Next Article in Journal
Genomics in Epidemiology and Disease Surveillance: An Exploratory Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Immature Platelet Fraction as a Surrogate Marker of Thrombo-Inflammation in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Life
Volume 15
Issue 12
10.3390/life15121847
life-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Chemical Characteristics and Biological Potential of Prunus laurocerasus Fruits

by
Mina Todorova
1,*,
Nadezhda Petkova
2,
Ivan Ivanov
2,
Yulian Tumbarski
3,
Velichka Yanakieva
3,
Ivelina Vasileva
2,
Yoana Barakova
1,
Emiliya Cherneva
4 and
Stoyanka Nikolova
1,*
1
Department of Organic Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry, University of Plovdiv, 4000 Plovdiv, Bulgaria
2
Department of Organic Chemistry and Inorganic Chemistry, University of Food Technologies, 26 Maritsa Blvd., 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria
3
Department of Microbiology, Technological Faculty, University of Food Technologies, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria
4
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Medical University of Sofia, 2 Dunav Str., 1000 Sofia, Bulgaria
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Life 2025, 15(12), 1847; https://doi.org/10.3390/life15121847
Submission received: 28 October 2025 / Revised: 27 November 2025 / Accepted: 28 November 2025 / Published: 30 November 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Therapeutic Approaches of Natural Products in Health and Disease)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Fruits of the Laurocerasus officinalis Roem., known as cherry laurel, are found in the Black Sea region. This study examines the phytochemical characterization, antioxidant properties, and antimicrobial potential of cherry laurel’s fruits, variety Novita, cultivated in Southern Bulgaria. The study is significant since it examines the phytochemical profile of this variety’s fruits for the first time. The carbohydrate composition of the fruit was identified. The total polyphenols and flavonoids of five fruit extracts (96% ethanol, 70% ethanol, 50% ethanol, 80% methanol, and water) were determined. The antioxidant potential of these five extracts was evaluated by three methods: DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP. We found that the 96% ethanol extract had the highest content of polyphenols and flavonoids and the highest antioxidant activity values by all three methods. A correlation was established between the content of polyphenols, flavonoids, and antioxidant activity based on the calculated correlation coefficient. The antimicrobial potential of methanolic and aqueous extracts of the fruit of the laurel cherry was evaluated against twenty microorganisms. It was found that the methanolic extracts exhibited moderate to high sensitivity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative strains, yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and five fungi, while water extracts had moderately sensitive activity against Micrococcus luteus only. Based on the results, we can conclude that the fruits demonstrate good antioxidant and antimicrobial potential.

1. Introduction

Laurocerasus officinalis Roem. is a species of flowering plant in the Rosaceae family and subfamily Prunoideae. It is also known by the synonyms, such as Prunus laurocerasus and laurel cherry.
The laurel cherry bush is an evergreen plant growing 2 to 6 m tall with ovoid dark purple to bright black fruits when ripe, 8–20 mm in diameter. The fruits are oval-round with a conical, elliptical, or round seed, similar to grape berries; 8–10 mm in diameter; and resemble cherries and ripen in clusters in the summer (July and August) [1,2,3].
The plant grows both naturally and under cultivation in the Black Sea region.
L. officinalis is an evergreen shrub, used for landscaping public open spaces—parks, gardens, and private properties [4,5,6].
The cyanogenic glycoside prulaurasin is found in the fruit, kernels, and leaves of Laurocerasus officinalis Roem. The compound’s distribution changes significantly as the fruit ripens; although its concentration in the kernels increases quickly during development, the initially high concentration in the pulp gradually decreases and is undetectable in fully ripe fruits, making the edible fruit safe [7].
The fruits of the cherry laurel are consumed fresh or dried; pickled; in juice, jam, or marmalade; and as beverages, or vinegar [8,9,10,11,12].
In Turkish alternative medicine, for example, the fruit is used to treat a number of diseases, such as sore throat; asthma; cough; stomach pain and ulcers; eczema; hemorrhoids; digestive and respiratory disorders; bronchitis; to strengthen bones; to expel kidney stones; to establish the acid-base balance of the blood; and also as a diuretic, antitussive, and antispasmodic agent [3,4,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20]. The fruit extract demonstrates a good effect in the healing of open wounds. This effect was investigated in vivo and in vitro using an excisional wound model in mice [21].
Leaf ethanol and water extracts of Laurocerasus officinalis Roem have been found to have anti-inflammatory, antifungal, and anti-nociceptive effects [22,23].
The antimicrobial activity of cherry laurel was an essential part of our investigation. To the best of our knowledge, only a few reports have been published on the bioactive contents and antimicrobial activity of cherry laurel fruits [21,24,25].
Approximately 1.6 million people die each year from fungal infections, which is more than three times the projected number of deaths from malaria and comparable to tuberculosis [26]. Fungal infections have changed from being a rare cause of disease to a major contributor to human morbidity and mortality worldwide as a result of the HIV epidemic and medical advancements over the past few decades that have increased the number of immunocompromised people [27].
Human pathogenic fungi can cause invasive, cutaneous, and mucosal infections [28]. Compared to bacterial infections, invasive fungal infections are currently treated with fewer medications [29]. The rising mortality and morbidity caused by fungal infections are also linked to the limited number of currently available antifungal medications and antifungal resistance [30,31,32].
Therefore, the current study aims to investigate the antioxidant and antimicrobial potential of cherry laurel fruit extracts.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Material

Cherry laurel fruits were collected in August 2024 from the Voivodinovo village, region of Plovdiv, Bulgaria (42°20′ N. 24°80′ E, GPS Coordinates). The harvested fresh fruits were directly used to prepare extracts. The plant material was provided by the Agricultural University—Plovdiv and was determined according to Delipavlov et al. and Stoyanov et al. [33,34]. All the solvents and chemicals were of analytical grade.

2.2. Fruit Extraction

For the extraction of phytochemical compounds, the fruits were extracted with 80% (v/v) aqueous methanol, 50% (v/v) aqueous ethanol, 70% (v/v) aqueous ethanol, 96% (v/v) aqueous ethanol, and water (hydromodul was 1:5). The extraction procedure was performed in an ultrasonic bath (VWR, Malaysia, VWR Singapore Pte Ltd., Singapore, 45 kHz and 30 W) at 45 °C for 15 min [35].

2.3. Geometric Parameters

The mass of the cherry laurel fruits was determined with a 0.001 g sensitivity of an electronic balance. The trilinear dimensions, namely major axis (L), mean axis (T), and minor axis (W), were measured by using a ruler with 0.1 mm sensitivity to determine the average size of the samples. The geometric mean diameter (GMD), sphericity (Φ), and aspect ratio (AR) were calculated using the following respective formulas [3,36,37].
GMD = (LWT)1/3,
Spherisity = (GMD)/L.100,
Surface area = π(GMD)2

2.4. Color Characteristics

The color of the laurel cherry fruits was determined with a colorimeter FRU WR-10QC (Anhui Haochuang Instrument Co., Anhui, China) and recorded in the L-a-b color system [38]. The color was determined by entering the data from L-a-b in a color available online (http://www.colormine.org/color-converter (accessed on 2 August 2025)). Chroma (C-ab) and hue (h°) were determined from the a and b values using Equations (4) and (5) [39].
C = sqrt (a*2 + b*2)
h° = arctan (b/a)
The total soluble solids (TSS) content was determined by a hand refractometer ATC (XDC Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China) and expressed as °Brix [40]. The pH values were assessed by a pH meter WTW pH 7110 (WTW, Weilheim in Oberbayern, Germany) equipped with a glass electrode, which was immersed directly into the laurel cherry fruit juice at 23 °C [41]. Titratable acidity (TA) was measured by titration of 2 mL with 0.1 M NaOH (Merck (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) using phenolphthalein as an indicator (Merck (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany)) to the pH value of 8.1, and the result was expressed as g of malic acid equivalent per 100 g fresh weight (fw) [42]. Maturity index (MI) was measured as the TSS value divided by TA [43].
For the moisture content, the fruits were dried at 105 ± 1 °C to a constant weight [44].
For the determination of ash content, the pulverized samples were placed in a crucible, ignited in a muffle furnace at 550 °C to a constant weight. Then, it was cooled in a desiccator and weighed at room temperature to obtain the weight of the ash [45].
The polyuronide content and the degree of esterification of pectin were determined according to [46,47].

