Journals / Turkish Journal Of Field Crops / 2013 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 1

DETERMINATION OF THE BEST HERBAGE YIELD AND HYPERICIN CONTENT OF ST. JOHN’S WORT (Hypericum perforatum L.) UNDER SEMI ARID CLIMATIC CONDITIONS

Pages
95–100
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results showed that there is a relationship between dry leaf yield and hypericin content of the plant parts and development stages of the plant

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum L.) has been used as a medicinal herb since ancient times, it contains several natural products with noteworthy biological activities.
📊
Key Findings & Data:There is no clear information about harvesting time yield and yield components of St.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results showed that there is a relationship between dry leaf yield and hypericin content of the plant parts and development stages of the plant
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2004 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

St. John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum L.) has been used as a medicinal herb since ancient times, it contains several natural products with noteworthy biological activities. There is no clear information about harvesting time yield and yield components of St. John’s Wort as the plants are collected from wild. Therefore, this research aimed to determine ontogenetic (pre-flowering, full flowering and post-flowering periods) and morphogenetic (bottom, middle and top parts) variations in herb yield and hypericin content of St. John’s Wort under Diyarbakır ecological conditions during the 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07 growing seasons. Fresh and dry herb yield, dry leaf yield and hypericin content were recorded. Ontogenetic x morphogenetic interaction resulted in statistically significant effects on yield characteristics and hypericin contents. The plant was not harvested during the seedling year; whereas fresh herb yields in second and third year ranged 2721 to 5607 kg ha and 2196 to 3955 kg ha respectively; while dry leaf yield in the second year varied ranged 323 to 1555 kg ha and in the third year 161 to 928 kg ha, hypericin content in the second and third year varied between 0.022 to 0.093% and 0.018 to 0.065% depending on parts of the plant. Hypericin content varied according to different parts of the plant, and the maximum value of 0.093% was obtained from the top part of the plants at the full flowering period. The results showed that there is a relationship between dry leaf yield and hypericin content of the plant parts and development stages of the plant

🔖

Cite This Article

INAN, M., KIRICI, S., KIZIL, S. (2022). DETERMINATION OF THE BEST HERBAGE YIELD AND HYPERICIN CONTENT OF ST. JOHN’S WORT (Hypericum perforatum L.) UNDER SEMI ARID CLIMATIC CONDITIONS. Turkish Journal Of Field Crops, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 1, 95–100. https://ajindex.com/articles/605853

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Banyai, E.S., A. Nagy, S. Vegvari, Z. Pluhar, 2002.
  2. Morphological, Chemical Characterization of St. John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum L.) hybrids. Acta Biologica Szegediensis, 46: 259-261.
  3. Bayram, E., O. Arabaci, H.E. Cakmak, 2002. Determination of Agronomic Characters and Hypericin Content of Hypericum perforatum L. Clones under the Bornova Ecological Condition. The Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Ege University, 39: 41-48. (in Turkish) Baytop, T., 1984. Therapy with Medicinal Plants in Turkey (Past and Present). Publication of the Istanbul University, No: 3255, (First edition) 480 p. (in Turkish) Burdock, G.A., 1997. Pharmacopsychiatry, 30 (Suppl, 2),129. Buter B., C. Orlacchio, A. Soldati, K. Berger, 1998. Significance of Genetic and Environmental aspects in the Field Cultivation of Hypericum perforatum. Planta Medica, 64: 431-437.
  4. Buter, K.B., B. Buter, 2002. Ontogenetic Variation Regarding Hypericin and Hyperforin levels in Four Accessions of Hypericum perforatum L. Journal of Herbs, Spices & Medicinal Plants, 9: 95-100.
  5. Cakmak, E.H., E. Bayram, 2003. Determination of Some Agronomical and Quality Characters of St. John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum L.) Populations Originated From Mugla. The Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Ege University, 40: 57-64. (in Turkish) Ceylan, A., Bayram, E., Arabaci, O., Marquard, R.A., Ozay, N., H. Geren, 2002. Breeding and Determination of Suitable Chemotype in st. John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum L.) Populations the Flora of Aegean Region. The Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Ege University, 42: 33-44. (in Turkish) Chatterjee, S.K., 2002. Cultivation of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants in India- A Commercial Approach. Acta Horticulturae, 576:191-202.
  6. Cirak, C., A.K. Ayan, B. Karabuk, K. Kevseroglu, A. Gulumser, 2007. Determination of Hypericin Content and Its Variation Limits in Plant Materials Commercially Sold by Akthars under the Name “Kantaron”. Turkey VIIth Field Crops Congress, 25-27 June 2007, Erzurum. 2: 526-529. (in Turkish) DAC (Deutscer Arzneimitted Codex) 3 Erganzung, 1986.
  7. Johanniskraut- Hyperici Herba, J-010 Frankfurt am Main Govi Ferlag. Ebadi, M., 2002. Pharmacodynamic Basic of herbal Medicine. 36: Hypericum (St. John’s Wort and Depression). CRC Pres LLC, London, New York. Franz, Ch., 1983. Nutrient and Water management for medicinal and Aromatic Plants. Acta Horticulturae, 132:203-215.
  8. Holzl, J. E. Ostrowski, 1987. Johnanniskraut (Hypericum perforatum L.) HPLC- Analyse der Wichtigen Inhalsstoffe und