| Literature DB >> 22258340 |
José Galberto Martins da Costa1, Gerlânia de Oliveira Leite, Albys Ferrer Dubois, Rodrigo Lopes Seeger, Aline Augusti Boligon, Margareth Linde Athayde, Adriana Rolim Campos, João Batista Teixeira da Rocha.
Abstract
Stryphnodendron rotundifolium is a phytotherapic used in the northeast of Brazil for the treatment of inflammatory processes which normally are associated with oxidative stress. Consequently, we have tested the antioxidant properties of hydroalcoholic (HAB) and aqueous extracts (AB) from the bark and aqueous extract (AL) from the leaves of Stryphnodendron rotundifolium to determine a possible association between antioxidant activity and the popular use of this plant. Free radical scavenger properties were assessed by the quenching of 1',1'-diphenil-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) and the calculated IC(50) were: HAB = 5.4 ± 0.7, AB = 12.0 ± 2.6, and AL = 46.3 ± 12.3 µg/mL. Total phenolic contents were: HAB = 102.7 ± 2.8, AB = 114.4 ± 14.6, and AL = 93.8 ± 9.1 µg/mg plant). HPLC/DAD analyses indicated that gallic acid, catechin, rutin and caffeic acid were the major components of the crude extracts of S. rotundifolium. Plant extracts inhibited Fe(II)-induced lipid peroxidation in brain homogenates. Iron chelation was also investigated and only HBA exhibited a weak activity. Taken together, the results suggest that S. rotundifolium could be considered an effective agent in the prevention of diseases associated with oxidative stress.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22258340 PMCID: PMC6268277 DOI: 10.3390/molecules17010934
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1High performance liquid chromatography profile of S. rotundifolium: (A): hydroalcoholic bark extract; (B): aqueous leaves extract; (C): aqueous bark extract. Gallic acid (peak 1), catechin (peak 2), caffeic acid (peak 3) and rutin (peak 4).
Phenolics and flavonoids composition of S. rotundifolium.
| Compounds | Hydroalcoholic bark | Aqueous leaves | Aqueous bark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mg/g | % | mg/g | % | mg/g | % | |
| Gallic acid | 210.8 ± 0.27 | 21.08 | 56.5 ± 0.09 | 5.65 | 89.3 ± 0.10 | 8.93 |
| Catechin | 160.4 ± 0.06 | 16.04 | 11.9 ± 0.27 | 1.19 | 50.7 ± 0.32 | 5.07 |
| Caffeic acid | 51.5 ± 0.18 | 5.15 | 3.2 ± 0.16 | 0.32 | 4.8 ± 0.05 | 0.48 |
| Rutin | 102.5 ± 0.34 | 10.25 | 31.2 ± 0.04 | 3.12 | 20.9 ± 0.17 | 2.09 |
Results are expressed as mean ± SEM performed in triplicate.
Figure 2Antioxidant properties of different extracts from S. rotundifolium Mart.: (A): hydroalcoholic bark extract; (B): aqueous leaves extract; (C): aqueous bark extract. Lipid peroxidation (TBARS production) in brain homogenates was determined either in the absence or in the presence of Fe2+ (10 µM). Values are expressed as mean ± SEM from 3 to 4 independent experiments performed in duplicate. *** p < 0.001 vs. Fe2+-induced TBARS; * p < 0.05 vs. Fe2+-induced TBARS; *** p < 0.001 vs. basal.
IC50 values (µg/mL) for TBARS, DPPH, iron chelation and deoxyribose degradation by hydroalcoholic bark (HAB), aqueous bark (AB), and aqueous leaves (AL) extracts from S. rotundifolium.
| TBARS | DPPH | Iron chelation | Deoxyribosedegradation | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Basal | Fe2+ | ||||
| HAB | 0.24 ± 0.02 | 7.00 ± 1.04 *** | 5.43 ± 0.73 *** | >200 | >100 |
| AB | 1.97 ± 0.44 | 13.58 ± 2.00 *** | 12.00 ± 2.67 *** | >200 | >100 |
| AL | 4.58 ± 1.73 | 60.00 ± 7.64 | 46.33 ± 12.35 | >200 | >100 |
*** p < 0.001 vs. aqueous leaves extracts from S. rotundifolium (Fe2+-induced TBARS and DPPH).
Figure 3S. rotundifolium extracts did not inhibit Fenton’s reaction. (A) hydroalcoholic bark extract; (B) aqueous leaves extract; (C) aqueous bark extract on basal and Fe2+ (10 µM) + H2O2 (1 mM)-induced deoxyribose degradation. Deoxyribose was incubated for 20 min with or without H2O2 or Fe2+ + H2O2 in the presence or absence of extracts. Data are mean ± SEM. Values average from 3 to 4 independent experiments performed in duplicate.
Figure 4DPPH radical scavenging activity by extracts from S. rotundifolium: (A) hydroalcoholic extract of bark; (B) aqueous extract of leaves; (C) aqueous extract of bark. The results are expressed as percentage of inhibition and ascorbic acid was used as a positive control. Data show means ± SEM values average from 3 to 4 independent experiments performed in triplicate. *** p < 0.001 vs. Control.
Figure 5Effects of different extracts from S. rotundifolium on iron chelation: (A) hydroalcoholic bark; (B) aqueous leaves; (C) aqueous bark. Data show means ± SEM values average from 3 to 4 independent experiments performed in triplicate. *** p < 0.001 vs. Control; ** p < 0.01 vs. Control; * p < 0.05 vs. Control.