Next Article in Journal
Antileishmanial and Antiplasmodial Activities of Secondary Metabolites from the Root of Antrocaryon klaineanum Pierre (Anacardiaceae)
Next Article in Special Issue
The Bioactive Properties of Carotenoids from Lipophilic Sea buckthorn Extract (Hippophae rhamnoides L.) in Breast Cancer Cell Lines
Previous Article in Journal
Sharpless Asymmetric Dihydroxylation: An Impressive Gadget for the Synthesis of Natural Products: A Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
Wild Artichoke (Cynara cardunculus subsp. sylvestris, Asteraceae) Leaf Extract: Phenolic Profile and Oxidative Stress Inhibitory Effects on HepG2 Cells
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Molecules
Volume 28
Issue 6
10.3390/molecules28062728
molecules-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Comparative Analysis of Metabolic Variations, Antioxidant Profiles and Antimicrobial Activity of Salvia hispanica (Chia) Seed, Sprout, Leaf, Flower, Root and Herb Extracts

by
Sara Motyka
1,2,
Barbara Kusznierewicz
3,*,
Halina Ekiert
1,
Izabela Korona-Głowniak
4 and
Agnieszka Szopa
1,*
1
Chair and Department of Pharmaceutical Botany, Faculty of Pharmacy, Collegium Medicum, Jagiellonian University, 9 Medyczna St., 30-688 Kraków, Poland
2
Doctoral School of Medical and Health Sciences, Collegium Medicum, Jagiellonian University, 16 Św. Łazarza St., 30-530 Kraków, Poland
3
Department of Chemistry, Technology and Biotechnology of Food, Faculty of Chemistry, Gdańsk University of Technology, 11/12 Narutowicza St., 80-233 Gdańsk, Poland
4
Department of Pharmaceutical Microbiology, Medical Univeristy of Lublin, Chodźki 1 St., 20-093 Lublin, Poland
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Molecules 2023, 28(6), 2728; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28062728
Submission received: 24 February 2023 / Revised: 14 March 2023 / Accepted: 15 March 2023 / Published: 17 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Phytochemistry and Biological Properties of Medicinal Plants)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the phytochemical profiles of the seeds, sprouts, leaves, flowers, roots and herb of Salvia hispanica and to demonstrate their significant contribution to antioxidant and antimicrobial activities. Applied methods were: HPLC-DAD coupled with post-column derivatization with ABTS reagent, untargeted metabolomics performed by LC-Q-Orbitrap HRMS, and two-fold micro-dilution broth method, which involved suspending a solution of tested compounds dissolved in DMSO in Mueller–Hinton broth for bacteria or Mueller–Hinton broth with 2% glucose for fungi. Metabolomic profiling using LC-Q-Orbitrap HRMS used in this study yielded the identification and preliminary characterization of one hundred fifteen compounds. The dominant class of compounds was terpenoids (31 compounds), followed by flavonoids (21 compounds), phenolic acids and derivatives (19 compounds), organic acids (16 compounds) and others (fatty acids, sugars and unidentified compounds). The organic and phenolic acids were the most abundant classes in terms of total peak area, with distribution depending on the plant raw materials obtained from S. hispanica. The main compound among this class for all types of extracts was rosmarinic acid which was proven to be the most abundant for antioxidant potential. All tested extracts exhibited considerable antibacterial and antifungal activity. The strongest bioactivity was found in leaf extracts, which presented bactericidal activity against Gram-positive bacteria (S. aureus, S. epidermidis, M. luteus and E. faecalis). The work represents the first compendium of knowledge comparing different S. hispanica plant raw materials in terms of the profile of biologically active metabolites and their contribution to antioxidant, antimicrobial and antifungal activity.

1. Introduction

Thanks to the development of advanced analytical technologies, it is now possible to better characterize the complex composition of many plant raw materials, with a focus on understanding their biologically active compounds. In this context, a very interesting plant species commonly used in phytotherapy as well as in health nutrition is chia—Salvia hispanica L. (Lamiaceae) [1,2]. Currently, S. hispanica can be field cultivated or cultivated in greenhouse conditions in many regions [3,4,5]. However, S. hispanica is a neglected and underutilized plant (NUCS) [6]. The plant is now known for its health-promoting properties [6,7,8]. Furthermore, chia seeds are well known in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and were used by the Mayan and Aztec tribes as food and an ingredient in many herbal mixtures. However, no specific healing properties were attributed to them at the time [1,9].
Currently, the main raw material obtained from S. hispanica is chia seed (Salviae hispanicae semen) [10]. The chemical composition and biological activities of chia seeds have been well described in the scientific literature, and therefore, commercial interest in this raw material continues to increase [11,12,13,14]. In 2009, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued a positive opinion on chia seeds, making them safe for use in the food industry [15]. In Canada, the seeds and chia seed oil are classified as “natural health product ingredient” [16]. However, few scientific studies deal with the analysis and commercial use of other raw materials derived from this plant, namely sprouts, leaves, flowers, and whole herbs.
The valuable chemical composition of chia seeds is crucial for their popular use in nutritional therapy for many diseases in our civilization. Chia seeds are valued in food production due to their high content of essential fatty acids such as α-linolenic acid and linoleic acid. In addition, the seeds are an essential source of plant protein and contain all essential amino acids (arginine, leucine, phenylalanine, lysine, valine, isoleucine, threonine, methionine, histidine and tryptophan). Chia seeds also contain high levels of dietary fiber, predominantly found in the water-insoluble fraction, as well as essential macro- and micronutrients [17,18]. Equally important is the content of biologically active compounds and antioxidants, which are responsible for the health-promoting potential of the seeds. Phenolic acids (gallic acid, ferulic acid, p-coumaric acid, caffeic acid), depsides (rosmarinic acid and chlorogenic acid), flavonols (kaempferol, quercetin, myricetin and rutoside), flavones (apigenin), isoflavones (daidzein, glycitin, genistein and glycitein) and flavan-3-ols (catechin, epicatechin) are present in predominant amounts [17,18,19,20]. Particularly noteworthy in the studies is the high content of rosmarinic acid, which has a broad spectrum of biological activity, including, in particular, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and antibacterial activities [17,21,22]. Scientific studies conducted on in vitro cultures on human and animal models demonstrate the antioxidant [11,19,23,24,25,26], antidiabetic [27,28,29,30,31], hypotensive [13,30,32,33,34], hypolipemic [28,35] and hepatoprotective effects of chia seeds.
On the other hand, interestingly, there are few papers dealing with phytochemical or biological studies of the other raw materials extracted from S. hispanica. Only some researchers focused on the sprouts and leaves of S. hispanica and proved that they could be an interesting plant resource [36,37,38,39,40,41,42]. It is known that chia leaves are a source of hydroxycinnamic acid and its derivatives, flavones (apigenin, luteolin, orientin, and vitexin), and flavonols (quercetin, kaempferol derivatives). In addition, studies on chia sprouts have shown that they are a source of proteins, minerals (especially calcium and magnesium), and vitamins (especially A, E, C, and the B group) [41,43]. In addition, sprouts contain a high concentration of unspecified plant polyphenols with strong antioxidant potential [44,45]. However, there are no scientific studies detailing and comparing the phytochemical profile and antioxidant and antimicrobial activity of chia flowers or herb.
The current scientific literature on the different morphological parts of S. hispanica is very limited. Studies have comprehensively described the composition and biological activity of chia seeds, but knowledge of the sprouts, flowers, leaves, or herb has not been exhaustively described. Current research on the analysis of the leaves is only related to the chemical analysis of the essential oil and the content of some biologically active compounds. Few studies describe the antioxidant capacity of chia leaf extracts.
The work aims to explore the scientific knowledge on the content of the main metabolites, focusing on the group of polyphenols present in different raw materials extracted from S. hispanica, as well as on their antioxidant, antimicrobial and antifungal activities. The work represents a comprehensive comparative analysis of S. hispanica plant material—seeds, sprouts, leaves, flowers, roots and herb. The study included phytochemical and qualitative analysis by the HPLC technique in conjunction with post-column derivatization and untargeted metabolomic analysis. Quantitative analysis of the content of the predominant phenolic compound—rosmarinic acid—was performed using HPLC-DAD. The study of antioxidant activity with the indication of the main compounds responsible for this activity was performed by post-column derivatization with ABTS reagent. The study compared the antioxidant potential of the tested extracts from different morphological parts of S. hispanica. In addition, a comparative study of antibacterial and antifungal activity was also carried out using the microdilution broth method.

2. Results

2.1. Metabolomic Profiling Using LC-Q-Orbitrap HRMS

The high-resolution, accurate mass via Orbitrap used in this study yielded the identification and preliminary characterization of one hundred fifteen compounds (Table 1). In Figure 1, the metabolite profiles as total ion chromatograms and heat maps with the signal intensity of individual analytes are reported. The largest class of compounds was terpenoids, with 31 compounds, followed by flavonoids (21 compounds), phenolic acids and derivatives (19 compounds), organic acids (16 compounds) and others such as fatty acids, sugars and unidentified compounds. The organic and phenolic acids were the most abundant classes in terms of total peak area with distribution depending on the type of part S. hispanica (Figure 1A).
This class was represented mainly by hydroxycinnamic acids and their derivatives. The main compound among this class for all types of extracts was rosmarinic acid (peak 49) with pseudo-molecular ions at m/z 359.0769 (C21H17O11−) and fragmentation ions at m/z 197.0450 and m/z 161.0235 formed by cleavage of a caffeic acid and danshensu moieties. The deprotonated form of caffeic acid was also detected in compound 69, which was identified as salvianolic acid F ([M-H]¯ m/z 313.07142). The extracts obtained from leaves, flowers and herbs were additionally characterized by a high content of ferulic acid (peak 54) and caffeic acid (peak 32) with [M-H] − ions at m/z 193.0496 and m/z 179.0336, respectively. In the case of ferulic acid, the fragmentation ion at m/z 134.0379 formed after the loss of carbon dioxide, and the methyl radical was observed. The caffeic acid precursor ion also generated characteristic major fragments at m/z 135.0441 due to the loss of carbon dioxide. Seed and sprout extracts, on the other hand, were characterized by a high content of salviaflaside (peak 39) with pseudo-molecular ions at m/z 521.1298 (C24H25O13−). The parent ion of this rosmarinic acid glucoside produced fragment ions at m/z 359.0748 and m/z 161.0235, expected for rosmarinic acid and caffeic acid, respectively.
The highest content of organic acids was observed for flower extracts. The major compounds were assigned as gluconic (peak 2), tartaric (peak 7), malic (peak 9), citric (peak 11) and isocitric acid (13).
Another class of phytochemicals detected in S. hispanica extracts was flavonoids. Most of the identified compounds belonging to this class have been assigned to flavones. In almost all extracts, the content of flavone with peak number 72 was the highest. Compound 72 gave the precursor ion [M-H]− at m/z 329.0663, indicating that its molecular formula was C17H14O7. It produced prominent fragment ions at m/z 299.0198 attributable to the loss of two methyl groups and m/z 271.0246 due to the further elimination of carbon monoxide. Therefore, this peak was identified as jaceosidin. Compound 70 yielded the base peak [M-H]− at m/z 269.04522. Precursor and product ions at m/z 117.0333 and 151.0027 confirmed that this compound is apigenin. The glucoside, rutinoside and glucuronide of apigenin were identified by the pseudomolecular peak ions at m/z 431.0981 (peak 38), 577.1561 (peak 42) and 445.07747 (peak 46), respectively, and aglycon ion in MS2 spectra formed after loss of glucoside (−162 amu), rutinoside (−308 amu) and glucuronide (−176 amu) moieties. Peaks 34, 41 and 57 were identified as luteolin glucoside, luteolin rutinoside and luteolin, respectively, based on the presence of the ion at m/z 285.0401 in MS2 or MS spectra. Compounds 40, 58 and 80 were identified as scutellarin, luteone glucoside and hispidulin, respectively. Compound 61, with the highest content in sprout extracts, gave a [M−H]− ion at m/z 345.06136 (C17H13O8−). The main fragment ion at m/z 315.0149 was attributable to the loss of two methyl groups. This compound was identified as hydroxyflavan–spinacetin.
Another main group of phytochemicals present in S. hispanica extracts were terpenoids. The highest content of these compounds was found in flower extracts. The most abundant compound (peak 87) with quasimolecular ion at m/z 345.17046 (C20H25O5−) has a unique fragmentation pattern with fragmentation ions at m/z 331.1508 and 315.1597 that have been previously observed for rosmadial and hydroxyrosmadial [46]. Therefore, this compound was assigned as a rosmadial derivative. Peaks 85 and 96 with a [M−H]− ions at m/z 343.15480 were assigned to isomers of rosmadial (C20H23O5−). Their parent ion generated characteristic fragments at m/z 315.1601 and m/z 299.1653 via the loss of ethylene and carbon dioxide, respectively.
In the extracts studied, especially those from sprouts, a high content of saccharides was also noted. Peaks 1 and 4 were tentatively identified as raffinose and sucrose, as they are often major transport sugars in salvia species [47]. In the case of extracts from leaves, flowers and herbs, the high content of compound 17 was also observed. Its precursor ion [M-H]− was found at m/z 271.08193, which indicates that its molecular formula is C12H15O7−. This compound was tentatively identified as arbutin. The presence of fatty acids was also observed in S. hispanica extracts. The two with the highest concentration are compounds 62 and 91, identified as trihydroxyoctadecadienoic acid (C18H31O5−) and dihydroxyoctadecadienoic acid (C18H31O4−), respectively.

