M+] in the mass spectra with EI. In such cases, in order to ensure more-reliable identification [56,76], the peaks of higher intensity [M + H]+ were recorded by the CI method.
Analyzing the results of the study obtained by GC–MS (Table 1) for the extracts of A. annua L., A. dracunculus L., A. santonicum L., A. abrotanum L., and A. scoparia L. and the quantities of their constituents, we can conclude the following: they are composed of acyclic, monocyclic, and bicyclic monoterpenoids; monocyclic, bicyclic, and tricyclic and eudesmanic sesquiterpenoids; coumarins; phenolic compounds; and other chemical compounds. More detailed results are presented in the Table S1.
The acyclic monoterpenoids group revealed in five Artemisia extracts by the method of GC–MS are distributed as follows: β-myrcene, trans-β- and cis-β-ocimene, α-citral, and β-citral—in all tested extracts; Artemisia ketone—in A. annua, A. santonica, and A. scoparia extracts, with its highest content in A. annua; Artemisia alcohol—in A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. santonica, and A. scoparia. Furthermore, the acyclic diterpene alcohol of phytol was detected in the acyclic compounds of A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. abrotanum, and A. scoparia.
Monocyclic monoterpenoids such as limonene and cineole were found in A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. santonica, and A. scoparia. The group of bicyclic monoterpenoids was represented by 3-carene, α-pinene, β-pinene, and camphene found in all tested extracts; sabinene was found in A. annua, A. dracunculus, and A. scoparia; cis-sabinenehydrate—in A. santonica and A. abrotanum; camphor—in A. annua, A. santonica, and A. abrotanum; cis-chrysanthenol—in A. santonica and A. abrotanum; and borneol—in A. annua, A. abrotanum, and A. scoparia. Monocyclic sesquiterpenoids were represented by such compounds as α-curcumene (A. santonica, A. scoparia), germacrene D (A. santonica), and α-bisabolol (A. annua, A. abrotanum, A. scoparia). Bicyclic sesquiterpenoids: caryophyllene (A. annua, A. santonica, A. abrotanum, A. scoparia), α-eudesmol (A. annua, A. santonica, A. abrotanum), and arteannuic acid (A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. scoparia). Bicyclic sesquiterpene lactone (Arteannuin b) was found in A. annua solely. Tricyclic sesquiterpenoids were represented by such sesquiterpene alcohols as spathulenol (A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. santonica, A. scoparia) and isospathulenol (A. dracunculus, A. santonica, A. abrotanum). The group of coumarins detected by the GC–MS method was represented by four derivatives: 7-geranyloxycoumarin (A. dracunculus, A. santonica, A. abrotanum), scopoletin (A. annua), scoparone (A. santonica, A. abrotanum, A. scoparia), and isofraxidin (A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. abrotanum).
The phenolic compounds included estragole (A. dracunculus, A. santonica, A. abrotanum), with its highest content in A. dracunculus, eugenol (A. santonica, A. scoparia), and capillene (A. dracunculus, A. santonica, A. abrotanum, A. scoparia).
In addition to the compounds listed above, using the GC–MS method in the extracts of A. annua., A. dracunculus, A. santonica, A. abrotnum, and A. scparia, the following were detected: sesquiterpene hydrocarbon (E)-β-famesene (A. annua, A. santonica, A. abrotanum); eudesmane sesquiterpenoid β-selinene (A. annua, A. santonica); alkamides (pellitorine, (2E,4E)-N-isobutylundeca-2,4-dien-8,10-diynamide) (A. annua, A. dracunculus, A santonica, A. abrotanum); (2E,4E)-1-(piperidin-1-yl)deca-2,4-dien-1-one (A. dracunculus); a capillin (A. dracunculus, A. santonica). The last one can be considered as the structure contains acetophenone and a polyyne (pentadiynyl) portion, conjugated together as an ynone. A. scoparia was detected to contain α-Amyrin, a pentacyclic triterpenoid alcohol.
The compounds detected in each Artemisia L. extract are enlisted in Table 2 with their names, molecular formula, experimental masses, ppm error < 5 (Table S2), and retention time values. Based on the results obtained by the HPLC–MS/MS(ESI) technique for A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. santonica, A. abrotanum, and A. scoparia and the quantitative analysis of the identified components (Table 2), it can be concluded that these species comprised sesquiterpene lactones such as β-santonin, artemisinin (A. dracunculus, A. santonica, A. abrotanum, and A. scoparia), taurin (A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. santonica, and A. scoparia), bicyclic sesquiterpenoid—arteannuic acid—(A. annua, A. dracunculus, and A. scoparia), and bicyclic sesquiterpene—arteannuin b (A. annua). The group of phenolic acids consisted of gentisic acid (A. annua and A. scoparia), chlorogenic acid, 3-O-feruloylquinic acid, ferulic acid, isochlorogenic acid, and rosmarinic acid detected in each of the five Artemisia L. extracts. During the HPLC analysis, we obtained records of peaks and mass spectra (ESI+) of coumarins including scopoletin (A. annua L.), which is consistent with the results obtained by the GC–MS, and of the coumarin glucosides, i.e., scopolin (A. annua L.), isofraxidin (A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. abrotanum), and fraxidin, identified in each of the five Artemisia extracts. The most-numerous groups identified by HPLC–MS/MS were composed of the following flavonoids: luteolin, isorhamnetin, eupatolitin, chrysosplenol D, and cirsilineol (A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. santonica, A. abrotanum, A. scoparia), quercetin-3-O-hexoside (A. abrotanum, A. scoparia), and casticin (from plant extracts of A. santonica and A. scoparia); flavonoid glycosides (rutin, quercetrin, and isoquercetrin) identified in every studied species of Artemisia; and flavonoid glucosides, namely vicenin-2 (A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. abrotanum, A. scoparia), feruloyl glucose (A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. santonica), and luteolin 7-O-glucoside (A. santonica, A. abrotanum, A. scoparia). Apart from that, A. abrotanum and A. scoparia were found to contain isorhamnetin-3-rutinoside, which belongs to the estrogenic flavonoids [77], similar to luteolin, isorhamnetin, rutin, quercetrin, isoquercetrin, and vicenin-2.
Extracted by the GC–MS and HPLC–MS/MS techniques, the collection of chemical compounds constituted a distinct and unique phytochemical profile composed by the five different species (A. annua cv. Novichok, A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd, A. santonica cv. Citral, A. abrotanum cv. Euxin, A. scoparia cv. Tavrida), exhibiting high biological activity and exercising antimicrobial properties attributed to terpenoids and sesquiterpenoids. Furthermore, β-santonin, a constituent of the sesquiterpene lactones group, has a wide spectrum of activity against nematodes and cestodes.

