Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine / 2014 / Article
Special Issue

Essential Oils: New Perspectives in Human Health and Wellness

View this Special Issue

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2014 |Article ID 159819 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/159819

Anna Rita Bilia, Francesca Santomauro, Cristiana Sacco, Maria Camilla Bergonzi, Rosa Donato, "Essential Oil of Artemisia annua L.: An Extraordinary Component with Numerous Antimicrobial Properties", Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, vol. 2014, Article ID 159819, 7 pages, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/159819

Essential Oil of Artemisia annua L.: An Extraordinary Component with Numerous Antimicrobial Properties

Academic Editor: William Setzer
Received16 Jan 2014
Accepted28 Feb 2014
Published01 Apr 2014


Artemisia annua L. (Asteraceae) is native to China, now naturalised in many other countries, well known as the source of the unique sesquiterpene endoperoxide lactone artemisinin, and used in the treatment of the chloroquine-resistant and cerebral malaria. The essential oil is rich in mono- and sesquiterpenes and represents a by-product with medicinal properties. Besides significant variations in its percentage and composition have been reported (major constituents can be camphor (up to 48%), germacrene D (up to 18.9%), artemisia ketone (up to 68%), and 1,8 cineole (up to 51.5%)), the oil has been subjected to numerous studies supporting exciting antibacterial and antifungal activities. Both gram-positive bacteria (Enterococcus, Streptococcus, Staphylococcus, Bacillus, and Listeria spp.), and gram-negative bacteria (Escherichia, Shigella, Salmonella, Haemophilus, Klebsiella, and Pseudomonas spp.) and other microorganisms (Candida, Saccharomyces, and Aspergillus spp.) have been investigated. However, the experimental studies performed to date used different methods and diverse microorganisms; as a consequence, a comparative analysis on a quantitative basis is very difficult. The aim of this review is to sum up data on antimicrobial activity of A. annua essential oil and its major components to facilitate future approach of microbiological studies in this field.

1. Introduction

Artemisia annua L., a plant belonging to the Asteraceae family, is an annual herb native to China and it grows naturally as a part of steppe vegetation in northern parts of Chatar and Suiyan province in China at 1,000–1,500 m above sea level. This plant can grow up to 2.4 m tall. The stem is cylindrical and branched. Leaves are alternate, dark green, or brownish green. Odour is characteristic and aromatic while the taste is bitter. It is characterized by large panicles of small globulous capitulums (2-3 mm diameter), with whitish involucres, and by pinnatisect leaves which disappear after the blooming period, characterised by small (1-2 mm) pale yellow flowers having a pleasant odour (Figure 1). The Chinese name of the plant is Qinghao (or Qing Hao or Ching-hao which means green herb). Other names are wormwood, Chinese wormwood, sweet wormwood, annual wormwood, annual sagewort, annual mugwort, and sweet sagewort. In the USA, it is well known as sweet Annie because after its introduction in the nineteenth century it was used as a preservative and flavouring and its aromatic wreath made a nice addition to potpourris and sachets for linens and the essential oil obtained from the flowering tops is used in the flavouring of vermouth [1]. The plant is now naturalised in many other countries such as Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Bulgaria, France, Hungary, Italy, Spain, Romania, the United States, and the former Yugoslavia [2].

Due to the presence of the unique sesquiterpene endoperoxide lactone artemisinin (Qinghaosu), one of the most important plant-derived drug in the treatment of the chloroquine-resistant and cerebral malarias, the plant is cropped on a large scale in China, Vietnam, Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, and Australia. In India, it is cultivated on an experimental basis in the Himalayan regions, as well as temperate and subtropical conditions [3].

The essential oil which is rich in mono- and sesquiterpenes represents another source of potential commercial value [4]. Besides significant variations in its percentage and composition have been reported, it has been successfully subjected to numerous studies which mainly concern the antibacterial and antifungal activities. Diverse experimental studies have been reported to date using different methods and testing different microorganisms; therefore, a comparative analysis on a quantitative basis is very difficult. The aim of our review is to sum up data on antimicrobial activity of A. annua volatiles and its major components to facilitate future approach of microbiological experimental in this field.

