529 Pure Appl. Chem., Vol. 79, No. 4, pp. 529–538, 2007. doi:10.1351/pac200779040529 © 2007 IUPAC Chemistry and evolution of the Piperaceae* Massuo J. Kato1,‡ and Maysa Furlan2 1Instituto de Química, Universidade de São Paulo, Av. Prof. Lineu Prestes, 748 – Bloco 11T, 05508-900, São Paulo, Brazil; 2Instituto de Química, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Av. Prof. Francisco Degni s/n, 14800-900, Araraquara, Brazil Abstract: The chemistry of members of the family Piperaceae is of great interest owing to the variety of biological properties displayed. A survey of structural diversity and bioactivity re- veals that groups of species specialize in the production of amides, phenylpropanoids, lig- nans and neolignans, benzoic acids and chromenes, alkaloids, polyketides, and a plethora of compounds of mixed biosynthetic origin. Bioassays against Cladosporium cladosporioides and C. sphaerospermun have resulted in the characterization of various amides, prenylated phenolic compounds, and polyketides as potential classes of antifungal agents. Studies on the developmental process in seedlings of Piper solmsianum have shown that phenylpropanoid are produced instead of the tetrahydrofuran lignans found in adult plants. In suspension cul- tures of P. cernuum and P. crassinervium, phenylethylamines and alkamides predominate, whereas in the adult plants prenylpropanoids and prenylated benzoic acids are the respective major compound classes. Knowledge of the chemistry, bioactivity, and ecology of Piperaceae species provides preliminary clues for an overall interpretation of the possible role and oc- currence of major classes of compounds. Keywords: Piperaceae; secondary metabolites; amides; chromenes; polyketides; lignans; mimetism. INTRODUCTION Biodiversity in the Neotropics is associated with a variety of biomes including the cerrado, caatinga, dry highlands, flooded areas, and Atlantic forest. Within these tropical and subtropical regions, some 2000 species representing the four major genera of the family Piperaceae, namely, Piper, Peperomia, Sarchorhachis, and Ottonia, are to be found [1–5]. Species of Piper are located in all types of vegeta- tion but mostly as components of pioneer vegetation, while Peperomia species are quite commonly en- countered as epiphytes or as succulent plants in moist forest and highland areas, respectively. Although general information relating to the biology of members of these genera is somewhat limited, some stud- ies concerning the mechanism of pollination and seed dispersal have been carried out [6]. Indeed, the high reproductive trait of Piper aduncum is thought to be responsible for the disturbingly successful in- vasion of the lowlands of Papua New Guinea by this species [7]. The family Piperaceae, together with other members of the order Piperales such as the Aristolochiaceae, Saururaceae, and Lactoridaceae, has been classified among the basal Angiosperms. A detailed knowledge of characters relating to the secondary chemistry, biosynthesis, and biology could *Pure Appl. Chem. 79, 467–823 (2007). An issue of reviews and research papers based on lectures presented at the 25th International Symposium on Chemistry of Natural Products (ISCNP-25) and 5th International Conference on Biodiversity (ICOB-5), held jointly in Kyoto, Japan, 23–28 July 2006, on the theme of natural products. ‡Corresponding author: E-mail: majokato@iq.usp.br contribute to establishing the evolution of this challenging group. The taxonomy of the Piperaceae is also somewhat complex. Very recently, the phylogeny of Piper species has been addressed through studies of floral morphology in association with DNA sequence data derived from rbcL, atpB, and 18S [5], whilst that of Peperomia has been inferred from investigations of trnK and matK regions [8]. Such approaches have provided a clear relationship between species and clades, but it is not certain whether a complementary correlation exists between secondary compounds. Thus the identification of