2.2. Antibacterial and Antifungal Activity of Ethanol Extracts of Artemisia L. Plants

Based on the literature data, the Artemisia L. essential oils and plant extracts possess high antibacterial activity against a wide spectrum of pathogenic microorganisms.
Thus, the Artemisia L. essential oils effectively inhibit the growth of the following fungal species: Rhizoctonia solani, Sclerotium rolfsii, Macrophomina phaseolina, Colletotrichum fragariae, Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, Colletotrichum acutatum, etc., which cause diseases and high crop losses [25,78,79,80]. The A. scoparia L., A. sieberi L., and A. aucheri L. essential oils and extracts were found to be effective against phytopathogens [71,81,82]. The antibacterial properties are largely dependent on the time of year when the plants are harvested to produce extracts, essential oils, and BAC; the highest potential was demonstrated by plants prepared in the second half of summer [83].
In a series of laboratory experiments with serial dilution, the antibacterial effectiveness of the Artemisia L. ethanol extracts against the phytopathogenic bacteria (four strains: Rathayibacter iranicus and Bacillus subtilis (Gram-positive) and Agrobacterium tumefaciens and Xanthomonas arboricola (Gram-negative) and phytopathogenic fungi (three strains: Alternaria solani, Fusarium graminearium, and Rhizoctonia solani) was evaluated for the first time. The results of the studies are given in Table 3 and Table S3.
The antibacterial properties of the extracts varied depending on the species of the plant and pathogenic strain. The extract from A. annua was the most-effective against the Gram-positive bacteria of R. iranicus, with the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) being 500 µg/mL and the minimal bactericidal concentration (MBC) being 1000 µg/mL. The antibacterial activity of the A. annua extract was likely mediated by the presence of artemisinic acid, ketone, and alcohol in the Artemisinin extract and its precursors [84]. Another Gram-positive B. subtilis strain was more resistant to the components of the A. annua extract. For B. subtilis, the inhibitory concentration was within 2000 µg/mL and above.
The ethanol extract of A. annua demonstrated low antibacterial and antimycotic properties against the studied Gram-negative phytopathogenic bacterial and fungal strains. The concentrations inhibiting the growth of X. arboricola and R. solani were, respectively, 1000 µg/mL and 2000 µg/mL, while 4000 µg/mL and higher for A. tumefaciens, A. solani, and F. graminearum. The antimicrobial properties of the A. annua extract prepared from cv. Novichok (the Nikitsky Botanic Garden) were comparable to those of the A. annua methanol extracts from India, but they were lower than those of the A. annua methanol extracts from Bulgaria [85,86] and significantly higher than those of the ethanol extracts from the plants grown in Romania [87]. Among all the species under study, the A. dracunculus ethanol extract demonstrated a selective antimicrobial activity against R. iranicus, requiring the lowest inhibitory and bactericidal concentrations. At an extract concentration of 310 µg/mL, the bacterial cells of R. iranicus were killed. According to the Alvarez-Martínez and Van Vuuren method, which distinguishes plant extracts by their effectiveness against bacteria and fungi, the obtained results correspond to a very high antimicrobial effect [88,89]. Such data are likely to be associated with the high estragole content attributed to the extracts of these species, which demonstrates large areas of inhibited Gram-positive bacteria growth [90]. Furthermore, estragole is famous for its antimycotic effect against pathogens as such A. niger, A. flavus, T. viride, C. albicans, A. solani, F. graminearum, and R. solani [91,92]. As per our research findings, the effective concentration of the A. dracunculus ethanol extract for inhibiting fungal growth is 1120 µg/mL. The obtained findings were similar to the results for the A. santonica ethanol extract.
X. arboricola, a Gram-negative bacterium, was more sensitive to the A. dracunculus and A. santonica extracts compared to B. subtilis and A. tumefaciens, and it ceased growing when the extracts’ concentrations reached 625 and 560 µg/mL, respectively.
The antimicrobial activity of the A. dracunculus ethanol extract was lower than that of the aqueous extract and higher than that of the methanol extract and was comparable to that of the A. tarragona ethanol–water extract from Iran, with the exception of the antimicrobial activity against R. iranicus and Gram-negative bacteria. Our experiments had significantly lower results for minimal inhibitory concentrations [82,93,94].
The extract of A. santonica demonstrated significantly higher outcomes compared to those obtained for the anti-phytopathogenic extracts [95] and lower than those obtained for the methanol extracts prepared from Bulgarian plants [86].
The ethanol extract of A. scoparia in comparison to others demonstrated significant effectiveness against Gram-negative bacteria (X. Arboricola and A. Tumefaciens) and fungi (F. graminearum and R. solani). Thus, the MIC values for X. arboricola and R. solani were 150 µg/mL, F. graminearum—310 µg/mL, and A. tumefaciens—625 µg/mL. These values correspond to the very high antimicrobial activity of the extracts [88,89]. The minimum bactericide and fungicide concentrations of the A. scoparia L. extract for the X. arboricola, R. solani, and F. graminearium strains were 625 µg/mL, being 2–4-times higher than the MIC values for the same. The values of the antibacterial activity of the ethanol extract of A. scoparia significantly exceed the activity of plants grown in Iran and Palestine [80,96].
The prominent antimicrobial effect of the A. scoparia ethanol extract is probably attributable to the high contents of capillin, capillen, and scoparon. The percentage of their total presence in the extract was 63%. Scoparon is a phytoalectin, a secondary metabolite produced by plants as a reaction to contamination by various pathogens [97]. Capillen and capillin are the major components of the essential oils, manifesting their strong antibacterial and antimycotic properties against various pathogens that cause diseases in animals and humans [98,99,100,101].
The extract of A. abrotanum cv. Euxin demonstrated the lowest activity among the studied ethanol extracts. Its MIC, MBC, and MFC values were 2000 µg/mL and higher. The concentrations inhibiting the fungal growth and killing their cells have not been determined for fungal species. According to Alzoreky N.S. [102], the antibacterial concentrations of the A. abrotanum methanol extract from Yemen started from 1320 µg/mL, which is in line with the data obtained in our studies.
Therefore, as per our study, the following antimicrobial sequence can be stated for the ethanol extracts of the Artemisia L. genus plants: A. scoparia > A. dracunculus > A. santonica > A. annua > A. abrotanum.

2.3. Nematocidal Activity of cv. Artemisia L. Extracts

Caenorhabditis elegans, a free-living soil nematode, is a suitable model organism for studies in neurotoxicology and ecotoxicology. C. elegans has an advantage over other model organisms due to its easy and inexpensive cultivation in the laboratory, safety for scientists, and high fertility [103,104,105]. C. elegans consists of 959 somatic cells including 302 neurons [104]. The nervous system of C. elegans has 890 electrical synapses, 1410 neuromuscular synapses, and 6393 chemical synapses using neurotransmitters specific to the vertebrate body (acetylcholine, dopamine, serotonin, glutamate, and γ-aminobutyric acid) [103]. At the same time, nematodes lack a circulatory system and an organ of external respiration, thereby significantly facilitating the interpretation of the results of toxicological experiments [104]. Ethanol extracts of various raw materials A. annua, A. dracunculus, and A. santonica, were found to cause dose-dependent nematode mortality (Table 4).
(−)-Tetramisole hydrochloride was used as a comparator. At concentrations of 1.875 μg/mL, 3.75 μg/mL, and 7.5 μg/mL, tetramisole caused the death of 14.5 ± 2.5, 26.0 ± 3.1, and 61.5 ± 2.7% of nematodes in 24 h.
In order to identify potential molecular targets of the studied extracts’ action, we performed experiments to evaluate their toxicity at a concentration of 500 µg/mL for C. elegans of both the wild-type and mutant lines.
Table 5 provides the results of the experiments aimed at examining the effects of the Artemisia extracts on nematodes of the N2 wild-type and the mutant lines of RB896, RB756, and JD217 with null mutations in the genes encoding the muscarin receptors of acetylcholine such as gar-1, gar-2, and gar-3, respectively. The RB918 line is a null mutation of the nicotine receptor gene for N-subtype acetylcholine. The A. annua extract for C. elegans of the RB896, RB756, and RB918 lines was the least toxic extract in these experiments. Three subtypes of the above receptors have been found in C. elegans, GAR-1, GAR-2, and GEAR-3, respectively [106,107,108]. The GAR-3 receptor is the best-investigated one; as for the pharmacological profiles of the GAR-1 and GAR-2 receptors, they are understudied. The low toxicity of the A. annua extract for nematodes of the RB896 and RB756 lines indicates that this extract contains substances affecting the GAR-1 and GAR-2 mAChRs of C. elegans (Table 5).
The agonists of the acetylcholine nicotine receptor (nAChRs) are represented by a large group of substances and used as pesticides and anthelminthic drugs. Nicotine receptors of both vertebrates and invertebrates are the ion channels formed by five transmembrane proteins. Homomeric and heteromeric agonists of acetylcholine nicotine receptors (nAChRs) are distinguished. The N-type nicotine receptor in C. elegans is homomeric and consists of five identical protein subunits of ACR-16 [109,110]. The results of our experiments showed that the extract of A. annua contains substances whose molecular target is the N-type nicotine receptor (Table 6).
Table 6 shows the toxicity of the artemisia extracts for the nematode line of the N2 wild-type and the nematodes of the five mutant lines. Each line lacks one of five subunits of the L-type nicotine receptor sensitive to levamisole. In most cases, the sensitivity of the C. elegans mutant lines to the negative effects of the Artemisia extracts did not exceed the sensitivity of the N2 wild-type line. The exception was the effect of the A. santonica extract on the CB904 nematode line and the effect of the A. annua extract on the CB522 nematode line. The least-toxic extract was A. annua for C. elegans of the VC428 line with the null mutation of the UNC-63 gene. The low sensitivity of C. elegans of the VC428 line to the toxic effect of the extract of A. annua L. suggests that this extract contains substances whose target is one of the subunits of the nAChR L-subtype, namely the UNC-63 protein.
Now, the study of nicotine receptors in invertebrates has a strong focus as these receptors are targets of many pesticides and anthelminthics. All nicotine acetylcholine receptors consist of five protein subunits, but there are more genes encoding these receptors. C. elegans has 29 genes of such a type, human—17—and investigated invertebrates—from 7 to 12 [110]. Hence, a large number of subtypes of these receptors with selective sensitivity to toxicants can be expected. Levamisole-sensitive L-subtype nicotine receptors are present in nematodes, both free-living and parasitic, but they are missing in warm-blooded animals, allowing the use of these receptor agonists for the treatment of helminthiasis in humans and animals. C. elegans has an L-subtype nicotine receptor consisting of three α-subunits (LEV-8, UNC-38, and UNC-63) and three non-α-subunits (UNC-1 and UNC-29). The α-subunits are thought to be involved in the binding of acetylcholine and other N-cholinergic agonists, and the other subunits form the ion channels in neuronal membranes and locomotor muscles [110,111,112]. Our mutant analysis revealed that the A. annua extract has substances affecting the nAChR N-subtype, consisting of five molecules of the ACR-16 protein (Table 4), and also, the α-subunit of the UNC-63 receptor is affected by the substances derived from the A. annua extract (Table 6).

