Cyanogenic Glycosides in Toxicology with Diversity, Metabolism, and Implications of Amygdalin in Prunus Species

Introduction

Cyanogenic glycosides are a class of naturally occurring phytochemicals widely distributed among plants, including those in the Prunus genus. These compounds, such as amygdalin, are significant in the fields of toxicology, medicine, and forensic science due to their ability to release hydrogen cyanide (HCN) upon enzymatic hydrolysis. This property makes them both a protective mechanism for plants against herbivory and a potential hazard to humans and animals when consumed in significant quantities. Amygdalin, in particular, is found abundantly in the seeds of apricots, almonds, and cherries, and has garnered attention for its controversial role in alternative medicine as well as its implications in accidental and intentional poisoning cases [1]. In the realm of forensic toxicology, cyanogenic glycosides play a pivotal role in investigating cases of cyanide poisoning [2-3]. Cyanide is a fast-acting and potent toxicant that disrupts cellular respiration, leading to fatal outcomes. Amygdalin, as a natural source of cyanide, complicates forensic investigations by raising questions about the origin of the poison—whether it stems from natural consumption, deliberate ingestion, or other sources. This complexity necessitates robust analytical methods and multidisciplinary approaches to identify and quantify these glycosides in biological samples and link them to potential exposure scenarios [4]. This article delves into the intricate relationship between cyanogenic glycosides and forensic toxicology, with a particular focus on amygdalin from Prunus species. It examines the biochemical mechanisms of cyanide release, environmental and genetic factors influencing glycoside content, and the advancements in detection methodologies [5]. Exploring the dual nature of amygdalin as both a toxicant and a therapeutic agent, this study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of its significance in toxicology, forensic investigations, and public health.

Fig 1: The morphological characteristics and seed structures of the four Prunus species shown in Fig. 1—Prunus humilis, P. japonica, P. pedunculata, and P. triloba—are consistent with their recognized taxonomic and phytochemical distinctions. Previous investigations have demonstrated that seeds of these Prunus germplasms exhibit notable variation in their chemical profiles, particularly in cyanogenic glycosides such as amygdalin. Using UHPLC-LTQ-Orbitrap-MS combined with multivariate analyses, Zhao et al. (2022) [16] reported significant differences in metabolite composition among these species, highlighting the influence of genetic background on bioactive compound distribution. Such variability is critical for understanding species-specific toxicological potential and quality evaluation of Pruni Semen. Adopted from [16], copyright permission from Published by Elsevier B.V under CC BY-NC-ND license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Biochemistry of Cyanogenic Glycosides

Cyanogenic glycosides are secondary metabolites found in many plant species, serving as a chemical defense mechanism against herbivores. Structurally, they consist of a sugar moiety linked to a cyanohydrin group, which remains stable under normal conditions but becomes a source of hydrogen cyanide (HCN) upon enzymatic hydrolysis. This biochemical process is activated when plant tissues are damaged due to external factors like chewing, grinding, or digestion [6]. Amygdalin, one of the most studied cyanogenic glycosides, undergoes a two-step enzymatic breakdown. Initially, the enzyme β-glucosidase removes the sugar moiety, resulting in the formation of prunasin. Subsequently, prunasin is hydrolyzed by prunasin hydrolase, releasing benzaldehyde (responsible for the almond-like aroma) and hydrogen cyanide. Cyanide exerts its toxic effect by inhibiting cytochrome c oxidase in the mitochondrial electron transport chain, which is essential for cellular respiration [7]. The inhibition of this enzyme disrupts ATP production, leading to cellular hypoxia and potential fatality. The level of toxicity depends on the amount of cyanogenic glycosides ingested, the efficiency of enzymatic hydrolysis, and the individual’s detoxification capability [8-9]. While the body can metabolize small amounts of cyanide using the enzyme rhodanese to form less toxic thiocyanate, excessive exposure overwhelms this protective mechanism, causing acute poisoning.

Sources of Amygdalin in Prunus Species

Amygdalin is predominantly found in the seeds, kernels, and occasionally leaves of several species within the Prunus genus [10]. These plants are valued for their edible fruits, but their seeds and kernels often contain high concentrations of cyanogenic glycosides, making them potentially hazardous when consumed in significant amounts.

Major Sources of Amygdalin:

• Apricot Kernels (Prunus armeniaca): Among the richest sources of amygdalin, apricot kernels are commonly associated with cyanide poisoning cases. Depending on the variety, amygdalin levels can range significantly, with some kernels containing enough cyanide to pose a serious risk.
• Bitter Almonds (Prunus dulcis var. amara): Bitter almonds are known for their high amygdalin content, with cyanide potential ranging from 20 to 50 mg per 100 grams. In contrast, sweet almonds contain negligible amounts of cyanogenic glycosides and are safe for consumption.
• Cherry Seeds (Prunus avium): Cherry pits are another notable source, particularly when crushed or chewed, which facilitates enzymatic hydrolysis and cyanide release.
• Peach Pits (Prunus persica): Like apricot kernels, peach pits are rich in amygdalin. Their ingestion has been implicated in accidental poisoning cases, especially among children who may inadvertently chew the seeds.

The variability in amygdalin content across species and even among individual plants highlights the complexity of assessing risk. Environmental factors, genetic variations, and cultivation practices all influence the concentration of cyanogenic glycosides in these plants (Nakamura et al., 2020).

Forensic Significance

The presence of amygdalin in commonly consumed fruits makes it a subject of forensic interest. Accidental poisoning can occur due to a lack of awareness about the toxicity of seeds or kernels, while deliberate ingestion might be investigated in cases of suicide or homicide. The ability to link cyanide poisoning to specific plant sources using analytical methods such as gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) or high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) is crucial in forensic toxicology [11]. Understanding the biochemistry and sources of amygdalin not only aids in toxicological investigations but also informs public health initiatives aimed at preventing accidental exposure. Education on the safe consumption of fruits and awareness about the dangers of cyanogenic glycosides are key to minimizing health risks [12-13].

Forensic Implications of Amygdalin

The forensic implications of amygdalin, a cyanogenic glycoside found in many Prunus species, are multifaceted and critical in toxicological investigations. From accidental poisoning cases to deliberate uses in criminal contexts, the ability to detect and quantify amygdalin and its metabolites plays a pivotal role in forensic science.

Accidental Poisoning

Accidental cyanide poisoning often arises from the unintentional ingestion of seeds or kernels with high levels of amygdalin. Such exposures typically occur due to a lack of awareness about the potential toxicity of these parts of fruits. For instance, homemade remedies or alternative treatments, like consuming apricot kernels for purported cancer cures, have led to documented cases of cyanide poisoning. The toxicity of amygdalin depends on its dose and the individual’s metabolic ability to detoxify cyanide. Symptoms of cyanide poisoning range from mild dizziness and headache to severe respiratory distress, convulsions, and death. Forensic investigations must establish the dose-response relationship to determine whether the exposure was accidental or deliberate. Quantifying the cyanide released from the hydrolysis of amygdalin provides key evidence in such cases [14-15]. Analytical tests on gastrointestinal contents, blood, and tissues help establish the link between the ingested material and cyanide toxicity.

Intentional Poisoning

Amygdalin-containing substances are sometimes used in cases of homicide or suicide, either alone or in combination with other poisons. Deliberate poisoning scenarios pose unique forensic challenges because cyanide, whether derived from natural sources or synthetic compounds, is a highly lethal agent. Establishing whether cyanide originated from natural sources like amygdalin or synthetic chemicals requires a thorough investigation.

In cases of homicide, a forensic toxicologist must analyze potential exposure routes and determine whether the substance was administered forcefully or voluntarily consumed. For suicides, investigators may find evidence like crushed seeds, cyanogenic supplements, or notes detailing intent. Toxicological analysis often involves comparing the concentration of cyanide in bodily fluids to established lethal thresholds to confirm the cause of death [16-17].

Challenges in Forensic Analysis

The detection of cyanogenic glycosides and their metabolites poses significant challenges due to the rapid metabolism of cyanide in the body [18]. Cyanide is swiftly converted to thiocyanate in the liver, which is less toxic and excreted in the urine. As a result, by the time samples are collected, the parent compound (cyanide) may no longer be present in detectable levels. To address these challenges, advanced analytical methods are employed:

• Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS): This technique is widely used to detect and quantify cyanide levels in biological samples. It offers high specificity and sensitivity, making it an essential tool for forensic toxicology.
• High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC): HPLC is particularly effective for analyzing cyanogenic glycosides in plant materials and biological matrices. It can separate and identify amygdalin and its hydrolysis products.
• Enzymatic and Spectrophotometric Assays: These methods are less commonly used but can provide initial screening for cyanide presence, especially in field settings.

One significant issue in forensic analysis is the instability of cyanide and its rapid volatilization, necessitating careful sample collection, storage, and handling. Additionally, the need to differentiate between cyanide derived from natural sources and synthetic compounds often complicates the investigation. Stable isotope analysis and other advanced techniques may be required for such differentiation.

Implications for Forensic Practice

Forensic toxicologists must not only identify cyanide poisoning but also link it to its source, such as amygdalin. This involves multidisciplinary approaches combining toxicology, analytical chemistry, and plant biology. Furthermore, public health measures to raise awareness about the risks of consuming cyanogenic glycosides and stringent regulations on their sale can help mitigate the incidence of poisoning cases, these challenges and employing state-of-the-art analytical methods, forensic science can continue to play a crucial role in understanding and preventing poisoning cases involving cyanogenic glycosides.

Detection and Quantification

In forensic toxicology, the accurate detection and quantification of cyanogenic glycosides and their metabolites, particularly amygdalin, is paramount in investigating poisoning cases. These compounds can lead to the production of cyanide, a potent toxin responsible for numerous fatalities, whether through accidental exposure or intentional poisoning. A variety of advanced analytical techniques are employed in forensic laboratories to determine the presence and concentration of cyanogenic compounds in biological samples, to determine the cause of death or poisoning.

Spectrophotometric Assays

Spectrophotometric assays are commonly used for the detection of cyanide ions, which are released during the hydrolysis of cyanogenic glycosides such as amygdalin. Cyanide’s toxicological effects are central to understanding the mechanisms of poisoning, and its presence in biological fluids or tissues can indicate the involvement of cyanogenic substances [19]. In a typical spectrophotometric assay, cyanide ions react with reagents to form a colored compound. The intensity of the color is directly proportional to the cyanide concentration, which can be quantified by measuring absorbance at a specific wavelength. One commonly used reagent is pyridine-barbituric acid, which forms a stable colored complex in the presence of cyanide. Spectrophotometry provides a relatively quick and inexpensive method of cyanide detection, making it valuable in routine forensic analysis. However, while sensitive, it may be less specific than more advanced techniques like GC-MS and HPLC, and thus, it is often used in conjunction with other methods for confirmatory analysis [20-21].

High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC)

High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) is a powerful tool for the detection and quantification of amygdalin and its derivatives in biological samples. This method involves separating the components of a mixture based on their interaction with a stationary phase while being propelled by a liquid mobile phase under high pressure. In the case of cyanogenic glycosides, HPLC allows for the precise separation of amygdalin, prunasin, and their hydrolysis products, including cyanide.

HPLC is particularly useful for identifying amygdalin concentrations in complex matrices such as blood, urine, and tissue samples, coupling HPLC with UV detection, forensic toxicologists can quantify the presence of amygdalin and its metabolites, even at low concentrations, which is important in determining the cause of death in poisoning cases. Moreover, HPLC can be adapted to detect cyanogenic glycosides in plant materials, such as apricot seeds or bitter almonds, where these compounds naturally occur in higher concentrations [22]. This makes HPLC an essential technique in both forensic toxicology and the investigation of cyanogenic plant poisoning.

Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS)

Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) is one of the most sensitive and specific techniques used to analyze cyanide levels in biological samples post-mortem. GC-MS combines the separation capabilities of gas chromatography with the precise identification and quantification provided by mass spectrometry. After the cyanogenic glycosides undergo hydrolysis to release cyanide, GC-MS can be used to detect and quantify the liberated cyanide in blood, tissues, or other bodily fluids. The process begins with the extraction of cyanide or its metabolites from the biological matrix, followed by derivatization to enhance the volatility of the compounds. The sample is then introduced into the gas chromatograph, where it is separated based on its chemical properties. The separated components are then passed into the mass spectrometer, which provides a fingerprint of the compounds based on their mass-to-charge ratio. GC-MS offers high sensitivity and specificity, making it an ideal choice for forensic cases involving low concentrations of cyanide [23]. This technique has the advantage of providing both qualitative and quantitative information, making it indispensable in confirming cyanide poisoning.

Biosensors and Nanotechnology-Based Detection Systems

In recent years, biosensors and nanotechnology-based detection systems have emerged as promising tools for the rapid and field-deployable detection of cyanogenic glycosides and cyanide. These technologies offer several advantages over traditional methods, including their ability to provide quick results, portability, and ease of use in remote or resource-limited settings. Biosensors, which use biological components such as enzymes or antibodies to detect specific molecules, have been developed to recognize cyanide ions with high sensitivity and specificity. Enzyme-based sensors, such as those using the β-glucosidase enzyme, can directly measure the release of cyanide from cyanogenic glycosides. Nanotechnology has further enhanced these detection systems, with nanoparticles and nanomaterials being used to amplify signals, increase sensitivity, and improve selectivity. Nanoparticle-based sensors, which can change color or fluorescence in the presence of cyanide, allow for visual detection without the need for complex laboratory equipment. These biosensors and nanodevices are particularly useful in point-of-care testing, where quick results are crucial for forensic investigations in remote locations or emergencies [24-25]. The detection and quantification of cyanogenic glycosides and their metabolites in forensic toxicology rely on a variety of techniques, including spectrophotometry, HPLC, GC-MS, and emerging biosensor technologies. Each of these methods provides unique advantages in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and applicability to different forensic contexts. Combining these techniques ensures that forensic toxicologists can accurately identify and quantify cyanogenic compounds, providing critical evidence in cases of poisoning and contributing to the advancement of forensic toxicology [26].

Dualistic Nature: Therapeutic vs. Toxic

Amygdalin’s purported anti-cancer properties have fueled its use in alternative medicine, despite a lack of FDA approval. Studies suggest that its breakdown product, cyanide, can selectively target tumor cells, although risks to healthy tissues remain high [27]. This controversial usage necessitates strict regulation and awareness among healthcare and forensic professionals.

Conclusion

Cyanogenic glycosides, such as amygdalin, are potent compounds found in several species of the Prunus genus, and their role in forensic toxicology cannot be understated. While amygdalin itself is not highly toxic, its hydrolysis produces cyanide, a deadly poison that can cause severe health consequences or even death if consumed in sufficient quantities. Understanding the biochemistry of cyanogenic glycosides, as well as their distribution in various plant parts, is crucial for forensic toxicologists tasked with investigating poisoning cases. The forensic implications of amygdalin are twofold: accidental and intentional poisoning. Accidental exposure typically arises from the consumption of raw or improperly processed seeds, while intentional poisoning often involves deliberate ingestion of cyanogenic substances. Both scenarios present challenges for forensic analysis, especially in distinguishing between naturally occurring cyanide and synthetic sources. Analytical methods like spectrophotometry, HPLC, and GC-MS play vital roles in detecting cyanogenic compounds, and emerging technologies such as biosensors and nanotechnology-based systems show great promise for improving detection in real-time, field-based scenarios. Several challenges remain in the accurate identification and quantification of cyanogenic glycosides in biological and plant samples. The instability of cyanogenic compounds and their rapid metabolism complicate the analysis, necessitating precise methodologies and sophisticated instrumentation. The continued evolution of forensic toxicology, with advancements in analytical tools, will enhance the ability to assess cyanide exposure and improve the understanding of its toxicological effects. These developments will contribute to more accurate forensic investigations, ensuring justice in cases involving cyanogenic poisoning.

References

1. FAO. (2018). Cyanogenic Glycosides in Plants and Their Toxicology.
2. Piršelová, B., & Jakubčinová, J. (2025). Plant cyanogenic glycosides: from structure to properties and potential applications. Frontiers in Plant Science, 16, 1612132.
3. Cressey, P., & Reeve, J. (2019). Metabolism of cyanogenic glycosides: A review. Food and chemical toxicology, 125, 225-232.
4. EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM), Dieter Schrenk, Margherita Bignami, Laurent Bodin, James Kevin Chipman, Jesús del Mazo, Bettina Grasl‐Kraupp et al. “Evaluation of the health risks related to the presence of cyanogenic glycosides in foods other than raw apricot kernels.” EFSA Journal 17, no. 4 (2019): e05662.
5. WHO. (2020). “Guidelines on Cyanide Exposure.” World Health Organization Reports.
6. EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM). (2016). Acute health risks related to the presence of cyanogenic glycosides in raw apricot kernels and products derived from raw apricot kernels. Efsa Journal, 14(4), e04424.
7. Ballhorn, D. J. (2011). Cyanogenic glycosides in nuts and seeds. In Nuts and seeds in health and disease prevention (pp. 129-136). Academic Press.
8. Mensah, M. A. (2022). Cyanogenic glycosides as food toxins. In Analysis of Naturally Occurring Food Toxins of Plant Origin (pp. 25-52). CRC Press.
9. Figurova, D., Tokarova, K., Greifova, H., Knížatová, N., Kolesarova, A., & Lukáč, N. (2021). Inflammation, it’s regulation and antiphlogistic effect of the cyanogenic glycoside amygdalin. Molecules, 26(19), 5972.
10. Wen, Q., Yu, S., Wang, S., Qin, Y., Xia, Q., Wang, S., … & Song, S. (2022). Impact of intestinal microbiota on metabolic toxicity and potential detoxification of amygdalin. Frontiers in microbiology, 13, 1030516.
11. Jaswal, V., & Palanivelu, J. (2018). Effects of the Gut microbiota on Amygdalin and its use as an anti-cancer therapy: Substantial review on the key components involved in altering dose efficacy and toxicity. Biochemistry and biophysics reports, 14, 125-132.
12. Struempf, H. G., Schondube, J. E., & Del Rio, C. M. (1999). The cyanogenic glycoside amygdalin does not deter consumption of ripe fruit by cedar waxwings. The Auk, 116(3), 749-758.
13. Deng, Ping, Bei Cui, Hailan Zhu, Buangurn Phommakoun, Dan Zhang, Yiming Li, Fei Zhao, and Zhong Zhao. “Accumulation pattern of amygdalin and prunasin and its correlation with fruit and kernel agronomic characteristics during apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.) kernel development.” Foods 10, no. 2 (2021): 397.
14. Yeats, T. H. (2018). Setting and diffusing the cyanide bomb in plant defense. Plant Physiology, 178(3), 956-957.
15. Bhandare, S. D., & Malode, S. S. (2026). Toxic Plant Metabolites, Cyanogenic Glycosides, Poisoning Mechanisms, Health Risks, and Analytical Method Development for Detecting Toxicants in Food. Food and Drug Safety, 3(1), 114-146.
16. Zhao, Zihan, Yue Liu, Yushi Zhang, Zeyu Geng, Rina Su, Lipeng Zhou, Chao Han, Zhanjun Wang, Shuangcheng Ma, and Weidong Li. “Evaluation of the chemical profile from four germplasms sources of Pruni Semen using UHPLC-LTQ-Orbitrap-MS and multivariate analyses.” Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis 12, no. 5 (2022): 733-742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpha.2022.06.007
17. Jiang, Y., Chen, J., Zhang, Y., Wang, J., Yang, H., Sun, Y., & Dong, S. (2026). Transcriptional regulation of amygdalin biosynthesis and catabolism during kernel development in Prunus mandshurica. Food Bioscience, 78, 108494.
18. El-Hajjaji, M. A., Nouioura, G., Fikri-Benbrahim, K., Soulo, N., El Ouassete, M., Lyoussi, B., & Benziane Ouaritini, Z. (2025). Phytochemical profiling and toxicity assessment of aqueous extract from bitter apricot kernels cultivated in Morocco. Scientifica, 2025(1), 5757744.
19. Welch, K. D., & Stonecipher, C. A. (2025). Cyanogenic glycoside–containing plants. In Veterinary Toxicology (pp. 935-941). Academic Press.
20. Pal, D., Thakur, S., & Takeshwar. (2024). Apple and Honey Peach Seeds: Morphology, Chemistry, Antiproliferative Properties and Toxicity Studies. In Seeds: Anti-proliferative Storehouse for Bioactive Secondary Metabolites (pp. 361-393). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
21. Singh, D. K., Prajapati, U., Singh, A., Tumdam, R., & Sharma, S. (2025). Forensic toxicology perspective on cyanide poisoning originating from natural seeds. Discover Toxicology, 2(1), 21.
22. Liu, Y. Q., Wu, H. L., Zhang, Z. Q., Wang, W. L., Han, G. Q., Zhang, C. H., … & Li, M. H. (2024). Traditional use, phytochemistry, pharmacology, toxicology and clinical applications of Persicae Semen: a review. Chinese journal of integrative medicine, 30(12), 1137-1147.
23. Tang, S., Wang, M., Peng, Y., Liang, Y., Lei, J., Tao, Q., … & Xu, H. (2024). Armeniacae semen amarum: a review on its botany, phytochemistry, pharmacology, clinical application, toxicology and pharmacokinetics. Frontiers in pharmacology, 15, 1290888.
24. Harun, S., & Mohamed-Hussein, Z. A. (2025). Glucosinolates and Cyanogenic Glycosides: Biosynthesis and Mechanism of Action Leading to Plant Defense. In Plant Specialized Metabolites: Phytochemistry, Ecology and Biotechnology (pp. 765-790). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
25. Zhao, Z., Liu, Y., Zhang, Y., Geng, Z., Su, R., Zhou, L., … & Li, W. (2022). Evaluation of the chemical profile from four germplasms sources of Pruni Semen using UHPLC-LTQ-Orbitrap-MS and multivariate analyses. Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis, 12(5), 733-742.
26. Guo, L., Xie, F., Huang, X., & Luo, Z. (2023). A chromosome-level genome of ‘Xiaobaixing’(Prunus armeniaca L.) provides clues to its domestication and identification of key bHLH genes in amygdalin biosynthesis. Plants, 12(15), 2756.
27. Sánchez-Pérez, R. (2023). Origin and domestication of wild bitter almond. Recent advancements on almond bitterness. In The almond tree genome (pp. 15-24). Cham: Springer International Publishing.