Quantification of α-methylene-λ-butyrolactone extracted from different parts ofAlstroemeria wilhelmina and evaluation of it's antigenicity using the guinea-pig maximization test

  • Koichi Harada
  • Shoko Ohmori
  • Chang-Nian Wei
  • Yoshiki Arimatsu
  • Atsushi Ueda
Original Article


To detect the type of contact dermatitis caused due to the handling ofAlstroemeria wilhelmina, 1% α-methylene-λ-butyrolactone (α-MBL) dissolved in physiological alien and a five-fold diluted saline solution of original extracts of flowers, leaves and stems of the flower were applied to guinea-pigs for extracts were applied to the animals as the challenge treatment in compliance with the guinea-pig maximization test (GMT). As a consequence, not only primary irritant dermatitis was observed, but also delayed type allergic contact dermatitis due toAlstroemeria wilhelmina was observed. α-MBL determined in the extracts using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) was found to be the biochemical material cause of the contact dermatitis. the flower region contained α-MBL in the highest concentrations compared with those of the leaves and stems. Therefore, the quantification of α-MBL in the extracts was concluded as being a useful evaluating method for contact dermatitis due to the handling ofAlstroemeria.

Key words

guinea-pig maximization test (GMT) α-methylene-λ-butyrolactone (α-MBL) Alstroemeria wilhelmina contact dermatitis high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) 


  1. 1).
    van Ketel WG, Verspyck Mijnnssen GA, Neering H. Contact eczema fromAlstroemeria. Contact Dermatitis 1975; 1: 323–324.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2).
    Marks JG. Allergic contact dermatitis toAlstroemeria. Arch. Dermatol. 1988; 124: 914–916.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3).
    Thiboutot DM, Hamory BH, Marks JG. Dermatoses among floral shop workers. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 1990; 22: 54–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4).
    Wilkinson JD, Rycroft RJG. Contact dermatitis. In: Champion RH, Burton JL, Ebling FJG, editors. Textbook of dermatology, 5th edition. London: Blackwell Scientific Publications. 1992; 611–715.Google Scholar
  5. 5).
    Santucci B, Picardo M, Iavarone C, Trogolo C. Contact dermatitis toAlstroemeria. Contact Dermatitis 1985; 12: 215–219.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6).
    Hausen BM, Prater E, Schubert H. The sensitizing capacity ofAlstroemeria cultivars in man and guinea pig. Remarks on the occurrence, quantity and irritant and sensitizing potency of their constituents tuliposide A and tulipalin A (α-methylene-γ-butyrolactone). Contact Dermatitis 1983; 9: 46–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7).
    Kawashima T, Omodaka S, Takei M, Ito T, Takase Y. Contact dermatitis due toAlstroemeria. HIFU 1986; 28: 322–327. (In Japanese).Google Scholar
  8. 8).
    Maguire H. Mechanism of intensification by complete Freund's adjuvant of the acquisition of delayed hypersensitivity in the guinea pig. Immuno. Commni. 1972; 1: 239–246.Google Scholar
  9. 9).
    Parish WE. Clinical immunology and allergy. In: Champion RH, Burton JL, Ebling FJG, editors. Textbook of dermatology, 5th edition. London: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1992: 253–304.Google Scholar
  10. 10).
    Magnusson B, Klingman AM. The identification of contact allergens by animal assay. The guinea pig maximization test. J. Invest. Dermatol. 1969; 52: 268–276.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11).
    Christensen LP, Kristiansen K. A simple HPLC method for the isolation and quantification of the allergens tuliposide A and tulipalin A inAlstroemeria. Contact Dermatitis 1995; 32: 199–203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12).
    van der Mei IAF, de Boer EM, Bruyuzeel DP. Contact Dermatitis inAlstroemeria workers. Occup. Med. 1998; 48: 397–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13).
    Ryan TA. Multiple comparisons in psychological research. Psychol. Bull. 1959; 56: 26–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14).
    Ryan TA. Significance test for multiple comparison of proportions, variances, and other statistics. Psycol. Bull. 1960; 57: 318–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15).
    Manda F, Tadera K, Aoyama K. Skin lesion due to okra (Hibiscus esculentus L.): proteolytic activity and allergenicity of okra. Contact Dermatitis 1992; 26: 95–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16).
    Bjorken BE. Contact allergy and depigmentation fromalstroemeria. Contact Dermatitis 1982; 8: 178–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17).
    Kubo Y, Yoshida H. A flower shop owner with allergic contact dermatitis toAlstroemeria Ligtu L. NICHIHI ARERUGI 1993; 1: 28–31. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  18. 18).
    Cook DK, Freeman S. Allergic contact dematitis to plants: an analysis of 68 patients tested at the Skin and Cancer Foundation. Australasian Journal of Dermatology. 1997; 38: 129–131.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19).
    McGovern TW.Alstroemeria L. American Journal of Contact Dermatitis 1999; 10: 172–176.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20).
    deJong NW, Vermeulen AM, Gerth van Wijk R, de Groot H. Occupational allergy caused by flowers. Allergy 1998; 53: 204–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21).
    Christensen LP. Direct release of the allergen tulipalin A fromAltroemeria cut flowers: a possible source of airborne contact dermatitis? Contact Dermatitis 1999; 41: 320–324.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22).
    α-Methylene Butyrolactone. The Merck Index 11th Edition. Merck & Co., Inc. 1989: 954.Google Scholar
  23. 23).
    Slob A. Tulip allergens inalstroemeria and some other liliflorae. Phytochemistry 1973; 12: 811–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24).
    Slob A, Jekel B, Jong BD. On the occurrence of tuliposides in the liliflorae. Phytochemistry 1975; 14: 1997–2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25).
    Ohira T. HINSHU NO BUNRUI TO TOKUSEL. In: Ohkawa K, editor. ALUSUTROMERIA. Tokyo: SEIBUNDOUSHINKOSHA, 1994: 36–46. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  26. 26).
    Arts A. Inzicht in typeAlstroemeria orientatiepunt voor teler. Vakblad voor de Bloemmisterij 1988; 37: 45.Google Scholar
  27. 27).
    Arts A. Methode van dunnen aanpassen ann typeAlstroemeria. Vakblad voor de Bloemmisterij 1988; 38: 46–47.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Japanese Society of Hygiene 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Koichi Harada
    • 1
  • Shoko Ohmori
    • 1
  • Chang-Nian Wei
    • 2
  • Yoshiki Arimatsu
    • 3
  • Atsushi Ueda
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of HygieneKumamoto University School of MedicineKumamotoJapan
  2. 2.Kumamoto Total Institute of FitnessKumamoto
  3. 3.Ginkyo College of Medical ScienceKumamoto

Personalised recommendations