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Sampling

For the raw material, we used A. annua L. (Novichok variety), A. dracunculus L. (Smaragd variety), A. santonicum L. (Citral variety), A. abrotanum L. (Euxin variety), and A. scoparia Waldst. & Kit (Tavrida variety) from an experimental area of the Aromatic and Medical Plants Collection in the Nikitsky Botanical Garden, located on the southern coast of Crimea (44°31′ N, 34°15′ E, 200 m above sea level). The plants grew in brown carbonate soil with medium humus and low clay content. The climatic conditions of the southern coast of Crimea are attributed to the geographical features, specifically the mountains, which shield the coastline from the northern winds and the warm waters of the Black Sea. All these have resulted in a dry subtropical climate of a Mediterranean type.
The sampling for the study was conducted during the mass flowering of the plants. The raw material was collected between 11 a.m. and 2 p.m., during the hottest hours of the day. The portion above ground was trimmed at the level of the lower leaves of the plant. The collected plants were stored in a well-ventilated location, shielded from direct sunlight, at a temperature range of 30–35 °C.

3.2. Extracts’ Preparation

A single-stage maceration was used to prepare five types of extracts from A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. santonica, A. abrotanum, and A. scoparia. The dry plant material was ground to a particle size range of 1–2 mm in a LM 202 laboratory mill manufactured by NV-Lab (Moscow, Russia). The ground material test portions, each weighing 15.0 g, were poured with 150 mL of a 70% ethanol solution and macerated at 45 °C under constant stirring for an hour and a half. The prepared extracts were filtered using a first-type Whatman filter (Cat. No. 1001 110). The obtained filtrate materials were concentrated in a LabTex Re 100-Pro rotary evaporator manufactured by DLAB Scientific Co., Ltd., Beijing, China, and stored in a dark location at a temperature of 4 °C.

3.3. Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry

In the context of GC–MS studies, the recording of chromatograms was carried out for a full-ion current by utilizing a Chromatec Crystal 5000.2 gas chromatograph, which was paired with Chromatec, a quadrupole mass spectrometer detector equipped with an Advanced Ion Source (Chromatec, Yoshkar-Ola, Russia), for both electron ionization (EI) and chemical ionization (CI). CR–5MS, a quartz capillary column (5%-phenyl-, 95%-dimethyl polysiloxane, 30 m × 0.25 mm × 0.25 µm, Chromatec, Yoshkar-Ola, Russia), was utilized. The GC–MS test conditions were as follows: injector temperature of 280 °C; interface temperature of 270 °C; ion source temperature of 250 °C; column oven initial temperature of 60 °C; initial thermostat conditioning time of 1 min; column temperature rate of 5°/min up to 210 °C; subsequent temperature rate of 12°/min up to 280 °C; isothermal conditions for 40 min; gas-carrier (He, 99.999%) velocity of 0.9 mL/min; sample volume of 1 µL; split ratio of 1:100.
The Artemisia L. extract composition was determined by recording the mass spectra for EI and CI at 70 eV and 30 eV, respectively, within the range of 50–550 m/z (using CH4 reagent gas, high purity). In order to process the mass spectra, we used the Chromatec Analytic 3.5 software (Chromatec, Yoshkar-Ola, Russia), the NIST MS Search Program, V.2.3, the NIST’20 mass spectra electronic libraries (NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, USA), and Wiley 12th Edition (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, USA) [113].
In addition, the retention times and indices were compared with those reported in [114,115] and presented in the databases mentioned above.

3.4. High Performance Liquid Chromatography—Mass Spectrometry

The HPLC–MS/MS-ESI study was performed on a Bruker maXis II™ high-resolution ESI-QTOF mass spectrometer (Bruker GmbH, Bremen, Germany) equipped with the ESI source Apollo II (in positive-ion-detection mode, capillary voltage +4 KV, source temperature of 250 °C, voltage shift of 500 V at the end plate, scanning time of 0.2 s) and coupled to the HPLC Dionex UltiMate™ 3000 series (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), including a gradient pump, a degassing module, an automatic sampler, and a chromatographic oven. The SB-C18 Agilent Zorbax chromatographic column (150 mm × 4.6 mm, 5 µm, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) was applied with the guard column (25 mm × 4.6 mm, 5 μm, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA).
HPLC–MS/MS-ESI conditions: a binary eluent (Solvent A: 0.1% aqueous formic acid; Solvent B: acetonitrile). The gradient elution mode: 5% of B for 0–22 min, 5–15% of B for 22–35 min, 15% of B for 35–45 min, 15–20% of B for 45–55 min, 20–50% of B for 55–60 min, 50–65% of B for 60–80 min, 65% of B for 80–85 min, and 5% B for 85–90 min at a constant flow rate of 0.6 cm3/min, 30 °C column oven, and injection volume of 10 µL.
Mass spectra (ESI+) were recorded within the range of 100–1000 Da. Auto MS/MS, the automatic fragmentation mode, was applied, and the collision energy parameters were set as follows: 15 eV (within the range of 100–200 Da), 35 eV (200–500 Da), 50 eV (500–1000 Da).
N2 was used (high purity) as the drying (flow rate of 8 L/min at a temperature of 250 °C), spray (pressure of 4 bar), and collision gas.
The Compass Data Analysis 4.4, Compass Target Analysis 4.4 (Bruker GmbH, Bremen, Germany) software was used to synchronize the work with the HPLC Dionex UltiMate™ 3000 series and control the mass spectral data collection and handling.
Using target analysis, all compounds were detected by applying strict analyzing criteria. Different collision energies were applied to obtain good-intensity parent ions, as well as significant fragment ions. Accurate and reproducible spectra with high mass accuracy helped in the identification process. The acquired data were processed using three acquisition software including Compass Data Analysis 4.4, Compass Target Analysis and Compass Library Editor (Bruker GmbH, Bremen, Germany). The MS intensity threshold was set at >1000, MS2 intensity > 500, base peak intensity 1000 counts (minimum), ppm error > 5, and mSigma values > 50.
GC–MS and HPLC–MS/MS were run in three replications. Statistical treatment of the data obtained was performed at a significance level of 5%. The results are presented as the average value ± the coverage interval.
Correlation analysis was performed with the OriginPro 8.1 software (OriginLab Corp., Northampton, MA, USA).

3.5. Reagents

The reagents used were as follows: deionized water (resistivity at 25 °C equal to 18 MΩ·cm) obtained with the Barnstead Pacific-TII Unit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), acetonitrile (gradient for chromatography), formic acid (98–100% “chemically pure pharm.”, Merck, Darmstadt, Germany), ethyl alcohol (“high purity”), norfloxacin, (−)-tetramisole scopoletin, rutin, luteolin, and artemisinin, (purities ≥98%) from Sigma-Aldrich Co., (Sigma-Aldrich Co., St. Louis, MO, USA), chloramphenicol (Kazan Pharmaceutical Plant, Kazan, Russia), and difenoconazole (Score250 EC, Syngenta, Wilmington, DE, USA). In ethanol, stock standard solutions (1 mg/mL) of scopoletin, rutin, luteolin, and artemisinin were produced and kept at 4 °C.

3.6. Antibacterial Effect Tests

3.6.1. Microorganism Strains and Growth Media

The study utilized the following phytopathological strains, namely bacteria (Rathayibacter iranicus ECM Ac-1602, Bacillus subtilis ECM B-12, Xanthomonas arboricola S3, Agrobacterium tumefaciens A-47) and fungal species (Alternaria solani K-100054, Fusarium graminearum FG-30, Rhizoctonia solani BKM F-895).
The liquid broth containing the spores of the microorganisms was prepared using standard growth media: Potato Extract Glucose broth for B. subtilis EMC B-12, X. arboricola S3, A. Tumefaciens A-47, A. solani K-100054, F. graminearum FG-30, and R. solani EMC F-895 and Corynebacterium Selective Agar for Rathayibacter iranicus EMC Ac-1602.

3.6.2. Antimicrobial Assay In Vitro

In the experiments, the determination of the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of the extracts of the following cultivar plants, A. annua, A. dracunculus, A. santonica, A. abrotanum, and A. scoparia, was performed using the method of two-fold serial dilution [116] with the modification provided in [117,118]. Fungistatic activity was defined by the serial dilution method [119] in liquid medium.
The 24 h bacterial cultures a swell as the fungal cultures grown from the 7th to the 14th d were used in the study. The final inoculum contained 105 CFU/mL of bacteria and 1.1–1.5 × 102 CFU/mL of fungi. The bacteria concentration was determined using a DEN-1B densitometer (Biosan, Riga, Latvia). Tubes containing only culture medium were used as the control.
In order to establish the minimal concentrations of the bactericidal and fungicidal agents (MBC and MFC, respectively), 10 mL of inoculum (or a piece of fungal mycelium) obtained from tubes with no discernible growth was incorporated into Petri dishes containing agarized nutrient medium via an inoculation loop.
The results of the bacterial growth were observed every day for 5 days at 30 °C for R. iranicus VKM Ac-1602, B. subtilis VKM B-12, and A. tumefaciens A-47 and at 25 °C for X. arboricola S3. The fungus was incubated in a thermostat at 26 °C for 7 d. The growth of the microorganisms was visually determined [76].
Norfloxacin, chloramphenicol, and difenoconazole were used as reference compounds in the experiments.