2.5. Celullose

The quantitative estimation of cellulose was performed gravimetrically [48].
Total lipid content (%) was determined by exhaustive Soxhlet extraction (AOAC methods) [49].
The total anthocyanin content (TAC) was estimated using the pH differential method [50].

2.6. Sugar and Polyol Content by HPLC-RID Method

The chromatographic separations and determination of sugars in the sample were performed on a high-performance liquid chromatograph, HPLC Elite Chrome Hitachi, equipped with a pump LC-20 AD, a column thermostat, a refractive index detector (RID) Chromaster 5450 (WVR, Hitachi, Tokyo, Japan), and software. The separation was carried out on the Shodex® Sugar SP0810 (7 μm, 300 × 8.0 mm i.d., Tokyo, Japan) column with Pb2+ and a guard column Shodex SP-G (5 μm, 6 × 50 mm), operating at 80 °C, mobile phase H2O with a flow rate of 0.5 mL/min, and an injection volume of 20 μL. All the samples before injection were filtered through ISO Lab (ISOLAB Laborgeräte GmbH, Eschau, Germany) filters with a diameter of 4 mm and a pore size of 0.45 μm. The detection of sucrose, glucose, fructose, and sorbitol was performed in the linear range of 0.5–10 mg/mL, and the linearity of standard curves was determined (R2 > 0.998) [51].

2.7. Total Phenols and Flavonoids Content

The fruit extracts (0.2 mL) were mixed with 1 mL of five-fold diluted Folin–Ciocalteu reagent and 0.8 mL of 7.5% Na2CO3. After 20 min, the absorbance was measured at 765 nm against a blank sample. The results were expressed as mg equivalent of gallic acid (GAE) per g fresh and dry weight. The total flavonoid content was analyzed colorimetrically using Al(NO3)3 reagents [52]. The results were expressed as mg equivalents of quercetin (QE) per g dry and fresh weight.

2.8. Antioxidant Activity

DPPH radical scavenging ability: The fruit extracts (0.15 mL) were mixed with 2.85 mL fresh 0.1 mM methanol solution of DPPH. The samples were incubated at 37 °C in darkness for 15 min. The reduction in absorbance was measured at 517 nm against a blank, and % inhibition was calculated [52].
ABTS+ radical scavenging ability: The ABTS+ solution (2.85 mL) was mixed with 0.15 mL of the extracts. After 15 min at 37 °C in darkness, the absorbance was measured at 734 nm against ethanol [52].
FRAP assay: The FRAP reagent was prepared before analysis by mixing 10 parts 0.3 M acetate buffer (pH 3.6), 1 part 10 mM 2,4,6-tri(2-pyridyl)-s-triazine in 40 mM HCl, and 1 part 20 mM FeCl3 ·6 H2O in distilled water. The FRAP reagent (3.0 mL) was mixed with 0.1 mL of fruit extracts. After 10 min at 37 °C in darkness, the absorbance of the sample was measured at 593 nm [52].

2.9. Antimicrobial Activity

Tested microorganisms
Twenty microorganisms, including six Gram-positive bacteria (Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6633, Bacillus amyloliquefaciens 4BCL-YT, Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923, Listeria monocytogenes NBIMCC 8632, Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 19433, and Micrococcus luteus 2YC-YT), six Gram-negative bacteria (Salmonella enteritidis ATCC 13076, Salmonella typhimurium, Klebsiella sp.—clinical isolate, Escherichia coli ATCC 25922, Proteus vulgaris ATCC 6380, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 9027), two yeasts (Candida albicans NBIMCC 74 and Saccharomyces cerevisiae ATCC 9763) and six fungi (Aspergillus niger ATCC 1015, Aspergillus flavus, Penicillium sp., Rhizopus spp.—plant isolates, and Fusarium moniliforme ATCC 38932) and Mucor from the collection of the Department of Microbiology at the University of Food Technologies, Plovdiv, Bulgaria, were selected for the antimicrobial activity test.
Luria–Bertani agar medium with glucose (LBG agar) was used for the cultivation of test bacteria. Malt extract agar (MEA) was used for the cultivation of test yeasts and fungi. The culture media were prepared according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Scharlab SL, Barcelona, Spain) and autoclaved at 121 °C for 20 min before use [53].
The antimicrobial activity of the extracts was determined by the agar well diffusion method [54]. After allowing the inoculated agar media to harden at room temperature, six wells (d = 6 mm) per Petri plate were made, and duplicates of 60 μL of the extracts were pipetted into the agar wells. The plates were incubated under identical conditions.
The antibiotics Penicillin (against bacteria) and Nystatin (against yeast and fungi), in the same concentration as the extracts, were used as controls.

2.10. Statistical Analysis

All the analyses were performed in triplicate (n = 3). The data were presented as mean values ± standard deviation (SD). Statistical analysis was performed using MS Excel 2010.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Physical Characteristics

3.1.1. Geometric Parameters Measurements

Biometric studies are important for the determination of plant patterns in breeding programs. This is especially useful for varieties that are being introduced to new conditions. The cultivation of native varieties primarily relies on technical knowledge and specific varieties and environmental factors [3]. Biometric characterization can target the entire plant, or specific features like fruit, its stones, or seeds [3].
The geometric and volumetric characteristics of the Novita cherry fruit (15 fruits) are given in Table 1.
The length, width, and thickness of the fruit were 14.7 mm, 12.2 mm, and 15.1 mm, respectively, and differed by 1–2 mm from the measured parameters of the genotype 55 K 07 grown in Samsun, Turkey (13.1 mm, 13.9 mm, and 12.9 mm) [3]. However, they were significantly smaller than the parameters of the other two genotypes, 54 K 01 and 61 K 04, from the same region (17.4/19.6 mm (L), 17.7/17.0 mm (W), and 16.9/15.9 mm (T)) [3].
The geometric mean diameter (GDM), sphericity, and area (S) were 13.9 mm, 94.6% and 6.1 cm2, respectively. The GDM parameter is slightly higher than that of 55 K 07 (13.3 mm), but is significantly smaller than the measurements for fruits of genotypes 54 K 01 (17.2 mm) and 61 K 04 (17.4 mm). This parameter is also associated with the moisture content, which in the Novita variety is 74.2% and is higher than the value for genotype 55 K 07, 61.29% [3].
Sphericity indicates that the shape of the biological materials is spherical and thus facilitates rolling on the surface. The sphericity is close to 54 K 01 (99.17%) and 55 K 07 (99.99%), and the area to 55 K 07 (5.57 cm2) [3].

3.1.2. Color Characteristics

The color of any food is a crucial attribute. The color coordinates of the cherry laurel fruit peel (L*, a*, b*) are shown in Table 2. A colorimeter was used to measure the brightness (L*), a* red color (+), and b* yellow color (+) parameters. Equations (4) and (5) were then used to determine the C* chromaticity (saturation) and h° color hue based on their values.
The brightness value (L*) for the fruit surface is 26.38 and is comparable to the value for the fruit of genotype 54 K 01, while for the fruits of genotype 55 K 07 and 61 K 04, the measured value is lower, 18.17 and 15.49, respectively. The a* and b* values of the three fruits from Samsun, Turkey, are significantly higher than those of the fruit of the Novita variety. The obtained color characteristics of the fruit skin were lower than the color parameters of the cherry laurel TRZ6 genotype grown in Trabzon in the Black Sea region in Turkey [4].
It has been found that there is a large difference in color parameters between different cherry laurel genotypes [3,4]. Based on the skin color measurements, the measured cherry laurel fruit variety Novita was black in color. The color of stone fruits such as plums and cherries is associated with the concentration of anthocyanins, which increases during ripening [55]. In different plum varieties, it has been observed that the total anthocyanin concentration is higher in the peel than in the pulp [55]. The measured amount of anthocyanins in the fruit of the cherry laurel, variety Novita, expressed as mg cyanidine-3-glycoside, is 12.84 mg/100 g fruit. Large variations in anthocyanin concentrations from 2 to 300 mg/100 g have been found in different sweet cherry varieties [55].