2.2. Antioxidant Profiling by Post-Column Derivatization with ABTS

Post-column derivatization of analytes with ABTS reagent was performed during HPLC analysis of extracts from different plant parts of S. hispanica. In the applied post-column derivatization, the principle action of the ABTS reagent is the same as in the case of spectrophotometric tests. The reduction reaction of the ABTS reagent leads to a significant shift in the visible UV spectrum, which results in a change in the absorption of the ABTS reagent (discoloration). Post-column introduction of the reagent into the on-line system and the presence of antioxidants in the eluate result in negative peaks in the chromatogram recorded at 734 nm (Figure 2A). The profiles obtained after derivatization indicated that several compounds identified in S. hispanica extracts exhibit antioxidant activity. The greatest contribution to the overall antioxidant activity was made by rosmarinic acid (peak 49). Its activity covered 26 to 49% of the total antioxidant activity (Figure 2B). In the case of seed extract, additionally, other derivatives of hydroxycinnamic acid, such as salviaflaside (peak 39) and dehydroxyl-rosmarinic acid-glucoside (45), showed antiradical potential visible as negative peaks on profile. In extracts from leaves, flowers and herbs, the presence of caffeic acid (peak 32) also caused the reduction of the ABTS radical. Other phytochemicals showing visible antioxidant activity were gluconic acid (peak 2), arbutin (peak 17), danshensu (peak 19), caftaric acid (peak 24) and chlorogenic acid (peak 27). The flower extract was characterized by a slightly different antioxidant profile compared to the rest of the extracts. In this case, additional antioxidants with a short retention time were noted (peaks 10, 12, 14). They were probably derivatives belonging to the group of pyrimidines and purines.
Recalculation of the area of negative peaks using the calibration curve of the standard antioxidant enabled the quantification of the total antioxidant activity of the extracts in an on-line system and its expression as Trolox equivalents (Figure 2B). The highest antioxidant activity was found in flower extracts. Lower activity by about 40% and 50% was shown by extracts from leaves and herbs, as well as extracts from seeds and sprouts, respectively.

2.3. Analysis of the Average Content of Rosmarinic Acid Performed Using DAD-UHPLC in Extracts from Seed, Sprout, Leaf, Flower and Herb of S. hispanica

Analysis of the average content of rosmarinic acid in extracts from seeds, sprouts, leaves, flowers and herb of S. hispanica showed that all analyzed morphological parts have a high content of rosmarinic acid. Among all the analyzed parts of S. hispanica, the average content of rosmarinic acid was the highest in the leaves (198.53 mg/100 g DW). There was slightly less rosmarinic acid in the herb (185.12 mg/100 g DW). Rosmarinic acid was present in lower amounts in the flowers (149.45 mg/100 g DW), in the sprouts (134.27 mg/100 g DW) and in the least amount in the seeds (127.25 mg/100 g DW) (Table 2).

2.4. Antibacterial and Antifungal Activities

The antibacterial and antifungal activities of the tested extracts are presented as the MICs, i.e., the lowest concentration of compound that inhibits visible growth of the microorganism and the MBCs, i.e., the lowest concentration that results in a ≥99.9% reduction of the microorganism inoculum upon subculture to a compound-free medium (Table 3). Vancomycin, ciprofloxacin and nystatin were used as the standard drugs. Tested extracts were more active against Gram-positive reference strains. Gram-negative bacteria tested showed 4–8 times higher MIC values in comparison to those for Gram-positive bacteria. The best bioactivity was indicated for leaves extract, which presented considerable bactericidal activity against Gram-positive bacteria (S. aureus, S. epidermidis, M. luteus and E. faecalis) counted by MBC/MIC index, which equals 1–4. A stronger inhibitory effect against Gram-negative reference strains was also presented by leaves extract. The leaves extract showed the best antimicrobial activity against two Gram-positive bacteria (S. epidermidis and S. aureus). More favorable antifungal activity of chia leaves was found for S. albicans (MIC = 5). The whole seeds extract exhibited greater activity against S. aureus, M. luteus and B. cereus compared to the ground seeds extract. However, ground seeds extract demonstrated greater activity against E. faecalis. The sprout extract showed the best effect and the lowest MIC against two Gram-positive bacteria (M. luteus and B. cereus). The results showed that the sprout extract exhibited the best antifungal activity against C. parapsilosis (MIC = 0.625.). The roots extract demonstrated the best antibacterial activity against M. luteus. Roots extract exhibited beneficial antifungal properties against C. parapsilosis and C. glabrata. The herb extract showed the least favorable antibacterial and antifungal activity. The antibacterial efficiency of tested extracts was in the order of leaves > sprouts > whole seeds > ground seeds > roots > herb. However, their activity was much lower compared to standard drugs routinely used in bacterial infection treatment. Not strong, but still better antifungal activity against Candida spp. reference strains were shown for sprout extract.

