Content uploaded by Aydin Him
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Aydin Him on Feb 11, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Pharmacologyonline 3: 363-369 (2008) Him et al.
363
ANTINOCICEPTIVE ACTIVITY OF ALPHA-PINENE AND FENCHONE
Aydin Him1*, Hanefi Ozbek2, Idris Turel3, Ahmet Cihat Oner3
1 Yüzüncü Yil University, Medical School, Department of Physiology, Van-Turkey
2 Yüzüncü Yil University, Medical School, Department of Pharmacology, Van-Turkey
3 Yüzüncü Yil University, Veterinary School, Department of Pharmacology, Van-Turkey
Summary
We aimed to investigate antinociceptive activities of some components of
Foeniculum vulgare Mill., commonly known as fennel. In this study,
alpha-pinene, limonene, fenchone, trans-anethol and alpha-copaene were
investigated for analgesic effects in mice using tail-flick tests which is
commonly employed as a pain model. The drugs were injected
intraperitoneally in doses of 0.05, 0.1 and 0.2 ml.kg-1. Alpha-pinene and
fenchone caused significant reduction in the nociceptive threshold in the
tail-flick test. The other compounds tested did not show significant
analgesic effects. The motor coordination of mice treated with alpha-
pinene or fenchone, evaluated by using the “rotarod” test, was not
impaired. The results obtained in the present study indicate that alpha
pinene and fenchone, major constituents of Foeniculum vulgare essential
oil, have antinociceptive activity in tail-flick test in mice.
Key Words: Foeniculum vulgare, alpha-pinene, fenchone, antinociception,
tail-flick test, rotarod test.
*Corresponding author: ahim@yyu.edu.tr, Fax: +90 432 2167519
Introduction
Foeniculum vulgare Mill., (commonly known as fennel) a member of
Umbelliferae, is an annual, biennial or perennial aromatic herb, depending on the variety,
which has been known since antiquity in Europe and Asia Minor. The dried, aromatic
fruits are widely employed in culinary preparations for flavoring bread and pastry, in
candies and in alcoholic liqueurs of French type, as well as in cosmetic and medicinal
preparations (1, 2).
Pharmacologyonline 3: 363-369 (2008) Him et al.
364
Fennel and its herbal drug preparations are used in public medicine for dyspeptic
complaints such as mild, spasmodic gastric-intestinal complaints, bloating and flatulence
(3-5), for pediatric colic and some respiratory disorders due to its anti-spasmodic effects
(6). There has been many studies showing that different extracts of Foeniculum vulgare
seeds have diuretic (7), antifungal (8, 9), antioxidant (10, 11), hepatoprotective (12), anti-
inflammatory (13) effects. Essential oil of Foeniculum vulgare has recently been shown
to have antinociceptive effects (13, 14). Trans-anethole and fenchone are the most
important volatile components of the Foeniculum vulgare essential oil. The trans-anethol
content reaches 84-90% in sweet fennel oil, whereas fenchone can be as high as 20% in
bitter fennel oil (15). Chromotograhic analysis showed that fennel seeds also have
methylchavicol, limonene, alpha-pinene, camphene, beta-pinene, beta-myrcene, alpha-
copaen, alpha-phellandrene, 3-carene, camphor, cis-anethole (16-18). To find out which
one of these components are responsible for antinociceptive activity of Foeniculum
vulgare we tested some of the ingrediens, namely alpha-pinene, limonene, fenchone,
trans-anethol and alpha-copaen, in tail-flick test, a commonly used pain model in mice.
Many of these components were reported to have various activities such as anti-
inflammatory (19, 20), antimicrobial (21-23), antioxidant (24), anticarcinogen (25, 26).