3.2. Chemical Composition

3.2.1. Titratable Acidity (TA), pH, Total Soluble Solids (TSS), Maturity Index, Moisture, and Ash

The parameters TSS, TA, and the TSS/TA ratio are related to the quality of the fruit [56].
Titratable acidity (TA) is an indicator of how organic acids in fruits affect their flavor. The type of organic acids, such as malic, citric, tartaric, quinic, oxalic, fumaric, and succinic acids, each with a unique flavor, contributes to the overall flavor of the fruit [57]. Malic acid is the main organic acid in fruits belonging to the Rosaceae family, both in the genera Prunus (plum, apricot, peach, nectarine, and cherry) and Malus (apple and pear). For these fruits, the total acidity is very high at the beginning of development with an accumulation of malic acid during the first phase of rapid growth, but decreases during the ripening process, except for sweet cherry, which shows a continuous increase in acidity during ripening [58]. Furthermore, TA is a parameter that determines the quality of foods during their storage [59].
The total acidity of the fruits of cherry laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis) usually falls in the range of 0.12 to 0.70 g malic acid per 100 mL fruit juice (Table 3). This acidity is mainly due to the presence of malic acid, which is the dominant organic acid in the fruit [60].
In contrast to the fruits grown in the northwest of Turkey (Kocaeli, Sea of Marmara) [5], the TA calculated for the studied cherry laurel fruit is 0.45 ± 0.01 and is consistent with the TA calculated for the genotypes of cherry laurels in the northeastern Black Sea region [4]. The fruit’s measured pH value exhibits the same pattern. The pH level has a significant impact on the growth of microbes in a particular diet. The fruit of the Novita variety has a pH of 4.54 ± 0.01 (Table 3), which is the same as the fruit cultivated in the northeastern Black Sea region (pH 4.5) [14].
In stone fruits, sweetness is important and is measured using a refractometer and expressed as the concentration of soluble solids (sugars, salts, amino acids, proteins, acids, soluble substances, etc.) (TSS) in Brix units, where 1 Brix = 1 g sucrose equivalent per 100 g solution. In stone fruits, TSS increases during ripening and represents one of the largest characteristic biochemical changes in the fruit that occur before harvest. TSS is one of the most widely used indices of fruit ripeness in nectarines, peaches, apricots, and plums, and for these fruits, the TSS value is in the range of 5–25 Brix% [61].
The TSS content in cherry laurel genotypes in the Black Sea region of Turkey varies in the range of 8.6–21.3%. In our results, the TSS value of the Novita variety is 17.67 ± 0.58% (Table 3) and is rather close to the value of the genotypes grown in the northeastern part of the Black Sea region (Rize, Trabzon, Giresun, and Ordu) [62,63].
The parameters TSS, TA, and their ratio (TSS/TA) are strongly related to fruit quality. This ratio helps to assess the balance between sweetness (TSS) and tartness (TA) in fruits [64]. During the ripening process, the organic acids of stone fruits are degraded, the sugar content increases, and the sugar/acid ratio reaches a higher value. High acidity levels, often found in underripe fruits, make the fruit taste sour. A lower sugar/acid ratio in fruits indicates a sour taste, while a higher ratio indicates a sweet taste [65,66]. Overripe fruits have very low levels of fruit acid and therefore lack a characteristic taste. Sugars and organic acids in fruits and their products affect not only the taste but also the stability, perception, and maintenance of quality. In stone fruits, total soluble solids (TSS) mainly determine sweetness, while total acidity contributes to tartness and overall flavor. The TSS/acidity ratio is a key indicator of fruit quality and sensory ripeness, influencing the sweet/tart balance [48,67].
The calculated TSS/TA ratio for variety Novita was 39.27, and it is comparable to one of the fruit genotypes studied by Sulusoglu et al. [5] and Islam et al. [63].
The ash content varies depending on the variety and the region where the fruit is grown [68]. In the present study, the ash value (0.83%) of cherry laurel is close to that of “Kiraz” (0.75%), it is twice as high as the determined value of “Findik” (0.43%) and is more than three times higher than the ash content of the fruit from Akcaabat, Trabzon, Turkey (0.26%) [14]. The determined ash content is more than three times higher compared to the fruit collected from Akcaabat, Trabzon [14].
The moisture content of the examined fruits was higher compared to the cherry laurel genotypes, where the following moisture values were reported: 60.38, 61.29, and 64.13% [6], but also corresponds to the fruits from Akcaabat, Trabzon, Turkey [14].

3.2.2. Polyuronide Content, Degree of Esterification of Pectin, Cellulose, and Total Lipids of Laurel Cherry, Variety Novita Fruit

Dietary supplements containing pectin may have decreased serum total cholesterol, decreased low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and moderated the glucose response. Therefore, pectin and fibers are important food components due to their role in preventing colon diseases [69,70].
The determined polyuronide content (3.33 ± 0.23%) is in accordance with that determined in the fruits of the laurel cherry grown in Akcaabat, Trabzon, Turkey (3.2 ± 0.4%) [14]. Pectin was categorized as highly esterified [71] based on the degree of esterification that has been found (Table 4). This is significant for its gelling capabilities [72], which are essential when making jams and other sweets from the laurel cherry fruit.
The cellulose content in the studied fruits was 0.36 ± 0.08. The content of total lipids, on the other hand, was 0.85% (Table 4). This is significantly higher than that reported by Kalyoncu et al. (0.001%) [73].

3.2.3. Sugar Content in the Laurocerasus officinalis, Novita Fruits

The levels of sugars and organic acids are important factors in determining the taste of ripe fleshy fruits. In most fruits, sugar accumulation is an early event during their growth. The main accumulated sugar, depending on the type of fruit, is glucose, being the main one for grapes, and fructose for berries, cherries, mangoes, and citrus species, while sucrose is the main sugar found in stone fruits such as apricot, plum, nectarine, and peach [56]. In our experiments, the sugar content in fresh Laurocerasus fruits was analyzed by the HPLC-RID method. Two monosaccharides (glucose and fructose), one polyvalent alcohol (sorbitol), and one disaccharide (sucrose) were found in the fruit, Figure 1. The highest amount found was for glucose (2.45%) and fructose (1.49%), followed by sorbitol (0.70%), and the lowest was sucrose (0.02%). Borsani et al. [74] noted that sorbitol is consumed early in the ripening process, followed by partial degradation of sucrose, accompanied by an increase in fructose and glucose.
Generally, in these fruits, glucose is the dominant monosaccharide, followed by fructose, and sucrose is present in trace amounts, which is fully consistent with the literature data [75].
The content and ratio of carbohydrates were consistent with the results reported by Esringu et al. for cherry laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis L.) species grown in Turkey. The authors found that in cultivated fruits, the amount of measured carbohydrates was higher than in wild ones [48]. Ayaz et al., on the other hand, reported five times higher amounts of glucose, fructose, and sorbitol in cultivated (Laurocerasus officinalis Oxygemmis, Globigemmis, and Angustifolia) and wild species (Laurocerasus officinalis Roem.), but the authors did not detect sucrose [6,8].

