Chlorogenic acid content in Calendula varieties through cut dates in Mexico

Calendula officinalis L. is a valuable plant for the medicinal uses of their capitulums (flowers). In this species has been demonstrated genetic diversity in the chemical composition of the capitulums. The flowers contain several phenolic compounds of nutraceutical value e.g. chlorogenic acid. This is an important intermediate in lignin biosynthesis. It is also an antioxidant and can contribute to treatment of atherosclerosis and ischemic perfusion illnesses. It is also an inhibitor of tumour promoting activity and decreases the cholesterol level in the blood of alcoholics by stimulation of secretion of bile acids. In this plant has not been studied the variation of the content of chlorogenic acid in connection with the varietal diversity and the continuous harvestings, because they are managed periodically through all the growth cycle. The aim of the study was to determine the concentration of chlorogenic acid in floral capitulums of six varieties of Calendula harvested through eight weekly cuts. HPLC was used as analytical tool to determine the concentration of this compound. The chromatographic method allowed to distinguish and quantity chlorogenic acid and it was found statistical diferences among cut dates and varieties in the concentration of this compound. The variety V6 was the highest in the concentration of chlorogenic acid whereas V5 was the lowest. The concentration of this compound varied from 1.43 to 89.05 mg/kg dry weigh. However the varieties V7 and V8 were higher in total flavonoids. These values are higher than those reported by others coworkers in different medicinal plants. From an agronomic point of view these data are important to suggest the best variety of Calendula floral capitulums related with chlorogenic acid content.

Keywords: Calendula, chlorogenic acid, liquid chromatography

References:

[1] Chang, et al 2002. J.Food Drug Anal. 10:178 – 182.

Muley, et al. 2009J. Pharm. Res. 8:455 – 465.

[2] Lincoln, et al 2000 Clinical and Exp Pharmacol and Physiol 27 (3): 152 – 159.

[3] Paynter et al 2006 Amer J Epidemiol 164 (11): 1075 – 1084