A. Koulman et al. / Phytochemistry 69 (2008) 1927–1932
1931
was concentrated to 100 ml under reduced pressure. About 50 ml
of H2O was added and the pH value was increased with 1% NH4OH
buffer to pH 10 and the extract was partitioned three times with
100 ml of CHCl3. The chloroform fraction was concentrated and
subjected to open CC using silica gel, collecting 25 ml fractions.
Elution was carried out with a series of solvents of increasing
polarity from 1 l of CHCl3:Me2CO:HCO2H (60/40/0.1), 0.5 l of
CHCl3:Me2CO:MeOH:HCO2H (25/10/65/0.1), 0.5 l of CHCl3:MeOH:
HCO2H (10/90/0.1) and ending with 0.5 l of Me2CO:MeOH:HCO2H
(10/90/0.1). To clean the column afterwards, it was eluted with
MeOH with 0.1% HCO2H. The fractions containing the compound
of interest (detected by LCMS) were combined, the pH adjusted
to 10 with 1% NH4OH buffer and the mixture partitioned for 3
times with 50 ml CHCl3 to transfer the compound to the CHCl3
phases. The CHCl3 phases were combined, concentrated and sub-
jected to open CC using silica gel, eluting with 1 l CHCl3:MeOH
(25/75) followed by 600 ml of MeOH with 0.1% HCO2H. This
yielded 62 mg of an enriched fraction.
3.7.1. E-Thesinine-O-40-a-rhamnoside (1)
Yellow oil; UV kmax MeCN/H2O (loge): 235, 305 nm (3.2). 1H and
13C NMR (500 MHz, D2O) see Table 1. HRESIMS, m/z [MH]+
434.2175 (Calcd. for C23H32NO7, 434.2173). ESIMS (positive ion
mode; m/z, rel int (%)) 434.2 [MH]+ ms2 434.20 @ 35% CE: 288.2
(100), 147.2 (2.6), 142.2 (4.1), 124 (0.6), ms3 434.20 @ 35% CE,
288.20 @ 35% CE: 147.0 (13.2), 142.12(17.3), 124.0 (100).
3.7.2. Z-Thesinine-O-40-a-rhamnoside (2)
Yellow oil; UV kmax MeCN/H2O (loge): 230, 290 nm (3.2). 1H and
13C NMR (500 MHz, D2O) see Table 2. HRESIMS, m/z [MH]+
434.2175 (Calcd. for C23H32NO7, 434.2173). ESIMS (positive ion
mode; m/z, rel int (%)) 434.2 [MH]+ ms2 434.20 @ 35% CE: 288.2
(100), 147.2 (0.5), 142.2 (1.5), ms3 434.20 @ 35% CE, 288.20 @
35% CE: 147.0 (12.4), 142.12(9.3), 124.0 (100).
3.7.3. E-Thesinine-O-40-a-rhamnoside-glycoside
ESIMS (positive ion mode; m/z, rel int (%)) 596.3 [MH]+ ms2
596.30 @ 35% CE: 434.2 (3.4), 288.2 (100), ms3 596.3 @ 35% CE,
288.20 @ 35% CE: 147.0 (14.4), 142.12 (19.3), 124.0 (100).
3.6. Identification of the necine base
Isolated alkaloid (ca. 10 mg) was dissolved in aqueous NaOH
(2.5%, 5 ml) and the mixture was allowed to stand at room temper-
ature with stirring for 10 m. LCMSMS analysis of an aliquot of the
reaction mixture with positive ESI detection as described below
showed the disappearance of the parent compound (m/z 434)
and with negative ESI detection the appearance of a pair of peaks
(m/z 309) putatively E and Z p-coumaric acid 4-O–rhamnoside.
Iso-PrOH (15 ml) was added to the mixture together with saturated
aqueous NaCl (10 ml) to aid partitioning. The organic layer was
separated, dried over anhydrous Na2SO4, and the iso-PrOH evapo-
rated under reduced pressure to give isoretronecanol as an oily res-
idue (1.1 mg). A necine base fraction was prepared for comparison
by base hydrolysis of an alkaloid extract from a Phalaenopsis hybrid
orchid, by an adaptation of the procedure of Frölich et al. (2006).
Aliquots of isoretronecanol and the Phalaenopsis necine base frac-
tion were dissolved in EtOAc and analysed by GC-MS under the
conditions described by Frölich et al. (2006). Isoretronecanol was
identified by comparison of the mass fragmentation pattern with
reference data (Wiley and NIST libraries) and by co-elution with
isoretronecanol and separation from trachelanthamidine from Pha-
laenopsis (Frölich et al., 2006).