From all these constituents only limonene was shown to have analgesic activity shown in
chemical nociception induced by intraperitoneal acetic-acid and in subplantar formalin
test, but did not manifest a significant effect in hot-plate test (27). Orhan et al. (19) did
not find an analgesic effect with alpha-pinene in p-benzoquinone-induced abdominal
contractions in mice, but found a mild anti-inflammatory effect. The other compounds of
Foeniculum vulgare essential oil have not been tested for analgesia yet.
In this study, alpha-pinene, limonene, fenchone, trans-anethol and alpha-copaen
were investigated for their antinociceptive effects using tail-flick tests which is
commonly employed as a pain model in mice.
Methods
Chemicals: (+)-Alpha-pinene, (+)-limonene, (-)-fenchone, trans-anethol and
alpha-copaen were all in liquid form and each was used at the doses of 0.05, 0.1 and 0.2
ml.kg-1, i.p. for tail-flick test. Alpha-pinene and fenchone were used at the dose of 0.2
ml.kg-1, i.p. for rotarod test. Alpha-copaen was purchased from Fluka (Switzerland) and
the others from Sigma-Aldrich (Steinheim,Germany). Morphine (10 mg.kg-1), given
subcutaneously, was used as a standard for comparison and obtained from Galen
(Istanbul, Turkey).
Animals: The protocol for the study was approved by the Ethical Committee of
Yuzuncu Yil University, Faculty of Medicine. Adult Balb/C mice (30 - 40 g, male) were
obtained from Animal House of the Faculty of Medicine. Each experimental group
included 5 animals and housed in a separate cage (48 x 35 x 22 cm) and kept at room
temperature (20 ± 2 0C), with natural dark-light cycle and provided with pelleted food
(Van Animal Feed Factory-Turkey) and water ad libitum.
Pharmacologyonline 3: 363-369 (2008) Him et al.
365
Tail-flick test: Nociceptive response was assessed with a tail-flick apparatus (LSI
Letica LE 7106, Spain) using a method initially described by D’Amour and Smith (28).
The animals were gently immobilized by using a glove, and the radiant heat was focused
on a blackened spot 1-2 cm from the tip of the tail. Mice responded to the focused heat
stimulus by flicking or moving their tail from the path of the stimulus. The reaction time
was automatically recorded. Beam intensity was adjusted to give a tail-flick latency of 7-
8 sec in control animals. Measuring was terminated if the latency exceeded the end of
time (20 sec) to avoid tissue damage. In all experiments nociceptive threshold was
measured twice for each animal before the drug administration to find the base line
latency, and 30, 90 and 150 min after the drug administration.
Rotarod test: Motor coordination of the mice were evaluated by using a rotarod
apparatus (Degisim, Turkey) consisting of a bar with a diameter of 5.6 cm, subdivided
into five compartments by a disc 19 cm in diameter. The bar rotated at a constant speed
of 8 rpm. The motor coordination was assessed on the basis of the endurance time of the
animals on the rotating rod. The day before the test, the animals were trained twice. On
the day of the test only the mice able to stay balanced on the rotating rod between 60 and
120 sec (cut-of time) were selected. The performance time was measured before and 30,
90 and 150 min after drug treatment. The test was conducted between 9 a.m. and 1 p.m.
Statistical analysis: The results were expressed as mean ± standard error of the
mean (S.E.M.). In tail-flick and rotarod tests the values after the drug administration were
compared with those of the baseline latency values using repeated measures of ANOVA.
To compare the analgesic effects of the drugs with those of morphine the analysis of
variance (One-way ANOVA) with post-hoc Tukey’s procedure for multiple comparisons
was used. P values of less then 0.05 were considered significant.
Results
The results of the nociceptive threshold of tail-flick test of alpha-pinene, limonene,
fenchone, trans-anethol and alpha-copaen are presented in Figure 1. In the control group,
injected with physiological saline, there was no change in the nociceptive threshold 30,
90 and 150 min after the injection (9.72 ± 0.52, 8.40 ± 0.39, 9.56 ± 0.17 s, respectively)
compared to the baseline latency measured before the injection (8.06 ± 0.15 s). Alpha-
pinene produced significant analgesic effects at 0.05 ml.kg-1 (11.56 ± 0.61, 10.48 ± 0.39,
11.32 ±0.37 vs. 7.96 ± 0.34 s), at 0.1 ml.kg-1 (10.20 ± 0.96, 9.36 ± 0.38, 10.48 ± 0.42 vs.
