| Literature DB >> 26035104 |
Therese Ellendorff1, Reto Brun2,3, Marcel Kaiser4,5, Jandirk Sendker6, Thomas J Schmidt7.
Abstract
Naphthoquinones (NQs) occur naturally in a large variety of plants. Several NQs are highly active against protozoans, amongst them the causative pathogens of neglected tropical diseases such as human African trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness), Chagas disease and leishmaniasis. Prominent NQ-producing plants can be found among Juglans spp. (Juglandaceae) with juglone derivatives as known constituents. In this study, 36 highly variable extracts were prepared from different plant parts of J. regia, J. cinerea and J. nigra. For all extracts, antiprotozoal activity was determined against the protozoans Trypanosoma cruzi, T. brucei rhodesiense and Leishmania donovani. In addition, an LC-MS fingerprint was recorded for each extract. With each extract's fingerprint and the data on in vitro growth inhibitory activity against T. brucei rhodesiense a Partial Least Squares (PLS) regression model was calculated in order to obtain an indication of compounds responsible for the differences in bioactivity between the 36 extracts. By means of PLS, hydrojuglone glucoside was predicted as an active compound against T. brucei and consequently isolated and tested in vitro. In fact, the pure compound showed activity against T. brucei at a significantly lower cytotoxicity towards mammalian cells than established antiprotozoal NQs such as lapachol.Entities:
Keywords: Juglandaceae; Juglans; LC-MS; Partial Least Squares; Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense; hydrojuglone glucoside; naphthoquinones
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26035104 PMCID: PMC6272576 DOI: 10.3390/molecules200610082
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Bioactivities of different extracts from Juglans regia (JR), Juglans cinerea (JC1 and JC2) and Juglans nigra (JN) against Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense (TB), Trypanosoma cruzi (TC) and Leishmania donovani (LD). FD = freeze dried, AD = air dried. Refer to Experimental section for extraction procedures A–G.
| No. | Species | Plant Part | State | Drying | Extraction | % Inhibition at 2 μg/mL Against | % Inhibition at 10 μg/mL Against | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TB | TC | LD | TB | TC | LD | ||||||
| 1 | JR | Male flower | Green | FD | D | 83.0 | 6.8 | 21.5 | 100.0 | 0.9 | 29.9 |
| 2 | JR | Pericarp | Green | FD | E | 4.7 | 7.9 | 16.7 | 36.7 | 11.7 | 21.1 |
| 3 | JR | Bark | n.a. | FD | D | 99.5 | 5.9 | 16.6 | 99.1 | 12.5 | 54.4 |
| 4 | JC2 | Leaf | Green | FD | D | 68.9 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 100.0 | 7.7 | 0.0 |
| 5 | JC1 | Pericarp | Green | FD | D | 23.2 | 2.6 | 24.6 | 100.0 | 0.9 | 23.3 |
| 6 | JR | Leaf | Green | FD | F | 15.9 | 0.0 | 24.9 | 78.4 | 0.0 | 23.6 |
| 7 | JN | Leaf | Green | FD | D | 45.2 | 0.4 | 26.4 | 100.0 | 5.7 | 24.2 |