3. Discussion

The conducted research is the first comparative analysis providing phytochemical profiling and connected with its antioxidant potential as well as antimicrobial properties of different raw materials obtained from S. hispanica. Rosmarinic acid was identified as the major compound responsible for antioxidant activity. The comparison of the quantity of this compound in relation to the ABTS reagent was shown. Furthermore, except for the antioxidant potential, the antimicrobial and antifungal properties were profiled for the first time while studying different S. hispanica raw materials. The chemical characterization revealed the presence of various groups of compounds in the extract from seeds, sprouts, leaves, flowers, and herb, mainly terpenoids (31 compounds), flavonoids (21 compounds), phenolic acids and derivatives (19 compounds), organic acids (16 compounds) and others (fatty acids, sugars, unidentified compounds).
Chia seeds are the most recognized raw material obtained from S. hispanica, although they are not well phytochemically profiled. A few studies described the polyphenolic profile of chia seeds, but our results are more comprehensive. Rahman et al. [48] determined the polyphenolic profile and biological activity of chia methanolic seed extract. They identified only the total phenolic content using the out-of-date method of the Singleton and Rossi assay (1965). They indicated rosmarinic acid, protocatechuic acid, p-hydroxybenzoic acid, p-coumaric acid, caffeic acid, and quercetin as the major components using HPLC-DAD-MS/MS method. The results of Oliveira-Alves et al. [49] in identifying the main phenolic compounds in methanolic chia seed extracts by LC-DAD-ESI-MS/MS methods mostly correspond with compounds identified in our study, too. The researchers confirmed the presence of phenolic acids (protocatechuic acid, p-hydroxybenzoic acid, cis-p-coumaric, cis and trans-caffeic acids, hydroxycoumaric acid, cis- and trans-ferulic acids, ellagic acid, rosmarinic acid), flavonoids (quercetin, quercetin-hexoside, kaempferol-hexoside, myricetin, apigenin, daidzein, rutin, genistein), and procyanidins (procyanidin dimer B 1, 2 and 3, procyanidin dimer A). Our results were consistent with those of Martinez-Cruz et al. [23] on 70% methanol extracts with the UHPLC method in chia seeds. The researchers indicate the main compounds as rosmarinic acid, protocatechuic acid, caffeic acid, gallic acid and daidzein. The estimated amount of rosmarinic acid was 92.67 mg/100 g DW, 1.4 times lower than the amount obtained in our results for seeds. The antioxidant activity determined by the DPPH assay indicated the high antioxidant capacity (percentage of inhibition = 68.83%) of chia seeds, which was 2 times higher than estimated in our study. The presence of phenolic acids, especially rosmarinic acid, and other phenolic compounds from isoflavones and anthocyanins were supposed to be responsible for this activity. The results were also most similar to those of Abdel-Aty et al. [50], who determined polyphenols profile using HPLC analysis. They identified in chia seed extracts: phenolic acids (gallic acid, protocatechuic acid, p-hydroxybenzoic acid, chlorogenic acid, caffeic acid, syringic acid, ferulic acid, synapic acid, rosmarinic acid, and cinammic acid) and flavonoids (quercetin, apigenin, chrysin). The researchers also proved that the most abundant phenolic acid identified in seeds extract was rosmarinic acid (0.320 mg/g DW). Dib et al. [51] quantified the groups of phenolic compounds in the hydromethanol extract of chia seeds. It was proved that chia seeds had a high content of total phenols (19.06 mg GAE/g DW), which were mainly represented by flavonoids (12.3 mg CE/g DW) and tannins (8.32 mg catechin equivalents (CE)/g DW). Moreover, the researchers assessed the antioxidant properties of the studied extract using DPPH and FRAP assay. The results indicated that the extract showed the highest DPPH scavenging potential with an IC50 of 0.27 mg/mL and FRAP assay with an EC50 of 0.06 mg/mL. In our study, qualitative and quantitative analysis of the main polyphenolic compounds present in chia seed extract demonstrated that the quantitatively dominant phenolic compound responsible for antioxidant activity was rosmarinic acid. The antioxidant activity of chia seeds has also been confirmed by other scientists, who have shown that chia seed extracts were able to scavenge DPPH radicals [52,53,54,55,56]. Tepe et al. [57] examined the antioxidant activity of an ethanolic extract of chia seeds and claimed that polyphenols present in chia seeds significantly inhibited oxygen free radicals. The same results were obtained by Craig et al. [58], who proved that the presence of polyphenols in chia seeds protects them from oxidative degradation. All performed studies confirm that rosmarinic acid was the main compound detected and quantified in chia seeds [23]. Similarly, the compound identified by our team—danshensu, is a simple polyphenol (3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)lactic acid) corresponding to the hydrated form of caffeic acid [59]. This compound is also described in plants in the Lamiaceae family [60,61]. Our study compared the quantitative content of rosmarinic acid in S. hispanica seed extracts with other literature data. In addition to the present study, rosmarinic acid was also quantified in S. hispanica seed extracts at two other centers. In the present experiment, the content of rosmarinic acid in the seed extracts was 34.98 mg/100 g DW. which was almost 2 times less than the content determined by Pellegrini et al. [62] and 2.65 times less than the content estimated by Martinez-Cruz et al. [23]. Moreover, our study also examined the antioxidant properties of chia seed extracts and determined the percentage effect of rosmarinic acid content on this activity (which was indicated at 34.33%). We proved that other derivatives of hydroxycinnamic acids, such as salviaflaside and dehydroxyl-rosmarinic acid-glucoside, also exhibited antiradical visible potential.
Chia seeds are the main raw material obtained from S. hispanica, but according to current scientific studies, compared to seeds, chia sprouts could have better nutritional value and antioxidant capacity, making them a new promising plant raw material of potential medical and agri-food utilities [63,64]. Our studies showed the metabolite profile of chia sprout extracts for the first time. We identified new compounds that had never been identified by researchers before. In sprouts extract, we identified organic acids—gluconic acid, xylonic acid, threonic acid, tartaric acid, quinic acid, malic acid, citric acid, isocitric acid, homocitric acid, caftaric acid, salicylic acid, tuberonic acid hexoside, phenolic acids and their derivatives—dihydroxybenzoic acid hexoside, danshensu, neochlorogenic acid, caffeic acid, salviaflaside, rosmarinic acid, dehydroxyl-rosmarinic acid-glucoside, ferulic acid, salvianolic acid F, 4-hydroxybenzoic acid, methyl rosmarinate, feruoyl arabinose, rabdossin, caffeoyl glucose. Namely, sprout extracts were characterized by a high content of salviaflaside and jaceosidin. Moreover, compared to all extracts we analyzed, the extracts from sprouts contained high amounts of saccharides (mainly raffinose and sucrose). In our study, we proved that the main group of secondary metabolites of chia sprout extracts were derivatives of hydroxycinnamic acids. Organic acids and flavonoids occupy the next position. We have shown that the proportion (%) of rosmarinic acid in the antioxidant activity of sprout extracts determined using post-column derivatization of analytes with ABTS reagent was the highest compared to the other analyzed extracts from raw materials obtained from S. hispanica. The analysis showed that chia sprouts had the highest percentage content of rosmarinic acid, which contributed to antioxidant activity, at 49.5%. These results are innovative because there are no scientific studies analyzing the phytochemical profile and antioxidant properties of chia sprouts extract. Calvo-Lerma et al. [36] indicated that chia sprouts extract contains higher total polyphenol content than seeds (2.87 vs. 1.78 mg GA/g DW). Their determination of the total antioxidant activity using the DPPH assay showed higher results in sprouts in comparison to seed extracts (5.69 vs. 3.49 mg TX/g DW), which is consistent with the results obtained by our team. Abdel-Aty et al. [50] evaluated the effect of the germination process of S. hispanica seeds on total phenolic and flavonoid contents and antioxidant and antimicrobial properties. In the chia sprout methanolic (80%) extracts with the HPLC method, 12 phenolic acids (gallic acid, protocatechuic acid, p-hydroxybenzoic acid, chlorogenic acid, caffeic acid, syringic acid, vanilic acid, ferulic acid, synapic acid, p-coumaric acid, rosmarinic acid, and cinammic acid) and 5 flavonoids (catechin, quercetin, apigenin, kaempferol, chrysin) were identified with concentrations ranging from 0.06 to 0.80 mg/g DW. Our results presented different data. We did not detect protocatechuic acid, vanilic acid, p-coumaric acid and cinammic acid in the sprout extracts. The researchers showed that the dominant phenolic compound found in chia sprout extracts was protocatechuic acid (0.50 mg/g DW), followed by rosmarinic acid (0.60 mg/g DW). In our study, we proved that rosmarinic acid was the abundant compound (134.27 mg/100 g DW) identified in sprout extracts.
Previously, only a few scientific studies dealt with chia leaves. The results demonstrated the presence of fatty acids, flavonoids and essential oil. Therefore, most scientific research focuses on analyzing components isolated from chia leaf essential oil [65,66,67,68,69,70]. In our study, we showed that phenolic acids derivatives (dominant compounds: rosmarinic acid, ferulic acid, caffeic acid, 4-hydroxybenzoic acid), flavonoids (dominant compounds: vitexin, jaceosidin) and organic acids (dominant compounds: gluconic acid, tartaric acid, malic acid, citric acid, isocitric acid) were predominant in studied S. hispanica leaves methanolic extract.
Among phenolic acids, the most abundant in leaves extract was rosmarinic acid. These results are in line with those obtained by Amato et al. [40], who analyzed the methanolic extracts of chia leaf using the HPLC-ESI-MS method. In the study conducted by us in the chia plant material, we identified hydroxycinnamic acids and their derivatives, especially flavonoids, mainly flavones, such as apigenin, luteolin, orientin, vitexin, jaceosidin and phenolic acids with dominant amounts of rosmarinic, ferulic, isocitric, caffeic acid and their derivatives. These compounds have been commonly found in other members of the genus Salvia before [71,72]. Similar results were obtained by Zúñiga-López et al. [73], who identified the phenolic composition of chia leaves using the UHPLC-HRMS method. However, these researchers identified only 18 bioactive compounds in the chia leaf extracts: organic acids (dominant compounds: protocatechuic acid, p-coumaric acid, quinic acid, sinapic acid), phenolic acids derivatives (dominant compounds: chlorogenic acid, rosmarinic acid, caffeic acid, ferulic acid) flavonoids (dominant compounds: orientin, acetyl orientin, vitexin, coumaroyl, luteolin-O-glucuronide, kaempferol, genistein, naringenin, salvianolic acid F isomer, and dimethyl quercetin). Most of the detected compounds overlap with those identified in our study, but in our study, we identified 115 compounds (Table 1). There are very limited studies on the correlation between metabolomic analyses and the antioxidant properties of chia leaves. In our study, analysis of antioxidant activity determined by post-column derivatization with ABTS reagent of the chia leaf extracts showed that rosmarinic acid present in the leaf extracts was the most abundant compound responsible for this activity. Amato et al. [40], for potential antioxidant measurements of S. hispanica leaf extracts, used another three assays: oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC), ORAC-Fluorescein (ORAC-FLORAC-FL index values) and 2,2′-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH). They proved that the methanolic extract of chia leaves exhibited higher antioxidant activity and indicated that rosmarinic acid was the most reactive compound, which is equivalent to the results obtained in our study. In our study, we broadened the results, and we pointed out that not only was rosmarinic acid responsible for antioxidant potential, but also other phytochemicals, such as caffeic acid, gluconic acid, arbutin, danshensu, caftaric acid and chlorogenic acid. Moreover, for the first time, we performed a recalculation of the area of negative peaks using the calibration curve of the antioxidant standard, which allowed us to quantify the total antioxidant activity of the leaf extracts in the on-line system. As a result, quantification of the total antioxidant activity of the extract expressed as Trolox equivalents and the percentage of the total antioxidant activity of the rosmarinic acids and other antioxidants present in the extracts showed that the antioxidant activity for the leaf extract was about 40–50%.
The study conducted by our team for the first time assessed the main metabolites and evaluated the antioxidant activity of S. hispanica flower extracts. The main group of secondary metabolites found in the flower extracts were organic acids (dominant compounds: gluconic acid, tartaric acid, citric acid, isocitric acid), flavonoids (dominant compounds: apigenin, jaceosidin), hydroxycinnamic acids and their derivatives (dominant compounds: caffeic acid, rosmarinic acid, ferulic acid, salvianolic acid F), and terpenoids (dominant compounds: hydroxyrosmadial, carnosic acid isomer, rosmadial derivative, rosmadial isomer, rosmanol, carnosol isomer). We showed that the main compound identified in flower extracts was rosmarinic acid. The maximum content of rosmarinic acid was determined in the flower extracts and was equal to 369.09 mg/100 g DW. Comparative analysis of the percentage contribution of rosmarinic acid to the antioxidant activity of all tested extracts from S. hispanica raw materials showed that the flower extracts contribute the least to antioxidant activity—26.3%. In our study, flower extracts demonstrated a slightly different antioxidant profile compared to the rest of the analyzed extracts. Probably the presence of derivatives belonging to the group of pyrimidines and purines was responsible for this activity.
Our study proved that the S. hispanica herb metabolite profile was the most abundant in organic acids (dominant compounds: citric acid, isocitric acid), phenolic acids (dominant compounds: rosmarinic acid, ferulic acid, salvianolic acid F) followed by flavonoids (dominant compounds: apigenin rutinoside, apigenin, jaceosidin, hispidulin), terpenoids and saccharides (dominant compounds: hydroxyrosmadial, carnosic acid isomer, rosmadial derivative, rosmadial isomer). The quantitively dominant compound for herb was also rosmarinic acid. Formerly, only Dziadek et al. [42] investigated the phytochemical profile of S. hispanica herb extracts. They identified the polyphenol profile by HPLC analysis. They found in herb extracts only the following compounds: p-hydroxybenzoic acid, caffeic acid, chlorogenic acid, ferulic acid, gallic acid, p-coumaric acid, rosmarinic acid, synapic acid, syringic acid, vanillic acid, acacetin, apigenin, catechin, epicatechin, hesperidin, hispidulin, isorhamnetin, kaempferol, luteolin, myricetin, naringin, quercetin, rutin, carnosic acid, and carnosol. In our study, a greater number of compounds were identified. We did not confirm the presence of chlorogenic acid, gallic acid, p-coumaric acid, synapic acid, syringic acid, vanillic acid, catechin, epicatechin, isorhamnetin, myricetin, naringin, quercetin and rutin. Dziadek et al. [42] also determined the antioxidant power of S. hispanica herb extracts at 716.26 μmol TX/g DW. In our study, we demonstrated that rosmarinic acid contributes to this activity. The percentage contribution of rosmarinic acid to the antioxidant activity of herb extracts was 47.66% (185.12 mg/100 g DW). Abou Zeid et al. [74] studied the aerial parts of S. hispanica by the UPLC-ESI-MS/MS technique. They identified significantly fewer compounds than in our study (37 compounds) from phenolic acids, flavonoids, tannins, diterpenoids, lignans and triterpenoids. The individual compounds: caffeic acid, rosmarinic acid, ferulic acid, orientin, vitexin, danshensu, carnosol, jaceosidin, syringetin and luteolin, are similar to these confirmed in the present study. Furthermore, Abou Zeid et al. performed the analysis of antioxidant properties by the DDPH method and demonstrated the significant potential of the ethyl acetate extracts of S. hispanica aerial parts (herb).
There is limited research on the antibacterial and antifungal actives of S. hispanica seeds, sprouts, leaves, roots and herb extract. Our study showed that chia leaf extracts exhibited the highest antibacterial and antifungal activity compared to the other tested extracts. Chia leaf extracts showed stronger antibacterial activity against two Gram-positive bacteria (S. epidermidis and S. aureus). More favorable antifungal activity of chia leaves was found for S. albicans. The sprout extracts demonstrated the best effect and lowest MIC against two Gram-positive bacteria (M. luteus and B. cereus). The results proved that the sprout extracts showed the best antifungal activity against C. parapsilosis. The herb extracts showed the least favorable antibacterial and antifungal activity. The antibacterial efficacy of the tested extracts was in the order of leaves > sprouts > herb. However, their activity was significantly lower compared to that of standard drugs routinely used to treat bacterial infections. Abdel-Aty et al. [50] examined the antimicrobial activity of chia sprouts raw chia seed extracts against Gram-negative bacteria (E. coli O157-H7 ATCC 51,659, Salmonella typhi ATCC 15,566 and Pseudomonas aeruginosa NRRL B-272) and one Gram-positive bacterium (Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 13,565). The range of MIC for the chia sprout extracts was lower (0.40–0.65 mg/mL) in comparison to the dry chia seed extracts. In our study, the activity of the chia sprout extracts was a bit less (the MIC range value 0.625–10 mg/mL). The antimicrobial activity of chia protein hydrolysates obtained from seeds was studied by Coelho et al. [75]. The protein hydrolysates exhibited favorable inhibitory activity against S. aureus to a greater extent compared to E. coli, which is in line with our results confirming the more favorable antimicrobial activity of all analyzed extracts against S. aureus compared to E. coli. Güzel et al. [76] investigated the antibacterial and antifungal activity of ethanol extract of chia seeds against reference strains of S. aureus, B. subtilis, E. coli, A. baumannii, A. hydrophila, C. albicans, C. tropicalis and C. glabrata showing their higher activity compared to those presented in this study. According to the recent literature, the composition and content of key bioactive compounds in chia seeds can vary depending on external factors such as geographic origin, climatic conditions, agricultural practices, extraction procedures and antimicrobial activity procedures [9,77]. These factors may affect the efficacy of the extract under study and may result in different outcomes compared to other studies. In addition, Güzel et al. demonstrated that chia seed extract exhibited the highest antifungal activity against C. glabrata, but the result was not as high as with fluconazole (MIC values: 31.25 µg/mL and 3.90 µg/mL, respectively). In our study, we found significantly higher antifungal activity of the whole seed extract compared to the ground seed extract. The antimicrobial effect of chia seeds is likely due to their rich chemical composition. Chia seeds are a source of fatty acids, accounting for about 30%, which include linoleic acid (17–26%) and linolenic acid (50–57%). Chia seeds are also a source of vitamins, macronutrients and micronutrients [9,78]. The presence of numerous antioxidants in chia seeds, such as omega-3 fatty acids, may determine their antimicrobial properties. Chia seeds contain kaempferol and quercetin, which have scientifically proven antibacterial properties. It can be inferred that kaempferol binds to an enzyme in bacterial cells and blocks a process essential for bacterial function. Chia seeds also contain caffeic acid and p-coumaric acid, which have proven antimicrobial activity [79,80]. Moreover, adding chia seeds to food products can increase their microbiological stability and prevent contamination without additional preservatives. Numerous human pathogens have been scientifically proven to be experimentally sensitive to the inhibitory effects of phenolic acids, flavonoids, tannins and anthocyanins, especially against several specific strains of Gram-positive bacteria (S. aureus, L. monocytogenes, M. luteus, E. faecalis, C. botulinum and B. subtilis) and Gram-negative bacteria (E. coli, S. typhimurium, S. enterica, P. mirabilis, Y. enterocolityca, S. dysenteriae, S. flexneri, P. fluorescens, P. aeruginosa and V. cholerae) and the fungal pathogen C. albicans [69,76,79,81,82,83,84,85,86].
In our study, we examined for the first time the antibacterial and antifungal properties of the root extract of the S. hispanica plant. The roots extract demonstrated beneficial antifungal properties against C. parapsilosis and C. glabrata.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Materials and Chemicals