6.96 ± 0.15 s), and at 0.2 ml.kg-1 doses (11.02 ± 0.58, 9.62 ± 0.60, 13.50 ± 0.62 vs. 7.40 ±
0.36 s). Fenchone produced significant analgesic effects at 0.05 ml.kg-1 (9.90 ± 0.42, 9.76
± 0.33, 9.98 ± 0.50 vs. 7.22 ± 0.34 s), at 0.1 ml.kg-1 (10.76 ± 0.84, 8.94 ± 0.48, 11.16 ±
0.36 vs. 7.06 ± 0.27 s), and at 0.2 ml.kg-1 doses (10.74 ± 0.17, 8.76 ± 0.42, 10.44 ± 0.67
vs. 7.56 ± 0.34s). Analgesic effects of both alpha-pinene and fenchone lasted as long as
150 minute after the drug administration. Morphine significantly increased the pain
threshold 30 and 90 min but not 150 min after the drug administration (15.69 ± 1.26,
18.08 ± 0.71, 11.00 ± 1.10 vs. 10.43 ± 0.51 s).
Pharmacologyonline 3: 363-369 (2008) Him et al.
366
The analgesic effects of both alpha-pinene and fenchone were significantly less
strong compared to that of morphine at 30 and 90 min after drug administration.
Although the effect of morphine disappeared 150 min after the injection alpha-pinene and
fenchone were still effective at this time point.
The motor coordination of mice treated with alpha-pinene or fenchone was not
impaired 30, 90 and 150 min after the drug administration compared with that of the
baseline latency (Table 1).
Experimental Groups
Control AP-I AP-II AP-III F-I F-II F-III A-I A-II A-III L-I L-II L-III AC-I AC-II AC-III M
Time (sec)
0
5
10
15
20 Baseline
30 min
90 min
150 min
***
***
* *
***
* * * *
**
Figure 1. Effects of alpha-pinene (AP), fenchone (F), trans-anethol(A), limonen (L) and
alpha-copaen (AC) at the doses of 0.05 (I), 0.1 (II) and 0.2 (III) ml/kg, i.p. on tail-flick
latency in mice. M, morphine 10 mg.kg-1, s.c. Significance in comparison with baseline
latency: *p<0.05, repeated measures of ANOVA.
Discussion
In the present study we investigated antinociceptive effects of the major
constituents of Foeniculum vulgare in tail-flick test, a commonly used pain model in
mice. Out of 5 constituents tested, namely alpha-pinene, limonene, fenchone, trans-
anethol and alpha-copaen, only alpha-pinene and fenchone showed a significant analgesic
activity.
Pharmacologyonline 3: 363-369 (2008) Him et al.
367
Table 1. Effects of alpha-pinene and fenchone on rotarod test in mice (n=5).
Treatment Time
(min) Endurance time on
rotarod (s)(mean ± SEM)
0 120 ± 0
30 120 ± 0
90 103 ± 17
Control (physiologic saline)
150 120 ± 0
0 120 ± 0
30 120 ± 0
90 118 ± 2
Alpha-pinene
150 120 ± 0
0 120 ± 0
30 120 ± 0
90 120 ± 0
Fenchone
150 119.4 ± 0.6
0 120 ± 0
30 57.8 ± 16.7 *
90 104.5 ± 15.5
Morphine
150 120 ± 0
*p<0.05, repeated measures of ANOVA.