2. Plant Distribution and Yield of the Volatiles

Essential (volatile) oil of A. annua can reach yields of 85 kg/ha. It is synthesised by secretory cells, especially of the uppermost foliar portion of the plant (top 1/3 of growth at maturity) which contains almost double number if compared with the lower leaves. It is reported that 35% of the mature leaf surface is covered with capitate glands which contain the terpenoidic volatile constituents. Essential oil from A. annua is distributed, with 36% of the total from the upper third of the foliage, 47% from the middle third, and 17% from the lower third, with only trace amounts in the main stem side shoots and roots. The yield of the oil generally ranges between 0.3 and 0.4% but it can reach 4.0% (V/W) from selected genotypes. Several studies have permitted the conclusion that A. annua crop could be harvested much before onset of flowering for obtaining high yields of artemisinin and the crop must be allowed to attain maturity to obtain high yields of the essential oil [5, 6].

Yield (herbage and essential oil content) can be increased with added nitrogen and the greatest growth was obtained with 67 kg N/ha. Increasing density of plants tended to increase essential oil production on an area basis, but the highest essential oil yields (85 kg oil/ha) were achieved by the intermediate density at 55,555 plants/ha receiving 67 kg N/ha. Finally the planting date and harvest time can influence the maximum concentration of the produced essential oil [6].

3. Chemical Profile of the Essential Oil

The essential oil, generally obtained by hydrodistillation of the flowering tops, analysed with GC-MS, revealed a great variability both in the qualitative and quantitative composition.

Chemical profile is generally influenced by the harvesting season, fertilizer and the pH of soils, the choice and stage of drying conditions, the geographic location, chemotype or subspecies, and choice of part plant or genotype or extraction method. In Table 1, the main constituents (>4%) of the investigated samples are reported.


Artemisia alcoholChina (Cult)7.5[20]

Artemisia ketoneNot stated38.0[22]
China (Cult)63.9[20]
Indian (Cult)58.8[28]
India (Cult)11.5[29]

Borneol Not stated20.0[22]
China (Cult)15.9[30]


Camphene hydrateUSA-IN12.0[25]

China (Cult)21.8[20]
Vietnam (Cult)3.3[20]
Indian (Cult)15.75[28]
India (Cult)8.4[29]


-Caryo phylleneItaly9.0[5]
Vietnam (Cult)5.6[20]
China (Cult)5.98[30]
India (Cult)12.2[29]

Caryophyllene oxideChina5.13[11]

India (Cult)10.19[28]

1,8-CineolFrance 11.66[23]
Iran 9.4[13]

China (Cult)12.9[30]

Germacrene DVietnam (Cult)18.3[20]
China (Cult)10.9[30]

-GuaieneChina (Cult)4.7[20]


Linalool acetateEngland 10.0[22]

MyrceneChina (Cult)5.1[20]




Iran 4.9[13]

Analysis of A. annua essential oils revealed the presence of mainly monoterpenoids and sesquiterpenes and the profiles showed great differences in the three main components, artemisia ketone, 1,8-cineole, and camphor, depending on the global phytogeographic origin. Oils can be grouped into the following:(i)Vietnamese oil with 3.3–21.8% camphor and 0.3–18.9% germacrene D,(ii)Chinese oil with high content of artemisia ketone (64%),(iii)Indian oil with 11.5–58.8% of artemisia ketone,(iv)French oil with 2.8–55% artemisia ketone, 1.2–11.6% 1,8-cineole, and 15% germacrene D,(v)North American oil with 35.7–68% artemisia ketone and 22.8–31.5% 1,8-cineole,(vi)Iranian oil with 48% camphor and 9.4% 1,8-cineole.

The presence of volatile oil is also reported in fruits and roots. Sesquiterpenes are the most abundant chemicals identified in the essential oil of the fruits; in particular, caryophyllene oxide (9.0%), caryophyllene (6.9%), (E)-β-farnesene (8.2%), and germacrene D (4.0%) are identified. However, only 52% of the total components were identified [7].

Upon hydrodistillation, the dried roots of Artemisia annua L. cultivar Jwarharti, a pleasantly fragrant essential oil, have been obtained with a yield of 0.25%. The oil was rich in sesquiterpenes and oxygenated sesquiterpenes and had cis-arteannuic alcohol (25.9%), (E)-β-farnesene (6.7%), β-maaliene (6.3%), β-caryophyllene (5.5%), caryophyllene oxide (4.4%), and 2-phenylbenzaldehyde (3.5%) as its major components [8].