Reagents of analytical, HPLC or MS grade, including acetonitrile, methanol, water, and formic acid, reagents for antioxidant profiling: 2,2′-azinobis(3 ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) diammonium salt (ABTS) and (±)-6-hydroxy-2,5,7,8-tetramethylchromane-2-carboxylic acid (Trolox) and rosmarinic acid standard were purchased from Sigma- Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA. Reference strains came from American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) (LGC Standards, Teddington, UK), Mueller–Hinton broth and agar were purchased from Oxoid Ltd. (Hampshire England); glucose, dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) were purchased from Avantor Performance Materials Poland S.A. (Gliwice, Poland); sterile physiological saline (BioMerieux, Craponne, France).

4.2. Plant Material

The seeds from which the plant material for analysis was obtained were from Guatemala, obtained from KruKam Polska S.A. (Wodzisław Śląski, Poland). The cultivation of S. hispanica was carried out under greenhouse conditions in the Prof. Marian Koczwara Medicinal Plants Garden of the Faculty of Pharmacy of the Jagiellonian University Medical College (Cracow, Poland). The herb, leaves and flowers were harvested in August 2021 during the flowering and fruiting period of the plants. Sprout culture was performed in a PlantiCo brand germinator (Stare Babice, Poland). The sprouts were collected in August 2021. The plant material was dried by freeze-drying (Labconco freeze-dryer, Kanas City, MO, USA).

4.3. Preparation of Extracts

For chromatographic analysis, the powdered lyophilizates (50 mg) were extracted with a methanol solution (70%, 0.5 mL). The extraction was assisted by ultrasound (15 min). The extracts were centrifuged (13,000 rpm, 15 min), and the supernatants were collected. The extraction step was repeated for the solid residue with another portion of methanol (70%, 0.5 mL). The combined supernatants (~1 mL) were subjected to chromatographic analysis.
To prepare the extracts used for the analysis of antibacterial and antifungal properties, samples of dry powdered plant tissue were weighed at 4 g DW each. The material was extracted with methanol in a volume of 100 mL. Extraction was carried out in an ultrasonic bath model 3 times for 20 min each. The extracts were filtered through tissue paper strainers. The material was extracted using blotting paper, which was poured into crystallizers after draining. The material was left to evaporate for 3 days. After 3 days, the material was eluted with methanol, and the weighed extract was placed in 7 mL (16 × 66 mm) polypropylene tubes from Rymed Company (Dabrowa Gornicza, Poland).

4.4. Untargeted Metabolomics by LC-Q-Orbitrap HRMS

The Salvia hispanica hydromethanolic extracts were investigated using a Dionex Ultimate 3000 UHPLC system (Thermo ScientificTM, Dionex, San Jose, CA, USA). Chromatography separations were performed using SynergiTM Hydro-RP A (150 × 4.5 mm, 4 µm, Phenomenex) column. Mobile phases A (water) and B (acetonitrile), both acidified with formic acid (0.1% v/v), were pumped at a flow rate of 0.8 mL/min1, according to the following gradient pattern: 0 min, 5% B; 20 min, 50% B; 25 min, 100% B; 27 min, 100% B and finally, the initial conditions were held for 8 min as a re-equilibration step. The injection volume was 4 μL. The chromatographic unit was coupled to a Q ExactiveTM Focus quadrupole-Orbitrap mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Bremen, Germany) with a heated electrospray ionization source (HESI II). The HESI parameters in negative polarity included: sheath gas flow rate, 35 arb; auxiliary gas flow rate, 15 arb; sweep gas flow rate, 3 arb; spray voltage, 2.5 kV; capillary temperature, 350 °C; S-lens RF level, 50; heater temperature, 300 °C. Full scan data in the negative mode was acquired at a resolving power of 70,000 FWHM; AGC target, 1e6; max IT, auto. A scan range of m/z 100–1200 was chosen for the compounds of interest. The parameters of data-dependent MS2 were as follows: resolution, 17,500; isolation window, 3.0 m/z; normalized collision energy, 30; AGC target, 1e6; max IT, auto. Mass calibration was performed once a week, in both positive and negative modes, using mixture containing n-butylamine, caffeine, Met-Arg-Phe-Ala (MRFA) and Ultramark 1621.
Raw data from high-resolution mass spectrometry were elaborated with Compound Discoverer (v. 2.1, Thermo, Waltham, MA, USA). Major metabolite identification was based on accurate mass and mass fragmentation pattern spectra against MS-MS spectra of compounds available on customized database of different classes of phytochemicals created on the basis of literature data on the Salvia species and implemented in the software. Raw data from three experimental replicates and a blank sample were processed using a workflow presented in Kusznierewicz et al. [87].

4.5. Antioxidant Profiling by Post-Colum Derivatization with ABTS

Antioxidant profiles were obtained for S. hispanica hydromethanolic extracts using an HPLC-DAD system (Agilent Technologies, 1200 series, Waldbronn, Germany) coupled with a Pinnacle PCX Derivatization Instrument (Pickering Laboratories Inc.) and a UV-Vis detector (Agilent Technologies). The chromatographic column and conditions of chromatographic separation were the same as in the case of LC-HRMS analysis. The post-column derivatization with ABTS reagent was carried out according to Kusznierewicz et al. [88,89] with slight modification. Stream of methanolic ABTS solution (1 mM) was introduced to the eluate stream at a rate of 0.1 mL/min and then directed to the reaction loop (1 mL, 130 °C). Reduction of ABTS radical by extract components was monitored at 734 nm. The antioxidant activity of the major reducing analytes was quantified with the use of Trolox calibration curve and expressed as Trolox equivalents. The percentage contribution of the rosmarinic acid to the antioxidant activity of extracts was estimated on the assumption that 100% is the sum of the negative peak areas integrated into chromatograms obtained after derivatization with ABTS.

4.6. Rosmarinic Acid Determination

For quantitative determination of rosmarinic acid, the calibration curve was generated by integrating the areas of absorption peaks (330 nm) determined during HPLC-DAD analysis of serial dilutions of authentic standard. The chromatographic system, column and conditions of separation were the same as in the case of antioxidant profiling (Section 4.5).

4.7. Antibacterial and Antifungal Activities

All extracts were screened for antibacterial and antifungal activities by two-fold micro-dilution broth method. Minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of tested compounds were evaluated for the panel of reference Gram-positive bacteria: Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923, S. aureus ATCC BAA-1707, Staphylococcus epidermidis ATCC 12228, Micrococcus luteus ATCC 10240, Bacillus cereus ATCC 10876 and Gram-negative bacteria: Salmonella Typhimurium ATCC 14028, Escherichia coli ATCC 25922, Proteus mirabilis ATCC 12453, Klebsiella pneumoniae ATCC 13883, Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 9027 and yeasts: Candida albicans ATCC 102231, Candida parapsilosis ATCC 22019, Candida glabrata ATCC 90030. The procedure for conducting antimicrobial activity testing has been described in detail before [90]. Briefly, the solutions of tested compounds dissolved in dimethylosulfoxide (DMSO) were suspended in Mueller–Hinton broth for bacteria or Mueller–Hinton broth with 2% glucose for fungi. Then the series of two-fold dilutions were carried out in the sterile 96-well polystyrene microtitrate plates (Nunc, Denmark), obtaining concentration range from 10 to 0.078 mg/mL in the appropriate medium. Simultaneously, the inocula of 24 h cultures of microorganisms in sterile physiological saline (0.5 McFarland standard density) were prepared and added to each well, obtaining final density of 5 × 105 CFU/mL for bacteria and 5 × 104 CFU/mL for yeasts; CFU—colony forming units. Proper positive (inoculum without tested compound) and negative (compound without inoculum) controls were added to each microplate. Vancomycin, ciprofloxacin and nystatin were used as the standard reference reagents. After incubation (35 °C, 24 h), the growth of microorganisms was measured spectrophotometrically at 600 nm (BioTEK ELx808, BioTek Instruments, Inc, Winooski, VT, USA). MICs were marked at the lowest dilution of extract without the growth of bacteria or fungi. Then, 5 µL of the suspension from each well, including controls, was subcultured on the agar plates in order to determine the minimal bactericidal concentration (MBC) or minimal fungicidal concentration (MFC). The plates were incubated at 35 °C for 24 h. The MBC/MFC was determined at the lowest concentration of extracts inhibiting the growth of microbes. MBC/MIC index was also calculated to show bacteriostatic or bactericidal effect of tested extracts.

5. Conclusions

In the current literature, there are no scientific studies on the comparative analysis of different plant raw materials obtained from S. hispanica. In addition, studies on the antioxidant, antimicrobial and antifungal activities of extracts from different chia raw materials are severely limited. Our work is innovative because it conducts an in-depth characterization and analysis comparing the antioxidant, antimicrobial and antifungal properties of all morphological parts of S. hispanica. In this study, for the first time, the phytochemical profiling and comparative analysis of various morphological parts/organs of S. hispanica extracts was conducted. We showed that in S. hispanica raw materials, the largest class of compounds were terpenoids, followed by flavonoids, phenolic acids and derivatives, organic acids, and other compounds, such as fatty acids and sugars. Conducted analyses proved that organic and phenolic acids were the most abundant class of phytochemicals identified in studied extracts. Rosmarinic acid, belonging to the hydroxycinnamic acids group, was the quantitatively dominant compound found in all tested extracts.
The greatest contribution to overall antioxidant activity was made by this compound. Rosmarinic acid contribution to total antioxidant activity was the highest for sprout, herb and leaf extracts (49.5, 47.7 and 47.1%, respectively) and the lowest for seed and flower extracts (34.3 and 26.3%, respectively). The contribution to the antioxidant activity of sprout, herb and leaf extracts was 144, 139 and 137 times stronger compared to seeds extract.
The results of the antibacterial and antifungal activities of the tested extracts proved their higher activity against Gram-positive than Gram-negative reference strains. In Gram-negative bacteria, the tested extracts showed 4–8 times higher MIC values compared to those for Gram-positive bacteria. The antibacterial efficiency of tested extracts was in the order of leaves > sprouts > whole seeds > ground seeds > roots > herb. However, compared to the leaf and herb extracts, the sprout extracts showed better antifungal activity against Candida spp. reference strains.
In conclusion, the results obtained in our study indicate that not only the seeds but also other morphological parts of S. hispanica may be a potential source of novel raw materials containing compounds with strong antioxidant, antimicrobial and antifungal potential.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.S. and S.M.; methodology, B.K., A.S., S.M. and I.K.-G.; investigation, B.K., S.M., A.S. and I.K.-G.; resources, A.S., S.M., B.K. and I.K.-G.; data curation, A.S., S.M., B.K. and I.K.-G.; writing—original draft preparation, A.S., S.M., B.K. and I.K.-G.; visualization, S.M.; B.K. and A.S.; funding acquisition, A.S. and S.M.; critical revision of the manuscript: A.S., S.M., H.E., B.K. and I.K.-G.; contributed in writing and formatting the final version: S.M., A.S., B.K. and I.K.-G. All authors participated in conducting experiments and writing and approving the final manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the financial support of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education Program number N42/DBS/000273 and Research Support Module UJ Programm number U1C/W42/NO/28.11.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

Sample Availability

Samples are not available from the authors.