molecu- lar traits should provide interesting possibilities for taxonomic projects. The most significant compound of Piper species is the piperamide piperine, which constitutes the active pungent principle of black pepper (Piper nigrum) [4]. A large number of reports have demon- strated the remarkable potential of such amides as insecticides, molluscicides, and antifungal agents [9]. Together with amides, various other classes of phytochemicals have been isolated from Piper species, principally the chromenes [10,11], phenylpropanoids, lignans and neolignans [12–14], alkaloids [15], and several compounds of mixed-biosynthetic origin [4]. In comparison with the genus Piper, our knowledge of the chemistry of Peperomia is rather lim- ited. Some structurally related compounds from Peperomia, including prenylated phenolics [16] and polyketide-chromenes [17,18], have been reported. Additionally, compounds derived from the shiki- mate pathway are also well represented in Peperomia species and these include the secolignans, the peperomins, and the styrene dimers derived from phenylpropanoid in which the γ-carbon is absent [19,20]. The aim of the present paper is to highlight the chemistry and bioactivity of selected secondary compounds isolated from members of the Piperaceae, and to consider their biosynthetic relationships in the context of the taxonomy of the family. BIOACTIVE COMPOUNDS AND THEIR BIOSYNTHETIC ORIGINS As part of a bioprospecting program relating to the isolation of bioactive compounds from Brazilian biodiversity, extracts from various species of Piperaceae have been screened using an antifungal bio- assay. A number of extracts proved to be active against Cladosporium sphaerospermum and C. clado- sporioides in a bio-autographic screen, and those derived from Piper hispidum [21], P. arboreum, and P. tuberculatum [22,23], were selected for dereplication studies. Chromatographic fractionation of these extracts yielded several classes of amides, amongst which the piperidone PT-4 and the piperidine PT-5 from P. tuberculatum were found to be highly active (Fig. 1). Additionally, the pyrrolidine-type amides PAR-1 and PAR-3 isolated from P. arboreum were extremely active with minimum inhibitory concen- tration (MIC) values of 0.1 µg in comparison with that of 0.5 µg exhibited by the positive control nys- tatin. Together with the significant activity of the Piper amides against fungi, a large volume of evi- dence is available relating to their toxicity, synergistic effect, and specificity against insects [24,25]. Indeed, the amides represent one of the classes of natural products considered most promising as po- tential pesticides by virtue of their toxicity against a wide variety of microorganisms and insects [26–28]. In this context, the suggestion that P. nigrum could be used in the protection of crops and of stored products is noteworthy [24]. M. J. KATO AND M. FURLAN © 2007 IUPAC, Pure and Applied Chemistry 79, 529–538 530 The occurrence of bioactive amides in Piper species is quite common [4], and we have detected several representatives in P. hispidum and P. scutifolium and also in one species of Peperomia. Additionally, chromenes, prenylated benzoic acid, hydroquinones, and polyketides with significant antifungal activities have also been isolated from Piper aduncum, P. hostmanianum, P. crassinervium, and P. gaudichaudianum (Fig. 2) [11]. A preliminary study of the structure–activity relationships indi- cated that the antifungal activity against C. cladosporioides is associated directly with the lipophilic properties of the molecules such as that occasioned by methylation of chromene I, or by the introduc- tion of a second isoprenyl moiety as in chromene III. It is also worth mentioning that benzoic acid de- rivatives from several Piper species are active against microorganisms [29–31] and that, as with the amides, this class of compound appears to be characteristic of Piper species. Some Piperaceae species also contain alkylated phenolic compounds formed