3.7. Nematocidal Activity

The following lines of Caenorhabditis elegans received from Caenorhabditis Genetics Center were used in this work: the N2 wild-type line and mutant lines of CB211 (lev-1(e211)IV), CB522 (unc-29(e522)I), CD904 (unc-38(e264)I), JD217 (gar-3(vu78)V), RB756 (gar-2(ok520)III), RB896 (gar-1(ok755)), RB918 (acr-16(ok789)V), VC428 (unc-63(gk234)I), and VC1041 (lev-8(ok1519)X). C. elegans was cultured in Petri dishes (d = 10 cm) with standard nematode-growing medium, which consisted of 17 g/L of bactoagar, 2.5 g/L of peptone, 50 mM NaCl, 1 mM MgSO4, 1 mM CaCl2, 5 mg/L of cholesterol, and 25 mM potassium phosphate buffer (pH 6.0). E. coli strain OP50 was used for nematode feeding [116]. Experiments were carried out with young mature nematodes (young adults) incubated in M9 buffer (3 g/L KH2PO4, 6 g/L Na2HPO4, 5 g/L NaCl, 1 mM MgSO4). The nematodes were washed three times for each experiment to remove the culture medium, bacteria, and exometabolites in M9 buffer with a volume of 10 mL and 50 individuals placed per vial in glass centrifugal vials of 10 mL. The M9 buffer and extracts of the A. annua, A. dracunculus, and A. santonica plants were added to the vials. To determine the nematocidal activity, the extracts were redissolved in DMSO. The final incubating volume was 1 mL. The number of dead nematodes was counted in 24 h. The nematodes that were incapable of responding to mechanical stimulus were deemed dead.
All studies were conducted with a three-fold repetition, and the results of the definitions were handled in accordance with the international standards [120,121].

4. Conclusions

The ethanol extracts of Artemisia L. cultivated on the southern coast of the Crimean peninsula in the Nikitsky Botanical Garden contain acyclic, monocyclic, and bicyclic monoterpenoids, monocyclic, bicyclic, tricyclic, and eudesmane sesquiterpenoids, coumarins, and phenolic compounds as the main compounds, having antibacterial and antifungal activity against phytopathogenic microorganisms.
The ethanol extract of the A. scoparia of Tavrida variety was the most toxic for microscopic phytopathogenic fungi and Gram-negative bacteria, and the A. dracunculus extract of the Smaragd variety had a toxic effect on Gram-positive bacteria. The minimum inhibitory concentrations of the above extracts were 150 µg/mL due to their high antimicrobial activity.
The nematocidal activity of the ethanol extracts of A. annua of the Novichok variety, A. dracunculus of the Smaragd variety, and A. santonica of the Citral on C. elegans, a soil nematode, characterized by a concentration range of 31.3–1000 µg/mL, was established. The mutant analysis revealed the insignificant effects of A. dracunculus and A. santonica extracts on the muscarinic and nicotinic receptors of C. elegans. Moreover, the A. annua extract had compounds acting on both the N-subtype nAChR receptors and levamisole receptors of α-subunit UNC-63.
The total results of the studies on the ethanol extracts obtained from the five varieties of the Artemisia L. species growing in the Nikitsky Botanical Garden collection of aromatic and medical plants indicated that, due to their high content of natural chemical compounds of different classes, showing high antibacterial, antifungal, and nematocidal activity, they are advanced initial raw materials as a basis for designing in the future the most-advanced and selective-goods for organic agriculture using the natural potential of the plants (Tables S1–S3).

Supplementary Materials

The supporting information can be downloaded at:

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, E.N. and I.F.; methodology and validation, E.N., I.F., L.L., D.T., A.R., G.S., A.E., A.G., F.B. and T.K.; formal analysis, E.N., I.F. and T.K.; investigation, F.B., D.T. and T.K.; resources, E.N., I.F., O.S. and T.K.; writing—original draft preparation, E.N., I.F., L.L., D.T., F.B. and T.K.; writing—review and editing, E.N., I.F., L.L., D.T., F.B. and T.K.; visualization, E.N., I.F., L.L. and T.K.; supervision, E.N., I.F. and T.K.; project administration, E.N. and I.F.; funding acquisition, E.N. and I.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.


This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available upon request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


