| Literature DB >> 22675389 |
Theophine Chinwuba Okoye1, Peter Achunike Akah, Charles Ogbonnaya Okoli, Adaobi Chioma Ezike, Edwin Ogechukwu Omeje, Uchenna Estella Odoh.
Abstract
Root bark preparation of Annona senegalensis Pers. (Annonaceae) is used in Nigerian ethnomedicine for treatment of infectious diseases. Extraction of the A. senegalensis powdered root bark with methanol-methylene chloride (1 : 1) mixture yielded the methanol-methylene extract (MME) which was fractionated to obtain the ethyl acetate fraction (EF). The EF on further fractionation gave two active subfractions, F1 and F2. The F1 yielded a lipophilic oily liquid while F2 on purification, precipitated white crystalline compound, AS2. F1 was analyzed using GC-MS, while AS2 was characterized by proton NMR and X-ray crystallography. Antibacterial and antifungal studies were performed using agar-well-diffusion method with 0.5 McFarland standard and MICs calculated. GC-MS gave 6 major constituents: kaur-16-en-19-oic acid; 1-dodecanol; 1-naphthalenemethanol; 6,6-dimethyl-bicyclo[3.1.1]hept-2-ene-2-ethanol; 3,3-dimethyl-2-(3-methylbuta-1,3-dienyl)cyclohexane-1-methanol; 3-hydroxyandrostan-17-carboxylic acid. AS2 was found to be kaur-16-en-19-oic acid. The MICs of EF, F1, and AS2 against B. subtilis were 180, 60, and 30 μg/mL, respectively. AS2 exhibited activity against S. aureus with an MIC of 150 μg/mL, while F1 was active against P. aeruginosa with an MIC of 40 μg/mL. However, the extracts and AS2 exhibited no effects against Candida albicans and Aspergillus niger. Therefore, kaurenoic acid and the lipophilic fraction from A. senegalensis root bark exhibited potent antibacterial activity.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22675389 PMCID: PMC3366254 DOI: 10.1155/2012/831327
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Biological sources of clinical strains of the test organisms.
| S/No | Clinical strain | Biological source |
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| Wound |
| 2 |
| Stool |
| 3 |
| Wound |
| 4 |
| Stool |
| 5 |
| Nasal discharge |
| 6 |
| Spoiled food |
| 7 |
| High vaginal swab (HVS) |
Phytochemical constituents of extract and fractions.
| Constituent | MME | EF | HF | MF | AS2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carbohydrate | + | − | − | + | − |
| Alkaloid | + | + | + | + | − |
| Reducing sugar | + | − | − | + | − |
| Glycoside | + | − | − | + | − |
| Saponins | + | − | − | + | − |
| Tannins | − | − | − | − | − |
| Flavonoids | + | + | − | − | − |
| Resin | + | + | + | + | − |
| Fats and oils | + | + | + | − | − |
| Steroids | + | − | + | + | − |
| Terpenoids | + | + | + | + | + |
| Acidic compounds | + | + | − | − | − |
+ = present; − = absent.
Figure 1X-ray crystallograph of AS2.
Figure 2Chemical structure of AS2.
Figure 3Spectral data analysis of AS2.
Chemical constituents of lipophilic fraction (F1).
| S/No | Chemical name | Molecular formula | Molecular weight | Retention (KOVAT's) index | MS ions/fragments (m/e) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | 1-dodecanol | C12H26O | 186 | 1457 | 27, 41, 55, 70, 83, 97, 111(112), 126, 140 |
| 02 | 6,6-dimethyl-bicyclo [3.1.1]hept-2-ene-2-ethanol | C11H18O | 166 | 1290 | 27, 41 (43), 67, 79, 91, 105, 122, 151. |
| 03 | Kaur-16-en-18-oic acid | C21H32O2 | 316 | 2056 | 27, 41, 55, 67, 79, 91, 105, 121, 133, 147, 159, 187, 213, 241, 257, 273, 301, 316. |
| 04 | 1-naphthalenemethanol | C15H26O | 222 | 1685 | 27, 41, 55, 69, 81, 109, 124, 191, 222. |
| 05 | 3,3-dimethyl-2-(3-methylbuta-1,3-dienyl) cyclohexan-1-methanol | C14H24O | 208 | 1592 | 41, 55, 69, 81, 95, 109, 123, 139, 165, 177, 193. |
| 06 | 3-hydroxyandrostan-17-carboxylic acid | C20H32O3 | 320 | 2375 | 43, 67, 79, 93, 108, 121, 135, 147, 161, 175, 194, 215, 233, 248, 287, 302. |
Figure 4Chemical structures of GCMS constituents of F1.
Inhibition zone diameter (IZD) of the extract and fractions.
| Organism | MME | HF | MF | EF | F1 | AS2 | CIP | GEN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 14.60 ± 0.12 | 13.30 ± 0.15 | 13.30 ± 0.06 | 14.00 ± 0.00 | 14.00 ± 0.23 | 16.00 ± 0.00 | 22.00 ± 0.12 | 26.00 ± 0.00 |
|
| 14.20 ± 0.42 | 12.30 ± 0.35 | + | 10.50 ± 0.17 | 10.33 ± 0.06 | 17.00 ± 0.00 | 28.00 ± 0.00 | 26.00 ± 0.00 |
|
| 13.00 ± 0.00 | + | + | + | 11.40 ± 0.31 | + | 25.00 ± 0.00 | 22.00 ± 0.12 |
|
| 12.60 ± 0.20 | + | + | + | + | + | 25.00 ± 0.30 | 20.00 ± 0.00 |
|
| + | + | + | + | + | + | NA | NA |
|
| + | + | + | + | + | + | NA | NA |
|
| + | + | + | + | + | + | NA | NA |
Values in mm, are mean ± SEM (ANOVA, Dunnet its post hoc); n = 3; +: no growth or no activity; concentration of AS2 = 50 mg/mL; CIP & GEN: 40 μg/mL while others are 100 mg/mL. CIP: ciprofloxacin, GEN: gentamicin, NA = not applicable.
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of extract and fractions.
| ORGANISM | MME | MF | HF | EF | F1 | AS2 | CIP | GEN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 370.00 | 150.00 | 140.00 | 180.00 | 60.00 | 30.00 | 0.28 | 0.02 |
|
| 8750.00 | + | + | + | + | 150.00 | 1.18 | 0.23 |
|
| 1080.00 | + | + | + | 40.00 | + | 3.60 | 0.79 |
|
| 70.00 | + | + | + | + | + | 0.39 | 1.77 |
MIC values are in μg/mL.