Recently, the analysis of aromatic waters, obtained from plants collected at full blooming, showed the presence, among others, of camphor (27.7%), 1,8-cineole (14%), artemisia ketone (10.1%), α-terpineol (6.1%), trans-pinocarveol (5.4%), and artemisia alcohol (2%). From plants at the preflowering stage, aromatic waters gave camphor (30.7%), 1,8-cineole (12.8%), artemisia alcohol (11.4%), artemisia ketone (9.5%), alpha-terpineol (5.8%), and trans-pinocarveol (3.0%) as the main constituents. The qualitative and quantitative profiles of the two aromatic waters were similar [5].

4. Antimicrobial Activities of the Essential Oils

The essential oil of Artemisia annua has been the subject of numerous studies to test the antibacterial and antifungal activity. Tests were carried out both on the whole oil (Table 2) and on its principal components such as camphor, 1,8-cineol, α-pinene, and artemisia ketone (Table 3). The main gram-positive bacteria tested with A. annua volatiles obtained by hydrodistillation were Staphylococcus aureus [914], Enterococcus hirae [12], Enterococcus faecalis [14], Streptococcus pneumoniae, Micrococcus luteus [9], Bacillus cereus [14], Sarcina lutea [10], Bacillus subtilis [9, 11], Bacillus thuringiensis [11], Bacillus spp. [14], and Listeria innocua [15]. The gram-negative Escherichia coli [9, 1114], Escherichia coli UPEC-Uropathogenic [14], Escherichia coli ETEC-Enterotoxigenic [16], Escherichia coli EPEC-Enteropathogenic [16], Escherichia coli EIEC-Enteroinvasive [16], Escherichia coli STEC-Shiga-toxin producer [16], Shigella sp. [10], Salmonella enteritidis [10], Klebsiella pneumoniae [10], Haemophilus influenzae [9], and Pseudomonas aeruginosa [9, 13, 14] were tested. Some strains of yeasts including Candida albicans [10, 12, 13], Candida krusei [9], and Saccharomyces cerevisiae [12, 13] and molds like Aspergillus fumigatus [10] were also tested (Table 2).

Bacterial strainsAgar disk diffusionConcentrationReferenceMICmg/mLReferenceMBCmg/mLReference

S. aureus Not active[12]
Active 32[13]
Active 5.00%[11]Active 0.0156–0.0313[11]
Active 10 mg/mL[9]
Active 5.0–10.0[10]Low activity>20.0–10.0[10]
Active 10 mg/mL[14]Active 0.031[14]Active 0.031[14]
E. hirae Active 0.1 mg/mL[12]
E. faecalis Active [9]
Active 10 mg/mL[14]Active 0.026[14]Active 0.031[14]
S. pneumoniae Active 10 mg/mL[9]
M. luteus Not active[9]
B. cereus Active 10 mg/mL[14]Active 0.053[14]Active0.055[14]
Low activity20[10]Low activity20[10]
B. subtilis Active 5.00%[11]Active 0.00781-0.00781[11]
Active 10 mg/mL[9]
B.  thuringensis Active 5.00%[11]Active 0.0313–0.0156[11]
B. sp.Active 10 mg/mL[14]Active 0.026[14]Active0.053[14]
L. innocua Not active[15]
Sarcina lutea Active 2.5[10]Active 2.5[10]
E. coli Not active[12]
Active 64[13]
Active 5.00%[11]Active 0.0313-0.0313[11]
Active 10 mg/mL[9]
Low activity20[10]Low activity20[10]
Active 5 mg/mL[14]Active 0.017[14]Active 0.024[14]
 UPECActive 5 mg/mL[14]Active 0.026[14]Active 0.031[14]
Shigella sp.Low activity20[10]Low activity20[10]
S. enteritidis Active 5[10]Low activity20[10]
K. pneumoniae Low activity20[10]Low activity20[10]
H. influenzae Active 10 mg/mL[9]
P. aeruginosa Not active[13]
Active 10 mg/mL[9]
Active 10 mg/mL[14]Active 0.025[14]Active 0.053[14]

Fungal strains Agar disk diffusion ConcentrationReferenceMIC mg/mLReferenceMFC mg/mLReference

C. albicans Active 0.2 mg/mL[12]
Active 2[13]
Low activity20[10]Not active>20[10]
C. krusei Active 10 mg/mL[9]
S. cerevisiae Active 0.2 mg/mL[12]
Active 2[13]
A. fumigatus Active 5[10]Active 5[10]

Artemisia ketone -Pinene1,8-CineoleCamphor Reference -Terpineol Reference
(%, v/v)
(%, v/v)

