香茅油纳米乳剂的构建、表征、抗菌性能和细胞毒性

doi:10.3866/PKU.WHXB202205053

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

化学合成杀菌剂的大量、不合理使用对人类健康造成危害的同时也会导致严重的环境污染。因此，迫切需要寻找低毒、高效、无残留的天然杀菌剂。植物精油因其优良的杀菌活性、良好的生物相容性和丰富的来源，已成为农业病害防控领域的研究热点。香茅油是一种具有趋避、杀虫和抗菌活性的天然植物精油，主要包括香茅醛、香叶醇和香茅醇。目前，关于香茅油的研究主要集中于卫生害虫的驱避和防治，而用于农业致病菌防治的相关报道相对较少。在实际应用中，香茅油的疏水性和挥发性导致其生物利用度低，不能充分发挥生物活性。因此，构建一种改善香茅油疏水性、降低挥发性的递送系统十分必要。纳米乳剂因具有液滴细微均匀、物理稳定性好、渗透能力强以及生物利用度高等优点，已成为疏水农药的重要递送系统。本研究通过观察样品的外观和微观结构，并且测量样品液滴大小，考察了乳化剂种类(亲水亲油平衡值，HLB)、用量和乳化时间对纳米乳剂形成及稳定的影响，在此基础上筛选了香茅油纳米乳剂的优化配方。同时本研究还调查了香茅油纳米乳剂的生物活性和生物安全性。结果表明，以蓖麻油聚氧乙烯醚EL-40 (HLB = 13.5)为乳化剂的纳米乳剂性能最佳，且乳化剂用量从3%增加到7% (w，质量分数)时，纳米乳剂稳定性提高。此外，高速剪切3 min获得的纳米乳剂稳定性最高。基于此，确定了香茅油纳米乳剂的优化配方为：5% (w)香茅油，6% (w)乳化剂(EL-40)，89% (w)去离子水，高速剪切3 min。香茅油纳米乳剂对菠萝泛菌(Pantoea ananatis)具有良好的抑制作用，抑制中浓度(EC₅₀)为74.85 mg·L⁻¹。纳米乳剂(低于100 mg·L⁻¹)处理人体正常肝细胞(L02) 24 h后，细胞存活率仍高于83%，凋亡率仅为6.93%，表明香茅油纳米乳剂具有较低的细胞毒性。本研究有助于设计和构建稳定、高效、安全的农业纳米乳剂，同时为植物精油作为农业杀菌剂提供了切实可行的解决方案。

关键词: 香茅油, 纳米乳剂, 稳定性, 杀菌剂, 细胞毒性, 环境友好

Abstract:

The excessive and unreasonable use of synthetic bactericides in the agricultural field has caused many serious problems, including toxic effects on human health and environmental pollution. Therefore, searching for low toxicity, highly efficient, and no-residue natural bactericides is urgently needed. Plant essential oil has become an emerging and hot topic in the agricultural field because of its excellent bactericidal activity, good biocompatibility, and abundant sources. Citronella oil is a natural plant essential oil with insect repellent, insecticidal, and antibacterial activities, which mainly includes citronellal, geraniol, and citronellol. At present, the major of research on citronella oil focuses on the repellency and control of sanitary pests, but there are relatively few reports on the control of agricultural pathogenic bacteria. In addition, the hydrophobicity and volatility of citronella oil lead to its low bioavailability and hinder its full biological activity. Therefore, constructing a delivery system for improving the hydrophobicity and reducing the volatility of citronella oil is urgently needed. Nanoemulsions have the advantages of fine and uniform droplets, better physical stability, efficient permeation ability, and enhanced bioavailability. Therefore, nanoemulsions are important drug delivery systems for hydrophobic pesticides. In this study, the influences of emulsifier type (hydrophilic-lipophilic balance (HLB)), dosage, and emulsifying time on the formation and stability of citronella oil nanoemulsions were investigated by observing the appearances and microstructures of samples and measuring droplet size, thereby the optimized formula of the citronella oil nanoemulsions was determined. Furthermore, the bioactivity and biosafety of citronella oil nanoemulsions were also investigated. The results showed that nanoemulsions using castor oil polyoxyethylene ethers EL-40 (hydrophilic-lipophilic balance = 13.5) as an emulsifier had the best performance, and the stability of nanoemulsions improved as the emulsifier dosage increased from 3% to 7% (w, mass fraction). In addition, the nanoemulsion prepared through high speed shearing for 3 min was the most stable. The optimal formula for citronella oil nanoemulsions was determined to contain 5% (w) citronella oil, 6% (w) emulsifier (EL-40), and 89% (w) deionized water, upon high speed shearing for 3 min. Then, the inhibitory effect of citronella oil nanoemulsions against the growth of Pantoea ananatis was studied. The concentration for 50% of maximal effect (EC₅₀) of citronella oil nanoemulsions against Pantoea ananatis was 74.85 mg·L⁻¹. The cell viability of L02 cells treated with the citronella oil nanoemulsions (below 100 mg·L⁻¹) was above 83% after 24 h, and the apoptosis rate was 6.93%, indicating that the citronella oil nanoemulsions had low cytotoxicity. This research facilitated the design and fabrication of stable, efficient, and safe agricultural nanoemulsions, and it provides a practical solution for using plant essential oils as agricultural bactericides.

