| Literature DB >> 24250446 |
Ihsan Ul-Haq1, Nazif Ullah, Gulnaz Bibi, Simab Kanwal, Muhammad Sheeraz Ahmad, Bushra Mirza.
Abstract
Euphorbia wallichii a perennial herb growing mainly in Himalayas has been widely used in folk medicines for its medicinal properties. In the present study, the crude methanolic root extract (CME) and its fractions; n-Hexane Fraction (NHF), n-Butanol Fraction (NBF), Chloroform Fraction (CHF), Ethyl acetate Fraction (EAF) and Aqueous Fraction (AQF) of this plant specie were investigated for antioxidant and cytotoxic activities and phytochemical analysis. Antioxidant activity was determined by using 2,2-diphenyl-1-picryl-hydrazyl free radical (DPPH) and DNA protection assay performed on pBR322 plasmid DNA. In both these assays, promising results were obtained for CME as well as other fractions. The IC50 values for DPPH assay were in a range of 7.89 to 63.35 μg/ml in which EAF showed the best anti-oxidant potential and almost all the tested samples showed certain level of DNA protection. The cytotoxic activity was assessed by using Sulforhodamine B (SRB) assay on human cell lines; H157 (Lung Carcinoma) and HT144 (Malignant Melanoma). The IC50 values of the tested samples ranged from 0.18 to 1.4 mg/mL against H157 cell line whereas against HT144 cell line the IC50 values ranged from 0.46 to 17.88 mg/mL with NBF fraction showing maximum potential for both. Furthermore, the phytochemical analysis of CME and its fractions showed the presences of flavonoids, saponins, tannins, terpenoides and cardiac glycosides with varying concentrations.Entities:
Keywords: Antioxidant; Cytotoxicity; DNA protection; E. wallichii; Phytochemical analysis
Year: 2012 PMID: 24250446 PMCID: PMC3813110
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran J Pharm Res ISSN: 1726-6882 Impact factor: 1.696
Figure 4Schematic diagram for fractionation of crude methanolic root extract (CME).
Percentage scavenging and IC50 of antioxidant assay for CME and Fractions of E. wallichii root
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
| 92.6 ± 0.23 | 93.0 ± 0.23 | 93.0 ± 0.32 | 53.0 ± 0.21 | 44.0 ± 0.00 | 18.0 ± 0.32 | 6.0 ± 0.56 | 8.410 |
|
|
| 12.2 ± 0.13 | - | - | - | - | - | - | >100 |
|
|
| 93.1 ± 0.60 | 93.2 ± 0.72 | 93.0 ± 0.52 | 37.0 ± 0.23 | 34.2 ± 0.34 | 3.1 ± 0.02 | - | 13.55 |
|
|
| 90.2 ± 0.72 | 31.1 ± 0.42 | 9.1 ± 0.35 | - | - | - | - | 63.35 |
|
|
| 92.7 ± 0.56 | 93.7 ± 0.45 | 91.3 ± 0.35 | 54.1 ± 0.34 | 48.0 ± 0.25 | 29.1 ± 0.21 | 5.0 ± 0.13 | 7.89 |
|
|
| 91.0 ± 0.32 | 90.2 ± 0.26 | 90.1 ± 0.76 | 29.0 ± 0.59 | 5.8 ± 0.32 | - | - | 15.23 |
|
|
| 95.0 ± 0.53 | 94.8 ± 0.61 | 90.0 ± 0.48 | 66.4 ± 1.2 | 44.7 ± 0.23 | 30.0 ± 0.41 | 11.7 ± 0.71 | 5.63 |
*Data represents mean values of three replicates, A.A.: Ascorbic acid, - : shows no activity