by prenylation with dimethylallyl pyrophosphate (DMAPP), geranyl pyrophosphate (GPP), or farnesyl pyrophosphate (FPP). Such is the case for P. aduncum, P. crassinervium, and Potomorphe umbellata, in which prenyl- ation involves either the introduction of a second prenyl group (chromenes I and II), or of geranyl (prenylated hydroquinone) or nerolidyl groups (4-nerolidylcatechol). For Piper species, the aromatic moiety in all of these cases has been shown to be p-hydroxybenzoic or protocatechuic acid [32] (Fig. 2). Interestingly, the hydroquinones isolated from leaves of P. crassinervium [11,33] bear prenyl moieties and represent natural products that have rarely been found in non-marine organisms [34,35]. The © 2007 IUPAC, Pure and Applied Chemistry 79, 529–538 Chemistry and evolution of the Piperaceae 531 Fig. 1 Biosynthetic routes to amides isolated from Piper species and one species of Peperomia. The MIC (µg) values shown in parenthesis were determined against C. sphaerospermun: the positive control employed in the assay was nystatin, which presented an MIC value of 0.5 µg; nd = not determined. chelated phenolic function is, however, also present in the acylphloroglucinol isolated from Peperomia glabella, and this could be considered to be an example of chemical mimicry between the two species. The biological activities of these hydroquinones include inhibition of mitosis as well as antitumor, anti- leukemic [36,37], analgesic, relaxant [38], and antioxidant [39] effects. The significant antioxidant ac- tivity of prenylated hydroquinones, in comparison with hydroquinone itself, to inhibit lipoperoxidation is likely due to the presence of the lipophilic prenyl group that facilitates insertion of the molecule into the liposome in the model assay. Prenylated hydroquinones with a 2E-configuration exhibited higher activities than their corresponding 2Z-isomers, probably owing to better insertion into the liposome [40]. The presence of alkylated phenolic compounds in a number of Piper species suggests that this genus might represent a promising target in further searches for compounds with important antioxidant properties. Indeed, the remarkable antioxidant properties of 4-nerolidylcatechol are already being ex- ploited in certain cosmetic preparations in an attempt to alleviate the symptoms of aging [41]. Our studies on antifungal compounds have also led to the isolation of several orsellinic acid-based chromenes such as that found in Peperomia villipetiola, which showed antifungal activity against C. cladosporioides [17]. Indeed, the structural similarity between the chromenes produced by species of Piper and Peperomia is impressive. However, the benzoyl moieties in the chromenes present in Piper species are produced from shikimic acid [42], whilst most of the aromatic moieties in the related com- pounds from Peperomia species, including the long alkyl chain phenols found in P. villipetiola and P. serpens [17,18], derive from the polyketide pathway. Virtually nothing is known concerning the pos- sible selective pressures that could be responsible for the formation of such biomimetic compounds. The discovery of bioactive compounds from Peperomia species based on popular medicinal uses of the plant are, unfortunately, very rare. Among the few examples that have been reported are the iso- lation of an antitumor dibenzylbutyrolactone derivative [43,44], and tetrahydrofuran lignans [45]. Several tetrahydrofuran lignans have also been isolated from Piper solmsianum, and these exhibit po- tent in vitro trypanocidal activities against trypomastigote forms of Trypanosoma cruzi, the causative M. J. KATO AND M. FURLAN © 2007 IUPAC, Pure and Applied Chemistry 79, 529–538 532 Fig. 2 Structural and biosynthetic relationships between the meroterpenes and polyketides present in members of the family Piperaceae. DMAPP = dimethylallyl pyrophosphate; GPP = geranyl pyrophosphate; NPP = nerolidol pyrophosphate; MEP = methylerythriol phosphate; MVA = mevalonic acid. agent of Chagas