Bacterial strains
 Gram- positive
  S. aureus 0.07–0.150.3–0.6>10>102.5–52.5–52.5–52.5–>10[10]
  Sarcina lutea 2.5101.[10]
  B. cereus 0.60.6>10>1020201010[10]
 Gram- negative
  E. coli 1010>10>102020>10>10[10]
  Shigella sp.0.60.6>10>101020>10>10[10]
  S.  enteritidis 0.6100.65510>10>10[10]
  K. pneumoniae 2.52.5>10>10551.255[10]
Fungal strains
C. albicans 1010>10>1052055[10]0.250.5[18]
C. glabrata 0.120.5[18]
C. dubliniensis 0.120.25[18]
C. krusei 0.120.5[18]
C. guillermondii 0.120.25[18]
C. parapsilosis 0.060.5[18]
C. tropicalis 0.50.5[18]
A. fumigatus 2.52.5551.[10]

The main gram-positive bacteria tested with methanol, chloroform, ethanol, hexane, and petroleum ether extracts of A. annua were Staphylococcus aureus [14, 17], Enterococcus faecalis [14], Micrococcus luteus [17], Bacillus cereus [14, 17], Bacillus subtilis [17], Bacillus pumilus [17], and Bacillus sp. [14]. The gram-negative Escherichia coli [14, 17], Escherichia coli UPEC [14], Salmonella typhi [14, 17], and Pseudomonas aeruginosa [14, 17] were tested.

In addition, several single main components were investigated (Table 3), including α-terpineol [18] tested on C. albicans, C. glabrata, C. dubliniensis, C. guilliermondii, C. krusei, C. parapsilosis, and C. tropicalis; artemisia ketone, α-pinene, 1,8-cineole, and camphor [10] tested on C. albicans, B. cereus, S. aureus, S. lutea, E. coli, K. pneumoniae, Ps. aeruginosa, S. enteritidis, Shigella sp., and A. fumigatus.

The antifungal activity of the essential oil was also evaluated against economically important foliar and soil-borne fungal pathogens of tomato. The essential oil was active against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, Botrytis cinerea, Phytophthora infestans, and Verticillim dahliae [19].

Different methods were used to evaluate the antibacterial and antifungal properties and included agar disk diffusion method [9, 11, 14, 17], minimal inhibition concentration (MIC) [9, 10, 1214, 1618], minimal bacterial concentration (MBC) [10, 14], and minimal fungicidal concentration (MFC) [10, 18] as reported in Table 2.

The results related to agar disk diffusion method (Table 2) show that some important pathogens are sensitive to A. annua essential oil obtained by hydrodistillation. S. aureus, S. pneumoniae, E. coli, UPEC, H. influenzae, P. aeruginosa, C. albicans, and C. krusei were inhibited by the action of the oil. H. influenzae, S. pneumoniae, and C. krusei were more sensitive; their inhibition zones diameters were >60, 50, and 30 mm, respectively. Satisfactory results were also achieved with genus Bacillus. On the contrary, M. luteus and L. innocua were resistant to this essential oil. Since the use of agar disk diffusion method is limited by the hydrophobic nature of most essential oils and plant extracts components that prevents their uniform diffusion through the agar medium, the most authors report the results obtained with MIC and MBC methods.

However, from the literature it is observed that the results obtained by agar disk diffusion method were confirmed by the liquid medium methods (MBC and MIC). At present there is no complete agreement on the concentration of the extracts to be considered active or inactive. Duarte and coworkers [16] proposed a classification to be applied to the extracts based on MIC values; this author considers MIC up to 500 μg/mL as strong inhibitors, MIC between 600 and 1500 μg/mL as moderate inhibitors, and MIC above 1600 μg/mL as weak inhibitors. In recent years, many different microbial species of medical interest have been tested from which emerged encouraging results except in the case of E. coli with special pathogenic characters (ETEC, EPEC, EIEC, and STEC) sensitive only at high concentrations of the extracts.

As concerns the results obtained against fungal strains, the data are rather limited. The results are contrasted against C. albicans but have to be more explored, while data related to A. fumigatus and C. krusei are encouraging.

Further studies have been performed with the main components present in A. annua essential oil (see Table 3). These studies show that artemisia ketone is the component of the oil that has the greatest antimicrobial activity; in fact, it always turns out to be effective against bacteria and some fungi (C. albicans and A. fumigatus) at very low concentrations (range 0.07–10 mg/mL). The other compounds tested in the studies have produced variable results; however, it should be emphasized the fact that all the compounds tested by liquid methods were active (range 1.25–5 mg/mL) against A. fumigatus, a dangerous microorganism frequently responsible for nosocomial infections in immunosuppressed subjects.

5. Concluding Remarks

During the last decade several authors have evaluated the antimicrobial activity of Artemisia annua and some of its main components. The composition of the essential oil shows great differences in the three main characteristic components, namely, artemisia ketone, 1,8-cineole, and camphor, depending on the global phytogeographic origin. Besides the different chemical profiles, artemisia essential oil has revealed strong antimicrobial properties towards numerous bacterial strains, both gram-positive and gram-negative, and diverse fungal strains, including many pathogens. Biological effects are the result of a synergism of all molecules contained in an essential oil, even if it is possible that the activity of the main components is modulated by other minor molecules, but the activity of the isolated constituents is also remarkable. Artemisia annua volatile constituents appear to be a resource of many biologically active compounds which will hopefully give new economically important by-product. The good results obtained encourage further researches aiming at a possible application of these substances in food and pharmaceutical and cosmetology fields.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.


  1. V. Dhingra, K. Vishweshwar Rao, and M. Lakshmi Narasu, “Current status of artemisinin and its derivatives as antimalarial drugs,” Life Sciences, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 279–300, 1999. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. D. L. Klayman, “Artemisia annua: from weed to respectable antimalarial plant,” in Human Medicinal Agents from Plants, A. D. Kinghom and M. F. Balandrin, Eds., American Chemical Society Symposium Series, pp. 242–255, Washington, DC, USA, 1993. View at: Google Scholar
  3. R. S. Bhakuni, D. C. Jain, R. P. Sharma, and S. Kumar, “Secondary metabolites of Artemisia annua and their biological activity,” Current Science, vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 35–48, 2001. View at: Google Scholar
  4. M. R. Tellez, C. Canel, A. M. Rimando, and S. O. Duke, “Differential accumulation of isoprenoids in glanded and glandless Artemisia annua L.,” Phytochemistry, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 1035–1040, 1999. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. A. R. Bilia, G. Flamini, F. Morgenni, B. Isacchi, and F. F. Vincieria, “GC MS analysis of the volatile constituents of essential oil and aromatic waters of Artemisia annua L. at different developmental stages,” Natural Product Communications, vol. 3, no. 12, pp. 2075–2078, 2008. View at: Google Scholar
  6. J. E. Simon, D. Charles, E. Cebert, L. Grant, J. Janick, and A. Whipkey, “Artemisia annua L.: a promising aromatic and medicinal,” in Advances in New Crops, J. Janick and J. E. Simon, Eds., pp. 522–526, Timber Press, Portland, Ore, USA, 1990. View at: Google Scholar
  7. R. Li, D. Wang, and H. Liao, “Chemical constituents of essential oil from the fruits of Artemisia annua L.,” Zhongnan Yaoxue, vol. 5, pp. 230–232, 2007. View at: Google Scholar
  8. D. Goel, R. Goel, V. Singh, M. Ali, G. R. Mallavarapu, and S. Kumar, “Composition of the essential oil from the root of Artemisia annua,” Journal of Natural Medicines, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 458–461, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. S. Ćavar, M. Maksimović, D. Vidic, and A. Parić, “Chemical composition and antioxidant and antimicrobial activity of essential oil of Artemisia annua L. from Bosnia,” Industrial Crops and Products, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 479–485, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. N. S. Radulović, P. J. Randjelović, N. M. Stojanović et al., “Toxic essential oils—part II: chemical, toxicological, pharmacological and microbiological profiles of Artemisia annua L. volatiles,” Food and Chemical Toxicology, vol. 58, pp. 37–49, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  11. Y. Li, H.-B. Hu, X.-D. Zheng, J.-H. Zhu, and L.-P. Liu, “Composition and antimicrobial activity of essential oil from the aerial part of Artemisia annua,” Journal of Medicinal Plant Research, vol. 5, no. 16, pp. 3629–3633, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  12. F. Juteau, V. Masotti, J. M. Bessière, M. Dherbomez, and J. Viano, “Antibacterial and antioxidant activities of Artemisia annua essential oil,” Fitoterapia, vol. 73, no. 6, pp. 532–535, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. M. R. Verdian-Rizi, E. Sadat-Ebrahimi, A. Hadjiakhoondi, M. R. Fazeli, and M. Pirali Hamedani, “Chemical composition and antimicrobial activity of Artemisia annua L. essential oil from Iran,” Journal of Medicinal Plants, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 58–62, 2008. View at: Google Scholar