3.7.4. Z-Thesinine-O-40-a-rhamnoside-glycoside
ESIMS (positive ion mode; m/z, rel int (%)) 596.3 [MH]+ ms2
596.30 @ 35% CE: 434.2 (3.4), 288.2 (100), ms3 596.3 @ 35% CE,
288.20@ 35% CE: 147.0 (12.4), 142.12 (8.3), 124.0 (100).
3.7.5. E- and Z-p-coumaric acid-4-O-a-rhamnoside
Analytical HPLC: Rt = 16.7 min and 18.5 min; ESIMS (negative
ion mode; m/z, rel int (%)) 309.1 [M–H]ꢀ, ms2 309.1 @ 35% CE:
163.0 (100), 119.1 (6), ms3 @ 35% CE: 119.1 (100) for both peaks.
3.7.6. (+)-Isoretronecanol
26
½aꢂD +55° (EtOH; c 0.055) Lit. [a]D +72° (Chapman and Hall Dic-
tionary of Natural Products, 2004); GC-MS: RI (DB-1MS), 1266; m/z
141 [MÅ]+.
3.7.7. Trachelanthamidine
GC-MS: RI (DB-1MS), 1239; m/z 141 [MÅ]+.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the support of the Foundation for Research
Science and Technology, Contract C10X0203 New opportunities
from Forage Plant Genomics and the AgResearch Board for Reinvest-
ment funding for metabolomics. We thank David Greenwood
(HortResearch and Auckland University) for his help with the
FTICRMS, and Professor Thomas Hartmann, of the Technical Uni-
versity, Braunschweig, Germany and an anonymous reviewer for
helpful suggestions.
3.7. Screening of grass extracts
Fresh plant material (between 100 and 200 mg fresh weight)
was collected in screw cap vials. For the extraction 1.5 ml of
MeOH:H2O (1/1) and two ceramic beads were added to each vial.
The vials were shaken vigorously in a BIO101/Savant FastPrep
FP120 (Qbiogene, Carlsbad, CA, USA) at 4.0 msꢀ1 for 45 s, after
which the tubes were rotated for 1 h at 30 rpm. After extraction
each vial was centrifuged at 13,000 rpm and 900 ll of the superna-
tant was transferred to an HPLC vial. Analytes were eluted through
a C18 Luna column (Phenomenex, Torrence, CA, USA) (150 ꢁ 2 mm,
5 lm) at a flow rate of 200 ll minꢀ1 using a Thermo Finnigan Sur-
veyor HPLC system with a solvent gradient (solvent A: H2O 0.1%
HCO2H; B: MeCN 0.1% HCO2H), starting with 3% B, 97% A for
5 min and then increasing to 23% B over 15 min followed by a col-
umn wash at 95% B. 1/2 were detected in SRM mode, selecting m/z
434.2 2.5, 35% relative collision energy, and quantifying the m/z
288.2 fragment ion. Furthermore the MS was set to collect frag-
mentation data in data dependent manner using a parent mass list
(m/z 140, 142, 156, 227, 286, 288, 382, 404, 432, 434, 444, 448,
450, 451, 561, 594, 596, 612) or otherwise the most intense ion.
References
Agrawal, P.K., 1992. NMR spectroscopy in the structural elucidation of
oligosaccharides and glycosides. Phytochemistry 31, 3307–3330.
Blankenship, J.D., Houseknecht, J.B., Pal, S., Bush, L.P., Grossman, R.B., Schardl, C.L.,
2005. Biosynthetic precursors of fungal pyrrolizidines, the loline alkaloids.
ChemBioChem 6, 1016–1022.
Bush, L.P., Jeffreys, J.A.D., 1975. Isolation and separation of tall fescue and ryegrass
alkaloids. Journal of Chromatography A 111, 165–170.
Cao, M., Koulman, A., Johnson, L.J., Lane, G.A., Rasmussen, S., 2008. Advanced data-
mining strategies for the analysis of direct-infusion ion trap mass spectrometry
data from the association of Lolium perenne with its endophytic fungus
Neotyphodium lolii. Plant Physiology 148, 1501–1514.
Dodson, C.D., Stermitz, F.R., 1986. Pyrrolizidine alkaloids from borage (Borago
officinalis) seeds and flowers. Journal of Natural Products 49, 727–728.
Faulkner, J.R., Hussaini, S.R., Blankenship, J.D., Pal, S., Branan, B.M., Grossman, R.B.,
Schardl, C.L., 2006. On the sequence of bond formation in loline alkaloid
biosynthesis. ChemBioChem 7, 1078–1088.