disease [46]. Since there is currently no efficient chemoprophylactic agent to prevent transmission of the disease by blood transfusion, the development of trypanocidal compounds is ur- gently required. Several tetrahydrofuran derivatives and analogs have been synthesized, and initial structure–activity relationships have been reported [47,48]. Among natural and tetrahydrofuran analogs, a trans relationship between the aromatic rings is necessary in order to maximize activity. Synthetic 1,4- bis-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)butane-1,4-dione presented an IC50 value of 10 µM against Y strains of T. cruzi, a value that is comparable with that of the natural trypanocidal compound grandisin. Further in- vestigations in this area are currently underway. DYNAMICS OF SECONDARY METABOLISM DURING DEVELOPMENT AND DIFFERENTIATION Since members of the Piperaceae represent such rich sources of bioactive compounds, a detailed knowl- edge of the dynamics of secondary compound biosynthesis during various stages of plant maturity would be of value. To this end, selected Piper species have been cultivated both in vitro (suspension cultures and differentiated plantlets) and in the field (seedlings and adult plants) in order to investigate changes in chemical composition during the developmental process (Fig. 3). In the case of P. aduncum, the major component, the phenylpropanoid dillapiol, was present together with apiol, myristicin, and elemicin in the volatile fractions derived from both seedlings and adult plants. Moreover, the major amides of P. tuberculatum were present in all tissues of the adult plants and in in vitro plantlets [49]. On the other hand, the two well-investigated species, P. regnellii and P. solmsianum, contained dihydro- benzofuran (conocarpan) and tetrahydrofuran neolignans (e.g., grandisin), respectively, as major com- pounds only in adult tissues [14,50]. The biosynthesis of (+)-conocarpan by an enzyme preparation ob- tained from the mature leaves of P. regnellii exhibited high enantioselectivity for the production of (+)-form [51]. A similar specificity was observed in P. solmsianum with respect to the conversion of 5-methoxyisoeugenol into (+)-4,4'-O-di-demethylgrandisin, which was then methylated to (+)-gran- disin (unpublished results). In contrast to the above, seedlings of both P. regnellii and P. solmsianum contained dillapiol and apiol as major compounds similar to P. aduncum. The regulation of the dimer- ization process during plant development is not yet clear. Among several Piper species for which cell suspension cultures were developed, those from P. cernuum and P. crassinervium produced detectable amounts of secondary compounds [52], the pro- files of which indicated a clear biosynthetic divergence between suspension cells and field-grown plants. Thus, adult specimens of P. cernuum produced compounds arising from the phenylalanine am- monia-lyase (PAL) pathway, intermediates of which were elaborated to simple cinnamic acid deriva- tives and a series of lignans (Fig. 3). The major components produced by suspension cultures, however, derived from tyrosine decarboxylase (TYDC) and included tyramine and dopamine. In the case of P. crassinervium, the major products present in adult plants were formed by the prenylation of p-hy- droxybenzoic acids to yield a number of hydroquinones (Fig. 2). Although the phenylethylamines tyra- mine and dopamine were not detectable in suspension cells of this species, four alkamides were isolated and characterized (PCRA-1/4). Since the alkamides require dopamine as precursor [53], it appears that the alternative TYDC pathway is predominant in suspension cells of both P. cernuum and P. crassin- ervium. Dopamine is not common as a natural product, but has been previously identified in P. amalago [4], and both phenylethylamines have been found in plants as cinnamoyl conjugates in Piper species [54,55] and as N-benzoyltyramine in Aniba riparia [56]. The physiological role of tyramine amides