  14. A. Massiha, M. Majid, K. Pahlaviani, K. Issazadeh, S. Bidarigh, and S. Zarrabi, “Antibacterial activity of essential oils and plant extracts of artemisia (Artemisia annua L.) in vitro,” Zahedan Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, vol. 15, pp. 14–18, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  15. M. Viuda-Martos, A. E.-N. G. S. El Gendy, E. Sendra et al., “Chemical composition and antioxidant and anti-Listeria activities of essential oils obtained from some Egyptian plants,” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, vol. 58, no. 16, pp. 9063–9070, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. M. C. T. Duarte, E. E. Leme, C. Delarmelina, A. A. Soares, G. M. Figueira, and A. Sartoratto, “Activity of essential oils from Brazilian medicinal plants on Escherichia coli,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 111, no. 2, pp. 197–201, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. P. Gupta, B. Dutta, D. Pant, P. Joshi, and D. Lohar, “In vitro antibacterial activity of Artemisia annua linn. Growing in India,” International Journal of Green Pharmacy, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 255–258, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. C. Marcos-Arias, E. Eraso, L. Madariaga, and G. Quindós, “In vitro activities of natural products against oral Candida isolates from denture wearers,” BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, vol. 11, article 119, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. E. M. Soylu, H. Yiǧitbaş, F. M. Tok et al., “Chemical composition and antifungal activity of the essential oil of Artemisia annua L. against foliar and soil-borne fungal pathogens,” Zeitschrift fur Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz, vol. 112, no. 3, pp. 229–239, 2005. View at: Google Scholar
  20. H. J. Woerdenbag, R. Bos, M. C. Salomons, H. Hendriks, N. Pras, and T. M. Malingre, “Volatile constituents of Artemisia annua L. (Asteraceae),” Flavour and Fragrance Journal, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 131–138, 1993. View at: Google Scholar
  21. L. M. Libbey and G. Sturtz, “Unusual essential oil grown in Oregon—II. Artemisia annua L.,” Journal of Essential Oil Research, vol. 1, pp. 201–202, 1989. View at: Google Scholar
  22. D. V. Banthorpe, B. V. Charlwood, G. M. Greaves, and C. M. Voller, “Role of geraniol and nerol in the biosynthesis of Artemisia ketone,” Phytochemistry, vol. 16, no. 9, pp. 1387–1392, 1977. View at: Google Scholar
  23. J. C. Chalchat, R. P. Garry, and J. Lamy, “Influence of harvest time on yield and composition of Artemisia annua oil produced in France,” Journal of Essential Oil Research, vol. 6, pp. 261–268, 1994. View at: Google Scholar
  24. G. D. Brown, “Cadinanes from Artemisia annua that may be intermediates in the biosynthesis of artemisinin,” Phytochemistry, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 637–641, 1994. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. D. J. Charles, E. Cebert, and J. E. Simon, “Characterisation of the essential oil of Artemisia annua L,” Journal of Essential Oil Research, vol. 3, pp. 33–39, 1991. View at: Google Scholar
  26. D. V. Banthorpe, D. Baxendale, C. Gatford, and S. R. Williams, “Monoterpenes of some Artemisia and Tanacetum species grown in England,” Planta Medica, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 147–152, 1971. View at: Google Scholar
  27. H. J. Woerdenbag, N. Pras, N. G. C. Nguyen Gia Chan et al., “Artemisinin, related sesquiterpenes, and essential oil in Artemisia annua during a vegetation period in Vietnam,” Planta Medica, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 272–275, 1994. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. A. Ahmad and L. N. Misra, “Terpenoids from Artemisia annua and constituents of its essential oil,” Phytochemistry, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 183–186, 1994. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. A. Ahmad Malik, J. Ahmad, S. R. Mir, M. Ali, and M. Z. Abdin, “Influence of chemical and biological treatments on volatile oil composition of Artemisia annua Linn,” Industrial Crops and Products, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 380–383, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. C. Ma, H. Wang, X. Lu, H. Li, B. Liu, and G. Xu, “Analysis of Artemisia annua L. volatile oil by comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography time-of-flight mass spectrometry,” Journal of Chromatography A, vol. 1150, no. 1-2, pp. 50–53, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2014 Anna Rita Bilia et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

More related articles

 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.