3.2.4. Total Phenolic Content and Flavonoids

The phenolic content, flavonoid concentration, and antioxidant potential of laurel cherry fruit have all been well investigated, particularly in the area of Turkey, where the plant is grown, and the fruits are used in traditional cooking.
Cherry laurel fruit is a good source of phenolics, together with considerable antioxidant activity [76]. The content of polyphenols and flavonoids in five fruit extracts (96% ethanol, 70% ethanol, 80% methanol, 50% ethanol, and water) of cherry laurel was investigated. The fruit of cherry laurel is a rich source of phenolics such as Chlorogenic acid, 4-Hydroxybenzoic acid, Ferulic acid, gallic acid, Protocatechuic acid, p-Coumaric acid, Vanillic acid, Rutin, and quercetin [77], which support its biological activity, especially its potential as a source of antioxidants [78].
Figure 2 presents the total polyphenol content (TPC) of the studied extracts. Since the fruit can be consumed both fresh and dried, the results for the total amount of flavonoids and polyphenols are shown for the fruit’s fresh and dry weight.
The content of bioactive components is presented for both fresh and dry weights. The 96% ethanol extract (0.91 mg GAE/g (fw)/3.53 mg GAE/g (dw)) had the highest content of polyphenols. The TPC decreased in the order of 70% ethanol (0.67 mg GAE/g (fw)/2.70 mg GAE/g (dw)), 80% methanol (0.62 mg GAE/g (fw)/2.40 mg GAE/g (dw)), 50% ethanol (0.46 mg GAE/g (fw)/1.76 mg GAE/g (dw)), and water (0.19 mg GAE/g (fw)/0.59 mg GAE/g (dw)).
Figure 3 presents the flavonoid content of the studied extracts. The results are presented as a comparison of fresh and dry weight.
The amount of total flavonoid content in different extracts exhibits a similar tendency. Most of the flavonoids were present in the 96% ethanol extract (0.29 mg QE/g (fw)/1.13 mg QE/g (dw)). The lowest level of TFC was detected in the water extract (0.05 mg QE/g (fw)/0.21 mg QE/g (dw)).
Koc et al. reported a polyphenol content of 16.84 to 23.32 mg GAE/100 g dry weight in Laurocerasus officinalis fruits grown in the Eastern Black Sea region of Turkey [79]. This is about ten times lower compared to the TPF content, measured in our experiments for the Novita variety. Compared to the methanolic extract of cherry laurel fruit grown in the “Zelenicje” Nature Reserve, Serbian (42.2 mg GAE/g dry extract and 13.5 mg QE/g dry extract) [80], the 80% methanolic extract had a twenty-fold lower level of TPC and TFC at 2.40 mg GAE/g (dw) and 0.74 mg QE/g (dw). The content of polyphenols and flavonoids in the laurel cherry variety Novita is about ten times higher than in wild varieties grown in Turkey [79], but lower than in varieties grown in Serbia [80]. The reason for this is most likely that the variety is cultivated for decorative purposes and mostly for landscaping (hedges).
In comparison to our experiments, methanol fruit extracts from twelve genotypes of cherry laurel cultivated in the Sakarya region, Turkey, contained five to twenty-eight times more polyphenols [24]. Methanol extracts of cherry laurel fruits gathered in different regions of Turkey, Istanbul [81], Giresun province [18], and the Eastern Black Sea area [15] had three to ten times higher concentrations of polyphenols than the methanol extract isolated in our study. The aqueous extract of the fruit of the laurel cherry, variety Novita, contains ten times less phenols compared to the collected fruit from Düzce, Turkey [82].
Our results were in agreement with the previously published data regarding peach, nectarine, and plum grown in the Plovdiv region, which belong to the Rosaceae family, Genus Prunus. The TPC values for 80% methanol extracts of the peach varieties “Gergana,” “Ufo4”, “July Lady,” and “Laskava” were 0.43 mg GAE/g, 0.34 mg GAE/g, 0.58 mg GAE/g, and 0.58 mg GAE/g [83]. Marinova et al. also reported a polyphenol content in peach (50.09 mg GAE/100 g) that was consistent with our results [84]. Our results also coincide with reports for total phenols for plum (Prunus domestica) (64.5 mg GAE/100 g) [70,85]. TPC levels in Chinese peaches and nectarines ranged from 340.1 mg GAE/kg to 820.3 mg GAE/kg, which were comparable to our results [86]. Additionally, a number of elements, including genotype, agronomic techniques, harvest ripeness, postharvest storage, meteorological conditions, and geographic regions, affect the overall phenolic content of the plant [79].

3.3. Biological Experiments

3.3.1. Antioxidant Activity Measurements

Three different techniques, DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP, were used to evaluate the antioxidant activity of the fruit extracts. DPPH and FRAP use single-electron transfer to determine antioxidant activity, whereas ABTS combines single-electron transfer with hydrogen atom transfer.
The results are presented in Table 5. The highest radical scavenging activity by the DPPH method was shown by the 96% ethanol extract, followed by the 70% ethanol, 80% methanol, 50% ethanol, and the water fruit extract. This trend is observed with the other two methods, ABTS and FRAP. Since the fruit can be consumed both fresh and dried, the results for the total amount of flavonoids, polyphenols, and antioxidant activity are shown for the fruit’s fresh (a) and dry (b) weight.
In the fruit extracts, the highest antioxidant values corresponded to the highest phenolic and flavonoid concentrations. Our results regarding the DPPH and ABTS analysis of the methanol extracts, and the DPPH analysis of the water extracts, are in accordance with the data reported by Celik et al. [76], while for the aqueous extracts, we report ten times lower results measured by the ABTS method.
The antioxidant activity of 80% methanolic extracts, presented by the ABTS and FRAP methods, demonstrates ten times higher activity compared to that reported by Capanoglu et al. [87].
The results of the antioxidant activity of 70% ethanolic extracts of laurel cherry are consistent with apples belonging to the Rosaceae family, variety Florina, grown in orchards from Plovdiv and Brestnik village −12.07 mM TE/g dw measured by DPPH method; 33.24 mM TE/g dw measured by ABTS method; and 19.63 mM TE/g dw measured by FRAP method [78].
The content of polyphenols and the demonstrated antioxidant activity in the fruits of the ornamental shrub Prunus laurocerasus are in full agreement with some fruits of the Rosaceae family that are present in the daily diet. Therefore, the fruits could be a source of biologically active substances with antioxidant potential.

3.3.2. Correlation Between the Total Phenolic Content, Total Flavonoid Content, and the Antioxidant Activity

The antioxidant capacity is most strongly influenced by the total phenolics and total flavonoid concentrations. A statistical indicator of the strength of a linear link between two variables is the correlation coefficient. The correlation showed the relationship between polyphenols (TPC and TFC), polyphenols, and antioxidant methods, and between the antioxidant methods themselves. The correlation between TPC, TFC, and antioxidant activity of the studied extracts measured by the three methods (DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP) is presented in Table 5. It was established that the radical scavenging activity of the studied extracts is highly correlated with the content of total phenols and flavonoids. TPC and TFC contribute to the antioxidant properties of the tested fruit extracts [88]. A positive linear correlation (r2) between the results obtained by the different antioxidant methods was found.
A similar observation for the positive dependence of the antioxidant potential, investigated by total phenolic content, was reported by Petkova et al. for Florina apple (coefficient of correlation r2 = 0.9801, 0.9462, and 0.9994 for ABTS, DPPH, and FRAP values, respectively) [53,89].

3.3.3. Antimicrobial Activity Results

Antibiotic resistance is currently one of the world’s most persistent issues, and several powerful drugs have failed to control diseases. Aggregated bacteria that adhere to surfaces and are covered in an extracellular polymeric matrix are called biofilms. Within a biofilm, the local environment shields persister cells from the immune system [90]. These bacterial biofilms can form on any surface, including medical devices and hospital water distribution systems [91]. Therefore, the current study aimed to evaluate the antimicrobial and antifungal activity of laurel cherry fruit extracts.
There is rather little information in the literature regarding the antibacterial activity of the fruit against a limited number of microorganisms. Özçelik et al. reported antibacterial activity of alcoholic fruit extracts only against four strains of Gram-positive bacteria, while we observed an inhibitory effect of fruit methanolic extracts against tested Gram-positive, Gram-negative bacteria, yeasts, and fungi [92].
The antimicrobial activity of the aqueous and methanolic extracts of the fruits of the laurel cherry was studied against six Gram-positive and six Gram-negative bacteria. In our experiments, the aqueous extracts did not exhibit antimicrobial activity against B. subtilis, B. amyloliquefaciens, S. aureus, L. monocytogenes, and E. faecalis, while the methanolic extracts showed moderate sensitivity (Table 6).
The aqueous extracts were moderately sensitive, and the methanolic extracts were highly sensitive against M. luteus. Concerning the Gram-negative bacterial strains, the methanolic extracts were moderately sensitive against five of them—S. enteritidis, S. typhimurium, E. coli, P. vulgaris, and P. aeruginosa—and were highly sensitive against Klebsiella sp. The methanolic extracts inhibited the growth of five of the tested fungi—A. niger, A. flavus, Penicillium sp., Rhizopus spp., and F. moniliforme—and showed high sensitivity against them (Table 6).
The fact that the quantity of polyphenolic components predominates in the methanol extract while sugars predominate in the aqueous solutions is a plausible reason for the methanol extract’s superior antibacterial action.
The methanol extracts showed strong sensitivity to five of the tested fungi—A. niger, A. flavus, Penicillium sp., Rhizopus spp., and F. moniliforme—and did not inhibit the growth of C. albicans and Mucor sp. The aqueous extracts did not show activity against the tested fungi and yeast S. cerevisiae. The methanol extracts showed moderate activity against yeast (Figure 4). Methanol, used as a control, did not show any antimicrobial effect.
In contrast to our research, Celik et al. found that aqueous and methanolic extracts of lyophilized cherry laurel powder did not exhibit antibacterial activity against Staphylococcus aureus NCTC 8530, Listeria monocytogenes ATCC 7644, and Escherichia coli BL21 [76]. Ayla et al. reported strong antibacterial activity of cherry laurel fruit extracts against both Gram-positive bacteria (Bacillus cereus and Staphylococcus aureus) and Gram-negative bacteria (Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumonia, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa) [21].

