| Literature DB >> 25202336 |
Lorena C L R Santana1, Maria R M Brito2, George L S Oliveira2, Antônia M G L Citó3, Clayton Q Alves4, Juceni P David5, Jorge M David6, Rivelilson M de Freitas1.
Abstract
The present study primarily aims to identify the relative density and the fatty acids (methyl esters) content present in the standardized ethanol extract of leaves of M. glomerata (EPMG). Meanwhile, in a second moment, this study evaluated the effects of the EPMG on the levels of amino acids in the hippocampus, and the mechanism of sedative and anxiolytic action. Adult mice were treated with doses of 200, 300, and 400 mg/kg and evaluated in open field, elevated plus-maze, light dark, and rotarod tests. Moreover, in the behavioral tests diazepam (GABAergic anxiolytic, 2 mg/kg) as positive control and flumazenil (GABA antagonist, 2.5 mg/kg) were used to identify mechanism of sedative and anxiolytic action produced by EPMG. The EPMG is constituted by the following compounds: methyl cinnamate, 2H-1-benzopyran-2-one, (2-hydroxyphenyl)methyl propionate, (Z)-methyl-hexadec-7-enoate, methyl hexadecanoate, hexadecanoic acid, (Z)-methyl-octadec-9-enoate, octadecanoic acid, and squalene. This extract demonstrated anxiolytic effects, which may be mediated by GABAergic system, and was able to increase GABA levels and reduce of glutamate and aspartate concentrations in mice hippocampus, which can directly and/or indirectly assist in their anxiolytic effect. Although more studies are needed, the EPMG could represent an interesting therapeutical strategy in the treatment of anxiety.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25202336 PMCID: PMC4151546 DOI: 10.1155/2014/710410
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Fatty acids methyl esters and other constituents identified by GC/MS, after hydrolysis and methylation of the standardized ethanol extract of leaves of M. glomerata Sprengel.
| Compound number | Compound name | R.T. | Area (%) | Main fragments (%) | M+/base peak |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Methyl cinnamate | 8.39 | 2.60 |
| 162/131 |
| 2 | 2H-1-Benzopyran-2-one | 9.49 | 20.47 |
| 146/118 |
| 3 | (2-Hydroxyphenyl)methyl propionate | 10.65 | 2.66 |
| 180/120 |
| 4 | (Z)-Methyl-hexadec-7-enoate | 17.49 | 2.64 |
| 268/43 |
| 5 | Methyl hexadecanoate | 17.77 | 36.00 |
| 270/74 |
| 6 | Hexadecanoic acid | 18.12 | 5.77 |
| 256/73 |
| 7 | (Z)-Methyl-octadec-9-enoate | 19.44 | 15.90 |
| 296/55 |
| 8 | Octadecanoic acid | 19.63 | 7.40 |
| 298/74 |
| 9 | Squalene | 26.96 | 3.89 |
| —/69 |
R.T.: retention time; M+: ion molecule.
Figure 1Chemical structure of fatty acids methyl esters and other constituents identified by GC/MS after hydrolysis and methylation of standardized ethanol extract of leaves of M. glomerata Sprengel.
Figure 2Chromatogram of standardized ethanol extract of leaves from M. glomerata Sprengel for identification of fatty acid methyl esters and other constituents by GC/MS, after hydrolysis and methylation.
Figure 3HPLC profile of the standardized ethanol extract of leaves of M. glomerata Sprengel.
Figure 4Antioxidant capacity of standardized ethanol extract of leaves from M. glomerata by inhibition of DPPH• and ABTS•+ radicals. Values represent the mean ± SEM (n = 3). *P < 0.05 compared with system (ethanolic solution of DPPH• and ABTS•+).
Evaluation of sedative action mechanism of standardized ethanol extract of leaves of M. glomerata in open field test.
| Groups ( | Number of crossings | Number of groomings | Number of rearings |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control (12) | 98.58 ± 1.19 | 4.83 ± 0.30 | 45.33 ± 0.14 |
| DZP 2 (12) | 38.58 ± 0.96a | 2.58 ± 0.15a | 13.33 ± 0.14a |
| EPMG 200 (12) | 94.5 ± 0.15b | 2.42 ± 0.26 | 41.0 ± 0.25b |
| EPMG 300 (12) | 95.5 ± 0.15b | 2.58 ± 0.19 | 46.0 ± 0.25b |
| EPMG 400 (12) | 103.5 ± 0.15b | 2.75 ± 0.18 | 47.0 ± 0.25b |
| FLU 2.5 (12) | 92.5 ± 0.15 | 4.58 ± 0.31 | 44.3 ± 0.14 |
| FLU 2.5 + DZP 2 (12) | 89.5 ± 0.15b | 4.67 ± 0.39b | 45.33 ± 0.14b |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG 200 (12) | 94.5 ± 0.15 | 2.58 ± 0.29 | 45.5 ± 0.55 |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG 300 (12) | 97.5 ± 0.15 | 2.67 ± 0.26 | 46.67 ± 0.67 |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG 400 (12) | 103.5 ± 0.15 | 2.75 ± 0.22 | 47.5 ± 0.78 |
Values represent the mean ± SEM of number of animals used in experiments. n represents the number of animals in each group. a P < 0.05, compared with negative control (vehicle), b P < 0.05, compared with diazepam group (ANOVA and t-Student-Newman-Keuls as post hoc test). EPMG: standardized ethanol extract of leaves of M. glomerata; DZP: diazepam; and FLU: flumazenil.
Evaluation of anxiolytic action mechanism of standardized ethanol extract of leaves from M. glomerata in light dark box test.
| Groups ( | Residence time in the light compartment (seconds) |
|---|---|
| Control (12) | 104.3 ± 0.33 |
| DZP 2 (12) | 158.3 ± 0.48a |
| EPMG 200 (12) | 133.3 ± 0.38a |
| EPMG 300 (12) | 157.3 ± 0.41a |
| EPMG 400 (12) | 169.3 ± 0.38a,b,c,d |
| FLU 2.5 (12) | 107.3 ± 0.38 |
| FLU 2.5 + DZP 2 (12) | 102.7 ± 0.38b |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG 200 (12) | 102.3 ± 0.38 |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG300 (12) | 104.7 ± 0.51 |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG400 (12) | 108.7 ± 0.62e |
Values represent the mean ± SEM of the number of animals used in experiments. n represents the number of animals in each group. a P < 0.05 compared with vehicle (negative control), b P < 0.05, compared with diazepam group, c P < 0.05, compared with group EPMG 200, d P < 0.05 compared with EPMG 300 group, e P < 0.05, compared with group EPMG 400 (ANOVA and t-Student-Newman-Keuls as post hoc test). EPMG: standardized ethanol extract of leaves of M. glomerata; DZP: diazepam; and FLU: flumazenil.
Evaluation of anxiolytic action mechanism of standardized ethanol extract of leaves of M. glomerata on motor coordination in rotarod test.
| Groups ( | Number of falls | Residence time on the rotating bar (seconds) |
|---|---|---|
| Control (12) | 1.67 ± 0.14 | 176.1 ± 1.02 |
| DZP 2 (12) | 2.83 ± 0.17a | 167.4 ± 3.18a |
| EPMG 200 (12) | 1.33 ± 0.31 | 177.3 ± 0.81 |
| EPMG 300 (12) | 1.50 ± 0.19 | 176.3 ± 0.60 |
| EPMG 400 (12) | 2.08 ± 0.47a | 174.1 ± 1.29a |
| FLU 2.5 (12) | 1.58 ± 0.19 | 177.5 ± 0.36b |
| FLU 2.5 + DZP 2 (12) | 1.67 ± 0.31b | 176.5 ± 0.36 |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG 200 (12) | 1.33 ± 0.33 | 177.8 ± 0.27 |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG300 (12) | 1.58 ± 0.23 | 177.4 ± 0.47 |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG400 (12) | 1.58 ± 0.26c | 177.7 ± 0.79c |
Values represent the mean ± SEM of the number of animals used in experiments. n represents the number of animals in each group. a P < 0.05 compared with negative control (vehicle), b P < 0.05, compared with diazepam group, and c P < 0.05, compared with FLU 2.5 + EPMG 400 group (ANOVA and t-Student-Newman-Keuls as post hoc test). EPMG: standardized ethanol extract of leaves of M. glomerata; DZP: diazepam; and FLU: flumazenil.
Evaluation of anxiolytic action mechanism of standardized ethanol extract of leaves from M. glomerata in elevated plus-maze test.
| Groups ( | NEOA | TTOA (seconds) |
|---|---|---|
| Control (12) | 11.67 ± 0.5 | 123.8 ± 0.41 |
| DZP 2 (12) | 15.83 ± 0.24a | 207.3 ± 0.70a |
| EPMG 200 (12) | 11.33 ± 0.38 | 123.6 ± 0.40 |
| EPMG 300 (12) | 11.67 ± 0.75 | 124.6 ± 0.40 |
| EPMG 400 (12) | 17.08 ± 0.78a,b,c,d | 226.3 ± 0.62a,b,c,d |
| FLU 2.5 (12) | 10.92 ± 0.68 | 123.5 ± 0.56 |
| FLU 2.5 + DZP 2 (12) | 10.58 ± 0.48b | 124.6 ± 0.40b |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG 200 (12) | 10.25 ± 0.46 | 122.8 ± 0.28 |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG 300 (12) | 10.58 ± 0.48 | 123.6 ± 0.40 |
| FLU 2.5 + EPMG 400 (12) | 11.5 ± 0.47e | 123.8 ± 0.55e |
Values represent the mean ± SEM of the number of animals used in experiments. n represents the number of animals in each group. a P < 0.05 compared with negative control, b P < 0.05, compared with diazepam group, c P < 0.05, compared with group EPMG 200, d P < 0.05 compared with EPMG 300 group, and e P < 0.05, compared with FLU 2.5 + EPMG 400 group (ANOVA and t-Student-Newman-Keuls as post hoc test). EPMG: standardized ethanol extract of leaves of M. glomerata; DZP: diazepam; and FLU: flumazenil.
Figure 5Effect of standardized ethanol extract of leaves of M. glomerata on amino acids levels (GABA, aspartate, glutamate, and glutamine) in mice hippocampus. Values represent the mean ± SEM of the number of animals used in experiments. a P < 0.05, compared with negative control, b P < 0.05, compared with EPMG 200 group, c P < 0.05, compared with group EPMG 200, and d P < 0.05, compared with EPMG 300 group (ANOVA and t-Student-Newman-Keuls as post hoc test).