9846 J. Agric. Food Chem., Vol. 54, No. 26, 2006
Mac´ıas et al.
solution was further extracted with ethyl acetate (three times). The
organic layers were combined and dried over anhydrous sodium sulfate,
and the solvent was distilled at reduced pressure. The obtained residue
was chromatographed (column chromatography, ethyl acetate/hexane,
increasing polarity) to obtain the corresponding benzoxazinones.
Bioactivity Evaluation and Statistical Analysis. Target Plants.
Selection of target plants is based on an optimization process made by
us in the search for a standard phytotoxicity evaluation bioassay (21).
After this process, several STS were proposed, including monocots
wheat and onion and dicots tomato, cress, and lettuce, which were
assayed for this study. The weeds rigid ryegrass and wild oat were
also tested by employing the same methodology.
Molecular Modeling and QSAR Calculations. Three-dimensional
models for the tested chemicals were obtained from AM1 calculations
performed by Hyperchem 7.01 software (26). Dipole moments, partial
charges, polarizabilities, and molecular volumes were obtained by
employing the algorithms implemented in this software. Molecular
parameters-activity correlations were performed by means of the
suitable Microsoft Office Excel 2003 spreadsheets (27). Statistical
significance, given as probability value for correlation (P), was
calculated for volume and dipole moment adjustments to phytotoxicity,
by employing the Pearson product moment correlation method, as
implemented in SigmaStat 3.1 software (28).
Methodology. Bioassays used Petri dishes (90 mm diameter) with
one sheet of Whatman no. 1 filter paper as substrate. Germination and
growth were conducted in aqueous solutions at controlled pH by using
10-2 M 2-[N-morpholino]ethanesulfonic acid (MES) and 1 M NaOH
(pH 6.0). Compounds to be assayed were dissolved in dimethyl
sulfoxide (DMSO) at different concentrations (0.2, 0.1, 0.02, 0.01, and
0.002 M), and these solutions were diluted with buffer (5 µL of DMSO
solution/mL of buffer) so that test concentrations for each compound
(10-3, 5 × 10-4, 10-4, 5 × 10-5, and 10-5 M) were reached. Additional
treatments for 5 × 10-6, 10-6, 5 × 10-7, 10-7, and 5 × 10-8 M were
prepared the same way for the most active chemicals to calculate
accurate IC50 values (concentrations at which the observed parameter
is stimulated or inhibited at 50% from control). This procedure
facilitated the solubility of the assayed compounds. The number of seeds
in each Petri dish depended on the seed size. The numbers of seeds
that were used for tomato, lettuce, cress, and onion were 25, 15 for
rigid ryegrass, and 10 were used for wheat and wild oat. Treatments,
negative controls (buffered aqueous solutions with DMSO and without
any tested compound), or internal reference solutions [commercial
herbicide Logran, selected after a comparison study previously reported
(21)] were added (5 mL) to each Petri dish. Four replicates were used
for tomato, cress, onion, lettuce, and rigid ryegrass; 10 replicates were
used for wheat and wild oat. The same number of replicates was used
for treatments, negative controls, and internal references.
After the addition of seeds and aqueous solutions, Petri dishes were
sealed with Parafilm to ensure closed-system models. Seeds were further
incubated at 25 °C in a Memmert ICE 700 controlled-environment
growth chamber, in the absence of light. Bioassays took 4 days for
cress, 5 days for lettuce, tomato, rigid ryegrass, wild oat, and wheat,
and 7 days for onion. After growth, plants were frozen at -10 °C for
24 h to avoid subsequent growth during the measurement process. This
facilitated the handling of the plants and allowed a more accurate
measurement of root and shoot lengths.