Although antinociceptive effect of neither alpha-pinene nor fenchone was as
strong as that of morphine their effects lasted 150 min while the effect of morphine did
not last as long. The compounds causing locomotor disruption or having sedative effects
may cause a false positive result in some tests measuring analgesia (29). Therefore we
have also tested the highest analgesic doses of alpha-pinene and fenchone for their effect
on motor coordination by rotarod test. In this study neither alpha-pinene nor fenchone
caused motor incoordination at the maximal doses used. Thus the analgesic effect of
alpha-pinene and fenchone is not likely to be through its effect on locomotor function or
its sedative effect. Although the present study found an analgesic effects with alpha-
pinene Orhan et al. (19) did not find so in p-benzoquinone-induced abdominal
contractions in mice, but found a mild anti-inflammatory effect. The discrepancy between
these two studies could be due to different pain models employed. Fenchone has not been
studied for analgesia before and reported to have analgesic effect here first time.
Limonene, which did not change pain threshold in tail-flick test in the current study, was
shown to cause a significant inhibition on chemical nociception induced by
intraperitoneal acetic-acid and in subplantar formalin test, both of which are
inflammatory pain models (27). However the researchers did not find an antinociceptive
effect with the same compound in hot-plate test model of pain, which uses a thermal
stimulation like in tail-flick test. As seen from these studies a compound effective in one
pain model may not exert similar effect in a different pain model, which could be related
to the different mechanisms relaying the pain sensation and the different site of action of
the chemicals.
Pharmacologyonline 3: 363-369 (2008) Him et al.
368
Among the major compounds of Foeniculum vulgare essential oil screened herein,
only alpha-pinene and fenchone exhibited antinociceptive activity in tail-flick model of
pain in mice without inducing motor incoordination.
References
1. Hansel R, Keller K, Rimpler H. Foeniculum. Hagers Handbuch der Pharmazeutishen.
New York: Springer; 1993:156-81.
2. Farrel KT. Spices, condiments, and seasonings. Westport: AVI Publishing; 1985:106-9.
3. Czygane FC. Fenchel: Teedrogen. In: Wichtl M, ed. Wissenscaftliche
Verlagsgesellscaht 2nd ed. Stuttgard:; 1989:171-3.
4. Forster HB. Spasmolytische wirkung pflanzhlicher carminativa. Z Al Med.
1983;59:1327-33.
5. Forster HB, Niklas H, Lutz S. Antispasmotic effects of some medicinal plants. Planta
Med. 1980;40:309-19.
6. Reynolds JEF. Essential oils and aromatic carminatives. Martindale-The Extra
Pharmacopeia. 28 ed. London: Royal Pharmaceutical Society; 1982:670-6.
7. Wright CI, Van-Buren L, Kroner CI, Koning MM. Herbal medicines as diuretics: a
review of the scientific evidence. Journal of ethnopharmacology. 2007;114(1):1-31.
8. Soylu S, Yigitbas H, Soylu EM, Kurt S. Antifungal effects of essential oils from
oregano and fennel on Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. Journal of applied microbiology.
2007;103(4):1021-30.
9. Ozcan MM, Chalchat JC, Arslan D, Ates A, Unver A. Comparative essential oil
composition and antifungal effect of bitter fennel (Foeniculum vulgare ssp. piperitum)
fruit oils obtained during different vegetation. Journal of medicinal food. 2006;9(4):552-
61.
10. Satyanarayana S, Sushruta K, Sarma GS, Srinivas N, Subba Raju GV. Antioxidant
activity of the aqueous extracts of spicy food additives--evaluation and comparison with
ascorbic acid in in-vitro systems. Journal of herbal pharmacotherapy. 2004;4(2):1-10.
11. Ruberto G, Baratta MT, Deans SG, Dorman HJ. Antioxidant and antimicrobial
activity of Foeniculum vulgare and Crithmum maritimum essential oils. Planta Med.
2000;66(8):687-93.
12. Ozbek H, Ugras S, Dulger H, et al. Hepatoprotective effect of Foeniculum vulgare
essential oil. Fitoterapia. 2003;74(3):317-9.