Key words: Citronella oil, Nanoemulsion, Stability, Bactericide, Cytotoxicity, Environment-friendliness

陈志洋, 唐雅婷, 吕泽, 孟霄汉, 梁前伟, 冯建国. 香茅油纳米乳剂的构建、表征、抗菌性能和细胞毒性[J]. 物理化学学报, 2022, 38(12), 2205053. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202205053

Zhiyang Chen, Yating Tang, Ze Lü, Xiaohan Meng, Qianwei Liang, Jianguo Feng. Citronella Oil Nanoemulsion: Formulation, Characterization, Antibacterial Activity, and Cytotoxicity[J]. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2022, 38(12), 2205053. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202205053

链接本文: https://www.whxb.pku.edu.cn/CN/10.3866/PKU.WHXB202205053

https://www.whxb.pku.edu.cn/CN/Y2022/V38/I12/2205053

图/表 12

Fig 1

Fig 2

Fig 3

Fig 4

Fig 5

Fig 6

Fig 7

Fig 8

Fig 9

Fig 10

Fig 11

Fig 12

参考文献 41

1	Gierer, F.; Vaughan, S.; Slater, M.; Thompson, H. M.; Elmore, J. S.; Girling, R. D. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 249, 236. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2019.03.025
2	Sookhtanlou, M.; Allahyari, M. S. Environ. Sci. Pollut. R. 2021, 28 (22),28168. doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-12502-y
3	Ramakrishnan, B.; Venkateswarlu, K.; Sethunathan, N.; Megharaj, M. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 654, 177. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.041
4	Fronza, G.; Toloza, A. C.; Picollo, M. I.; Carbajo, A. E.; Rodriguez, S.; Mougabure-Cueto, G. A. Acta Trop. 2019, 194, 53. doi: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2019.03.021
5	Feng, J.; Ma, Y.; Chen, Z.; Liu, Q.; Yang, J.; Gao, Y.; Chen, W.; Qian, K.; Yang, W. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2021, 9 (14),4988. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.0c08105
6	Sinha, S.; Biswas, D.; Mukherjee, A. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2011, 137 (3),1521. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2011.08.046
7	He, F.; Wang, W.; Wu, M.; Fang, Y.; Wang, S.; Yang, Y.; Ye, C.; Xiang, F. Ind. Crops Prod. 2020, 153, 112552. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.112552
8	Bouyahya, A.; Abrini, J.; Dakka, N.; Bakri, Y. J. Pharm. Anal. 2019, 9 (5),301. doi: 10.1016/j.jpha.2019.03.001
9	Samba, N.; Aitfella-Lahlou, R.; Nelo, M.; Silva, L.; Coca, R.; Rocha, P.; Lopez Rodilla, J. M. Molecules 2021, 26 (1),155. doi: 10.3390/molecules26010155
10	Moncada, J.; Tamayo, J. A.; Cardona, C. A. Ind. Crops Prod. 2014, 54, 175. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2014.01.035
11	Iliou, K.; Kikionis, S.; Petrakis, P. V.; Ioannou, E.; Roussis, V. Pest Manage. Sci. 2019, 75 (8),2142. doi: 10.1002/ps.5334
12	Wan, L.; Li, H.; Huang, C.; Feng, Y.; Chu, G.; Zheng, Y.; Tan, W.; Qin, Y.; Sun, D.; Fang, Y. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 2017, 109, 109. doi: 10.1016/j.jct.2016.12.011
13	Rodrigues, K. A. d. F.; Dias, C. N.; do Amaral, F. M. M.; Moraes, D. F. C.; Mouchrek Filho, V. E.; Andrade, E. H. A.; Maia, J. G. S. Pharm. Biol. 2013, 51 (10),1293. doi: 10.3109/13880209.2013.789536
14	Timung, R.; Barik, C. R.; Purohit, S.; Goud, V. V. Ind. Crops Prod. 2016, 94, 178. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2016.08.021
15	Motelica, L.; Ficai, D.; Ficai, A.; Trusca, R.-D.; Ilie, C.-I.; Oprea, O.-C.; Andronescu, E. Foods 2020, 9 (12),121801. doi: 10.3390/foods9121801
16	Meng, Y.; Yang, H.; Wang, D.; Ma, Y.; Wang, X.; Blasi, F. Processes 2021, 9 (7),1199. doi: 10.3390/pr9071199
17	Rezaei, A.; Fathi, M.; Jafari, S. M. Food Hydrocolloids 2019, 88, 146. doi: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2018.10.003
18	Rieger, K. A.; Birch, N. P.; Schiffman, J. D. Carbohyd. Polym. 2016, 139, 131. doi: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.11.073