Bioassay Data Acquisition. Evaluated parameters (germination rate,
root and shoot length) were recorded by using a Fitomed system (23),
which allowed automatic data acquisition and statistical analysis by
its associated software.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
General Bioactivity Profiles. All compounds, when active,
showed inhibitory profiles for all evaluated parameters. Growth
parameters (root and shoot length) were more affected than
germination rates in most of the cases, although 6-Cl-D-DIBOA
provoked very powerful inhibitions also in this parameter (IC50
) 20.4 µM, R2 ) 0.8103, L. esculentum; and 10.3 µM, R2 )
0.9754, L. satiVa). Among growth parameters, root length was
more affected than shoot length. All tested species were
significantly affected by the tested chemicals. Among STS, cress
and onion were the most affected, whereas lettuce and wheat
were the plants most tolerant to the tested treatments. The effects
provoked by certain chemicals such as 6-Cl-D-DIBOA and 6-F-
D-DIBOA forced us to test them at lower concentrations (see
above). Results for both compounds on all tested species (root
lengths) are shown in Figure 4.
In general terms, these compounds had a more pronounced
phytotoxicity compared to the previously tested benzoxazinones
(2-4). To relate phytotoxic effects with structural features and
to compare the aromatic ring substituted benzoxazinones with
the previously tested ones, a cluster analysis was performed
(Figure 5).
The analysis, based on more than 1500 activity data, yielded
four clusters (G1, G2, G3, and G4). The latter three are grouped
in a cluster of higher order, indicating the chemicals from the
first one (6-Cl- and 6-F-D-DIBOA) to be very different from
the other ones in terms of bioactivity profiles. Groups G2 and
G3 belong to the same cluster, as similarities among the
chemicals grouped in them, in terms of bioactivity, may exist.
Chemicals are ordered by their average phytotoxic effects from
top to bottom. Thus, G1 groups the most phytotoxic compounds,
G2 contains highly phytotoxic chemicals, G3 is formed by
medium or low phytotoxicity compounds, and the last group,
G4, is formed by slightly active or nonactive chemicals.
Statistical Analysis. Data were statistically analyzed using Welch’s
test, with significance fixed at 0.01 and 0.05 and presented as percentage
differences from control. Zero represents control, positive values
represent stimulation of the studied parameter, and negative values
represent inhibition. The cluster analysis (joining/tree clustering) was
obtained by using Statistica v. 5.0 software (24), and it is presented as
a horizontal hierarchical tree plot. Germination rate, shoot length, and
root length average activity values for each concentration, for all tested
species and all chemicals, were included in the analysis to acquire an
overall view of the phytotoxicity and its relation with chemical structure.
IC50 values were obtained after the phytotoxicity data and concentra-
tions (logarithmic scale) had been adjusted to a constant slope sigmoidal
dose-response curve, defined by the equation
6-Cl- and 6-F-D-DIBOA provoked highly significant inhibi-
tions at concentrations lower than the other chemicals. This
behavior can be quantified by calculating the corresponding IC50
values (micromolar), shown in Table 3. Blank spaces indicate
a bad fit to the dose-response model (R2 < 0.85).
Both chemicals provoked on root length with IC50 values
close to or below 1 µM, as recorded for A. cepa and L. satiVum.
The effects on the weed A. fatua are especially relevant. None
of their IC50 values are above 60 µM. Their structures have a
halogen atom at C-6 in common.
With regard to the chemicals placed in group G2, all of them
have in common the presence of fluorine in their structures,
this atom being placed at C-7 and C-8 or as a trifluoromethyl
group at C-6. IC50 values for these chemicals varied over a wide
range of concentrations. Wheat was the less sensitive plant
(248.3-735.1 µM), whereas the most pronounced inhibitions
were obtained for onion and cress with IC50 values below 50
µM. It is interesting to compare the effects on wheat and its
Ymax - Ymin
Y ) Ymin
+
50-X
1 + 10logIC
where X indicates the logarithm of concentration, Y indicates the
response (phytotoxicity), and Ymax and Ymin are the maximum and
minimum values of the response, respectively. Goodness of fit is
described by determination coefficient (R2). The adjustment and the
R2 were obtained by using GraphPad Prism software v. 4.00 (25).