  1. Burtscher-Schaden, H.; Durstberger, T.; Zaller, J.G. Toxicological Comparison of Pesticide Active Substances Approved for Conventional vs. Organic Agriculture in Europe. Toxics 2022, 10, 753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Mucciarelli, M.; Maffei, M. Introduction to the Genus. In Artemisia; Wright, C.W., Ed.; Taylor & Francis Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2002; pp. 1–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Watson, L.E.; Bates, P.L.; Evans, T.M.; Unwin, M.M.; Estes, J.R. Molecular phylogeny of Subtribe Artemisiinae (Asteraceae), including Artemisia and its allied and segregate genera. BMC Evol. Biol. 2002, 2, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Abad, M.J.; Bedoya, L.M.; Apaza, L.; Bermejo, P. The Artemisia L. Genus: A Review of Bioactive Essential Oils. Molecules 2012, 17, 2542–2566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Hayat, M.Q.; Ashraf, M.; Khan, M.A.; Jabeen, S. Ethnobotany of the genus Artemisia L. (Asteraceae) in Pakistan. Ethnobot. Res. Appl. 2009, 7, 147–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bora, K.S.; Sharma, A. The genus Artemisia: A comprehensive review. Pharm. Biol. 2011, 49, 101–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Shinyuy, L.M.; Loe, G.E.; Jansen, O.; Mamede, L.; Ledoux, A.; Noukimi, S.F.; Abenwie, S.N.; Ghogomu, S.M.; Souopgui, J.; Robert, A.; et al. Secondary Metabolites Isolated from Artemisia afra and Artemisia annua and Their Anti-Malarial, Anti-Inflammatory and Immunomodulating Properties—Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: A Review. Metabolites 2023, 13, 613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Ding, J.; Wang, L.; He, C.; Zhao, J.; Si, L.; Huang, H. Artemisia scoparia: Traditional uses, active constituents and pharmacological effects. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2021, 273, 113960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Das, S.; Vörös-Horváth, B.; Bencsik, T.; Micalizzi, G.; Mondello, L.; Horváth, G.; Kőszegi, T.; Széchenyi, A. Antimicrobial Activity of Different Artemisia Essential Oil Formulations. Molecules 2020, 25, 2390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bisht, D.; Kumar, D.; Kumar, D.; Dua, K.; Chellappan, D.K. Phytochemistry and pharmacological activity of the genus Artemisia. Arch. Pharm. Res. 2021, 44, 439–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kishore, N.; Dubey, N.K.; Chansouria, J.P.N. Antimycotic activity of the essential oil of Artemisia nilagirica. Flavour Fragr. J. 2001, 16, 61–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wenqiang, G.; Shufen, L.; Ruixiang, Y.; Yanfeng, H. Comparison of composition and antifungal activity of Artemisia argyi Levl. et Vant inflorescence essential oil extracted by hydrodistillation and supercritical carbon dioxide. Nat. Prod. Res. 2006, 20, 992–998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Guan, X.; Ge, D.; Li, S.; Huang, K.; Liu, J.; Li, F. Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial Activities of Artemisia argyi Lévl. et Vant Essential Oils Extracted by Simultaneous Distillation-Extraction, Subcritical Extraction and Hydrodistillation. Molecules 2019, 24, 483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Kiso, Y.; Ogasawara, S.; Hirota, K.; Watanabe, N.; Oshima, Y.; Konno, C.; Hikino, H. Antihepatotoxic principles of Artemisia capillaris Buds 1. Planta Med. 1984, 50, 81–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Shreenidhi, K.; Bose, V.G. A Preliminary Investigation on the Antihepatotoxic Activity of Artemisia pallens Leaves in the Diclofenac-Treated—Pangasius sps. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2022, 31, 4837–4849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ivanescu, B.; Lungu, C.; Vlase, L.; Gheldiu, A.M.; Grigorescu, C.; Corciova, A. Bioactive Compounds from Artemisia campestris L. subsp. Campestris. Rev. Chim. 2018, 69, 3076–3081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Abate, G.; Zhang, L.; Pucci, M.; Morbini, G.; Mac Sweeney, E.; Maccarinelli, G.; Ribaudo, G.; Gianoncelli, A.; Uberti, D.; Memo, M.; et al. Phytochemical Analysis and Anti-Inflammatory Activity of Different Ethanolic Phyto-Extracts of Artemisia annua L. Biomolecules 2021, 11, 975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Aglarova, A.M.; Zilfikarov, I.N.; Severtseva, O.V. Biological Characteristics and Useful Properties of Tarragon (Artemisia dracunculus L.) (Review). Pharm. Chem. J. 2008, 42, 81–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Tambo, E.; Khater, E.I.M.; Chen, J.-H.; Bergquist, R.; Zhou, X.-N. Nobel prize for the artemisinin and ivermectin discoveries: A great boost towards elimination of the global infectious diseases of poverty. Infect. Dis. Poverty 2015, 4, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Xin-Zhuan, S.; Miller, L.H. The discovery of artemisinin and the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Sci. China Life Sci. 2015, 58, 1175–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wang, M.; Park, C.; Wu, Q.; Simon, J.E. Analysis of Artemisinin in Artemisia annua L. by LC-MS with Selected Ion Monitoring. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 7010–7013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Teja-Isavadharm, P.; Siriyanonda, D.; Siripokasupkul, R.; Apinan, R.; Chanarat, N.; Lim, A.; Wannaying, S.; Saunders, D.; Fukuda, M.M.; Miller, R.S.; et al. A Simplified Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry Assay for Artesunate and Dihydroartemisinin, Its Metabolite, in Human Plasma. Molecules 2010, 15, 8747–8768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Cesar, I.C.; Ribeiro, J.A.A.; Teixeira, L.S.; Bellorio, K.B.; de Abreu, F.C.; Moreira, J.M.; Chellini, P.R.; Pianetti, G.A. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for the simultaneous quantitation of artemether and lumefantrine in human plasma: Application for a pharmacokinetic study. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 2011, 54, 114–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Persaud, S.; Eid, S.; Swiderski, N.; Serris, I.; Cho, H. Preparations of Rectal Suppositories Containing Artesunate. Pharmaceutics 2020, 12, 222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Pandey, A.K.; Singh, P. The Genus Artemisia: A 2012–2017 Literature Review on Chemical Composition, Antimicrobial, Insecticidal and Antioxidant Activities of Essential Oils. Medicines 2017, 4, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Anibogwu, R.; Jesus, K.D.; Pradhan, S.; Pashikanti, S.; Mateen, S.; Sharma, K. Extraction, Isolation and Characterization of Bioactive Compounds from Artemisia and Their Biological Significance: A Review. Molecules 2021, 26, 6995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Seo, J.M.; Kang, H.M.; Son, K.H.; Kim, J.H.; Lee, C.W.; Kim, H.M.; Chang, S.I.; Kwon, B.M. Antitumor activity of flavones isolated from Artemisia argyi. Planta Med. 2003, 69, 218–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Liu, C.Z.; Murch, S.J.; EL-Demerdash, M.; Saxena, P.K. Artemisia judaica L.: Micropropagation and antioxidant activity. J. Biotechnol. 2004, 110, 63–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lee, H.G.; Yu, K.A.; Oh, W.K.; Baeg, T.W.; Oh, H.C.; Ahn, J.S.; Jang, W.C.; Kim, J.W.; Lim, J.S.; Choe, Y.K.; et al. Inhibitory effect of jaceosidin isolated from Artemisia argyion the function of E6 and E7 oncoproteins of HPV 16. J. Ethnopharmacol 2005, 98, 339–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Jia, L.; Song, Q.; Zhou, C.; Li, X.; Pi, L.; Ma, X. Dihydroartemisinin as a putative STAT3 inhibitor, suppresses the growth of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma by targeting Jak2/STAT3 signaling. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, 0147157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Slezakova, S.; Ruda-Kucerova, J. Anticancer Activity of Artemisinin and its Derivatives. Anticancer Res. 2017, 37, 5995–6003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Feng, X.; Cao, S.; Qiu, F.; Zhang, B.-L. Traditional application and modern pharmacological research of Artemisia annua L. Pharmacol. Ther. 2020, 216, 107650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kiani, B.H.; Kayani, W.K.; Khayam, A.U.; Dilshad, E.; Ismail, H.; Mirza, B. Artemisinin and its derivatives: A promising cancer therapy. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2020, 47, 6321–6336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Efferth, T. Beyond malaria: The inhibition of viruses by artemisinin-type compounds. Biotechnol. Adv. 2018, 36, 1730–1737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Efferth, T.; Romero, M.R.; Wolf, D.G.; Stamminger, T.; Marin, J.J.; Marschall, M. The antiviral activities of artemisinin and artesunate. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2008, 47, 804–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Obeid, S.; Alen, J.; Nguyen, V.H.; Pham, V.C.; Meuleman, P.; Pannecouque, C.; Le, T.N.; Neyts, J.; Dehaen, W.; Paeshuyse, J. Artemisinin analogues as potent inhibitors of in vitro hepatitis C virus replication. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e81783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Romero, M.R.; Efferth, T.; Serrano, M.A.; Castano, B.; Macias, R.I.; Briz, O.; Marin, J.J. Effect of artemisinin/artesunate as inhibitors of hepatitis B virus production in an “in vitro” replicative system. Antivir. Res. 2005, 68, 75–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Xiao, J.; Liu, P.; Hu, Y.; Liu, T.; Guo, Y.; Sun, P.; Zheng, J.; Ren, Z.; Wang, Y. Antiviral activities of Artemisia vulgaris L. extract against herpes simplex virus. Chin. Med. 2023, 18, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. D’Alessandro, S.; Scaccabarozzi, D.; Signorini, L.; Perego, F.; Ilboudo, D.P.; Ferrante, P.; Delbue, S. The Use of Antimalarial Drugs against Viral Infection. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Rolta, R.; Salaria, D.; Sharma, P.P.; Sharma, B.; Kumar, V.; Rathi, B.; Verma, M.; Sourirajan, A.; Baumler, D.J.; Dev, K. Phytocompounds of Rheum emodi, Thymus serpyllum, and Artemisia annua Inhibit Spike Protein of SARS-CoV-2 Binding to ACE2 Receptor: In Silico Approach. Curr. Pharmacol. Rep. 2021, 7, 135–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Cao, R.; Hu, H.; Li, Y.; Wang, X.; Xu, M.; Liu, J.; Zhang, H.; Yan, Y.; Zhao, L.; Li, W.; et al. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 potential of artemisinins in vitro. ACS Infect. Dis. 2020, 6, 2524–2531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Sehailia, M.; Chemat, S. Antimalarial-agent artemisinin and derivatives portray more potent binding to Lys353 and Lys31-binding hotspots of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein than hydroxychloroquine: Potential repurposing of artenimol for COVID-19. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021, 16, 6184–6194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Rai, K.K.; Sharma, L.; Pandey, N.; Meena, R.P.; Rai, S.P. Repurposing Artemisia annua L. flavonoids, artemisinin and its derivatives as potential drugs against novel coronavirus (SARS-nCoV) as revealed by in-silico studies. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Biotechnol. 2020, 84, 374–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Nie, C.; Trimpert, J.; Moon, S.; Haag, R.; Gilmore, K.; Kaufer, B.B.; Seeberger, P.H. In vitro efficacy of Artemisia extracts against SARS-CoV-2. Virol. J. 2021, 18, 182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Nair, M.S.; Huang, Y.; Fidock, D.A.; Polyak, S.J.; Wagoner, J.; Towler, M.J.; Weathers, P.J. Artemisia annua L. extracts inhibit the in vitro replication of SARS-CoV-2 and two of its variants. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2021, 274, 114016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Gendrot, M.; Duflot, I.; Boxberger, M.; Delandre, O.; Jardot, P.; Bideau, M.L.; Andreani, J.; Fonta, I.; Mosnier, J.; Rolland, C.; et al. Antimalarial artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACT) and COVID-19 in Africa: In vitro inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 replication by mefloquine-artesunate. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 2020, 99, 437–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Orege, J.I.; Adeyemi, S.B.; Tiamiyu, B.B.; Akinyemi, T.O.; Ibrahim, Y.A.; Orege, O.B. Artemisia and Artemisia-based products for COVID-19 management: Current state and future perspective. Adv. Tradit. Med. 2023, 23, 85–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Malhotra, A.; Rawat, A.; Prakash, O.; Kumar, R.; Srivastava, R.M.; Kumar, S. Chemical composition and pesticide activity of essential oils from Artemisia annua L. harvested in the rainy and winter seasons. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2023, 107, 104601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Kim, Y.B.; Cho, H.J.; Yi, Y.S. Anti-inflammatory role of Artemisia argyi methanol extract by targeting the caspase-11 non-canonical inflammasome in macrophages. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2023, 307, 116231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Qanash, H.; Bazaid, A.S.; Aldarhami, A.; Alharbi, B.; Almashjary, M.N.; Hazzazi, M.S.; Felemban, H.R.; Abdelghany, T.M. Phytochemical Characterization and Efficacy of Artemisia judaica Extract Loaded Chitosan Nanoparticles as Inhibitors of Cancer Proliferation and Microbial Growth. Polymers 2023, 15, 391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Chebbac, K.; Benziane Ouaritini, Z.; El Moussaoui, A.; Chalkha, M.; Lafraxo, S.; Bin Jardan, Y.A.; Nafidi, H.-A.; Bourhia, M.; Guemmouh, R. Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Properties of Chemically Analyzed Essential Oil of Artemisia annua L. (Asteraceae) Native to Mediterranean Area. Life 2023, 13, 807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Chebbac, K.; Benziane Ouaritini, Z.; Allali, A.; Tüzün, B.; Zouirech, O.; Chalkha, M.; El Moussaoui, A.; Lafraxo, S.; Nafidi, H.-A.; Bin Jardan, Y.A.; et al. Promising Insecticidal Properties of Essential Oils from Artemisia aragonensis Lam. and Artemisia negrei L. (Asteraceae) by Targeting Gamma-Aminobutyric Acid and Ryanodine Receptor Proteins: In Vitro and In Silico Approaches. Separations 2023, 10, 329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Kshirsagar, S.G.; Rao, R.V. Antiviral and Immunomodulation Effects of Artemisia. Medicina 2021, 57, 217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Banožić, M.; Wronska, A.W.; Jakovljević Kovač, M.; Aladić, K.; Jerković, I.; Jokić, S. Comparative Evaluation of Different Extraction Techniques for Separation of Artemisinin from Sweet Wormwood (Artemisia annua L.). Horticulturae 2023, 9, 629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Hong, M.; Kim, M.; Jang, H.; Bo, S.; Deepa, P.; Sowndhararajan, K.; Kim, S. Multivariate Analysis of Essential Oil Composition of Artemisia annua L. Collected from Different Locations in Korea. Molecules 2023, 28, 1131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Fitsev, I.M.; Blokhin, V.K.; Budnikov, G.K. Chromatographic techniques in forensic chemical examinations. J. Anal. Chem. 2004, 59, 1171–1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Singh, H.P.; Kaur, S.; Mittal, S.; Batish, D.R.; Kohli, R.K. Phytotoxicity of major constituents of the volatile oil from leaves of Artemisia scoparia Waldst. & Kit. Z. Naturforsch. 2008, 63, 663–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Al-Marzoqi, A.H.; Hameed, I.H.; Idan, S.A. Analysis of bioactive chemical components of two medicinal plants (Coriandrum sativum and Melia azedarach) leaves using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC–MS). Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2015, 14, 2812–2830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zhigzhitzhapova, S.V.; Randalova, T.E.; Radnaeva, L.D. Composition of essential oil of Artemisia scoparia Waldst. et Kit. from Buryatia and Mongolia. Russ. J. Bioorg. Chem. 2016, 42, 730–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Hameed, I.H.; Altameme, H.J.; Idan, S.A. Artemisia annua: Biochemical products analysis of methanolic aerial parts extract and anti-microbial capacity. Res. J. Pharm. Biol. Chem. Sci. 2016, 7, 1843–1868. [Google Scholar]
  61. Sharonova, N.L.; Terenzhev, D.A.; Bushmeleva, K.N.; Gumerova, S.K.; Lyubina, A.P.; Fitsev, I.M.; Belov, T.G. Phytochemical Contents, Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Properties of Gnaphalium uliginosum L. Ethanolic Extract and Essential Oil for Agricultural Uses. Asian J. Chem. 2019, 11, 2672–2678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Sharonova, N.; Nikitin, E.; Terenzhev, D.; Lyubina, A.; Amerhanova, S.; Bushmeleva, K.; Rakhmaeva, A.; Fitsev, I.; Sinyashin, K. Comparative Assessment of the Phytochemical Composition and Biological Activity of Extracts of Flowering Plants of Centaurea cyanus L., Centaurea jacea L. and Centaurea scabiosa L. Plants 2021, 10, 1279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Avula, B.; Wang, Y.H.; Smillie, T.J.; Mabusela, W.; Vincent, L.; Weitz, F.; Khan, I.A. Quantitative determination of flavonoids by column high-performance liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry and ultraviolet absorption detection in Artemisia afra and comparative studies with various species of Artemisia plants. J. AOAC Int. 2009, 92, 633–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Souhila, T.; Fatma Zohra, B.; Tahar, H.S. Identification and quantification of phenolic compounds of Artemisia herba-alba at three harvest time by HPLC-ESI–Q-TOF–MS. Int. J. Food Prop. 2019, 22, 843–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Fu, C.; Yu, P.; Wang, M.; Qiu, F. Phytochemical analysis and geographic assessment of flavonoids, coumarins and sesquiterpenes in Artemisia annua L. based on HPLC-DAD quantification and LC-ESI-QTOF-MS/MS confirmation. Food Chem. 2020, 312, 126070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Trifan, A.; Zengin, G.; Sinan, K.I.; Sieniawska, E.; Sawicki, R.; Maciejewska-Turska, M.; Skalikca-Woźniak, K.; Luca, S.V. Unveiling the Phytochemical Profile and Biological Potential of Five Artemisia Species. Antioxidants 2022, 11, 1017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Shi, H.; Wang, Z.; Xu, F.; Li, J.; Li, J.; Wang, M. A Discovery-Based Metabolomic Approach Using UPLC-Q-TOF-MS/MS Reveals Potential Antimalarial Compounds Present in Artemisia annua L. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 14903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Fitsev, I.; Shlyamina, O.; Makaeva, A.; Nasybullina, G.; Saifutdinov, A. Detection of cypermethrin residues in toxicological control objects using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry with solid-phase extraction. Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng. Res. Dev. 2020, 10, 5563–5570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Fitsev, I.M.; Likhacheva, A.Y.; Sayfutdinov, A.M.; Mukharlyamova, A.Z.; Mokhtarova, S.L.; Nasybullina, Z.R. Determination of diquat and paraquat by high performance liquid chromatography in areas of environmental monitoring. Uchenye Zap. Kazan. Univ. Seriya Estestv. Nauk. 2021, 163, 61–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Fitsev, I.M.; Rakhmetova, E.R.; Mukhammetshina, A.G.; Burkin, K.E.; Shlyamina, O.V. Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry Determination of Deltamethrin in Food. Uchenye Zap. Kazan. Univ. Seriya Estestv. Nauk. 2021, 163, 569–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Obistioiu, D.; Cristina, R.T.; Schmerold, I.; Chizzola, R.; Stolze, K.; Nichita, I.; Chiurciu, V. Chemical characterization by GC–MS and in vitro activity against Candida albicans of volatile fractions prepared from Artemisia dracunculus, Artemisia abrotanum, Artemisia absinthium and Artemisia vulgaris. Chem. Cent. J. 2014, 8, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Al-Shuneigat, J.; Al-Sarayreh, S.; Al-Qudah, M.; Al-Tarawneh, I.; Al-Saraireh, Y.; Al-Qtaitat, A. GC–MS analysis and antibacterial activity of the essential oil isolated from wild Artemisia herba-alba grown in South Jordan. Br. J. Med. Med. Res. 2015, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Sahu, N.; Meena, S.; Shukla, V.; Chaturvedi, P.; Kumar, B.; Datta, D.; Arya, K.R. Extraction, fractionation and re-fractionation of Artemisia nilagirica for anticancer activity and HPLC-ESI-QTOF-MS/MS determination. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2018, 213, 72–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Chaudhary, R.; Maharjan, B.; Bharati, S.; Shrestha, T.; Mishra, P.K.; Karanjit, S.; Shrestha, R.L.S. Phytochemical screening GC–MS analysis and biological activities of extracts of Artemisia vulgaris Linn. Amrit Res. J. 2021, 2, 83–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Houti, H.; Ghanmi, M.; Satrani, B.; Mansouri, F.E.; Cacciola, F.; Sadiki, M.; Boukir, A. Moroccan Endemic Artemisia herba-alba Essential Oil: GC–MS Analysis and Antibacterial and Antifungal Investigation. Separations 2023, 10, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Fitsev, I.M.; Nikitin, E.N.; Rakhmaeva, A.M.; Terenzhev, D.A.; Sakhno, T.M.; Nasybullina, Z.R. Chemical composition of Cupressus sempervirens L. and Thuja occidentalis L. essential oils and their activity against phytopathogenic fungi. Uchenye Zap. Kazan. Univ. Seriya Estestv. Nauk. 2022, 164, 392–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Lee, S.J.; Chung, H.Y.; Maier, C.G.A.; Wood, A.R.; Dixon, R.A.; Mabry, T.J. Estrogenic Flavonoids from Artemisia vulgaris L. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1998, 46, 3325–3329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Farzaneh, M.; Ahmadzadeh, M.; Hadian, J.; Tehrani, A.S. Chemical composition and antifungal activity of the essential oils of three species of Artemisia on some soil-borne phytopathogens. Commun. Agric. Appl. Biol. Sci. 2006, 71, 1327–1333. [Google Scholar]
  79. Bouzenna, H.; Krichen, L. Pelargonium graveolens L’Her. and Artemisia arborescens L. essential oils: Chemical composition, antifungal activity against Rhizoctonia solani and insecticidal activity against Rhyzopertha dominica. Nat. Prod. Res. 2013, 27, 841–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Ramezani, M.; Fazli-Bazzaz, B.; Saghafi-Khadem, F.; Dabaghian, A. Antimicrobial activity of four Artemisia species of Iran. Fitoterapia 2004, 75, 201–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Sengul, M.; Ercisli, S.; Yildiz, H.; Gungor, N.; Kavaz, A.; Çetin, B. Antioxidant, antimicrobial activity and total phenolic content within the aerial parts of Artemisia absinthum, Artemisia santonicum and Saponaria officinalis. Iran. J. Pharm. Res. 2011, 10, 49. [Google Scholar]
  82. Behbahani, B.A.; Shahidi, F.; Yazdi, F.T.; Mortazavi, S.A.; Mohebbi, M. Antioxidant activity and antimicrobial effect of tarragon (Artemisia dracunculus) extract and chemical composition of its essential oil. J. Food Meas. Charact. 2017, 11, 847–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Yun, K.W.; Jeong, H.J.; Kim, J.H. The influence of the growth season on the antimicrobial and antioxidative activity in Artemisia princeps var. orientalis. Ind. Crops Prod. 2008, 27, 69–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Dhingra, V.; Pakki, S.R.; Narasu, M.L. Antimicrobial activity of artemisinin and its precursors. Curr. Sci. 2000, 78, 709–713. [Google Scholar]
  85. Gupta, P.C.; Dutta, B.; Pant, D.; Joshi, P.; Lohar, D.R. In Vitro Antibacterial Activity of Artemisia annua Linn. Growing in India. Int. J. Green Pharm. 2009, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Sotirova, A.; Mutafova, B.; Berkov, S.; Nikolova, M. Antibacterial Activity of Methanol Extract and Acetone Exudates from Bulgarian Plants. Acta Microbiol. Bulg. 2022, 38, 48–51. [Google Scholar]
  87. Bordean, M.E.; Ungur, R.A.; Toc, D.A.; Borda, I.M.; Marțiș, G.S.; Pop, C.R.; Filip, M.; Vlassa, M.; Nasui, B.A.; Pop, A.; et al. Antibacterial and Phytochemical Screening of Artemisia Species. Antioxidants 2023, 12, 596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Álvarez-Martínez, F.J.; Barrajón-Catalán, E.; Herranz-López, M.; Micol, V. Antibacterial plant compounds, extracts and essential oils: An updated review on their effects and putative mechanisms of action. Phytomedicine 2021, 90, 153626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Van Vuuren, S.; Holl, D. Antimicrobial natural product research: A review from a South African perspective for the years 2009–2016. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2017, 208, 236–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Andrade, T.C.; De Lima, S.G.; Freitas, R.M.; Rocha, M.S.; Islam, M.; Da Silva, T.G.; Militão, G.C. Isolation, characterization and evaluation of antimicrobial and cytotoxic activity of estragole, obtained from the essential oil of Croton zehntneri (Euphorbiaceae). An. Acad. Bras. Ciências 2015, 87, 173–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Shin, S.; Kang, C.-A. Antifungal Activity of the Essential Oil of Agastache Rugosa Kuntze and Its Synergism with Ketoconazole. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2003, 36, 111–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Shin, S. Essential oil compounds from Agastache rugosa as antifungal agents against Trichophyton species. Arch. Pharm. Res. 2004, 27, 295–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Tajbakhsh, M.; Soleimani, N. Evaluation of the bactericidal effects of Zingiber officinale, Aloysia citrodora and Artemisia dracunculus on the survival of standard Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial strains. Jorjani Biomed. J. 2018, 6, 22–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Ekiert, H.; Świątkowska, J.; Knut, E.; Klin, P.; Rzepiela, A.; Tomczyk, M.; Szopa, A. Artemisia dracunculus (Tarragon): A review of its traditional uses, phytochemistry and pharmacology. Front. Pharmacol. 2021, 12, 653993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Dadasoglu, F.; Kotan, R.; Cakir, A.; Cakmakci, R.; Kordali, S.; Ozer, H.; Karagoz, K.; Dikbas, N. Antibacterial activities of essential oils, extracts and some of their major components of Artemisia spp. L. against seed-borne plant pathogenic bacteria. Fresenius Environ. Bull. 2015, 24, 2715–2724. [Google Scholar]
  96. Rahhal, B.M.; Jaradat, N.; Hawash, M.; Qadi, M.; Issa, L.; Yahya, A.; Sanyora, S.; Saed, M.; Al-Rimawi, F. Phytochemical Screening, Antioxidative, Antiobesity, Antidiabetic and Antimicrobial Investigations of Artemisia scoparia Grown in Palestine. Processes 2022, 10, 2050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Yamaga, I.; Nakamura, S. Penicillium growth inhibition, fruit decay reduction, and polymethoxyflavones and scoparone induction in satsuma mandarin irradiated with ultraviolet-A light-emitting diodes. Sci. Hortic. 2022, 303, 111197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Manika, N.; Chanotiya, C.S.; Darokar, M.; Singh, S.; Das Bagchi, G. Compositional characters and antimicrobial potential of Artemisia stricta Edgew. F. stricta Pamp. Essential oil. Rec. Nat. Prod. 2016, 10, 40–46. [Google Scholar]
  99. Stojanović, G.S.; Ickovski, J.D.; Đorđević, A.S.; Petrović, G.M.; Stepić, K.D.; Palić, I.R.; Stamenković, J.G. The First Report on Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial Activity of Artemisia scoparia Waldst. et Kit. Extracts. Nat. Prod. Commun. 2020, 15, 1934578X20915034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Sugimoto, N.; Tada, A.; Yamazaki, T.; Tanamoto, K. Antimicrobial activity and constituents in rumput roman extract as a natural food preservative. J. Food Hyg. Soc. Jpn. 2007, 48, 106–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Imai, K. Studies on the essential oil of Artemisia capillaris Thunb. III. Antifungal activity of essential oil. Structure and antifungal principal capillin. Yakugaku Zasshi J. Pharm. Soc. Jpn. 1956, 76, 405–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Alzoreky, N.S.; Nakahara, K. Antibacterial activity of extracts from some edible plants commonly consumed in Asia. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2003, 80, 223–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Avila, D.; Helmcke, K.; Aschner, M. The Caenorhabiditis elegans model as a reliable tool in neurotoxicology. Hum. Exp. Toxicol. 2012, 31, 236–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Brenner, S. The genetics of Caenorhabditis elegans. Genetics 1974, 77, 71–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Choi, J. Caenorhabditis elegans as a biological model for multilevel biomarker analysis in environmental toxicology and risk assessment. Toxicol Res. 2008, 24, 235–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Kim, S.; Shin, Y.; Shin, Y.; Park, Y.S.; Cho, N.J. Regulation of ERK1/2 by the C. elegans muscarinic acetylcholine receptor GAR-3 in Chinese hamster ovary cells. Mol. Cells 2008, 25, 504–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Liu, Y.; LeBoeuf, B.; Garcia, L.R. Gαq-coupled muscarinic acetylcholine receptors enhance nicotinic acetylcholine receptor signaling in Caenorhabditis elegans mating behavior. J. Neurosci. 2007, 27, 1411–1421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Steger, K.A.; Avery, L. The GAR-3 muscarinic receptor cooperates with calcium signals to regulate muscle contraction in the Caenorhabditis elegans pharynx. Genetics 2004, 167, 633–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Bass, C.; Denholm, I.; Williamson, M.S.; Nauen, R. The global status of insect resistance to neonicotinoid insecticides. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2015, 121, 78–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Sattelle, D.B. Invertebrate nicotinic acetylcholine receptors-targets for chemicals and drugs important in agriculture, veterinary medicine and human health. J. Pestic. Sci. 2009, 34, 233–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Dent, J.A. What can Caenorhabditis elegans tell us about nematocides and parasites? Biotechnol. Bioprocess Eng. 2001, 6, 252–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Holden-Dye, L.; Walker, R.J. Anthelmintic drugs and nematicides: Studies in Caenorhabditis elegans. In WormBook; University of Southampton: Southampton, UK, 2014; pp. 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Kalmykova, A.D.; Yakupova, E.N.; Bekmuratova, F.A.; Fitsev, I.M.; Ziyatdinova, G.K. Evaluation of the antioxidant properties and GC–MSD analysis of commercial essential oils from plants of the Lamiaceae family. Uchenye Zap. Kazan. Univ. Seriya Estestv. Nauk. 2023, 165, 94–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Babushok, V.I.; Linstrom, P.J.; Zenkevich, I.G. Retention indices for frequently reported compounds of plant essential oils. J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 2011, 40, 3–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Adams, R.P. Identification of Essential Oil Components by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry, 4th ed.; Allured Publishing Corporation: Carol Stream, IL, USA, 2007; ISBN 978-1-932633-21-4. [Google Scholar]
