Our current therapeutic drugs for Alzheimer's disease are predominantly derived from the alkaloid class of plant phytochemicals. These drugs, such as galantamine and rivastigmine, attenuate the decline in the cholinergic system but, as the alkaloids occupy the most dangerous end of the phytochemical spectrum (indeed they function as feeding deterrents and poisons to other organisms within the plant itself), they are often associated with unpleasant side effects. In addition, these cholinesterase inhibiting alkaloids target only one system in a disorder, which is typified by multifactorial deficits. The present paper will look at the more benign terpene (such as Ginkgo biloba, Ginseng, Melissa officinalis (lemon balm) and Salvia lavandulaefolia (sage)) and phenolic (such as resveratrol) phytochemicals; arguing that they offer a safer alternative and that, as well as demonstrating efficacy in cholinesterase inhibition, these phytochemicals are able to target other salient systems such as cerebral blood flow, free radical scavenging, anti-inflammation, inhibition of amyloid-β neurotoxicity, glucoregulation and interaction with other neurotransmitters (such as γ-aminobutyric acid) and signalling pathways (e.g. via kinase enzymes).

Sixteen lambs were divided into two groups and fed two different diets. Eight lambs were stall-fed with a concentrate-based diet (C), and the remaining eight lambs were allowed to graze on Lolium perenne (G). The antioxidant status was measured in the liver and plasma samples before and after solid-phase extraction (SPE) to probe the antioxidant effects that grass phenolic compounds may have conferred onto the animal tissues. The liver and plasma samples from grass-fed lambs displayed a greater antioxidant capacity than the tissues from C lamb group, but only if samples had not been passed through SPE cartridges. Finally, the feed and animal tissues, which had been purified by SPE, were analysed by liquid chromatography combined with mass spectrometry (LC–MS) to identify phenolic compounds present in L. perenne and to evaluate the results from the antioxidant assays. It would appear that the improvement of the antioxidant capacity of lamb liver and plasma from lambs fed ryegrass was not related to the direct transfer of phenolic compounds from grass to the animal tissues.

Within the Aphidoidea, most species of Aphididae, as long as they are in small numbers and not carrying plant viruses, do little perceptible damage to their food plants. In species that cause toxicoses, it is usually assumed that some component of the saliva must be responsible. Paradoxically, however, the salivary enzymes of Aphididae are similar to those that already occur in plants – oxidases and enzymes that depolymerize polysaccharides – and the salivary enzymes are injected in very small amounts relative to their counterparts in the plant. Damage to plants triggers defensive, biochemical responses, and it is suggested that the injected enzymes serve mainly to divert or counter responses at the immediate interface of stylets and plant tissues. The saliva of Aphididae contains non-enzymic, reducing compounds which, in the presence of oxidases, can combine with and inactivate defensive phytochemicals – including those released in response to damage and transported in the phloem sieve tube sap on which Aphididae feed. Salivary and gut oxidases deactivate ingested phytochemicals by oxidative polymerization. Aphididae inject saliva into sieve tubes before sustained ingestion of sap, and this saliva has been presumed to condition the sieve tubes, but in what way remains unclear. It is suggested that there is a dynamic biochemical interaction between aphids and plants; that the interaction is usually well balanced for most of the Aphididae; hence, no outcome is readily observable. Where a significant imbalance occurs, however, either the aphid is unable to feed, i.e. the plant is resistant, and/or the aphid does not effectively counter a hypersensitive response. Not all plant responses are disadvantageous to aphids. Gall-forming Aphidoidea trigger and control abnormal growth in the plant to the insects' advantage, possibly by eliciting vigorous oxidation in selective meristematic tissues, thereby limiting supply of molecular oxygen and inhibiting oxygen-dependent growth-controls. Current problems and possible approaches for further research are reviewed.