as phytoalexins has been recognized in tobacco, Nicotiana tabacum [57], and they have also been shown to be directly involved in suberization processes in wounded potatoes (Solanum tuberosum) [58]. The only indication of a regulatory role for such compounds in suspension cells of P. crassinervium is the finding that alkamide production is induced by UV light (unpublished results). © 2007 IUPAC, Pure and Applied Chemistry 79, 529–538 Chemistry and evolution of the Piperaceae 533 The prenylation of chromenes I to II in adult P. aduncum plants has been shown to change re- markably over each 24-h period, with the maximum level of prenyltransferase activity and the highest accumulation of both chromenes occurring regularly during the early morning (Fig. 4) [42]. Similar studies need to be conducted for the polyketide-chromenes in Peperomia species in order to understand how the prenylation step is regulated. The biosynthetic origin of the prenyl moiety has been investigated only in the case of 4-nerolidylcatechol from Potomorphe umbellata [32]. The labeled precursors [3-14C]-R,S-mevalonolactone, [U-14C]-glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate, and [U-14C]-glucose were fed to leaves of the plant in order to determine conditions that would permit maximum uptake of tracer. Further experiments were conducted with [U-13C]-glucose as precursor, and the positions of label in- corporated into 4-nerolidylcatechol were determined by 13C NMR spectra analysis. The pattern of spe- cific incorporation into the product (Fig. 5) was consistent with the simultaneous operation of the mevalonate and triose/pyruvate pathways, and suggested an exchange of plastidic and cytoplasmic isopentenyl diphosphate (IPP) units, respectively. Detailed investigations are under way in order to de- termine a general pattern of terpenoid biosynthesis in Piper species. M. J. KATO AND M. FURLAN © 2007 IUPAC, Pure and Applied Chemistry 79, 529–538 534 Fig. 3 Biosynthetic relationship between lignoids in Piper species and the divergence of secondary metabolism during differentiation of P. cernuum and P. crassinervium. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE PROSPECTS The chemical profiles of the species of Piper and Peperomia that have been investigated so far reveal biosynthetic lineages in the production of the major constituents. Compounds showing antifungal ac- tivities were isolated using bioactivity-guided procedures and subsequently characterized as amides, chromenes of different origin (shikimate and polyketide), and alkylphenols (polyketides and mero- terpenes). With respect to chromenes and alkylphenols, the structural similarities of the compounds found in various species of the two genera are suggestive of similar physiological roles, but the selec- tive pressures that might be responsible for such convergence are not clear. Tetrahydrofuran lignans © 2007 IUPAC, Pure and Applied Chemistry 79, 529–538 Chemistry and evolution of the Piperaceae 535 Fig. 4 Circadian changes in the content of chromenes 1 (○) and 2 (�) (A) and in the prenyltransferase activity in leaves of P. aduncum (B) [42]. Fig. 5 Labeling pattern determined in 4-nerolidylcatechol biosynthesized from [1-13C]-glucose by P. umbellata indicating the participation of both mevalonic acid (MVA) and methylerythriol phosphate (MEP) pathways [32]. have also been found in species of both Piper and Peperomia: those from P. solmsianum have been shown to be active against T. cruzi and their skeleta have been employed as scaffold structures for syn- thetic and structure–activity studies. The production of lignans in Peperomia is curious since seco- lignans (peperomins) and dinorlignans (pellucidins) have been detected in both P. glabella and P. pel- lucida: the structures of peperomins and dibenzylbutyrolactone lignans are also indicative of convergence. A study of the dynamics of biosynthesis of the major secondary compounds in Piperaceae species revealed a circadian rhythm in the production of the chromenes