References

  1. Cahill, J.P. Ethnobotany of Chia, Salvia hispanica L. (Lamiaceae). Econ. Bot. 2003, 57, 604–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Wimberley, J.; Cahill, J.; Atamian, H.S. De novo Sequencing and Analysis of Salvia hispanica Tissue-Specific Transcriptome and Identification of Genes Involved in Terpenoid Biosynthesis. Plants 2020, 9, 405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Benetoli da Silva, T.R.; de Melo, S.C.; Nascimento, A.B.; Ambrosano, L.; Bordin, J.C.; Alves, C.Z.; Secco, D.; Santos, R.F.; Gonçalves-Jr, A.C.; da Silva, G.D. Response of chia (Salvia hispanica) to sowing times and phosphorus rates over two crop cycles. Heliyon 2020, 6, e05051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Motyka, S.; Skała, E.; Ekiert, H.; Szopa, A. Health-promoting approaches of the use of chia seeds. J. Funct. Foods 2023, 103, 105480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bordin-Rodrigues, J.C.; da Silva, T.R.B.; Del Moura Soares, D.F.; Stracieri, J.; Ducheski, R.L.P.; da Silva, G.D. Bean and chia development in accordance with fertilization management. Heliyon 2021, 7, e07316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ochatt, S.; Jain, S.M. Breeding of Neglected and Under-Utilized Crops, Spices, and Herbs; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  7. Chivenge, P.; Mabhaudhi, T.; Modi, A.; Mafongoya, P. The Potential Role of Neglected and Underutilised Crop Species as Future Crops under Water Scarce Conditions in Sub-Saharan Africa. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12, 5685–5711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Marcinek, K.; Krejpcio, Z. Chia seeds (Salvia hispanica): Health promoting properties and therapeutic applications—A review. Rocz. Panstw. Zakl. Hig. 2017, 68, 123–129. [Google Scholar]
  9. Motyka, S.; Koc, K.; Ekiert, H.; Blicharska, E.; Czarnek, K.; Szopa, A. The Current State of Knowledge on Salvia hispanica and Salviae hispanicae semen (Chia Seeds). Molecules 2022, 27, 1207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Baldivia, A.S. A Historical Review of the Scientific and Common Nomenclature Associated with Chia: From Salvia hispanica to Salvia mexicana and Chian to Salba. Agric. Res. Technol. Open Access J. 2018, 18, 556047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ullah, R.; Nadeem, M.; Imran, M. Omega-3 fatty acids and oxidative stability of ice cream supplemented with olein fraction of chia (Salvia hispanica L.) oil. Lipids Health Dis. 2017, 16, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Miranda-Ramos, K.C.; Millán-Linares, M.C.; Haros, C.M. Effect of Chia as Breadmaking Ingredient on Nutritional Quality, Mineral Availability, and Glycemic Index of Bread. Foods 2020, 9, 663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Vuksan, V.; Whitham, D.; Sievenpiper, J.L.; Jenkins, A.L.; Rogovik, A.L.; Bazinet, R.P.; Vidgen, E.; Hanna, A. Supplementation of Conventional Therapy with the Novel Grain Salba (Salvia hispanica L.) Improves Major and Emerging Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2007, 30, 2804–2810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Martínez, E.; García-Martínez, R.; Álvarez-Ortí, M.; Rabadán, A.; Pardo-Giménez, A.; Pardo, J.E. Elaboration of Gluten-Free Cookies with Defatted Seed Flours: Effects on Technological, Nutritional, and Consumer Aspects. Foods 2021, 10, 1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Bresson, J.L.; Flynn, A.; Heinonen, M.; Hulshof, H.; Korhonen, K.; Lagiou, P.; Løvik, M.; Marchelli, R.; Martin, A.; Moseley, B.; et al. Opinion on the safety of ‘Chia seeds (Salvia hispanica L.) and ground whole Chia seeds’ as a food ingredient. EFSA J. 2009, 7, 996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Health Canada. Salvia hispanica. Available online: http://webprod.hc-sc.gc.ca/ (accessed on 14 May 2022).
  17. Mohd Ali, N.; Yeap, S.K.; Ho, W.Y.; Beh, B.K.; Tan, S.W.; Tan, S.G. The promising future of chia, Salvia hispanica L. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2012, 2012, 171956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Ullah, R.; Nadeem, M.; Khalique, A.; Imran, M.; Mehmood, S.; Javid, A.; Hussain, J. Nutritional and therapeutic perspectives of Chia (Salvia hispanica L.): A review. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 53, 1750–1758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Grancieri, M.; Martino, H.S.D.; Gonzalez de Mejia, E. Protein Digests and Pure Peptides from Chia Seed Prevented Adipogenesis and Inflammation by Inhibiting PPARγ and NF-κB Pathways in 3T3L-1 Adipocytes. Nutrients 2021, 13, 176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Valdivia-López, M.Á.; Tecante, A. Chia (Salvia hispanica). A review of native mexican seed and its nutritional and functional properties. Advances in Food and Nutrition Research; Elsevier Inc.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2015; Volume 75, pp. 53–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Melo, D.; MacHado, T.B.; Oliveira, M.B.P.P. Chia seeds: An ancient grain trending in modern human diets. Food Funct. 2019, 10, 3068–3089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hrnčič, M.; Ivanovski, M.; Cör, D.; Knez, Ž. Chia Seeds (Salvia hispanica L.): An Overview—Phytochemical Profile, Isolation Methods, and Application. Molecules 2019, 25, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Martínez Cruz, O.; Paredes López, O. Phytochemical profile and nutraceutical potential of chia seeds (Salvia hispanica L.) by ultra high performance liquid chromatography. J. Chromatogr. A 2014, 1346, 43–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Li, X.; He, P.; Hou, Y.; Chen, S.; Xiao, Z.; Zhan, J.; Luo, D.; Gu, M.; Lin, D. Berberine inhibits the interleukin-1 beta-induced inflammatory response via MAPK downregulation in rat articular chondrocytes. Drug Dev. Res. 2019, 80, 637–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Gómez-Favela, M.A.; Gutiérrez-Dorado, R.; Cuevas-Rodríguez, E.O.; Canizalez-Román, V.A.; del Rosario León-Sicairos, C.; Milán-Carrillo, J.; Reyes-Moreno, C. Improvement of Chia Seeds with Antioxidant Activity, GABA, Essential Amino Acids, and Dietary Fiber by Controlled Germination Bioprocess. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 2017, 72, 345–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Villanueva-Lazo, A.; Montserrat-de la Paz, S.; Grao-Cruces, E.; Pedroche, J.; Toscano, R.; Millan, F.; Millan-Linares, M.C. Antioxidant and Immunomodulatory Properties of Chia Protein Hydrolysates in Primary Human Monocyte–Macrophage Plasticity. Foods 2022, 11, 623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Kulczyński, B.; Kobus-Cisowska, J.; Taczanowski, M.; Kmiecik, D.; Gramza-Michałowska, A. The Chemical Composition and Nutritional Value of Chia Seeds—Current State of Knowledge. Nutrients 2019, 11, 1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Rossi, S.A.; Oliva, M.E.; Ferreira, M.R.; Chicco, A.; Ferreira, M.R.; Chicco, A.; Lombardo, Y.B. Dietary chia seed induced changes in hepatic transcription factors and their target lipogenic and oxidative enzyme activities in dyslipidaemic insulin-resistant rats. Br. J. Nutr. 2013, 109, 1617–1627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Oliva, M.E.; Ingaramo, P.; Vega Joubert, M.B.; Ferreira, M.D.R.; D’Alessandro, M.E. Effects of Salvia hispanica L. (chia) seed on blood coagulation, endothelial disfunction and liver fibrosis in an experimental model of metabolic cyndrome. Chia Seed Shows Good Protein Quality, Hypoglycemic Effect and Improves the Lipid Profile and Liver and Intestinal Morphology of Wistar Rats. Foods Funct. 2021, 12, 12407–12420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Fonte-Faria, T.; Citelli, M.; Atella, G.C.; Raposo, H.F.; Zago, L.; de Souza, T.; da Silva, S.V.; Barja-Fidalgo, C. Chia oil supplementation changes body composition and activates insulin signaling cascade in skeletal muscle tissue of obese animals. Nutrition 2019, 58, 167–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Da Silva Marineli, R.; Moura, C.S.; Moraes, É.A.; Lenquiste, S.A.; Lollo, P.C.B.; Morato, P.N.; Amaya-Farfan, J.; Maróstica, M.R. Chia (Salvia hispanica L.) enhances HSP, PGC-1α expressions and improves glucose tolerance in diet-induced obese rats. Nutrition 2015, 31, 740–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Toscano, L.T.; da Silva, C.S.O.; Toscano, L.T.; de Almeida, A.E.M.; da Cruz Santos, A.; Silva, A.S. Chia Flour Supplementation Reduces Blood Pressure in Hypertensive Subjects. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 2014, 69, 392–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Segura Campos, M.R.; Peralta González, F.; Chel Guerrero, L.; Betancur Ancona, D. Angiotensin I-Converting Enzyme Inhibitory Peptides of Chia (Salvia hispanica) Produced by Enzymatic Hydrolysis. Int. J. Food Sci. 2013, 2013, 158482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Orona-Tamayo, D.; Valverde, M.; Nieto-Rendón, B.; Paredes-Lopez, O. Inhibitory activity of chia (Salvia hispanica L.) protein fractions against angiotensin I-converting enzyme and antioxidant capacity. Leb. Technol. 2015, 64, 236–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Da Silva, B.P.; Dias, D.M.; de Castro Moreira, M.E.; Toledo, R.C.L.; da Matta, S.L.P.; Lucia, C.M.D.; Martino, H.S.D.; Pinheiro-Sant’Ana, H.M. Chia Seed Shows Good Protein Quality, Hypoglycemic Effect and Improves the Lipid Profile and Liver and Intestinal Morphology of Wistar Rats. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 2016, 71, 225–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Calvo-Lerma, J.; Paz-Yépez, C.; Asensio-Grau, A.; Heredia, A.; Andrés, A. Impact of Processing and Intestinal Conditions on in Vitro Digestion of Chia (Salvia hispanica) Seeds and Derivatives. Foods 2020, 9, 290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  37. Gómez-Velázquez, H.D.J.; Aparicio-Fernández, X.; Reynoso-Camacho, R. Chia Sprouts Elicitation with Salicylic Acid and Hydrogen Peroxide to Improve their Phenolic Content, Antioxidant Capacities In Vitro and the Antioxidant Status in Obese Rats. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 2021, 76, 363–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Bermejo, N.F.; Munné-Bosch, S. Mixing chia seeds and sprouts at different developmental stages: A cost-effective way to improve antioxidant vitamin composition. Food Chem. 2023, 405, 134880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Bermejo, N.F.; Hoummadi, G.; Munné-Bosch, S. β-Carotene biofortification of chia sprouts with plant growth regulators. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2021, 168, 398–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Amato, M.; Caruso, M.C.; Guzzo, F.; Galgano, F.; Commisso, M.; Bochicchio, R.; Labella, R.; Favati, F. Nutritional quality of seeds and leaf metabolites of Chia (Salvia hispanica L.) from Southern Italy. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2015, 241, 615–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Benincasa, P.; Falcinelli, B.; Lutts, S.; Stagnari, F.; Galieni, A. Sprouted Grains: A Comprehensive Review. Nutrients 2019, 11, 421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Dziadek, K.; Kopeć, A.; Dziadek, M.; Sadowska, U.; Cholewa-Kowalska, K. The Changes in Bioactive Compounds and Antioxidant Activity of Chia (Salvia hispanica L.) Herb under Storage and Different Drying Conditions: A Comparison with Other Species of Sage. Molecules 2022, 27, 1569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Gan, R.Y.; Lui, W.Y.; Wu, K.; Chan, C.L.; Dai, S.H.; Sui, Z.Q.; Corke, H. Bioactive compounds and bioactivities of germinated edible seeds and sprouts: An updated review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 59, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Teodoro, A.J. Bioactive Compounds of Food: Their Role in the Prevention and Treatment of Diseases. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2019, 2019, 3765986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Erba, D.; Angelino, D.; Marti, A.; Manini, F.; Faoro, F.; Morreale, F.; Pellegrini, N.; Casiraghi, M.C. Effect of sprouting on nutritional quality of pulses. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 70, 30–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Castañeta, G.; Cifuentes, N.; Sepulveda, B.; Bárcenas-Pérez, D.; Cheel, J.; Areche, C. Untargeted Metabolomics by Using UHPLC–ESI–MS/MS of an Extract Obtained with Ethyl Lactate Green Solvent from Salvia rosmarinus. Separations 2022, 9, 327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Abd Rashed, A.; Rathi, D.-N.G. Bioactive Components of Salvia and Their Potential Antidiabetic Properties: A Review. Molecules 2021, 26, 3042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Rahman, M.J.; de Camargo, A.C.; Shahidi, F. Phenolic and polyphenolic profiles of chia seeds and their in vitro biological activities. J. Funct. Foods 2017, 35, 622–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Oliveira-Alves, S.C.; Vendramini-Costa, D.B.; Betim Cazarin, C.B.; Maróstica Júnior, M.R.; Borges Ferreira, J.P.; Silva, A.B.; Prado, M.A.; Bronze, M.R. Characterization of phenolic compounds in chia (Salvia hispanica L.) seeds, fiber flour and oil. Food Chem. 2017, 232, 295–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Abdel-Aty, A.M.; Elsayed, A.M.; Salah, H.A.; Bassuiny, R.I.; Mohamed, S.A. Egyptian chia seeds (Salvia hispanica L.) during germination: Upgrading of phenolic profile, antioxidant, antibacterial properties and relevant enzymes activities. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 2021, 30, 723–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Dib, H.; Seladji, M.; Bencheikh, F.Z.; Faradji, M.; Benammar, C.; Belarbi, M. Phytochemical Screening and Antioxidant Activity of Salvia hispanica. J. Pharm. Res. Int. 2021, 33, 167–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Tuncil, Y.E.; Çelik, Ö.F. Total phenolic contents, antioxidant and antibacterial activities of chia seeds (Salvia hispanica L.) having different coat color. Akad. Ziraat Derg. 2019, 8, 113–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Da Silva Marineli, R.; Moraes, É.A.; Lenquiste, S.A.; Godoy, A.T.; Eberlin, M.R.; Marostica, M.R. Chemical characterization and antioxidant potential of Chilean chia seeds and oil (Salvia hispanica L.). Food Sci. Technol. 2014, 59, 1304–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Silveira Coelho, M.; de las Mercedes Salas-Mellado, M. Chemical Characterization of CHIA (Salvia hispanica L.) for Use in Food Products. J. Food Nutr. Res. 2014, 2, 263–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Sargi, S.C.; Silva, B.C.; Santos, H.M.C.; Montanher, P.F.; Boeing, J.S.; Júnior, O.O.S.; Souza, N.E.; Visentainer, J.V. Antioxidant capacity and chemical composition in seeds rich in omega-3: Chia, flax, and perilla. Food Sci. Technol 2013, 33, 541–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Segura-Campos, M.R.; Ciau-Solís, N.; Rosado-Rubio, G.; Chel-Guerrero, L.; Betancur-Ancona, D. Chemical and Functional Properties of Chia Seed (Salvia hispanica L.) Gum. Int. J. Food Sci. 2014, 2014, 241053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  57. Tepe, B.; Sokmen, M.; Akpulat, H.A.; Sokmen, A. Screening of the antioxidant potentials of six Salvia species from Turkey. Food Chem. 2006, 95, 200–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Craig, R. Application for approval of whole chia (Salvia hispanica L.) seed and ground whole seed as novel food ingredient. Commission Decision 2009/827/EC. In Advisory Committee for Novel Foods and Process; Company David Armstrong: Dublin, Ireland, 2004; pp. 1–29. [Google Scholar]
  59. Liu, A.H.; Guo, H.; Ye, M.; Lin, Y.H.; Sun, J.H.; Xu, M.; Guo, D.A. Detection, characterization and identification of phenolic acids in Danshen using high-performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection and electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 2007, 1161, 170–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ruan, M.; Li, Y.; Li, X.; Luo, J.; Kong, L. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of the major constituents in Chinese medicinal preparation Guan-Xin-Ning injection by HPLC–DAD–ESI-MSn. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 2012, 59, 184–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Chen, H.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, X.; Yang, J.; Wang, Q. Qualitative Analysis and Simultaneous Quantification of Phenolic Compounds in the Aerial Parts of Salvia miltiorrhiza by HPLC-DAD and ESI/MSn. Phytochem. Anal. 2011, 22, 247–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Pellegrini, M.; Lucas-Gonzalez, R.; Sayas-Barberá, E.; Fernández-López, J.; Pérez-Álvarez, J.A.; Viuda-Martos, M. Bioaccessibility of Phenolic Compounds and Antioxidant Capacity of Chia (Salvia hispanica L.) Seeds. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 2018, 73, 47–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Pająk, P.; Socha, R.; Broniek, J.; Królikowska, K.; Fortuna, T. Antioxidant properties, phenolic and mineral composition of germinated chia, golden flax, evening primrose, phacelia and fenugreek. Food Chem. 2019, 275, 69–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Motyka, S.; Ekiert, H.; Szopa, A. Chia sprouts and microgreens as a new nutraceutical raw materials and their health-promoting impact in modern dietetics. Curr. Issues Pharm. Med. Sci. 2023. Under Review (CIPMS-00112-2023-01). [Google Scholar]
  65. Dahham, S.; Tabana, Y.; Iqbal, M.; Ahamed, M.; Ezzat, M.; Majid, A.; Majid, A. The Anticancer, Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Properties of the Sesquiterpene β-Caryophyllene from the Essential Oil of Aquilaria crassna. Molecules 2015, 20, 11808–11829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Dorman, H.J.D.; Deans, S.G. Antimicrobial agents from plants: Antibacterial activity of plant volatile oils. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2000, 88, 308–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Barrero, A.F.; Quílez del Moral, J.F.; Lara, A.; Herrador, M.M. Antimicrobial Activity of Sesquiterpenes from the Essential Oil of Juniperus thurifera Wood. Planta Med. 2005, 71, 67–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Ahmed, M.; Ting, I.P.; Scora, R.W. Leaf Oil Composition of Salvia hispanica L. from Three Geographical Areas. J. Essent. Oil Res. 1994, 6, 223–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Elshafie, H.S.; Aliberti, L.; Amato, M.; De Feo, V.; Camele, I. Chemical composition and antimicrobial activity of chia (Salvia hispanica L.) essential oil. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2018, 244, 1675–1682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Sánchez-Velázquez, O.A.; Mondor, M.; Segura-Campos, M.R.; del Carmen Quintal-Bojórquez, N.; Hernández-Álvarez, A.J. Bioactive Phytochemicals from Chia Seed (Salvia hispanica) Oil Processing By-Products; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; pp. 1–25. [Google Scholar]
  71. Brieskorn, C.H.; Biechele, W. Flavone aus Salvia officinalis L. 22. Mitt. über Inhaltsstoffe von Salvia off. L. Arch. Pharm. 1971, 304, 557–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Lu, Y.; Yeap Foo, L. Polyphenolics of Salvia—A review. Phytochemistry 2002, 59, 117–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Zúñiga-López, M.C.; Maturana, G.; Campmajó, G.; Saurina, J.; Núñez, O. Determination of Bioactive Compounds in Sequential Extracts of Chia Leaf (Salvia hispanica L.) Using UHPLC-HRMS (Q-Orbitrap) and a Global Evaluation of Antioxidant In Vitro Capacity. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Abou Zeid, E.M.; Abdel Ghani, A.E.; Mahmoud, M.Y.; Abdallah, R.H. Phytochemical Investigation and Biological Screening of Ethyl Acetate Fraction of Salvia hispanica L. Aerial Parts. Pharmacogn. J. 2022, 14, 226–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Silveira Coelho, M.; Manólio Soares-Freitas, R.A.; Gomes Arêas, J.A.; Gandra, E.A.; de Las Mercedes Salas-Mellado, M. Peptides from Chia Present Antibacterial Activity and Inhibit Cholesterol Synthesis. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 2018, 73, 101–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Güzel, S.; Ülger, M.; Özay, Y. Antimicrobial and Antiproliferative Activities of Chia (Salvia hispanica L.) Seeds. Int. J. Second. Metab. 