13. Choi EM, Hwang JK. Antiinflammatory, analgesic and antioxidant activities of the
fruit of Foeniculum vulgare. Fitoterapia. 2004;75(6):557-65.
14. Ozbek H, Tas A, Ozgokce F, Selcuk N, Alp S, Karagoz S. Evaluation of median
lethal dose and analgesic activity of Foeniculum vulgare Miller essential oil. Intl J Pharm.
2006;2(2):181-3.
15. Bernath N, Nemeth E, Kattaa A, Hethelyi E. Morphological and chemical evaluation
of fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill.) population of different origin. J Eseent Oil Res.
1996;8:247-53.
16. Mimica-Dukic N, Kujundzic S, Sokovic M, Couladis M. Essential oil composition
and antifungal activity of Foeniculum vulgare Mill obtained by different distillation
conditions. Phytother Res. 2003;17(4):368-71.
Pharmacologyonline 3: 363-369 (2008) Him et al.
369
17. Diaz-Maroto MC, Diaz-Maroto Hidalgo IJ, Sanchez-Palomo E, Perez-Coello MS.
Volatile components and key odorants of fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill.) and thyme
(Thymus vulgaris L.) oil extracts obtained by simultaneous distillation-extraction and
supercritical fluid extraction. Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.
2005;53(13):5385-9.
18. Simandi B, Deak A, Ronyai E, et al. Supercritical carbon dioxide extraction and
fractionation of fennel oil. Journal of agricultural and food chemistry. 1999;47(4):1635-
40.
19. Orhan I, Kupeli E, Aslan M, Kartal M, Yesilada E. Bioassay-guided evaluation of
anti-inflammatory and antinociceptive activities of pistachio, Pistacia vera L. Journal of
ethnopharmacology. 2006;105(1-2):235-40.
20. Martin S, Padilla E, Ocete MA, Galvez J, Jimenez J, Zarzuelo A. Anti-inflammatory
activity of the essential oil of Bupleurum fruticescens. Planta Med. 1993;59(6):533-6.
21. Hammer KA, Carson CF, Riley TV. Antifungal activity of the components of
Melaleuca alternifolia (tea tree) oil. Journal of applied microbiology. 2003;95(4):853-60.
22. Macchioni F, Cioni PL, Flamini G, et al. Acaricidal activity of pine essential oils and
their main components against Tyrophagus putrescentiae, a stored food mite. Journal of
agricultural and food chemistry. 2002;50(16):4586-8.
23. Lee HS. Acaricidal activity of constituents identified in Foeniculum vulgare fruit oil
against Dermatophagoides spp. (Acari: Pyroglyphidae). Journal of agricultural and food
chemistry. 2004;52(10):2887-9.
24. Wei A, Shibamoto T. Antioxidant activities and volatile constituents of various
essential oils. Journal of agricultural and food chemistry. 2007;55(5):1737-42.
25. Giri RK, Parija T, Das BR. d-limonene chemoprevention of hepatocarcinogenesis in
AKR mice: inhibition of c-jun and c-myc. Oncology reports. 1999;6(5):1123-7.
26. Crowell PL, Siar Ayoubi A, Burke YD. Antitumorigenic effects of limonene and
perillyl alcohol against pancreatic and breast cancer. Advances in experimental medicine
and biology. 1996;401:131-6.
27. do Amaral JF, Silva MI, Neto MR, et al. Antinociceptive effect of the monoterpene
R-(+)-limonene in mice. Biological & pharmaceutical bulletin. 2007;30(7):1217-20.
28. D'Amour FE, Smith DL. A method for determining loss of pain sessation. Pharmacol
J Exp Ther. 1941;72:74-9.
29. Chernov HI, Wilson DE, Fowler F, Plummer AJ. Non-specificity of the mouse
writhing test. Arch Int Pharmacodyn Ther. 1967;167:171-8.