  116. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institutes (CLSI). Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically. In CLSI Standard M07, 11th ed.; Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Wayne, PA, USA, 2018; p. 112. [Google Scholar]
  117. Kanagarajan, V.; Ezhilarasi, M.R.; Gopalakrishnan, M. In vitro microbiological evaluation of 1,1′-(5,5′-(1,4-phenylene)bis(3-aryl-1H-pyrazole-5,1-(4H,5H)-diyl))diethanones, novel bisacetylated pyrazoles. Org. Med. Chem. Lett. 2011, 1, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Akhmedov, A.; Gamirov, R.; Panina, Y.; Sokolova, E.; Leonteva, Y.; Tarasova, E.; Potekhina, R.; Fitsev, I.; Shurpik, D.; Stoikov, I. Towards potential antifungal agents: Synthesis, supramolecular self-assembly and in vitro activity of azole mono-, sesqui- and diterpenoids. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2023, 21, 4863–4873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institutes (CLSI). Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts. In CLSI Standard M27, 4th ed.; Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Wayne, PA, USA, 2017; p. 31. [Google Scholar]
  120. ISO 5725-1:1994; Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of Measurements Methods and Results–Part 1: General Principles and Definitions. TC 69/SC 6; International Standards Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 1994.
  121. ISO/IEC GUIDE 98-1:2009; Uncertainty of Measurement—Part 1: Introduction to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2009; p. 32.
Table 1. The results of the determination of the quantitative content of non-polar components in extracts of the plants as follows: A. annua. cv. Novichok, A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd, A. santonica cv. Citral, A. abrotanum cv. Euxin, and A. scoparia cv. Tavrida obtained by GC–MS (components with ω > 0.04%, mass., n = 3, p = 0.95).
Table 1. The results of the determination of the quantitative content of non-polar components in extracts of the plants as follows: A. annua. cv. Novichok, A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd, A. santonica cv. Citral, A. abrotanum cv. Euxin, and A. scoparia cv. Tavrida obtained by GC–MS (components with ω > 0.04%, mass., n = 3, p = 0.95).
tR1, minCompoundω (%)
A. annua
cv. Novichok
A. dracunculus
cv. Smaragd
A. santonica
cv. Citral
A. abrotanum
cv. Euxin
A. scoparia
cv. Tavrida
7.83Limonene1.87 3.613.542.80
8.17Artemisia ketone32.811.210.05
8.53Artemisia alcohol3.740.060.050.08
14.39Germacrene D0.07
17.12Arteannuin b4.00
18.22Arteannuic acid4.051.240.86
1 Retention time, min.
Table 2. The results of quantitative content determination for polar components in the extracts of A. annua cv. Novichok, A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd, A. santonica cv. Citral, A. abrotanum cv. Euxin, and A. scoparia cv. Tavrida obtained by the HPLC–MS/MS(ESI+) technique (the components with ω ≥ 0.04%, in mean ± SEM, n = 3, p = 0.95, are provided).
Table 2. The results of quantitative content determination for polar components in the extracts of A. annua cv. Novichok, A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd, A. santonica cv. Citral, A. abrotanum cv. Euxin, and A. scoparia cv. Tavrida obtained by the HPLC–MS/MS(ESI+) technique (the components with ω ≥ 0.04%, in mean ± SEM, n = 3, p = 0.95, are provided).
tR1, minCompoundω (%)
A. annua
cv. Novichok
A. dracunculus
cv. Smaragd
A. santonica
cv. Citral
A. abrotanum
cv. Euxin
A. scoparia
cv. Tavrida
2.4Arteannuic acid4.851.740.92
15.0Gentisic acid0.570.520.480.100.58
36.7Feruloyl glucose1.714.921.534.634.23
40.83-O-feruloyl-quinic acid3.844.612.734.524.32
46.8Scopoletin 22.06
53.5Quercetin-3-O-hexoside4.73 2.944.834.835.33
53.8Luteolin 7-O-glucoside3.433.323.342.787.24
57.2Isochlorogenic acid3.043.453.563.226.34
61.4Luteolin 23.323.575.907.605.67
63.5Rosmarinic acid6.737.458.104.395.64
63.8Chrysosplenol D7.169.947.918.318.20
64.1Taurin 33.444.783.723.121.23
68.7Arteannuin b4.05
72.2Artemisinin 21.450.
1 Retention time, min; 2 the identification of the peaks or the identities was confirmed by comparing them with authentic samples; 3 (3S,3aS,5aR,9bS)-3,5a,9-trimethyl-3a,5,5a,7,8,9b-hexahydronaphtho [1,2-b]furan-2,6(3H,4H)-dione.
Table 3. Antibacterial activity (MIC, MBC/MFC, µg/mL) of the ethanol extracts, namely A. annua cv. Novichok, A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd, A. santonica cv. Citral, A. abrotanum cv. Euxin, and A. scoparia cv. Tavrida.
Table 3. Antibacterial activity (MIC, MBC/MFC, µg/mL) of the ethanol extracts, namely A. annua cv. Novichok, A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd, A. santonica cv. Citral, A. abrotanum cv. Euxin, and A. scoparia cv. Tavrida.
Bacteria/Fungi StrainA. annua
cv. Novichok
A. dracunculus
cv. Smaragd
A. santonica
cv. Citral
A. abrotanum
cv. Euxin
A. scoparia
cv. Tavrida
Nor 1/Chl 2/Dif 3
Rathayibacter iranicus VKM Ac-16250010003103101000100020002000500050000.500.50
Bacillus subtilis
VKM B-12
2000 >50002000>50004000>50004000>50004000>50000.500.50
Agrobacterium tumefaciens
Xanthomonas arboricola S3100020006251250560112020004000150625250.00500.00
Alternaria solani K-100054400040002500250025002500>5000>5000125012501.9031.30
Fusarium graminearum FG-304000>50002500250025002500>5000>50003106253.9062.50
Rhizoctonia solani
VKM F-895
1 Norfloxacin; 2 chloramphenicol; 3 difenoconazole.
Table 4. Toxic effects of Artemisia extracts on Caenorhabditis elegans of the N2 wild-type line.
Table 4. Toxic effects of Artemisia extracts on Caenorhabditis elegans of the N2 wild-type line.
SamplePercentage of Dead Nematodes, %
Extract Concentration, µg/mL
A. annua cv. Novichok10092.0 ± 2.275.3 ± 3.555.3 ± 4.046.0 ± 4.022.0 ± 4.1
A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd10095.3 ± 1.768.0 ± 3.844.0 ± 4.034.0 ± 3.824.0 ± 4.2
A. santonica cv. Citral10094.5 ± 1.680.0 ± 2.867.0 ± 3.351.0 ± 3.540.0 ± 3.4
Table 5. Toxic effects of Artemisia extracts on Caenorhabditis elegans, both the N2 wild-type and mutant lines of RB896, RB756, JD217, and RB918.
Table 5. Toxic effects of Artemisia extracts on Caenorhabditis elegans, both the N2 wild-type and mutant lines of RB896, RB756, JD217, and RB918.
SamplePercentage of Dead Nematodes, %
A. annua cv. Novichok85.2 ± 2.29.5 ± 2.09.0 ± 2.083.6 ± 2.38.0 ± 1.9
A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd82.4 ± 2.477.2 ± 2.672.0 ± 2.884.5 ± 2.583.0 ± 2.6
A. santonica cv. Citral86.5 ± 2.448.0 ± 3.593.5 ± 1.727.5 ± 3.183.5 ± 2.6
Note: Concentration of extracts is 500 µg/mL.
Table 6. Toxic effects of Artemisia extracts on the C. elegans line of the N2 wild-type and the mutant lines of VC1041, VC 428, CB211, CB904, as well as CB522 VC1041, VC 428, CB211, CB904, and CB522.
Table 6. Toxic effects of Artemisia extracts on the C. elegans line of the N2 wild-type and the mutant lines of VC1041, VC 428, CB211, CB904, as well as CB522 VC1041, VC 428, CB211, CB904, and CB522.
SamplePercentage of Dead Nematodes, %
A. annua cv. Novichok92.0 ± 1.785.5 ± 2.414.8 ± 2.246.5 ± 3.586.5 ± 2.490.8 ± 1.8
A. dracunculus cv. Smaragd82.0 ± 2.755.2 ± 3.135.0 ± 3.328.5 ± 3.147.5 ± 3.567.6 ± 2.9
A. santonica cv. Citral91.0 ± 2.067.5 ± 3.327.5 ± 3.166.0 ± 3.310062.5 ± 3.4
Note: Concentration of extracts is 500 µg/mL.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Nikitin, E.; Fitsev, I.; Egorova, A.; Logvinenko, L.; Terenzhev, D.; Bekmuratova, F.; Rakhmaeva, A.; Shumatbaev, G.; Gatiyatullina, A.; Shevchuk, O.; et al. Five Different Artemisia L. Species Ethanol Extracts’ Phytochemical Composition and Their Antimicrobial and Nematocide Activity. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 14372.

AMA Style

Nikitin E, Fitsev I, Egorova A, Logvinenko L, Terenzhev D, Bekmuratova F, Rakhmaeva A, Shumatbaev G, Gatiyatullina A, Shevchuk O, et al. Five Different Artemisia L. Species Ethanol Extracts’ Phytochemical Composition and Their Antimicrobial and Nematocide Activity. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023; 24(18):14372.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nikitin, Evgeny, Igor Fitsev, Anastasia Egorova, Lidia Logvinenko, Dmitriy Terenzhev, Feruzakhon Bekmuratova, Adelya Rakhmaeva, Georgiy Shumatbaev, Alsu Gatiyatullina, Oksana Shevchuk, and et al. 2023. "Five Different Artemisia L. Species Ethanol Extracts’ Phytochemical Composition and Their Antimicrobial and Nematocide Activity" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 18: 14372.

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop