Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The sensitizing capacity of Compositae plants

VI. Guinea pig sensitization experiments with ornamental plants and weeds using different methods

  • Original Contributions
  • Published:
Archives of Dermatological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Experimental studies in guinea pigs using ether extracts of 20 different species of the Compositae plant family were carried out with the open epicutaneous method (OET) and the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT). The results demonstrate that Cnicus benedictus (blessed thistle), Chrysanthemum leucanthemum (marguerite, ox-eye daisy) and Helianthus debilis (dwarf sunflower) are strong sensitizers while Helenium amarum (bitterweed), Gaillardia amblyodon (blanket flower), Artemisia ludoviciana (prairie sage), Ambrosia trifida (giant ragweed) and Solidago virgaurea (goldenrod) are medium sensitizers. Twelfe species revealed only a weak or no sensitizing capacity; among those were corn flower, wormwood, mugwort, coltsfoot and dandelion. Cross-reactivities were observed in a considerable number of the investigated plant species. The sensitizing power as well as the observed cross-reactions depend on the occurrence of sesquiterpene lactones which have an α-methylene group exocyclic to the lactone in common (“immunologic requisite”). As a practical consequence, patients suffering from allergic contact dermatitis due to Compositae species are strictly requested to avoid contact with the offending species and all related species to prevent recurrences of their skin lesions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bonnevie P (1939) Äthiologie und Pathogenese der Ekzemkrankheiten. Nyt. Nordisk Forlag, Kopenhagen (JA Barth, Leipzig), pp 382–408

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brunsting LA, Anderson CR (1931) Ragweed dermatitis. J Am Med Assoc 103:1285–1290

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brunsting LA, Williams DH (1936) Ragweed (contact) dermatitis. J Am Med Assoc 106:1533–1535

    Google Scholar 

  4. Burry JN, Kuchel R, Reid JG, Kirk J (1973) Australian bush dermatitis: compositae dermatitis in South Australia. Med J Aust I:110–116

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fahr H, Noster U, Schulz KH (1976) Comparison of guinea pig sensitization methods. Cont Derm 2:335–339

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fischer NH, Olivier EJ, Fischer HD (1979) The biogenesis and chemistry of sesquiterpene lactones. Progr Chem Org Nat Prod 38:47–430

    Google Scholar 

  7. Friis B, Hjorth N, Vail JI, Mitchell JC (1975) Occupational dermatitis from Cichorium (chicory, endive) and Lactuca (lettuce). Contact Dermatitis 1:311–313

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Grater WC (1975) Hypersensitivity dermatitis from American weeds other than poison ivy. Ann Allergy 35:159–164

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hänsel R, Kartarahardja M, Huang JT, Bohlmann F (1980) Sesquiterpen-lacton β-D-Glucopyranosid sowie ein neues Eudesmanolid aus Taraxacum officinale Wigg. Phytochemistry 19:857–861

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hannah L (1919) Ragweed dermatitis. J Am Med Assoc 72:853–854

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hausen BM (1977) A simple method for extracting crude sesquiterpene lactose from Compositae plants for skin tests. Contact Dermatitis 3:58–60

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hausen BM (1979) The sensitizing capacity of Compositae plants. III. Test results and cross-reactions in Compositae-sensitive patients. Dermatologica 159:1–11

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hausen BM (1982) Taraxinsäure-1′-0-β-D-Glucopyranosid, das Kontaktallergen des Löwenzahn (Taraxacum officinale, Wigg.). Derm Beruf Umwelt 30 (2):51–53 (Editio Cantor)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hausen BM, Schulz KH (1976) Chrysanthemum allergy. Identification of the allergens. Arch Dermatol Res 255:111–121

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hausen BM, Schulz KH (1978) Allergische Kontaktdermatitis durch Löwenzahn. Derm Beruf Umwelt 26:198

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hausen BM, Osmundsen PE (1983) Contact allergy to parthenolide in Tanacetum parthenium (L.) Schulz-Bip. (feverfew, Asteraceae) and cross-reactions to related sesquiterpene lactone containing Compositae species. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 63:308–314

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hjorth N, Roed-Petersen J, Thomson K (1976) Airborne contact dermatitis from Compositae oleoresins simulating photodermatitis. Br J Dermatol 95:613–620

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Howe JS (1887) Dermatitis venenata caused by Leucanthemum vulgare. Boston Med Surg J 116:227–229

    Google Scholar 

  19. Howell JB (1946) Contact dermatitis. An analysis or tabulation of all cases proved in a single year. Arch Dermatol 53:265–277

    Google Scholar 

  20. Howell JB (1971) Sensitivity to common weeds. Contact Dermatitis Newsletter 10:230

    Google Scholar 

  21. Janke D (1950) Durch Löwenzahn verursachtes Ekzem. Hautarzt (Berlin) 1:177–181

    Google Scholar 

  22. Janson P (1953) Citrustruchte und Hauterkrankungen. Z Hautkr: 144–147

  23. Krook G (1977) Occupational contact dermatitis from Lactuca sativa and Cichorium (endive). Contact Dermatitis 3:27–36

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lapière S, Mme Van Cauwenberghe (1956) Quelques cas de sensibilisation à nos plantes d'appartements et de jardin. Arch Belg Derm Syph 12:10–18

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Longin LA (1928) Quelques éruptions botaniques. Ann Dermatol (Paris) 2:778–792

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lonkar A, Mitchell JC, Calnan CD (1974) Contact dermatitis from Parthenium hysterophorus. Trans St John's Hosp Dermatol Soc 60:43–53

    Google Scholar 

  27. Mackoff S, Dahl AO (1951) A botanical consideration of the weed oleoresin problem. Minn Med 34:1169–1173

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Magnusson B, Kligman AM (1970) Allergic contact dermatitis in the guinea pig. Identification of contact allergens. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois

    Google Scholar 

  29. McCord CP (1962) The occupational toxicity of cultivated flowers. Ind Med Surg 31:365–368

    Google Scholar 

  30. Massey AB (1941) Plant poisoning. Merck Rep 50:24–28

    Google Scholar 

  31. Mitchell JC, Dupuis G (1971) Allergic contact dermatitis from sesquiterpenoids of the Compositae family of plants. Br J Dermatol 84:139–150

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Mitchell JC, Rook A (1979) Botanical dermatology. Plants and plant products injurious to the skin. Greengrass, Vancouver

    Google Scholar 

  33. Mitchell JC, Fritig B, Singh B, Towers GHM (1970) Allergic contact dermatitis from Frullania and Compositae. The role of sesquiterpene lactones. J Invest Dermatol 54:233–239

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Mitchell JC, Geissman TA, Dupuis G, Towers GHN (1971) Allergic contact dermatitis caused by Artemisia and Chrysanthemum species. The role of sesquiterpene lactones. J Invest Dermatol 56:98–101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Morris SE (1954) Dermatitis among food handlers. Ind Med Surg 23:343–344

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Oppenheim M (1931) Überempfindlichkeit gegen die Orakelblume. Dermatol Wochenschr 93:1706

    Google Scholar 

  37. Padolina WG, Yoshioka H, Nakatami N, Mabry TJ, Monti SA, Davic RE, Cox PJ, Sim GA, Watson WH, Wu IB (1974b) Glaucolide A and B, new germacranolide-type sesquiterpene lactones from Vernonia (Compositae). Tetrahedron 30:1161–1170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Pautrizel R, Lopes G (1951) Parallélisme entre classification botanique et spécificité allergénique; sensibilisation aux phanérogames; cas de la famille des synanthérées. Sem Hôp Paris 35:1558–1561

    Google Scholar 

  39. Ramirez MA, Eller JJ (1930) The “patch” test in “contact dermatits”. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1:489–495

    Google Scholar 

  40. Rinkel HJ, Balyeat RM (1932) Occupational dermatitis due to lettuce. J Am Med Assoc 98:137–138

    Google Scholar 

  41. Roed-Petersen J, Hjorth N (1976) Compositae sensitivity among patients with contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 2:271–281

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Rowe AH (1939) Contact allergy to Cocklebur (Xanthium spinosum). A preliminary report. Arch Dermatol 39:149

    Google Scholar 

  43. Scarzella M (1958) Un caso di dermatite da contacto de Leucanthemum vulgare. Minerva Pediatr (Torino) 10:34–36

    Google Scholar 

  44. Schwartz L, Tulipan L, Birmingham DJ (1957) Occupational diseases of the skin. Irritant plants and woods. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  45. Shelmire B (1940) Contact dermatitis from vegetation. South Med J 33:337–346

    Google Scholar 

  46. Slater BJ, Norris JL, Francis N (1946) Ragweed dermatitis. Occup Med 2:298–300

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sutton RL (1919) Ragweed dermatitis. J Am Med Assoc 73:1433–1437

    Google Scholar 

  48. Touton K (1925) Die Hauterkrankungen durch Pflanzen und Pflanzenprodukte. Z Hautkr 17:713–824

    Google Scholar 

  49. Touton K (1925) Nachträge zu dem Ergebnisbericht “Die Hautkrankheiten durch Pflanzen und Pflanzenprodukte”. Z Hautkr 20:833–854

    Google Scholar 

  50. Touton K (1927) Pseudophytogene und phytogene Berufs-und Gewerbedermatosen. Dermatol Z 49:385–405

    Google Scholar 

  51. Underwood GB, Gaul LE (1948) Overtreatment dermatitis in dermatitis venenata due to plants. J Am Med Assoc 138:570–582

    Google Scholar 

  52. Vail JI, Mitchell JC (1973) Occupational dermatitis from Cichorium intybus, C. endivia and Lactuca sativa var. longifolia. Contact Dermatitis Newsletter 14:413

    Google Scholar 

  53. Yoshioka H, Mabry TJ, Timmerman BN (1973) The sesquiterpene lactones. The University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, D-2000, Hamburg 20, Federal Republic of Germany

    W. Zeller, M. de Gols & B. M. Hausen

Authors
  1. W. Zeller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. de Gols
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B. M. Hausen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zeller, W., de Gols, M. & Hausen, B.M. The sensitizing capacity of Compositae plants. Arch Dermatol Res 277, 28–35 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00406478

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00406478

Key words

Search

Navigation