| Literature DB >> 23800021 |
Shafiqul Islam1, Samima Nasrin, Muhammad Ali Khan, A S M Sakhawat Hossain, Farhadul Islam, Proma Khandokhar, M Nurul Haque Mollah, Mamunur Rashid, Golam Sadik, Md Aziz Abdur Rahman, A H M Khurshid Alam.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of plants and their derived substances increases day by day for the discovery of therapeutic agents owing to their versatile applications. Current research is directed towards finding naturally-occurring antioxidants having anticancer properties from plant origin since oxidants play a crucial role in developing various human diseases. The present study was designed to investigate the antioxidant and anticancer properties of Sygygium fruticosum (Roxb.) (abbreviated as SF).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23800021 PMCID: PMC3691922 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6882-13-142
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med ISSN: 1472-6882 Impact factor: 3.659
Figure 1Determination of (A) total antioxidant capacity and (B) ferrous reducing antioxidant capacity of CME and its various fractions (PEF, CHF, EAF and AQF). Data expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3, p < .05) for all tested dosages.
Figure 2Determination of (A) DPPH radical scavenging activity and (B) OH radical scavenging activity of CME and its various fractions (PEF, CHF, EAF and AQF). Data expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3, p < .05) for all tested dosages.
Figure 3Determination of (A) lipid peroxidation inhibition of CME and its various fractions (PEF, CHF, EAF and AQF) and (B) ICof CME and its various fractions (PEF, CHF, EAF and AQF) determined from lipid peroxidation inhibition assay. Data expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3, p < .05) for all tested dosages.
Figure 4Relationship of total phenolic contents with (A) % DPPH free radical scavenging, (B) % hydroxyl radical scavenging activity and (C) % lipid peroxidation inhibition. Data expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3, p < .001).
Polyphenol contents of CME and its various fractions: PEF, CHF, EAF and AQF
| Phenolics | 301.63 ± 4.361 | 17.56 ± 1.41 | 118.13 ± 1.61 | 526.22 ± 1.55 | 266.88 ± 2.78 |
| Flavonoids | 219.88 ± 15.17 | 152.13 ± 6.34 | 128.21 ± 9.38 | 612.75 ± 5.37 | 185.71 ± 11.35 |
| Flavonols | 119.38 ± 1.24 | 185.48 ± 1.19 | 149.01 ± 2.78 | 220.38 ± 1.26 | 132.54 ± 1.77 |
| Proanthocyanidins | 10.32 ± 1.31 | 12.36 ± 0.04 | 11.94 ± 0.25 | 44.68 ± 0.05 | 33.33 ± 0.07 |
NB: 1Each value is the average of three analyses ± standard deviation. a, b and c expressed in terms of GAE, CAE and QUE, respectively (mg of GA, CA and QU/g of dry extract, respectively).
Figure 5Relationship of % lipid peroxidation inhibition with (A) % DPPH free radical scavenging and (B) % hydroxyl radical scavenging activity. Data expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3, p < .001).
Effect of EAF on EAC cell growth inhibition in mice ()
| Control (EAC cell bearing mice) | - | - | (3.83 ± 0.57) ×107 | - |
| Bleomycin | Standard | 0.3 mg/kg | (0.62 ± 0.05) × 107** | 83.81 |
| EAF | Experimental | 25 mg/kg | (1.9 ± 0.21) × 107* | 50.39 |
| 50 mg/kg | (1.25 ± 0.11) × 107** | 67.36 |
Number of mice in each case (n=6); the results were shown as mean ± SEM. Where significant values are *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01