2020, 7, 174–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. de Falco, B.; Amato, M.; Lanzotti, V. Chia seeds products: An overview. Phytochem. Rev. 2017, 16, 745–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Motyka, S.; Ekiert, H.; Szopa, A. Chemical composition, biological activity and utilization of chia seeds (Salviae hispanicae semen). Farm. Pol. 2021, 77, 651–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Stojković, D.; Petrović, J.; Soković, M.; Glamočlija, J.; Kukić-Marković, J.; Petrović, S. In situ antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of naturally occurring caffeic acid, p -coumaric acid and rutin, using food systems. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2013, 93, 3205–3208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Duda-Chodak, A.; Tarko, T.; Satora, P.; Sroka, P. Interaction of dietary compounds, especially polyphenols, with the intestinal microbiota: A review. Eur. J. Nutr. 2015, 54, 325–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Tajkarimi, M.M.; Ibrahim, S.A.; Cliver, D.O. Antimicrobial herb and spice compounds in food. Food Control 2010, 21, 1199–1218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Gyawali, R.; Ibrahim, S.A. Natural products as antimicrobial agents. Food Control 2014, 46, 412–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Yadav, A.; Joshi, A.; Kachhwaha, S. Chemical characterization of extracts from various parts of Salvia hispanica L. and their antibacterial activity. Indian J. Nat. Prod. Resour. 2021, 12, 202–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Divyapriya, G.K.; Veeresh, D.J.; Yavagal, P.C. Evaluation of antibacterial efficiacy of chia (Salvia hispanica) seeds extract against Porphyromonas gingivalis, Fusobacterium nucleatum and Agregatibacter Actinomycetemcomitans-An in-vitro study. Int. J. Ayurveda Pharma Res. 2016, 4. Available online: https://ijapr.in/index.php/ijapr/article/view/325. (accessed on 20 September 2022).
  85. Cui, H.; Zhang, X.; Zhou, H.; Zhao, C.; Lin, L. Antimicrobial activity and mechanisms of Salvia sclarea essential oil. Bot. Stud. 2015, 56, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  86. Nadeem, M.; Imran, M.; Aslam Gondal, T.; Imran, A.; Shahbaz, M.; Muhammad Amir, R.; Wasim Sajid, M.; Batool Qaisrani, T.; Atif, M.; Hussain, G.; et al. Therapeutic Potential of Rosmarinic Acid: A Comprehensive Review. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Kusznierewicz, B.; Mróz, M.; Koss-Mikołajczyk, I.; Namieśnik, J. Comparative evaluation of different methods for determining phytochemicals and antioxidant activity in products containing betalains—Verification of beetroot samples. Food Chem. 2021, 362, 130132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Kusznierewicz, B.; Piasek, A.; Bartoszek, A.; Namiesnik, J. Application of a commercially available derivatization instrument and commonly used reagents to HPLC on-line determination of antioxidants. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2011, 24, 1073–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Kusznierewicz, B.; Piasek, A.; Bartoszek, A.; Namiesnik, J. The Optimisation of Analytical Parameters for Routine Profiling of Antioxidants in Complex Mixtures by HPLC Coupled Post-column Derivatisation. Phytochem. Anal. 2011, 22, 392–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Widelski, J.; Okińczyc, P.; Paluch, E.; Mroczek, T.; Szperlik, J.; Żuk, M.; Sroka, Z.; Sakipova, Z.; Chinou, I.; Skalicka-Woźniak, K.; et al. The Antimicrobial Properties of Poplar and Aspen–Poplar Propolises and Their Active Components Against Selected Microorganisms, including Helicobacter pylori. Pathogens 2022, 11, 191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Molecules 28 02728 g001 550
Figure 1. Total ion chromatograms (registered in negative-ion mode) (A) set with heat map representing the mean peak area value of the identified compounds (B) detected in extracts from different parts of S. hispanica. For identity of peaks, see Table 1.
Figure 1. Total ion chromatograms (registered in negative-ion mode) (A) set with heat map representing the mean peak area value of the identified compounds (B) detected in extracts from different parts of S. hispanica. For identity of peaks, see Table 1.
Molecules 28 02728 g001
Molecules 28 02728 g002 550
Figure 2. HPLC antioxidant profiles of seed, sprout, leaf, flower and herb extracts of S. hispanica registered at 734 nm after post-column derivatization with ABTS reagent (A) set with bar and pie charts reporting, respectively, antioxidant activity expressed as Trolox equivalents and the percentage contribution to the total antioxidant activity of rosmarinic acid and other antioxidants present in extracts (B). For identity of peaks, see Table 1.
Figure 2. HPLC antioxidant profiles of seed, sprout, leaf, flower and herb extracts of S. hispanica registered at 734 nm after post-column derivatization with ABTS reagent (A) set with bar and pie charts reporting, respectively, antioxidant activity expressed as Trolox equivalents and the percentage contribution to the total antioxidant activity of rosmarinic acid and other antioxidants present in extracts (B). For identity of peaks, see Table 1.
Molecules 28 02728 g002
Table
Table 1. Retention times (RT, min), proposed formulas, experimental m/z, accuracy (Δ, ppm) and main diagnostic experimental product ions of the major compounds identified by LC-Q-Orbitrap HRMS in seed, sprout, leaf, flower and herb extracts of S. hispanica in ESI(−).
Table 1. Retention times (RT, min), proposed formulas, experimental m/z, accuracy (Δ, ppm) and main diagnostic experimental product ions of the major compounds identified by LC-Q-Orbitrap HRMS in seed, sprout, leaf, flower and herb extracts of S. hispanica in ESI(−).
No.RT [min]NameProposed FormulaTheoretical (m/z)Observed (m/z)Δ (ppm)Fragment Ions (m/z)Class *
11.86RaffinoseC25H28O11503.15534503.15543−0.289.0230; 71.0124; 101.0231; 59.0125; 113.0231S
21.88Gluconic acidC6H12O7195.05048195.049853.275.0073; 59.0125; 72.9917; 71.0124; 87.0074OA
31.91Xylonic acidC5H10O6165.03992165.039045.387.0074; 75.0073; 71.0124; 59.0125; 72.9917OA
41.95SucroseC12H22O11341.10839341.10850−0.359.0125; 89.023; 71.0124; 101.023; 113.0231S
51.95Threonic acidC4H8O5135.02935135.028278.075.0073; 71.0124; 72.9917; 59.0125; 55.0176OA
62.01Quinic acidC7H12O6191.05557191.054913.485.0281; 93.0332; 59.0125; 87.0074; 71.0124OA
72.02Tartaric acidC4H6O6149.00862149.007636.672.9917; 59.0125; 87.0074; 73.9951; 68.9968OA
82.09HeptoseC7H14O7209.06613209.065712.085.0281; 57.0332; 59.0125; 55.0176; 71.0124S
92.29Malic acidC4H6O5133.01370133.012588.471.0125; 72.9917; 59.0125; 72.0158; 115.0022OA
102.35Uric acid isomerC5H4N4O3167.02052167.02071−1.169.008; 96.019; 124.014; 97.0029; 81.008P
112.67Citric acidC6H8O7191.01918191.018433.987.0074; 111.0075; 57.0332; 85.0281; 67.0175OA
122.77Uric acid isomerC5H4N4O3167.02052167.019585.669.008; 96.019; 124.0139; 97.0029; 110.9332P
133.03Isocitric acidC6H8O7191.01918191.018453.887.0073; 111.0074; 57.0332; 85.0281; 67.0175OA
143.14PseudouridineC9H12N2O6243.06171243.06187−0.682.0284; 110.0234; 66.0335; 118.9651; 146.9601P
153.56MethoxyguanosineC11H15N5O6312.09441312.09476−1.1134.0461; 146.9601; 135.0507; 148.9558; 254.889P
163.39Homocitric acidC7H10O7205.03483205.034412.171.0488; 101.023; 99.0438; 115.0385; 125.0231OA
173.80ArbutinC12H16O7271.08178271.08193−0.5108.0204; 109.0235; 71.0124; 85.0281; 123.0441H
185.87Dihydroxybenzoic acid hexosideC13H16O9315.07161315.07193−1.0108.0204; 152.0105; 109.0288; 112.9843; 68.9944PAD
196.13DanshensuC9H10O5197.04500197.044562.272.9917; 123.0439; 135.0441; 134.0361; 122.0361PAD
206.42Dihydroxybenzoic acid hexosideC13H16O9315.07161315.07191−0.9109.0282; 153.0183; 152.0105; 112.9843; 68.9943PAD
217.00Neochlorogenic acidC16H18O9353.08726353.08754−0.8191.0554; 135.044; 179.0341; 192.0587; 136.0473PAD
227.04UnknownC75H57O121148.377181148.37575−1.31148.377; 1149.3793; 1026.3395; 1027.3422; 127.6119-
237.44D-(+)-TryptophanC11H12N2O2203.08205203.081612.2116.0493; 74.0234; 142.0652; 117.0527; 72.0076AA
247.48Caftaric acidC13H12O9311.04031311.04066−1.1135.044; 149.0081; 179.0341; 87.0074; 136.0473OA
257.64UnknownC20H36O11451.21794451.21830−0.8167.1068; 89.023; 71.0124; 119.0337; 59.0125-
268.21Caffeoyl glucoseC15H18O9341.08726341.08739−0.4135.044; 179.0342; 180.0376; 136.0474; 134.0368PAD
278.48Chlorogenic acidC16H18O9353.08726353.08745−0.5191.0554; 85.0281; 161.0234; 93.0331; 135.0438PAD
288.87Salicylic acidC7H6O3137.02387137.02389−0.1108.0204; 136.0154; 137.0233; 91.0176; 65.0019OA
299.15Tuberonic acid hexosideC18H28O9387.16551387.16584−0.859.0125; 89.023; 101.0231; 71.0124; 207.102OA
309.49Feruloyl arabinoseC14H14O9325.05596325.05622−0.8134.0362; 193.05; 112.9847; 117.0334; 135.0395PAD
319.80Tuberonic acid hexosideC18H28O9387.16551387.16582−0.859.0125; 89.0230; 163.1119; 71.0124; 101.023OA
329.95Caffeic acidC9H8O4179.03444179.033624.6135.0441; 134.0362; 89.0383; 107.0491; 136.0473PAD
3310.47UnknownC17H30O9377.18116377.18142−0.759.0125; 71.0124; 112.9844; 377.1813; 89.023-
3410.64OrientinC21H20O11447.09274447.09305−0.7327.0511; 357.0618; 328.0545; 297.0406; 285.0406FV
3510.82Tuberonic acidC12H18O4225.11269225.112451.159.0125; 97.0645; 68.9944; 81.0331; 95.0489OA
3610.86UnknownC75H55O111130.366581130.36512−1.31131.3685; 1132.3582; 1133.3661; 239.0889; 652.0154-
3710.92Przewalskinic acid AC18H14O8357.06105357.06142−1.0109.0282; 159.0442; 269.0817; 135.0441; 175.0392PAD
3811.46VitexinC21H20O10431.09783431.09814−0.7311.0564; 283.0613; 312.0597; 341.0668; 269.0458FV
3911.86SalviaflasideC24H26O13521.12952521.12978−0.5161.0235; 323.0773; 359.0748; 179.0341; 324.0808PAD
4012.00ScutellarinC21H18O12461.07201461.07254−1.1285.0407; 286.044; 113.0232; 85.0282; 112.9843FV
4112.23Luteolin rutinosideC27H30O15593.15065593.15118−0.9285.0403; 593.1502; 284.0327; 594.1534; 269.0456FV
4212.38Apigenin rutinosideC27H30O14577.15574577.15610−0.6269.0455; 270.0489; 577.1547; 311.0541; 112.9841FV
4312.48Apigenin-malonyl glucosideC24H22O13517.09822517.09854−0.6311.0564; 413.088; 312.0597; 341.0667; 283.0614FV
4412.75RabdosiinC36H30O16717.14557717.14622−0.9475.1037; 339.051; 519.0935; 476.1072; 365.0666PAD
4513.08Dehydroxyl-rosmarinic acid-glucosideC24H26O12505.13461505.13508−0.9161.0235; 323.0773; 181.0498; 179.0342; 324.0809PAD
4613.40Apigenin-7-glucuronideC21H18O11445.07709445.07747−0.8269.0456; 113.0231; 270.049; 85.0281; 59.0125FV
4713.46Syringetin-glucosideC23H24O13507.11387507.11422−0.7345.0616; 330.0382; 346.065; 331.0416; 315.0149FV
4813.82Tuberonic acid hexosideC18H28O9387.16551387.16587−0.989.0230; 59.0125; 112.9843; 71.0125; 113.0232OA