in P. aduncum with the prenylation ac- tivity being controlled by light. Moreover, the production of tetrahydrofuran lignans and dihydroben- zofuran neolignans in P. regnellii and P. solmsianum appeared to be highly regulated during plant de- velopment since no production of lignans/neolignans was observed at the seedling stage. On the other hand, the seedlings produced highly oxygenated phenylpropanoids (dillapiol and apiol) as exemplified by P. aduncum. The analysis of differentiated and undifferentiated tissues of P. cernuum and P. crassin- ervium revealed a clear pattern of production of phenylethylamines and alkamides in cell suspension cultures, respectively. In summary, knowledge relating to the plasticity of secondary metabolism and its regulation, to- gether with information concerning the biological roles of the products, could provide a basis for the determination of taxonomic markers within the family Piperaceae. REFERENCES 1. T. G. Yuncker. Hoehnea 2, 19 (1972). 2. T. G. Yuncker. Hoehnea 3, 29 (1973). 3. T. G. Yuncker. Hoehnea 4, 71 (1974). 4. V. S. Parmar, S. C. Jain, K. S. Bisht, R. Jain, P. Taneja, J. A. Tyagi, O. D. Prasad, A. K. Wengel, J. C. E. Olsen, P. M. Boll. Phytochemistry 46, 597 (1997). 5. M. A. Jaramillo, P. S. Manos, E. A. Zimmer. Int. J. Plant Sci. 165, 403 (2004). 6. S. B. Mikich, G. V. Bianconi, B. H. L. N. S. Maia, S. D. Teixeira. J. Chem. Ecol. 29, 2379 (2003). 7. H. M. Rogers, A. E. Hartemink. J. Trop. Ecol. 16, 243 (2006). 8. S. Wanke, M.-S. Samain, L. Vanderschaeve, G. Mathieu, P. Goetghebeur, C. Neinhuis. Plant Biol. 8, 93 (2006). 9. L. A. Dyer, A. D. N. Palmer. Piper. A Model Genus for Studies of Evolution, Chemical Ecology, and Trophic Interactions, Kluwer Academic/Plenum (2004). 10. D. C. Baldoqui, M. J. Kato, A. J. Cavalheiro, V. S. Bolzani, M. C. M. Young, M. Furlan. Phytochemistry 51, 899 (1999). 11. J. G. L. Lago, C. S. Ramos, D. C. C. Casanova, A. A. Morandim, D. Bergamo, A. J. Cavalheiro, V. S. Bolzani, M. Furlan, E. F. Guimarães, M. C. M. Young, M. J. Kato. J. Nat. Prod. 67, 1783 (2004). 12. S. Jensen, J. Hansen, P. M. Boll. Phytochemistry 33, 523 (1993). 13. P. J. C. Benevides, P. Sartorelli, M. J. Kato. Phytochemistry 52, 339 (1999). 14. R. C. C. Martins, P. Sartorelli, L. R. Latorre, M. J. Kato. Phytochemistry 7, 843 (2000). 15. V. S. Parmar, S. C. Jain, S. Gupta, S. Talwar, V. K. Rajwanshi, R. Kumar, A. Azim, S. Malhotra, N. Kumar, R. Jain, N. K. Sharma, O. D. Tyagi, S. J. Lawrie, W. Errington, O. W. Howarth, C. E. Olsen, S. K. S. J. Wengel. Phytochemistry 49, 1069 (1998). 16. T. Tanaka, F. Asai, M. Linuma. Phytochemistry 49, 229 (1998). 17. K. J. M. Salazar, G. E. D. Paredes, L. R. Lluncor, M. C. M. Young, M. J. Kato. Phytochemistry 66, 573 (2005). 18. R. O. S. Kitamura, P. Romoff, M. C. M. Young, M. J. Kato, J. H. G. Lago. Phytochemistry 67, 2398 (2006). M. J. KATO AND M. FURLAN © 2007 IUPAC, Pure and Applied Chemistry 79, 529–538 536 19. N. Li, J.-L. Wu, T. Hasegawa, J. I. Sakai, L. Y. Wang, S. Kakuta, Y. Furuya, A. Tomida, T. Tsuruo, M. Ando. J. Nat. Prod. 69, 234 (2006). 20. J.-L. Wu, N. Li, T. Hasegawa, J. Sakai, T. Mitsui, H. Ogura, T. Kataoka, S. Oka, M. Kiuchi, A. Tomida, T. Turuo, M. Li, W. Tang, M. Ando. J. Nat. Prod. 69, 790 (2006). 21. A. C. Alécio, V. S. Bolzani, M. J. Kato, M. Furlan. J. Nat. Prod. 61, 637 (1998). 22. H. M. D. Navickiene, A. C. Alécio, M. J. Kato, V. S. Bolzani, M. C. M. Young, A. J. Cavalheiro, M. Furlan. Phytochemistry 55, 621 (2000). 23. R. V. Silva, H. M. D. Navickiene, M. J. Kato, V. S. Bolzani, C. I. Meda, M. C. M. Young, M. Furlan. Phytochemistry 59, 521 (2002). 24. I. M. Scott, H. Jensen, J. G. Scott, M. B. Isman, J. T. Arnason, B. J. R. Philogène. Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 54, 212 (2003). 25. L. A. Dyer, C. D. Dodson, J. O. Stireman, M. A. Tobler, A. M. Smilanich, R. M. Fincher, D. K. Letourneau. J. Chem. Ecol. 29, 2499 (2003). 26 S.-E. Lee, B.-S. Park, M.-K. Kim, W.-S. Choi, H.-T. Kim, K.-Y. Cho, S.-G. Lee, H.-S. Lee. Crop Prot. 20, 523 (2001). 27 Y.-C. Yang, S.-G. Lee, H.-K. Lee, M.-K. Kim, S.-H. Lee, H.-S. Lee. J. Agric. Food Chem. 50, 3765 (2002). 28. C. B. Bernard, H. G. Krishnamurty, D. Chauret, T. Durst, B. J. R. Philogene, P. Sanchezvindas, C. Hasbun, L. Poveda, L. Sanroman, J. T. Arnason. J. Chem. Ecol. 21, 801 (1995). 29. A. Lópes, D. S. Ming, G. H. N. Towers. J. Nat. Prod. 65, 62 (2002). 30. J. Orjala, C. A. Erdelmeier, A. D. Wright, T. Rali, O. Sticher. Planta Med. 59, 546 (1993). 31. C. Terreaux, M. P. Gupta, K. Hostettmann. Phytochemistry 49, 461 (1998). 32. D. C. B. Bergamo, M. J. Kato, V. S. Bolzani, M. Furlan. J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 16, 1406 (2005). 33. A. P. Danelutte, J. H. G. Lago, M. C. M. Young, M. J. Kato. Phytochemistry 64, 555 (2003). 34. B. M. Howard, K. Clarkson, R. C. Bernstein. Tetrahedron Lett. 46, 4449 (1979). 35. M. Fadli, J. M. Aracil, G. Jeanty, B. Banaigs, C. Francisco, S. Moreau. Tetrahedron Lett. 32, 2477 (1991). 36. W. E. G. Muller, A. Maidhof, R. K. Zahn, H. C. Schoroder, M. J. Gasic, D. Heidemann, A. Bernd, B. Kurelec, E. Eich, G. Seibert. Cancer Res. 45, 4822 (1985). 37. W. E. G. Muller, R. K. Zhan, M. J. Gasic, N. Dogovic, A. Maidhof, C. Becker, B. Diehl-Seifert, E. Eich. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. C 80, 47 (1985). 38. R. De Pasquale, C. Circosta, F. Occhiuto, S. De Rosa, S. De Stefano. Phytother. Res. 5, 49 (1991). 39. N. Cotele, S. Moreau, J. S. Bernier, J. P. Catteau, J. P. Henichart. Free Radical Biol. Med. 11, 63 (1991). 40. L. F. Yamaguchi, J. H. G. Lago, T. M. Tanizaki, P. Di Mascio, M. J. Kato. Phytochemistry 67, 1838 (2006). 41. V. V. Silva, C. D. Ropke, R. L. de Almeida, D. V. Miranda, C. Z. Kera, D. P. Rivelli, T. C. H. Sawada, S. B. M. Barros. Int. J. Pharm. 303, 125 (2005). 42. A. A. Morandim, D. C. B. Bergamo, M. J. Kato, A. J. Cavalheiro, V. S. Bolzani, M. Furlan. Phytochem. Anal. 16, 282 (2005). 43. N. Li, J.-L. Wu, T. Hasegawa, J.-I. Sakai, L.-Y. Wang, S. Kakuta, Y. Furuya, A. Tomida, T. Tsuruo, M. Ando. J. Nat. Prod. 69, 234 (2006). 44. J.-L. Wu, N. Li, T. Hasegawa, J.-I. Sakai, T. Mitsui, H. Ogura, T. Kataoka, S. Oka, M. Kiuchi, A. Tomida, T. Turuo, M. Li, W. Tang, M. Ando. J. Nat. Prod. 69, 790 (2006). 45. J.-L. Wu, N. Li, T. Hasegawa, J.-I. Sakai, S. Kakuta, W. Tang, S. Oka, M. Kiuchi, H. Ogura, T. Kataoka, A. Tomida, T. Tsuruo, M. Ando. J. Nat. Prod. 68, 1656 (2005). 46. R. C. Martins, J. H. G. Lago, M. J. Kato. Phytochemistry 64, 667 (2003). 47. K. Nihei, K. Konno, L. S. C. Bernardes, N. P. Lopes, S. Albuquerque, I. Carvalho, M. T. Pupo, R. C. C. Martins, M. J. Kato. Arkivoc (vi) 112 (2004). 48. L. S. C. Bernardes, M. J. Kato, S. Albuquerque, I. Carvalho. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 14, 7075 (2006). © 2007 IUPAC, Pure and Applied Chemistry 79, 529–538 Chemistry and evolution of the Piperaceae 537 49. H. M. D. Navickiene, M. J. Kato, V. S. Bolzani, M. Furlan. Phytochem. Anal. 14, 281 (2002). 50. P. J. C. Benevides, P. Sartorelli, M. J. Kato. Phytochemistry 52, 339 (1999). 51. P. Sartorelli, P. J. C. Benevides, R. E. Ellensohn, M. V. A. F. Rocha, P. R. H. Moreno, M. J. Kato. Plant Sci. 161, 1083 (2001). 52. A. P. Danelutte, M. B. Costantin, G. E. Delgado, R. Braz-Filho, M. J. Kato. J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 16, 1425 (2005). 53. P. J. Facchini, K. L. Huber-Allanach, L. W. Tari. Phytochemistry 54, 121 (2000). 54. R. Mata, I. Morales, O. Pérez, I. Rivero-Cruz, L. Acevedo, I. Enriquez-Mendoza, R. Bye, S. Franzblau, B. Timmermann. J. Nat. Prod. 67, 1961 (2004). 55. S. K. Singh, A. K. Prasad, C. E. Olsen, A. Jha, S. C. Jain, V. S. Parmar, J. Wengel. Phytochemistry 43, 1355 (1996). 56. J. M. Barbosa-Filho, M. Yoshida, O. R. Gottlieb, R. D. S. B. C. Barbosa, A. M. Giesbrecht, M. C. M. Young. Phytochemistry 26, 2615 (1987). 57. G. Guillet, V. de Luca. Plant Physiol. 137, 692 (2005). 58. O. Borg-Olivier, B. Monties. Phytochemistry 32, 601 (1993). M. J. KATO AND M. FURLAN © 2007 IUPAC, Pure and Applied Chemistry 79, 529–538 538