19	Agrawal, N.; Maddikeri, G. L.; Pandit, A. B. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2017, 36, 367. doi: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2016.11.037
20	Sanchez-Gonzalez, L.; Vargas, M.; Gonzalez-Martinez, C.; Chiralt, A.; Chafer, M. Food Eng. Rev. 2011, 3 (1),1. doi: 10.1007/s12393-010-9031-3
21	Bouchemal, K.; Briancon, S.; Perrier, E.; Fessi, H. Int. J. Pharm. 2004, 280 (1–2),241. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2004.05.016
22	Katsouli, M.; Giannou, V.; Tzia, C. Food Funct. 2020, 11 (10),8878. doi: 10.1039/d0fo01707h
23	Xu, N.; Wu, X.; Zhu, Y.; Miao, J.; Gao, Y.; Cheng, C.; Peng, S.; Zou, L.; McClements, D. J.; Liu, W. Food Chem. 2021, 355, 129508. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.129508
24	Feng, J.; Chen, Q.; Wu, X.; Jafari, S. M.; McClements, D. J. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25 (22),21742. doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-2183-z
25	McClements, D. J. Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 2017, 28, 7. doi: 10.1016/j.cocis.2016.12.002
26	Li, L.-W.; Chen, X.-Y.; Liu, L.-C.; Yang, Y.; Wu, Y.-J.; Chen, G.; Zhang, Z.-F.; Luo, P. Lwt-Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 140, 110815. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2020.110815
27	Thapa, R.; Sai, K.; Saha, D.; Kushwaha, D.; Aswal, V. K.; Moulick, R. G.; Bose, S.; Bhattaharya, J. J. Mol. Liq. 2021, 334, 115998. doi: 10.1016/j.molliq.2021.115998
28	Zhu, Z.; Wen, Y.; Yi, J.; Cao, Y.; Liu, F.; McClements, D. J. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2019, 536, 80. doi: 10.1016/j.jcis.2018.10.024
29	Rave, M. C.; Echeverri, J. D.; Salamanca, C. H. J. Food Eng. 2020, 273, 109801. doi: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2019.109801
30	Liu, Q.; Gao, Y.; Fu, X.; Chen, W.; Yang, J. H.; Chen, Z. Y.; Wang, Z. X.; Zhuansun, X. X.; Feng, J. G.; Chen, Y. Colloids Surf. B 2021, 201, 111626. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2021.111626
31	Feng, J.; Chen, W.; Liu, Q.; Chen, Z.; Yang, J.; Yang, W. Pest Manage. Sci. 2020, 76 (12),4192. doi: 10.1002/ps.5976
32	Guan, W. X.; Tang, L. M.; Wang, Y.; Cui, H. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2018, 66 (29),7568. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.8b01388
33	Li, J. M.; Chang, J. W.; Saenger, M.; Deering, A. Food Chem. 2017, 232, 191. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.03.147
34	Hong, I. K.; Kim, S. I.; Lee, S. B. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2018, 67, 123. doi: 10.1016/j.jiec.2018.06.022
35	Feng, J.; Wang, R.; Chen, Z.; Zhang, S.; Yuan, S.; Cao, H.; Jafari, S. M.; Yang, W. Colloids Surf., A 2020, 596, 124746. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2020.124746
36	Rai, V. K.; Mishra, N.; Yadav, K. S.; Yadav, N. P. J. Controlled Release 2018, 270, 203. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2017.11.049
37	Du, Z.; Wang, C.; Tai, X.; Wang, G.; Liu, X. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2016, 4 (3),983. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.5b01058
38	Liang, X.; Wu, J.; Yang, X.; Tu, Z.; Wang, Y. Colloids Surf. Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 2018, 546, 107. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2018.02.063
39	Abbas, S.; Bashari, M.; Akhtar, W.; Li, W. W.; Zhang, X. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2014, 21 (4),1265. doi: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2013.12.017
40	Fryd, M. M.; Mason, T. G. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2010, 1 (23),3349. doi: 10.1021/jz101365h
41	Tong, K.; Zhao, C.; Sun, Z.; Sun, D. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2015, 3 (12),3299. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.5b00903