4. Conclusions

The present study investigates the phytochemical composition and biological activities of the fruits of the Novita shrub, grown as an ornamental plant in the South of Bulgaria. The study is significant since it examines the phytochemical profile of this variety’s fruits for the first time.
The fruits can be consumed as a novel food ingredient containing dietary fiber (cellulose and pectins), sugars (glucose, fructose, and sucrose), natural pigments (anthocyanins), and phenolic compounds. The results of this study showed that the fruits contain low levels of sucrose, dietary fiber, and moderate total phenolic content. Based on its antioxidant and antimicrobial potential, laurel cherry extracts can be incorporated into dietary supplements. For a better understanding of its potential as an antimicrobial agent, further research on the synergy between Prunus laurocerasus and traditional antibiotics is necessary.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.T., N.P. and S.N.; methodology, N.P., I.I., M.T., V.Y., I.V. and Y.T.; validation, M.T., E.C. and S.N.; formal analysis, M.T., N.P., E.C., Y.T., I.I., I.V. and Y.B.; investigation, M.T., Y.B., Y.T., I.V. and V.Y.; writing—original draft preparation, M.T. and S.N.; writing—review and editing, M.T., N.P. and S.N.; visualization, M.T.; supervision, M.T., N.P. and S.N.; project administration, M.T. and S.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study is part of Scientific Project DUEcoS No. BG-RRP-2.004-0001-C01-MC.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Islam, A. ‘Kiraz’ cherry laurel (Prunus laurocerasus). N. Z. J. Crop Hortic. Sci. 2002, 30, 301–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Yazici, K.C.; Akir, B.; Kazaz, S. An important genetic resource for Turkey, Cherry laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis Roemer). Acta Hortic. 2011, 890, 261–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Altuntas, E.; Saracoglu, O.; Polatci, H. Physico-mechanical, colour and chemical properties of selected cherry laurel genotypes of Turkey. Adv. Agric. Sci. 2018, 6, 61–76. [Google Scholar]
  4. Halilova, H.; Ercisli, S. Several physico-chemical characteristic of cherry laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis Roem.) fruits. Biotechnol. Biotechnol. Equip. 2010, 24, 1970–1973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Sulusoglu, M. The cherry laurel (Prunus laurocerasus L.) tree selection. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2011, 6, 3574–3582. [Google Scholar]
  6. Ayaz, F.A. Studies on water soluble sugar and sugar alcohol in cultivar and wild forms of Laurocerasus officinalis Roem. Pak. J. Bot. 1997, 29, 331–336. [Google Scholar]
  7. Demirbolat, İ.; Kartal, M. Prulaurasin content of leaves, kernels and pulps of Prunus lauracerasus L. (Cherry Laurel) during ripening. J. Res. Pharm. 2019, 22, 69–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ayaz, F.A.; Kadioglu, A.; Reunanen, M.; Var, M. Sugar composition in fruits of Laurocerasus officinalis Roem. and its three cultivars. J. Food Compos. Anal. 1997, 10, 82–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Liyana-Pathirana, C.M.; Shahidi, F.; Alasalvar, C. Antioxidant activity of cherry laurel fruit (Laurocerasus officinalis Roem.) and its concentrated juice. Food Chem. 2006, 99, 121–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Baltaci, C.; Yilmaz, K.; Ozturk, S.; Karpuz, O. Vinegar production from different cherry laurel fruits and investigation of some of their physicochemical properties. J. Food Saf. Food Qual. 2024, 75, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Konak, Ü.I.; Erem, F.; Altindağ, G.; Certel, M. Effect of Cherry Laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis Roem.) Incorporation on Physical, Textural and Functional Properties of Cakes and Cookies. Uludağ Univ. J. Agric. Fac. 2015, 29, 13–24. [Google Scholar]
  12. Temiz, H.; Tarakçı, Z.; Islam, A. Effect of cherry laurel marmalade on physicochemical and sensorial characteristics of the stirred yogurt during storage time. GIDA 2014, 39, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ayaz, F.A.; Reunanen, M.; Küçükislamoğlu, M.; Var, M. Seed fatty acid composition in wild form and cultivars of Laurocerasus officinalis Roem. Pak. J. Bot. 1995, 27, 305–308. [Google Scholar]
  14. Kolaylı, S.; Küçük, M.; Duran, C.; Candan, F.; Dinçer, B. Chemical and antioxidant properties of Laurocerasus officinalis Roem. (cherry laurel) fruit grown in the Black Sea region. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 7489–7494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Yildiz, H.; Ercisli, S.; Narmanlioglu, H.K.; Guclu, S.; Akbulut, M.; Turkoglu, Z. The main quality attributes of non-sprayed cherry laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis Roem.) genotypes. Genetika 2014, 46, 129–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Yeşilada, E.; Sezik, E.; Honda, G.; Takaishi, Y.; Takeda, Y.; Tanaka, T. Traditional medicine in Turkey IX: Folk medicine in north-west Anatolia. J. Ethnopharmacol. 1999, 64, 195–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Erdemoglu, N.; Küpeli, E.; Yeşilada, E. Anti-inflammatory and antinociceptive activity assessment of plants used as remedy in Turkish folk medicine. J Ethnopharmacol. 2003, 89, 123–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Alasalvar, C.; Al-Farsi, M.; Shahidi, F. Compositional characteristics and antioxidant components of cherry laurel varieties and pekmez. J. Food Sci. 2005, 70, 47–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Karahalil, F.Y.; Şahin, H. Phenolic composition and antioxidant capacity of Cherry Laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis Roem.) sampled from Trabzon region, Turkey. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2011, 10, 16293–16299. [Google Scholar]
  20. Colak, A.; Özen, A.; Dincer, B.; Güner, S.; Ayaz, F.A. Diphenolases from two cultivars of cherry laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis Roem.) fruits at an early stage of maturation. Food Chem. 2005, 90, 801–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ayla, S.; Okur, M.E.; Günal, M.Y.; Özdemir, E.M.; Çiçek Polat, D.; Yoltaş, A.; Biçeroğlu, Ö.; Karahüseyinoğlu, S. Wound healing effects of methanol extract of Laurocerasus officinalis Roem. Biotech. Histochem. 2019, 94, 180–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Uslu, H.; Uslu, G.A.; Özen, H.; Karaman, M. Effects of different doses of Prunus laurocerasus L. leaf extract on oxidative stress, hyperglycaemia and hyperlipidaemia induced by type I diabetes. Indian J. Tradit. Knowl. 2018, 17, 430–436. [Google Scholar]
  23. Özkan, K.; Karadağ, A.; Sağdıç, O. Evaluation of the Antioxidant Capacity, Antimicrobial Effect, and In Vitro Digestion Process of Bioactive Compounds of Cherry Laurel Leaves Extracts. J. Agric. Sci. 2023, 29, 352–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Beyhan, O.; Demïr, T.; Yurt, B. Determination of antioxidant activity, phenolic compounds and biochemical properties of cherry laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis R.) grown in Sakarya Turkey. Bahçe 2018, 47, 17–22. [Google Scholar]
  25. İslam, A.; Karakaya, O.; Gün, S.; Karagöl, S.; Öztürk, B. Fruit and biochemical characteristics of Selected Cherry Laurel Genotypes. Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Derg. 2020, 57, 105–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bongomin, F.; Gago, S.; Oladele, R.; Denning, D. Global and Multi-National Prevalence of Fungal Diseases—Estimate Precision. J. Fungi 2017, 3, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Robbins, N.; Caplan, T.; Cowen, L.E. Molecular Evolution of Antifungal Drug Resistance. Ann. Rev. Microbiol. 2017, 71, 753–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Thambugala, K.M.; Daranagama, D.A.; Tennakoon, D.S.; Jayatunga, D.P.W.; Hongsanan, S.; Xie, N. Humans vs. Fungi: An Overview of Fungal Pathogens against Humans. Pathogens 2024, 13, 426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Roy, M.; Karhana, S.; Shamsuzzaman, M.; Khan, M.A. Recent Drug Development and Treatments for Fungal Infections. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2023, 54, 1695–1716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Rabaan, A.A.; Sulaiman, T.; Al-Ahmed, S.H.; Buhaliqah, Z.A.; Buhaliqah, A.A.; AlYuosof, B.; Alfaresi, M.; Al Fares, M.A.; Alwarthan, S.; Alkathlan, M.S.; et al. Potential Strategies to Control the Risk of Antifungal Resistance in Humans: A Com-prehensive Review. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Roemer, T.; Krysan, D.J. Antifungal Drug Development: Challenges, Unmet Clinical Needs, and New Approaches. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 2014, 4, a019703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Lee, Y.; Robbins, N.; Cowen, L.E. Molecular Mechanisms Governing Antifungal Drug Resistance. npj Antimicrob. Resist. 2023, 1, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Stoyanov, K.; Raycheva, T.s.; Cheschmedzhiev, I. Key to the Native and Foreign Vascular Plants in Bulgaria; Interactive extended and supplemented edition; Academic Publishing House of the Agrarian University: Plovdiv, Bulgaria, 2022; ISBN 978-954-517-313-4. (In Bulgarian). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Available online: https://bgflora.net/families/rosaceae/prunus/prunus_laurocerasus/prunus_laurocerasus_en.html (accessed on 10 August 2025).
  35. Petkova, N.; Ivanov, I.; Denev, P.; Pavlov, A. Bioactive substance and free radical scavenging activities of flour from jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) tubers—A comparative study. Turk. J. Agric. Nat. Sci. 2014, 2, 1773–1778. Available online: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/142339 (accessed on 10 March 2025).
  36. Megat Ahmad Azman, P.N.; Shamsudin, R.; Che Man, H.; Ya’acob, M.E. Some Physical Properties and Mass Modelling of Pepper Berries (Piper nigrum L.), Variety Kuching, at Different Maturity Levels. Processes 2020, 8, 1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kabeel, E.H.; Khater, E.-S.G.; Bahnasawy, A.H.; Atawia, A.A.R. Some Physical and Chemical Properties of Mango Fruits. Ann. Agric. Sci. 2021, 59, 679–688. [Google Scholar]
  38. Tumbarski, Y.D.; Todorova, M.M.; Topuzova, M.G.; Georgieva, P.I.; Petkova, N.T.; Ivanov, I.G. Postharvest Biopreservation of Fresh Blueberries by Propolis-Containing Edible Coatings Under Refrigerated Conditions. Curr. Res. Nutr. Food Sci. 2022, 10, 99–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ly, B.C.K.; Dyer, E.B.; Feig, J.L.; Chien, A.L.; Bino, S.D. Research techniques made simple: Cutaneous colorimetry: A reliable technique for objective skin color measurement. J. Investig. Dermatol. 2020, 140, 3–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Tumbarski, Y.; Nikolova, R.; Petkova, N.; Ivanov, I.; Lante, A. Biopreservation of fresh strawberries by carboxymethyl cellulose edible coatings enriched with a bacteriocin of Bacillus methylotrophicus BM47. Food Technol. Biotechnol. 2019, 57, 230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Tumbarski, Y.; Petkova, N.; Todorova, M.; Ivanov, I.; Deseva, I.; Mihaylova, D.; Ibrahim, S.A. Effects of pectin-based edible coatings containing a bacteriocin of Bacillus methylotrophicus BM47 on the quality and storage life of fresh blackberries. Ital. J. Food. Sci. 2020, 32, 420–437. [Google Scholar]
  42. ISO 750:1998(E); Fruit and Vegetable Products—Determination of Titratable Acidity. International Organization Standardization (ISO): Geneva, Switzerland, 1998. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/22569.html (accessed on 17 December 2024).
  43. AOAC Official Method 934.06; Moisture in Dried Fruits. AOAC International: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2007. Available online: http://www.eoma.aoac.org/methods/info.asp?ID=21670 (accessed on 20 February 2025).
  44. AOAC Official Method 940.26; Ash of Fruits and Fruit Products. AOAC International: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2007. Available online: http://www.eoma.aoac.org/methods/info.asp?ID=15176 (accessed on 10 January 2025).
  45. Shelukhina, N.P.; Fedichkina, L.G. A rapid method for quantitative determination of pectic substances. Acta Bot. Neerl. 1994, 43, 205–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Slavov, A.; Ognynanov, M.; Vasileva, I. Pectic polysaccharides extracted from pot marigold (Calendula officinalis) industrial waste. Food Hydrocoll. 2020, 101, 105545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Lurie, I.S.; Skokan, L.E.; Tsitovich, A.P. Technochemical and Microbiological Control in Confectionery Production: A Handbook; KolosS: Moscow, Russia, 2003. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  48. Esringu, A.; Akšić, M.F.; Ercisli, S.; Okatan, V.; Gozlekci, S.; Cakir, O. Organic acids, sugars and mineral content of cherry laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis Roem.) accessions in Turkey. Comptes Rendus Acad. Bulg. Sci. 2016, 69, 115–122. [Google Scholar]
  49. AOAC International. Official Methods of Analysis, 18th ed.; Current through revision 2, 2007; AOAC International: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  50. Lee, J.; Durst, R.W.; Wrolstad, R.E. Determination of total monomeric anthocyanin pigment content of fruit juices, beverages, natural colorants, and wines by the pH differential method: Collaborative study. J. AOAC Int. 2005, 88, 1269–1278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Hadjikinova, R.; Petkova, N.; Hadjikinov, D.; Denev, P.; Hrusavov, D. Development and validation of HPLC-RID method for determination of sugars and polyols. J. Pharm. Sci. Res. 2017, 9, 1263–1269. [Google Scholar]
  52. Ivanov, I.G.; Vrancheva, R.Z.; Marchev, A.S.; Petkova, N.T.; Aneva, I.Y.; Denev, P.P.; Georgiev, V.G.; Pavlov, A.I. Antioxidant activities and phenolic compounds in Bulgarian Fumaria species. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci. 2014, 3, 296. [Google Scholar]
  53. Petkova, P.; Bileva, T.; Valcheva, E.; Dobrevska, G.; Grozeva, N.; Todorova, M.; Popov, V. Non-Polar Fraction Constituents, Phenolic Acids, Flavonoids and Antioxidant Activity in Fruits from Florina Apple Variety Grown under Different Agriculture Management. Nat. Life Sci. Commun. 2023, 22, e2023012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Yanakieva, V.; Parzhanova, A.; Dimitrov, D.; Vasileva, I.; Raeva, P.; Ivanova, S. Study on the Antimicrobial Activity of Medicinal Plant Extracts and Emulsion Products with Integrated Herbal Extracts. Agric. For. 2023, 69, 71–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Valero, D.; Serrano, M. Growth and ripening stage at harvest modulates postharvest quality and bioactive compounds with antioxidant activity. Stewart Postharvest Rev. 2013, 3, 7. [Google Scholar]
  56. Valero, D.; Serrano, M. (Eds.) Fruit ripening. In Postharvest Biology and Technology for Preserving Fruit Quality; CRC Press-Taylor & Francis: Boca Raton, FL, USA; New York, NY, USA; London, UK, 2010; pp. 7–47. [Google Scholar]
  57. Díaz-Mula, H.M.; Castillo, S.; Martínez-Romero, D.; Valero, D.; Zapata, P.J.; Guillén, F.; Serrano, M. Organoleptic, nutritive and functional proper ties of sweet cherry as affected by cultivar and ripening stage. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 2009, 15, 535–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Pobiega, K.; Igielska, M.; Włodarczyk, P.; Gniewosz, M. The use of pullulan coatings with propolis extract to extend the shelf life of blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) fruit. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 56, 1013–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Hardisson, A.; Rubio, C.; Martin, M.; Alvarez, R.; Diaz, E. Mineral composition of the banana (Musa acuminata) from the island of Tenerife. Food Chem. 2001, 112, 153–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Celik, F.; Ercisli, S.; Yilmaz, S.O.; Hegedus, A. Estimation of Certain Physical and Chemical Fruit Characteristics of Various Cherry Laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis Roem.) Genotypes. Hortic. Sci. 2011, 46, 924–927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Scalisi, A.; O’Connell, M.G. Relationships between Soluble Solids and Dry Matter in the Flesh of Stone Fruit at Harvest. Analytica 2021, 2, 14–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Akbulut, M.; Macit, I.; Ercisli, S.; Koc, A. Evaluation of 28 cherry laurel (Laurocerasus officinalis) genotypes in the Black Sea region, Turkey. N. Z. J. Crop Hortic. Sci. 2007, 35, 463–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Islam, A.; Vardal, E. Pomological Characteristics of Cherry Laurel (Prunus laurocerasus L.) Grown in Rize. Acta Hort. 2009, 818, 133–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Silué, Y.; Fawole, O.A. Cluster analysis of Japanese plum cultivars for optimizing export handling conditions. Sci. Hortic. 2025, 346, 114185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Öncül, N.; Karabiyikli, Ş. Factors Affecting the Quality Attributes of Unripe Grape Functional Food Products. J. Food Biochem. 2015, 39, 686–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Ladaniya, M.S. Fruit Quality Control, Evaluation, and Analysis. In Citrus Fruit; Ladaniya, M.S., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2008; pp. 475–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Abanoz, Y.Y.; Okcu, Z. Biochemical content of cherry laurel (Prunus laurocerasus L.) fruits with edible coatings based on caseinat, Semperfresh and lecithin. Turk. J. Agric. For. 2022, 46, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Usenik, V.; Štampar, F.; Veberič, R. Anthocyanins and Fruit Colour in Plums (Prunus domestica L.) during Ripening. Food Chem. 2009, 114, 529–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Green, C.J. Fibre in enteral nutrition. Clin. Nutr. 1987, 20, 23–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Reiser, S. Metabolic effects of dietary pectins related to human health. Food Technol. 2001, 41, 91–99. [Google Scholar]
  71. Chandel, V.; Biswas, D.; Roy, S.; Vaidya, D.; Verma, A.; Gupta, A. Current Advancements in Pectin: Extraction, Properties and Multifunctional Applications. Foods 2022, 11, 2683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Said, N.S.; Olawuyi, I.F.; Lee, W.Y. Pectin Hydrogels: Gel-Forming Behaviors, Mechanisms, and Food Applications. Gels 2023, 9, 732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Kalyoncu, İ.H.; Ersoy, N.; Elidemir, A.Y.; Dolek, C. Mineral and Some Physico-Chemical Composition of ‘Karayemis’ (Prunus laurocerasus L.) Fruits Grown in Northeast Turkey. World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. Int. J. Biol. Biomol. Agric. Food Biotechnol. Eng. 2013, 7, 430–433. [Google Scholar]
  74. Borsani, J.; Budde, C.O.; Porrini, L.; Lauxmann, M.A.; Lombardo, V.A.; Murray, R.; Andreo, C.S.; Drincovich, M.F.; Lara, M.V. Carbon metabolism of peach fruit after harvest: Changes in enzymes involved in organic acid and sugar level modifications. J. Exp. Bot. 2009, 60, 1823–1837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Alasalvar, C.; Chang, S.K. Antioxidants, polyphenols, and health benefits of cherry laurel: A review. J. Food Bioact. 2020, 10, 47–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Celik, O.F.; Demirkol, M.; Durmus, Y.; Tarakci, Z. Effects of drying method on the phenolics content and antioxidant activities of cherry laurel (Prunus laurocerasus L.). J. Food Meas. Charact. 2020, 14, 48–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Ozturk, B.; Celik, S.M.; Karakaya, M.; Karakaya, O.; Islam, A.; Yarilgac, T. Storage temperature affects phenolic content, antioxidant activity and fruit quality parameters of cherry laurel (Prunus laurocerasus L.). J. Food Process. Preserv. 2017, 41, e12774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Erguney, E.; Gulsunoglu, Z.; Durmus, E.F.; Akyilmaz, M.K. Improvement of physical properties of cherry laurel powder. Acad. Food 2017, 13, 108–114. [Google Scholar]
  79. Bilenler Koc, T.; Karabulut, I. Effect of Altitude and Location on Compositions and Antioxidant Activity of Laurel Cherry (Prunus Laurocerasus L.). JAFAG 2023, 40, 50–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Karabegović, I.T.; Stojičević, S.S.; Veličković, D.T.; Todorović, Z.B.; Nikolić, N.Č.; Lazić, M.L. The effect of different extraction techniques on the composition and antioxidant activity of cherry laurel (Prunus laurocerasus) leaf and fruit extracts. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2014, 54, 142–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Sahan, Y.; Cansev, A.; Celik, G.; Cinar, A. Determination of Various Chemical Properties, Total Phenolic Contents, Antioxidant Capacity and Organic Acids in Laurocerasus officinalis Fruits. Acta Hortic. 2012, 939, 359–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Celep, E.; Aydın, A.; Yesilada, E. A comparative study on the in vitro antioxidant potentials of three edible fruits: Cornelian cherry, Japanese persimmon and cherry laurel. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2012, 50, 3329–3335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Mihaylova, D.; Popova, A.; Desseva, I.; Petkova, N.; Stoyanova, M.; Vrancheva, R.; Slavov, A.; Slavchev, A.; Lante, A. Comparative Study of Early- and Mid-Ripening Peach (Prunus persica L.) Varieties: Biological Activity, Macro-, and MicroNutrient Profile. Foods 2021, 10, 164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Marinova, D.; Ribarova, F.; Atanassova, M. Total phenolics and total flavonoids in bulgarian fruits and vegetables. J. Univ. Chem. Technol. Metall. 2005, 40, 255–260. [Google Scholar]
  85. Denev, P.; Lojek, A.; Ciz, M.; Kratchanova, M. Antioxidant activity and polyphenol content of Bulgarian fruits, Bulg. J. Agric. Sci. 2013, 19, 22–27. [Google Scholar]
  86. Guo, C.; Bi, J.; Li, X.; Lyu, J.; Zhou, M.; Wu, X. Antioxidant profile of thinned young and ripe fruits of Chinese peach and nectarine varieties. Int. J. Food Prop. 2020, 23, 1272–1286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Capanoglu, E.; Boyacioglu, D.; de Vos, R.C.; Hall, R.D.; Beekwilder, J. Procyanidins in fruit from sour cherry (Prunus cerasus) differ strongly in chain length from those in laurel cherry (Prunus laurac erasus) and Cornelian cherry (Cornus mas). J. Berry Res. 2011, 1, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Lee, K.; Kim, Y.; Kim, D.; Lee, C. Major phenolics in apple and their contribution in the total antioxidant capacity. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 6516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Petkova, N.T.; Kuzmanova, S.; Bileva, T.; Valcheva, E.; Dobrevska, G.; Grozeva, N.; Popov, V. Influence of conventional and organic agriculture practices on the total phenols and antioxidant potential of Florina apple fruits. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2021, 1031, 012088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Thi, M.T.T.; Wibowo, D.; Rehm, B.H.A. Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Biofilms. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 8671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. De Oliveira, D.M.P.; Forde, B.M.; Kidd, T.J.; Harris, P.N.A.; Schembri, M.A.; Beatson, S.A.; Paterson, D.L.; Walker, M.J. Antimicrobial Resistance in ESKAPE Pathogens. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2020, 33, e00181-19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Özçelik, E.; Uysal Pala, Ç. Antioxidant and antimicrobial properties of cherry laurel leaf and fruit extracts. In Proceedings of the Istanbul International Modern Scientific Research Congress-III, İstanbul, Turkey, 6–8 May 2022; pp. 1131–1138. [Google Scholar]
Life 15 01847 g001
Figure 1. HPLC-RID chromatogram of cherry laurel water extract (1. sucrose, 2. glucose, 3. fructose, and 4. sorbitol).
Figure 1. HPLC-RID chromatogram of cherry laurel water extract (1. sucrose, 2. glucose, 3. fructose, and 4. sorbitol).
Life 15 01847 g001
Life 15 01847 g002
Figure 2. Total phenolic content (mg GAE/g) in laurel cherry extracts: (a) fresh weight, (b) dry weight.
Figure 2. Total phenolic content (mg GAE/g) in laurel cherry extracts: (a) fresh weight, (b) dry weight.
Life 15 01847 g002
Life 15 01847 g003
Figure 3. Total flavonoids (mg QE/g) in laurel cherry extracts: (a) fresh weight, (b) dry weight.
Figure 3. Total flavonoids (mg QE/g) in laurel cherry extracts: (a) fresh weight, (b) dry weight.
Life 15 01847 g003
Life 15 01847 g004
Figure 4. Selected petri dish photos of antimicrobial and antifungal activity assay of cherry laurel extracts.
Figure 4. Selected petri dish photos of antimicrobial and antifungal activity assay of cherry laurel extracts.
Life 15 01847 g004
Table 1. Weight and geometrical parameters of laurel cherry fruit.
Table 1. Weight and geometrical parameters of laurel cherry fruit.
Parameters
Weight (g)1.6 ± 0.2
Width (mm), W12.2 ± 0.2
Length (mm), L14.7 ± 0.3
Thickness, (mm) T15.1 ± 0.4
GDM, (mm)13.9 ± 0.1
Spherisity, (%)94.6 ± 2.2
Surface area, (cm2)6.1 ± 0.1
Table 2. Color parameters.
Table 2. Color parameters.
Color ParametersValues
L*26.38 ± 0.28
a*0.89 ± 0.02
b*0.11 ± 0.01
C*0.91 ± 0.07
hue angle h°13.09 ± 0.64
Table 3. Values of Titratable acidity (TA), pH, TSS, moisture, and ash in the fruits of the laurel cherry, variety Novita.
Table 3. Values of Titratable acidity (TA), pH, TSS, moisture, and ash in the fruits of the laurel cherry, variety Novita.
ParameterValue
pH4.54 ± 0.01
total acidity (%)0.45 ± 0.01
TSS, Brix (%)17.67 ± 0.58
moisture (%)74.19 ± 1.19
ash (%)0.83 ± 0.09
Table 4. Polyuronide, degree of esterification of pectin, cellulose, and total lipid content.
Table 4. Polyuronide, degree of esterification of pectin, cellulose, and total lipid content.
ParameterValue
polyuronic acid content (%)3.33 ± 0.23
degree of esterification (%)56.47 ± 7.01
celulose (%)0.36 ± 0.08
total lipids (%)0.85 ± 0.04
Table 5. Antioxidant activity (mM TE/g) of the tested laurel cherry extracts.
Table 5. Antioxidant activity (mM TE/g) of the tested laurel cherry extracts.
DPPHABTSFRAP
96% ethanol5.90 a ± 0.548.28 a ± 0.166.79 a ± 0.23
22.85 b ± 0.8332.04 b ± 0.2526.28 b ± 0.91
70% ethanol4.46 a ± 0.226.27 a ± 0.305.06 a ± 0.04
17.29 b ± 0.7324.27 b ± 0.1419.59 b ± 0.16
80% methanol4.31 a ± 0.805.60 a ± 0.403.77 a ± 0.05
16.70 b ± 0.9121.69 b ± 0.1814.60 b ± 0.18
50% ethanol2.78 a ± 0.234.14 a ± 0.142.83 a ± 0.14
10.76 b ± 0.6716.04 b ± 0.5410.95 b ± 0.67
water0.45 a ± 0.050.97 a ± 0.020.57 a ± 0.01
1.76 b ± 0.073.75 b ± 0.342.24 b ± 0.19
The results for the antioxidant activity measured by the three methods are presented for fresh (a) and dry (b) weight of the fruit.
Table 6. Antimicrobial activity of water and methanol fruit extracts.
Table 6. Antimicrobial activity of water and methanol fruit extracts.
Inhibition Zone, mm
Tested MicroorganismWater ExtractMethanol ExtractNystatinPenicillin
B. subtilis0 ± 0.0013 ± 0.00n.a.-
B. amyloliquefaciens0 ± 0.0012 ± 0.00n.a.-
S. aureus0 ± 0.0017 ± 0.00n.a.30
L. monocytogenes8 ± 0.0015 ± 0.00n.a.20
E. faecalis0 ± 0.0013 ± 0.00n.a.-
M. luteus15 ± 0.0020 ± 0.00n.a.-
S. enteritidis8 ± 0.0017 ± 0.00n.a.-
S. typhimurium0 ± 0.0017 ± 0.00n.a.-
Klebsiella sp.0 ± 0.0020 ± 0.00n.a.-
E. coli0 ± 0.0013 ± 0.00n.a.-
P. vulgaris0 ± 0.0012 ± 0.00n.a.-
P. aeruginosa0 ± 0.0013 ± 0.00n.a.-
C. albicans0 ± 0.000 ± 0.0021n.a.
S. cerevisiae0 ± 0.0012 ± 0.0018n.a.
A. niger0 ± 0.0025 ± 0.0018n.a.
A. flavus0 ± 0.0020 ± 0.0018n.a.
Penicillium sp.0 ± 0.0022 ± 0.00n.a.n.a.
Rhizopus spp.0 ± 0.0020 ± 0.00n.a.n.a.
F. moniliforme0 ± 0.0020 ± 0.0015n.a.
Mucor spp.0 ± 0.008 ± 0.00n.a.n.a.
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

