Advertisement

Chemistry of Natural Compounds

, Volume 49, Issue 3, pp 496–498 | Cite as

Comparison of the fatty acid compositions of Six Centaurea species

  • Y. Tekeli
  • G. Zengin
  • A. Aktumsek
  • M. Sezgin
Article

Fatty acids have very important biological functions, including as a source of energy and as components of biological membranes. The dietary intake of fatty acids is very important because many degenerative diseases such as cardiovascular diseases are associated with fatty acids.

Centaurea belong to the family Asteraceae, and there are more than 500–600 species of this genus worldwide [1]. In Turkey, there are about 179 Centaurea species. Many species of the genus are endemic to Turkey, and the endemism ratio is 61%. [2]. Centaurea species have attractive flowers and have been used in important medicinal applications in many countries. For example, C. drabifolia, C. pulchella, C. depressa, and C. solsititialis are used to treat various ailments such as abscesses, hemorrhoids, and the common cold in Anatolian folk medicine. Previous studies have shown differences in the fatty acid compositions of some Centaurea species, such as C. carduiformis [3], C. patula and C. pulchella [4], C....

Keywords

Fatty Acid Composition Total Fatty Acid Essential Fatty Acid Hemorrhoid Total Fatty Acid Content 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgment

This study was supported financially by the Selcuk University Scientific Research Foundation.

References

  1. 1.
    J. Mabberley, The Plant Book, 2nd Ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Guner, N. Ozhatay, T. Ekim, and K. H. C. Baser, Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands, Vol. 11, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, UK, 2000, p. 163.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Y. Tekeli, M. Sezgin, A. Aktumsek, G. O. Guler, and M. A. Sanda, Nat. Prod. Res., 24, 1883 (2010).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    G. Zengin, Y. S. Cakmak, G. O. Guler, and A. Aktumsek, Food Chem. Toxicol., 48, 2638 (2010).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Zengin, G. O. Guler, Y. S. Cakmak, and A. Aktumsek, Grasas Aceites, 62, 90 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Aktumsek, G. Zengin, G. O Guler, Y. S. Cakmak, and A. Duran, Food Chem. Toxicol., 49, 2914 (2011).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    N. Yildirim, S. Sunar, G. Agar, S. Bozari, and O. Aksakal, Biochem. Genet., 47, 850 (2009).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    S. M. Innis, Brain Res., 1237, 37 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Heidari, A. Siami, and C. Monazami, Iran Agric. Res., 19, 41 (2000).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. T. Labuschagne and A. Hugo, J. Food Biochem., 34, 93 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. M. Grundy and M. A. Denke, J. Lipid Res., 31, 1149 (1990).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    V. Dubois, S. Breton, M. Linder, J. Fanni, and M. Parmintier, Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Tech., 109, 710 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. F. Ramadan and J. T. Morsel, Phytochem. Anal., 14, 366 (2003).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    IUPAC, Standards Methods for Analysis of Oils, Fats and Derivatives, C. Paquot (ed.), 6th Edn, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1979, pp. 59–66.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemistry, Science and Arts FacultyMustafa Kemal UniversityHatayTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Biology, Science FacultySelcuk UniversityKonyaTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Chemistry, Science FacultySelcuk UniversityKonyaTurkey

Personalised recommendations