Phytochemical analysis of CME and Fractions of E. wallichii
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 1 | Alkaloids | ||||||
| Dragendoff's | + | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Mayer's | + | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Wagners | + | - | - | - | - | - | |
| 2 | Flavonoids | ||||||
| Harborne | ++ | + | ++ | + | ++ | + | |
| 3 | Steriods | ||||||
| Liebermann-Burchard reaction | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| 4 | Saponins | ||||||
| Frothing Test | + | - | ++ | + | ++ | +++ | |
| 5 | Tannins | ||||||
| FeCl3 Test | +++ | - | +++ | - | +++ | +++ | |
| 6 | Phlobatannins | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 7 | Terpenoids | +++ | +++ | - | ++ | - | - |
| 8 | Cardiac Glycosides | ||||||
| Keller-Kiliani Test | +++ | +++ | - | ++ | - | - | |
+ : weekly present, ++: moderately present, +++: highly present , - : not present
Figure 1DNA protection affect of crude extract and different fractions of E. wallichii roots.1 = 1Kb DNA Ladder, 2 = Plasmid DNA (pBR 322), 3 = Plasmid DNA treated with FeSO4, 4 = Plasmid DNA treated with H2O2, 5 = Plasmid DNA treated with FeSO4 and H2O2, a= 1000 μg/mL, b = 100 μg/mL, c = 10 μg/mL, 6 = CME, 7 = NHF, 8 = NBF, 9 = CHF, 10 = EAF, 11 = AQF in which a,b,c shows three replicates for each test sample
Cytotoxic activity of CME and Fractions of E. wallichii root *.
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| CME | 38 ± 0.9 | 56 ± 1.0 | 64 ± 0.6 | 73 ± 0.7 | 75 ± 0.8 | 0.29 | 20 ± 0.8 | 45 ± 1.1 | 58 ± 1.1 | 63 ± 1.2 | 67 ± 1.1 | 0.87 |
| NHF | 38 ± 0.7 | 51 ± 1.0 | 54 ± 1.1 | 54 ± 0.6 | 58 ± 0.9 | 0.74 | 11 ± 0.9 | 15 ± 0.8 | 30 ± 0.9 | 38 ± 0.9 | 38 ± 0.9 | 17.88 |
| NBF | 41 ± 0.9 | 61 ± 2.0 | 73 ± 0.7 | 75 ± 0.9 | 76 ± 0.9 | 0.18 | 28 ± 1.0 | 54 ± 0.9 | 66 ± 1.1 | 68 ± 1.3 | 74 ± 0.8 | 0.46 |
| CHF | 29 ± 0.7 | 33 ± 2.1 | 49 ± 1.1 | 55 ± 1.1 | 65 ± 1.1 | 1.36 | 7 ± 1.1 | 28 ± 1.1 | 48 ± 1.3 | 60 ± 1.1 | 61 ± 1.1 | 1.69 |
| EAF | 42 ± 1.1 | 57 ± 1.0 | 67 ± 1.2 | 76 ± 1.1 | 78 ± 1.1 | 0.22 | 37 ± 1.1 | 43 ± 1.1 | 57 ± 1.2 | 64 ± 1.1 | 75 ± 1.1 | 0.54 |
| AQF | 22 ± 0.7 | 34 ± 0.8 | 44 ± 1.1 | 57 ± 0.7 | 66 ± 0.9 | 1.4 | 7 ± 0.9 | 17 ± 0.9 | 27 ± 0.9 | 33 ± 0.9 | 45 ± 0.9 | 11.7 |
| Methotrexate | 81 ± 0.9 | 92 ± 1.1 | 97 ± 1.1 | 98 ± 0.3 | 98 ± 0.7 | 5.9E-5 | 61 ± 0.9 | 67 ± 1.1 | 69 ± 0.9 | 74 ± 1.3 | 85 ± 1.2 | 0.02 |
*a) Activity given as % inhibition of cancer cells. b) H157 (lung carcinoma cells) and HT144 (malignant melanoma cells). c) IC50 was calculated by graphical method using MS-Excel 2007.
Figure 2Flavonoid contents (% w/w dry extract/fraction) of E. wallichii CME and its fractions with standard deviations
Figure 3Total phenolic contents (% w/w of dry extract/fraction) of E. wallichii CME and its fractions with standard deviations