Page 60 - AJWEP-v22i3

Almoshadak

The observed differences in secondary metabolite and 82.59 µg AAE/g DM, respectively). The TAC of the
accumulation between sites may be driven by root and leaf extracts at site S1 suggests that subjecting
environmental factors, such as soil salinity, nutrient S. monoica to challenging conditions enhances its
availability, and climatic conditions, as well as genetic ability to produce antioxidant molecules as a survival
variability among S. monoica populations. For instance, mechanism in harsh conditions.
the higher accumulation of phenols and alkaloids in site The high concentration of secondary metabolites in
S1 samples could be a response to specific stressors such the roots and leaves of S. monoica contributes to the
as high salinity or oxidative stress, as these compounds high antioxidant potential of their extracts, particularly
are known to play protective roles under such at site S1. As stated by Kranner et al., the activation
54
conditions. 51,52,57 However, the genetic profile of these of mechanisms that protect and repair cells, such
plants at each site could potentially cause significant as the antioxidant defense system, occurs rapidly
differences in secondary metabolite composition. following cellular stress. This activation may explain
the significant rise in antioxidant capacity. Boestfleisch
3.5. Antioxidative potential of S. monoica roots and et al. suggested that increasing light intensities and salt
55
leaves levels enhance the antioxidant capacity of halophytic
Table 6 presents the antioxidant potential of S. species. Furthermore, the higher antioxidant activity of
monoica root and leaf extracts collected from different the extracts from the roots and leaves may be attributed
sites in Jeddah, as determined by the DPPH radical to the high concentration of phenols, flavonoids,
scavenging activity and the TAC. The DPPH activity and terpenoids in S. monoica. Given that phenolics,
was significantly impacted by the collection site and the flavonoids, and terpenoids are potent antioxidants, the
plant organ (p<0.05), whereas the TAC of the extracts enhanced antioxidant activity of the extracts is likely
was significantly affected (p<0.01). The root extract due to their elevated levels. 56
of S. monoica at site S2 and the leaf extract of site The differences in antioxidant potential between
S3 exhibited the highest DPPH activity (83.09% and the study sites may reflect variations in environmental
87.80%, respectively). However, the TAC of the root effectors and genetic architecture among S. monoica
and leaf extracts of S. monoica at site S1 was the most populations. The higher antioxidant capacity in the site
significant compared to the other sampling sites (60.79 S1 sample could be a response to elevated oxidative
stress for mitigating the damaging ROS. However,
62
Table 6. Antioxidative potential of the root and without detailed data on the environmental conditions
leaf extracts of Suaeda monoica and genetic profiles of the plants at each site, it is difficult

Organ DPPH TAC (µg to definitively attribute the differences in antioxidant
activity (%) AAE/g DM) potential to specific factors.
Root Site 1 80.46±4.44 b 60.79±0.93 c 3.6. Phytochemical composition of S. monoica leaf
Root Site 2 83.09±2.22 ab 53.69±0.66 d extracts
Root Site 3 72.97±5.25 c 60.25±0.40 c The GC-MS analysis of the phytochemical constituents
Leaves Site 1 82.33±4.27 ab 82.59±0.21 a in the ethanolic extracts derived from S. monoica
Leaves Site 2 82.54±4.20 ab 81.53±0.04 a leaves exhibited significant qualitative and quantitative
Leaves Site 3 87.80±0.12 a 72.85±1.60 b differences based on the specific collection site
(Table 7). The leaf extracts exhibited a diverse array
Source of variation of chemical classes, encompassing sesquiterpenes,
Fisher’s test 4.813 649.595 phenols, hydrocarbons, amino acids, aldehydes,
Probability 0.0120 0.0000 amines, fatty acids, alkaloids, diterpenes, glycosides,
Least significant difference 6.817 0.6781 esters, and silicate derivatives. Notably, the principal
Notes: a,b,c The different letters in the same column represent active phytoconstituents identified in S. monoica
significant variations at a 5% level. Sites having different letters extract collected from site S1 included palmitic
indicate significant differences in the parameters measured, acid, tau-muurolol, nonanoic acid, and δ-amorphene
whereas the same letters indicate no significant differences in the (24.13%, 10.14%, 10.09%, and 9.09%, respectively).
parameters measured.
Abbreviations: AAE: Ascorbic acid equivalent; DM: Dry matter; On the other hand, the predominant phytoconstituents
DPPH: 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl; TAC: Total antioxidant in the plant extract collected from site S2 displayed
capacity. a distinct composition, with nonanoic acid, palmitic

Volume 22 Issue 3 (2025) 54 doi: 10.36922/ajwep.8523