Todorova, M.; Petkova, N.; Ivanov, I.; Tumbarski, Y.; Yanakieva, V.; Vasileva, I.; Barakova, Y.; Cherneva, E.; Nikolova, S. Chemical Characteristics and Biological Potential of Prunus laurocerasus Fruits. Life 2025, 15, 1847. https://doi.org/10.3390/life15121847

AMA Style

Todorova M, Petkova N, Ivanov I, Tumbarski Y, Yanakieva V, Vasileva I, Barakova Y, Cherneva E, Nikolova S. Chemical Characteristics and Biological Potential of Prunus laurocerasus Fruits. Life. 2025; 15(12):1847. https://doi.org/10.3390/life15121847

Chicago/Turabian Style

Todorova, Mina, Nadezhda Petkova, Ivan Ivanov, Yulian Tumbarski, Velichka Yanakieva, Ivelina Vasileva, Yoana Barakova, Emiliya Cherneva, and Stoyanka Nikolova. 2025. "Chemical Characteristics and Biological Potential of Prunus laurocerasus Fruits" Life 15, no. 12: 1847. https://doi.org/10.3390/life15121847

APA Style

Todorova, M., Petkova, N., Ivanov, I., Tumbarski, Y., Yanakieva, V., Vasileva, I., Barakova, Y., Cherneva, E., & Nikolova, S. (2025). Chemical Characteristics and Biological Potential of Prunus laurocerasus Fruits. Life, 15(12), 1847. https://doi.org/10.3390/life15121847

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