[1]	戚洺瑄, 金斓煜, 姚宏鹤, 徐子鹏, 成腾, 陈棋, 朱城, 白阳. 钙钛矿太阳能电池在反向偏压下的电学失效及稳定性研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2025, 41(8): 100088 - .
[2]	薛夷菡, 韩雪, 张洁, 温晓茹. NCQDs修饰FeOOH基复合材料的制备及其电容脱盐性能[J]. 物理化学学报, 2025, 41(7): 100072 - .
[3]	周昱晨, 刘焕敏, 李红星, 宋欣妤, 唐永华, 周鹏. 设计热力学稳定的贵金属单原子光催化剂用于乙醇的高效非氧化转化形成高纯氢和增值产物乙醛[J]. 物理化学学报, 2025, 41(6): 100067 - .
[4]	唐海莲, 陈思远, 刘巧云, 白国义, 乔波涛, 刘菲. 用于糠醇加氢的稳定型Rh/羟基磷灰石催化剂：氧化型金属-载体强相互作用在还原条件下的应用[J]. 物理化学学报, 2025, 41(4): 100036 - .
[5]	周欣, 霍怡廷, 杨松瑀, 何博文, 王晓晶, 吴珍, 张建军. 利用飞秒瞬态吸收光谱研究pH值对质子化COF光催化H₂O₂生成的影响[J]. 物理化学学报, 2025, 41(12): 100160 - .
[6]	李芷阳, 邓晖, 蔡芯琪, 陈卓. 磁性核壳胶囊局域中和胃酸用于活性益生菌的高效递送[J]. 物理化学学报, 2024, 40(7): 2306051 - .
[7]	郭雅雯, 李大伟, 高杨, 李翠红. 非富勒烯受体有机太阳能电池稳定性研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2024, 40(6): 2306050 - .
[8]	王梦茵, 黄若贝, 熊剑峰, 田景华, 李剑锋, 田中群. 锌-空气电池隔膜的关键作用及其最新研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2024, 40(6): 2307017 - .
[9]	AhmedYameen, 封想想, 高远基, 丁洋, 龙操玉, HaiderMustafa, 李恒月, 李专, 黄誓成, SaidaminovMakhsud I., 阳军亮. 离子液体界面修饰的高效稳定FAPbI₃钙钛矿太阳能电池[J]. 物理化学学报, 2024, 40(6): 2303057 - .
[10]	田晓靖, 黄至纯, 张青松, 王旭, 杨宁, 邓南平. PNIPAm温敏纳米纤维膜：交联作用下的形貌稳定性和响应行为[J]. 物理化学学报, 2024, 40(4): 2304037 - .
[11]	李莹, 赵钰燊, 陈凯, 刘旭, 伊廷锋, 陈立锋. 高性能锂离子电池用N掺杂C-Sn交联纳米纤维自支撑电极的理性设计[J]. 物理化学学报, 2024, 40(3): 2305007 - .
[12]	王往, 刘宇澄, 陈胜利. 基于镍铁层状双氢氧化物的氧析出催化剂：催化机制、电极设计和稳定性[J]. 物理化学学报, 2024, 40(2): 2303059 - .
[13]	胡雪晨, 夏求应, 岳钒, 何欣怡, 梅正浩, 王金石, 夏晖, 黄晓东. LiNbO₃负极薄膜电化学性能及全固态薄膜锂离子电池应用[J]. 物理化学学报, 2024, 40(2): 2309046 - .
[14]	梅建宝, 李贝, 张舒, 肖东东, 胡朴, 张更. 高性能三元NASICON型Na_3.5−xMn_0.5V_1.5−xZr_x(PO₄)₃/C钠离子电池正极材料[J]. 物理化学学报, 2024, 40(12): 2407023 - .
[15]	兰畅, 楚宇逸, 王烁, 刘长鹏, 葛君杰, 邢巍. 质子交换膜燃料电池阴极非贵金属M-N_x/C型氧还原催化剂研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2023, 39(8): 2210036 -0 .