4913.96Rosmarinic acidC21H18O11359.07670359.07689−0.5161.0235; 72.9917; 179.0341; 135.044; 197.045PAD
5014.08Azelaic acidC9H16O4187.09704187.096383.597.0646; 123.0803; 57.0332; 125.0961; 95.0489OA
5114.64Apigenin caffeoyl glucosideC30H26O13593.12952593.13009−1.0431.0985; 311.0564; 413.0882; 293.0458; 432.102FV
5215.16Hydramacroside AC28H36O12563.21286563.21326−0.7387.1663; 175.0392; 388.1696; 563.2132; 193.0499SI
5315.34IsorhamnetinC16H12O7315.05048315.050740.8300.0277; 112.9843; 136.987; 301.0312; 68.9943FV
5415.39Ferulic acidC10H10O4193.05009193.049592.6133.0284; 161.0235; 134.0354; 132.0207; 137.0236PAD
5515.964-Hydroxybenzoic acidC7H6O3137.02387137.022827.693.0332; 65.0383; 94.0366; 75.0226; 66.0416PAD
5616.65UnknownC17H30O8361.18625361.18662−1.068.9942; 112.9842; 161.0230; 346.1458; 101.0224-
5717.04LuteolinC15H10O6285.03992285.04008−0.6133.0283; 285.0405; 151.0026; 175.0392; 107.0126FV
5817.10Luteone 7-glucosideC26H28O11515.15534515.15563−0.6355.1188; 267.1034; 267.1394; 112.9843; 311.0934FV
5917.27UnknownC20H18O6353.10252353.10282−0.8247.1127; 265.087; 245.0968; 291.1024; 221.0970-
6017.49Methyl rosmarinateC19H18O8373.09235373.09270−0.9135.0440; 179.0342; 174.9552; 146.9602; 136.0474PAD
6117.64SpinacetinC17H14O8345.06105345.06136−0.9315.0149; 215.0344; 287.0198; 316.0181; 330.0383FV
6217.92Trihydroxy-octadecadienoic acidC18H32O5327.21715327.21740−0.7171.1018; 85.0281; 137.0961; 57.0332; 69.0332FA
6317.93UnknownC20H16O6351.08687351.08702−0.4281.0455; 219.081; 245.0966; 261.0921; 247.0758-
6418.06Salvianolic acid FC17H14O6313.07122313.07146−0.8161.0235; 133.0283; 162.0268; 123.0439; 151.039PAD
6518.18Salvicanaric acid methyl esterC20H28O5347.18585347.18607−0.6347.1865; 348.1899; 303.1604; 329.1759; 304.1631TP
6618.44Salvianolic acid FC17H14O6313.07122313.07143−0.7161.0234; 133.0283; 123.044; 151.0391; 162.0268PAD
6718.61UnknownC21H22O8401.12365401.12389−0.6266.9768; 401.1448; 121.7044; 191.5617; 214.7006-
6819.11Trihydroxyoctadecenoic acidC18H34O5329.23280329.23304−0.7211.1335; 171.1018; 229.1442; 112.9843; 183.1383FA
6919.21Salvianolic acid FC17H14O6313.07122313.07142−0.6161.0235; 133.0284; 162.0268; 123.044; 151.0391PAD
7019.38ApigeninC15H10O5269.04500269.04522−0.8117.0333; 151.0027; 269.0457; 149.0234; 107.0126FV
7119.60Hydroxycarnosic acidC20H28O5347.18585347.18598−0.4273.186; 317.1759; 274.1902; 271.1705; 245.1907TP
7219.73JaceosidinC17H14O7329.06613329.06633−0.6299.0198; 313.0355; 300.0232; 314.0423; 271.0246FV
7319.93Trihydroxy-dimethoxyflavoneC17H14O7329.06613329.06633−0.6299.0198; 313.0356; 300.0232; 314.0422; 285.0401FV
7420.40Gibberellin A5 methyl esterC20H24O5343.15458343.154730.5343.1551; 271.0978; 344.1584; 218.058; 275.0927TP
7520.61Carnosol isomerC20H26O4329.17528329.175631.0314.1526; 299.0198; 329.1758; 298.1214; 316.1317TP
7620.82HydroxyrosmadialC20H24O6359.14947359.14967−0.6359.1503; 315.1602; 360.1537; 316.1635; 329.1399TP
7721.08Trihydroxy-trimethoxyflavoneC18H16O8359.07670359.07703−0.9329.0305; 314.0071; 330.0338; 311.0201; 315.0106FV
7821.26Rosmadial isomerC20H24O5343.15458343.154730.5343.1552; 328.1319; 344.1586; 313.1446; 298.1207TP
7921.38Carnosic acid isomerC20H28O4331.19094331.19132−1.1331.1916; 299.1653; 331.1586; 246.0897; 287.2019TP
8022.01HispidulinC16H12O6299.05557299.05584−0.9284.0327; 285.0361; 256.0375; 299.056; 133.0283FV
8122.58CirsimaritinC17H14O6313.07122313.07157−1.1283.0249; 284.0283; 297.0406; 255.0299; 163.0027FV
8222.66SalvinalC20H20O6355.11817355.11842−0.7355.1189; 356.1223; 235.0762; 325.0719; 201.0551BF
8322.93Rosmaridiphenol isomerC20H28O3315.19602315.19623−0.6315.1966; 283.1701; 112.9843; 68.9944; 230.0942TP
8422.97Rosmadial derivativeC20H26O5345.17020345.17103−2.4345.1707; 314.0386; 346.1743; 171.1014; 315.0402TP
8523.29Rosmadial isomerC20H24O5343.15458343.154800.7330.1474; 300.1368; 299.1653; 343.155; 315.1601TP
8623.36Hydroxycarnosic acidC20H28O5347.18585347.185840.01332.1534; 303.1967; 302.1427; 304.2001; 347.1776TP
8723.38Rosmadial derivativeC20H26O5345.17020345.17046−0.7330.1473; 300,1397; 331.1508; 315.0402; 301,1402TP
8823.60Dihydroxy-trimethoxyflavoneC18H16O7343.08178343.08215−1.1313.0356; 298.012; 314.039; 193.0136; 299.0153FV
8923.75FA 18:4+2OC18H28O4307.19094307.19122−0.9119.0854; 97.0645; 137.096; 65.0383; 125.0959FA
9023.84Hydroperoxyoctadecatrienoic acidC18H30O4309.20659309.20698−1.399.0802; 209.1177; 171.1018; 57.0332; 137.0963FA
9124.04Dihydroxyoctadecadienoic acidC18H32O4311.22224311.22258−1.1223.1700; 87.0437; 57.0333; 224.1735; 85.0281FA
9224.15Carnosol isomerC20H26O4329.17528329.175590.9329.1759; 330.1793; 112.9843; 314.1518; 299.0200TP
9324.19Acacetin/GenkwaninC16H12O5283.06065283.06089−0.8268.0378; 269.0411; 240.0421; 117.0332; 239.0345FV
9424.23Hydroxycarnosic acidC20H28O5347.18585347.18620−1.0347.1864; 348.19; 331.1514; 303.1968; 243.1754TP
9524.26Carnosol isomerC20H26O4329.17528329.175631.03329.1759; 330.1793; 112.9843; 314.1518; 299.02TP
9624.77Rosmadial isomerC20H24O5343.15455343.15486−0.9343.1551; 299.1656; 269.1182; 328.1314; 315.1611TP
9724.88Carnosol isomerC20H26O4329.17528329.175570.8329.1759; 314.1525; 330.1793; 285.186; 315.1558TP
9824.90Palmitoyl-sulfoquinovosyl glycerolC25H48O11S555.28391555.28420−0.5555.2846; 556.2879; 225.007; 80.9637; 299.0440FA
9925.11Hydroperoxyoctadecatrienoic acidC18H30O4309.20659309.20692−1.196.9588; 309.174; 125.0959; 171.1015; 79.9560FA
10025.30GibberellinA24C20H26O5345.17020345.17054−1.0257.1911; 81.0332; 301.1811; 259.1341; 283.1706TP
10125.35RosmanolC20H26O5345.1702345.17040.6283.1704; 330.1473; 315.1964; 284.1736TP
10225.42Carnosol isomerC20H26O4329.17529329.17563−1.0329.176; 69.0332; 330.1794; 285.1859; 287.2019TP
10325.75TaxodioneC20H26O3313.18038313.180781.3298.1573; 299.1608; 313.1809; 314.1844; 297.1488TP
10426.24Hydroxy-deoxocarnosolC20H28O4331.19094331.19116−0.7331.1916; 287.1654; 332.1952; 313.1812; 288.1686FA
10526.47Rosmaridiphenol isomerC20H28O3315.19602315.19618−0.5315.1967; 79.9559; 244.1103; 300.1732; 299.1653TP
10626.5113-Hydroxy-9.11-octadecadienoic acid/13-HODEC18H32O3295.22728295.227490.6171.102; 277.2174; 195.1389; 295.2286; 113.096FA
10726.58Hydroxy-deoxocarnosolC20H28O4331.19094331.19134−1.2331.1915; 298.1574; 332.195; 285.1859; 270.1624TP
10826.62Carnosol isomerC20H26O4329.17528329.175600.9301.1810; 302.1843; 286.1575; 329.1757; 271.1337TP
10926.64Rosmaridiphenol isomerC20H28O3315.19598315.196180.5315.1967; 316.2000; 285.1861; 79.956; 286.1894TP
11026.70EpirosmanolC20H26O5345.17020345.17045−0.7286.1576; 245.1910; 273.1860; 289.1809; 287.1613TP
11126.75SugiolC20H28O2299.20108299.201421.0299.2018; 300.2051; 227.1073; 228.1119; 283.1698TP
11226.77Rosmaridiphenol isomerC20H28O3315.19602315.19622−0.6315.1967; 316.2001; 297.1861; 241.1231; 272.1420TP
11326.95Carnosol isomerC20H26O4329.17528329.175600.9314.1527; 329.176; 315.1559; 330.1795; 299.0203TP
11427.06Carnosol isomerC20H26O4329.17528329.175580.9314.1527; 315.1559; 329.1759; 299.0201; 330.1793TP
11527.28Carnosol isomerC20H26O4329.17528329.175600.9329.1759; 330.1792; 314.1523; 313.1441; 299.1297TP
* Classes: AA—amino acids; BF—benzofurans; FA—fatty acids; FV—flavonoids; OA—organic acids; P—purines/pyrimidines; PAD—phenolic acid derivatives; S—saccharides; SI—secoiridoids; TP—terpenoids.
Table
Table 2. Average content of rosmarinic acid (mg/100 g DW ± SD) performed by HPLC-DAD analysis in seed, sprout, leaf, flower and herb extracts of S. hispanica.
Table 2. Average content of rosmarinic acid (mg/100 g DW ± SD) performed by HPLC-DAD analysis in seed, sprout, leaf, flower and herb extracts of S. hispanica.
Plant MaterialContent (mg/100 g DW) ± SD
Seeds127.25 ± 0.03
Sprouts134.27 ± 0.04
Leaves198.53 ± 0.18
Flowers149.45± 0.03
Herb185.12 ± 0.02
Table
Table 3. The antibacterial and antifungal activities of seeds, sprout, leaf, root and herb extract S. hispanica.
Table 3. The antibacterial and antifungal activities of seeds, sprout, leaf, root and herb extract S. hispanica.
MicroorganismsWhole
Seeds *		Ground
Seeds		SproutsLeavesHerbRoots *Standard Drug (mg/L)
MICMBC/MFC MICMBC/MFC MICMBC/MFC MIC MBC/MFC MIC MBC/MFC MICMBC/MFC MIC MBC/MFC
Gram-positive bacteriamg/mLVancomycin
S. aureus ATCC 259230.6250.6251.251.252.52.50.6250.6252.52.51.251.250.980.98
S. aureus ATCC BAA 170752.5>1010551.251.25552.5>50.980.98
S. epidermidis ATCC 122285>52.552.5>100.3130.3132.52.52.5>50.980.98
M. luteus ATCC 102400.070.6250.151.250.6251.251.251.252.550.62550.120.12
B. cereus ATCC 108760.31>50.625>100.625>101.25>105>101.25>51.953.9
E. faecalis ATCC 292125>51.25>101.25>101.2555>10>5>50.981.95
Gram-negative bacteriamg/mLCiprofloxacin
S. Typhimurium ATCC 14028>5>5>10>1010>105>1010>10>5>50.0610.06
E. coli ATCC 25922>5>5>10>1010>105>10>10>10>5>50.0150.08
P. mirabilis ATCC 12453>5>5>10>1010>102.52.55>10>5>50.0300.03
K. pneumoniae ATCC 13883>5>5>10>1010>1010>1010>10>5>50.1220.24
P. aeruginosa ATCC 9027>5>510>1010>105>105>10>5>50.4880.98
Fungimg/mLNystatin
C. glabrata ATCC 900305510>1010>1010>1010>100.62550.480.48
C. albicans ATCC 1022310.07510>102.5>105>1010>101.2550.240.48
C. parapsilosis ATCC 220190.003510>100.62510101010100.3150.240.48
MIC—minimal inhibitory concentration, MBC—minimal bacteridical concentration, MFC—minimal fungicidal concentration [mg/mL]. * in concentration range from 5 to 0.003 mg/mL.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Motyka, S.; Kusznierewicz, B.; Ekiert, H.; Korona-Głowniak, I.; Szopa, A. Comparative Analysis of Metabolic Variations, Antioxidant Profiles and Antimicrobial Activity of Salvia hispanica (Chia) Seed, Sprout, Leaf, Flower, Root and Herb Extracts. Molecules 2023, 28, 2728. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28062728

AMA Style

Motyka S, Kusznierewicz B, Ekiert H, Korona-Głowniak I, Szopa A. Comparative Analysis of Metabolic Variations, Antioxidant Profiles and Antimicrobial Activity of Salvia hispanica (Chia) Seed, Sprout, Leaf, Flower, Root and Herb Extracts. Molecules. 2023; 28(6):2728. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28062728

Chicago/Turabian Style

Motyka, Sara, Barbara Kusznierewicz, Halina Ekiert, Izabela Korona-Głowniak, and Agnieszka Szopa. 2023. "Comparative Analysis of Metabolic Variations, Antioxidant Profiles and Antimicrobial Activity of Salvia hispanica (Chia) Seed, Sprout, Leaf, Flower, Root and Herb Extracts" Molecules 28, no. 6: 2728. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28062728

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop