General Information of Natural Product (ID: NP0941)
  Natural Product Name
4-Methylbenzaldehyde
  Synonyms
p-Tolualdehyde; 4-METHYLBENZALDEHYDE; 104-87-0; 4-Tolualdehyde; p-Formyltoluene; p-Tolylaldehyde; p-Toluylaldehyde; p-Methylbenzaldehyde; Benzaldehyde, 4-methyl-; para-Tolualdehyde; para-Methylbenzaldehyde; para-Toluyl aldehyde; Paratolualdehyde; 4-Toluylaldehyde; 4-Methyl-Benzaldehyde; PTAL; 4-methyl benzaldehyde; UNII-GAX22QZ28Q; NSC 2224; MFCD00006954; GAX22QZ28Q; CHEMBL190927; CHEBI:28617; para-tolyl aldehyde; 4-Toluicaldehyde; CCRIS 2942; HSDB 5361; EINECS 203-246-9; Tolualdehydes; p-tolu-aldehyde; AI3-24380; p-toluenealdehyde; p-toluic aldehyde; p-tolyl-methanone; p-Tolualdehyde, c; p-methyl benzaldehyde; p-4-methylbenzaldehyde; p-Tolualdehyde, 97%; PARA TOLUALDEHYDE; TOLUALDEHYDE, P-; bmse000527; DSSTox_CID_21520; DSSTox_GSID_41520; SCHEMBL29171; p-Tolualdehyde, >=97%, FG; DTXSID9041520; P-Tolualdehyde, 99+% (GC); TIMTEC-BB SBB040232; NSC2224; ZINC896404; 4-methylbenzaldehyde;p-Tolualdehyde; OZAGREL SODIUM IMPURITY 19; p-Tolualdehyde, analytical standard; NSC-2224; AKOS BBS-00003200; Tox21_304012; BDBM50159265; LABOTEST-BB LT00930011; LABOTEST-BB LT03333783; STL194064; AKOS000119345; AS02824; CS-W013576; HY-W012860; MCULE-2461351642; PS-5663; 2,2,5,5-TETRACHLOROBENZOPHENONE; NCGC00357225-01; AC-16956; CAS-104-87-0; DB-003768; FT-0652962; T0259; T1073; C06758; p-Tolualdehyde, Vetec(TM) reagent grade, 97%; A801081; Q3266675; W-108803; F2190-0585; UNII-ALC105UA3K component FXLOVSHXALFLKQ-UHFFFAOYSA-N
Click to Show/Hide
  Formula C8H8O
  Weight 120.15
  Structure Could Not Find 2D Structure
3D Structure Download 2D Structure Download
  InChI InChI=1S/C8H8O/c1-7-2-4-8(6-9)5-3-7/h2-6H,1H3
  InChI Key FXLOVSHXALFLKQ-UHFFFAOYSA-N
  Isomeric SMILES CC1=CC=C(C=C1)C=O
  Canonical SMILES CC1=CC=C(C=C1)C=O
  External Links PubChem ID 7725
CAS ID 104-87-0
NPASS ID NPC100039
CHEMBL ID CHEMBL190927
  NP Activity Charts   Click to show/hide

 The Content Variation of Natural Product Induced by Different Factor(s)
      Species Name: Fragaria vesca
  Factor Name: Cultivar Comparison [1]
              Species Info Factor Info
               Experiment Detail
Whole leaves and inflorescences of two wild strawberry cultivars ('Rugia' and 'Baron von Solemacher') harvested in 2008 during the agrotechnical experiment performed by Department of Vegetable and Medicinal Plants, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, were used as a material for determinations. Samples were collected before noon at sunny and dry days at the beginning of wild strawberry's flowering stage. Material was dried up to 35 ℃ in shadow and air just after the harvest.
Click to Show/Hide
               Factor Function
Depending on a cultivar, air-dry inflorescences from wild strawberry contain from 0.21% ('Baron von Solemacher' cv.) to 0.30% ('Rugia' cv.), whereas leaves contains from 0.46% ('Baron von Solemacher' cv.) to 0.62% ('Rugia' cv.) of essential oils. GC/MS analysis of essential oils achieved from studied materials revealed presence of 70 (including 59 identified) compounds in leaves of 'Rugia' cv. and 58 (including 50 identified) compounds in leaves of 'Baron von Solemacher' cv. Essential oils from inflorescences of 'Rugia' cv. contained 52 (including 47 identified), while 'Baron von Solemacher' cv. contained 54 (including 46 identified) compounds. The chromatographic analyses by GC-MS revealed that myrthenol, nonal, linalool and phthalide dibuthyl dominated in essential oils obtained from leaves, while myrthenol, citronelol, linalool and geraniol - from those of inflorescences. There were qualitative differences between oil components at both studied materials and differentiation between both cultivars, as well.
Click to Show/Hide
               Factor Part Location NP Content
 
Leaf: Fragaria vesca cv. Rugia
Leaves Poland
NP Content: <0.05 %
      Species Name: Vitis vinifera cv. Pinot noir
  Factor Name: Drought Stress Treatment [2]
              Species Info Factor Info
               Experiment Detail
3-year old single shoot V. vinifera plants (cultivar Pinot noir 18 Gm grafted on Kober 5BB, 51 plants) potted in 3L pots in a sandy loam soil were used. All plants were well watered (200 mL per day) at the beginning of the experiment (04.06.2010; DAY 0; 5 plants) and water was supplied to all control plants once every day (250 mL per day), whereas water supply of stressed plants was stopped. Physiological measurements and sampling of leaves took place on 07.06.2010 (DAY 3; 5 control, 5 stressed plants), 10.06.2010 (DAY 6; 5 control, 5 stressed plants) and 12.06.2010 (DAY 8; 5 control, 10 stressed plants). Due to very hot weather conditions in June 2010 the experiment was stopped after 8 days and 12 available control plants were used to restart the drought treatment with 6 control and 6 stressed plants on 11.06.2010 and all plants were measured on 15.06.2010 (DAY 5). The mean leaf temperatures at midday were: 25 ℃ (04.06.2010; DAY 0), 31.9 ℃ (07.06.2010; DAY 3), 30.8 ℃ (15.06.2010; DAY 5), 35.8 ℃ (10.06.2010; DAY 6) and 35.7 ℃ (12.06.2010; DAY 8). The mean PAR radiation per day (measured from 6:00 am till 7:00 pm) was 144.1 µmol m-2 s-1. Each plant was used only once for physiological measurements and sampling of leaves.On every day of the experiment (day 0, 3, 5, 6, 8) the pot weight and the volumetric soil moisture content (ThetaProbe ML2x and handheld data logger Moisture Meter HH2, Delta-T Devices, Cambridge, United Kingdom) was recorded. The water potential (PWSC Model 3000, Soilmoisture Equipment Corporation, Santa Barbara, USA) was determined for the 6th leaf (representing the insertion level of the shoot from the basis) of every plant and measurement day. Chlorophyll fluorescence and gas exchange parameters of light adapted leaves were determined with the 4th and 5th leaf, whereas dark adaptation was performed only with the 5th leaf. Immediately after these non-invasive measurements, the 5th leaf was harvested, frozen in liquid nitrogen and further used for the measurement of polyphenols, selected primary metabolites and volatiles (VOCs).
Click to Show/Hide
               Factor Function
The content of different groups of primary and secondary metabolites is significantly influenced by severe drought stress in grapevine leaves. The content of the majority of the metabolites (around 60% of primary metabolites, around 85% of polyphenols and about 40% of the detected and identified VOCs) increased upon drought stress treatment. Among these especially the primary metabolites citric acid and glyceric acid were strongly influenced by the short as well as the prolonged drought stress treatment, whereas all polyphenols were only induced upon the prolonged drought stress treatment.
Click to Show/Hide
               Factor Part Location NP Content
 
Normal condition
Leaves Vienna, Austria
NP Content: 1305.8 ± 367.4 peak areas
 
Dry 3-5 days
Leaves Vienna, Austria
NP Content: 1841.2 ± 471.0 peak areas
 
Dry 6-8 days
Leaves Vienna, Austria
NP Content: 2051.1 ± 1550.1 peak areas
References
1 Contents and chemical composition of essential oils from wild strawberry (Fragaria vesca L.)
2 Severe drought stress is affecting selected primary metabolites, polyphenols, and volatile metabolites in grapevine leaves (Vitis vinifera cv. Pinot noir)