| 8 | JR | Pericarp | Green | FD | G | 20.0 | 5.3 | 25.5 | 100.0 | 9.3 | 27.4 |
| 9 | JN | Leaf | Green | FD | F | 85.6 | 0.0 | 28.3 | 100.0 | 10.3 | 40.8 |
| 10 | JR | Pericarp | Green | FD | D | 24.1 | 0.0 | 24.1 | 100.0 | 0.0 | 28.7 |
| 11 | JR | Male flower | Senescent | FD | D | 9.7 | 11.1 | 23.5 | 18.2 | 5.5 | 20.3 |
| 12 | JN | Pericarp | Senescent | None | A | 5.9 | 0.0 | 19.1 | 43.0 | 23.8 | 18.4 |
| 13 | JC2 | Pericarp | Green | FD | D | 15.5 | 0.0 | 16.3 | 99.8 | 13.3 | 23.2 |
| 14 | JR | Pericarp | Green | FD | D | 26.1 | 4.4 | 16.6 | 100.0 | 23.5 | 24.5 |
| 15 | JC1 | Leaf | Senescent | FD | D | 95.6 | 0.2 | 2.6 | 100.0 | 3.0 | 0.0 |
| 16 | JN | Pericarp | Green | None | A | 15.1 | 0.0 | 23.9 | 76.5 | 15.7 | 14.3 |
| 17 | JN | Pericarp | Senescent | None | B | 12.3 | 5.1 | 22.5 | 39.4 | 10.1 | 19.3 |
| 18 | JR | Leaf | Senescent | FD | C | 9.5 | 11.8 | 25.5 | 22.7 | 10.5 | 27.6 |
| 19 | JR | Leaf | Green | FD | C | 73.4 | 0.0 | 26.9 | 100.0 | 8.3 | 57.9 |
| 20 | JN | Pericarp | Green | None | B | 42.7 | 0.0 | 24.7 | 100.0 | 12.9 | 23.5 |
| 21 | JR | Leaf | Senescent | FD | B | 30.8 | 0.0 | 24.5 | 100.0 | 11.9 | 27.7 |
| 22 | JR | Leaf | Green | FD | D | 51.8 | 3.1 | 21.1 | 100.0 | 1.7 | 27.7 |
| 23 | JR | Leaf | Green | FD | D | 17.2 | 9.1 | 18.0 | 98.7 | 4.0 | 19.8 |
| 24 | JC1 | Leaf | Green | FD | D | 60.7 | 6.8 | 15.6 | 100.0 | 0.0 | 23.9 |
| 25 | JR | Leaf | Senescent | AD | D | 2.5 | 8.5 | 16.4 | 24.6 | 18.7 | 25.2 |
| 26 | JR | Pericarp | Green | FD | B | 43.4 | 5.6 | 12.1 | 100.0 | 4.4 | 50.8 |
| 27 | JR | Leaf | Green | AD | D | 13.9 | 6.9 | 26.5 | 22.8 | 4.7 | 22.1 |
| 28 | JN | Leaf | Senescent | FD | D | 76.3 | 8.1 | 26.2 | 100.0 | 0.0 | 20.1 |
| 29 | JC2 | Leaf | Senescent | FD | D | 15.3 | 13.0 | 25.9 | 80.4 | 15.2 | 18.6 |
| 30 | JR | Leaf | Green | FD | B | 15.2 | 6.7 | 27.6 | 94.3 | 15.4 | 18.2 |
| 31 | JN | Pericarp | Green | FD | D | 54.4 | 9.7 | 22.7 | 100.0 | 0.0 | 29.0 |
| 32 | JN | Leaf | Green | FD | C | 8.7 | 12.1 | 24.3 | 19.9 | 11.7 | 38.7 |
| 33 | JC1 | Leaf | Green | FD | C | 5.7 | 8.4 | 20.8 | 8.8 | 0.0 | 34.9 |
| 34 | JR | Pericarp | Green | FD | C | 69.4 | 8.7 | 29.2 | 100.0 | 18.1 | 100.0 |
| 35 | JN | Pericarp | Green | FD | C | 5.7 | 4.8 | 17.3 | 71.0 | 6.0 | 27.8 |
| 36 | JN | Pericarp | Green | AD | C | 100.0 | 0.0 | 20.7 | 100.0 | 16.1 | 69.3 |
Figure 1PLS model with activity data against Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense. Numbers in scores plot (a) and response plot (d) relate to samples numbers of Table 1. Colour code in (a) indicates the samples’ inhibitory activity from the lowest (8.8%, blue) to the highest value (100%, red). Red colour in (d) indicates cross-validated data. Numbers in regression coefficient plot (b) and loadings plot (c) relate to bucket numbers. Buckets representing (1) are highlighted by circles.
Signals of the mass spectrum of (1) (sample No. 28) and related buckets as identified by PLS. All fragment ions were confirmed by MS/MS of m/z 339 [M + H]+.
| Mass Spectrum of (1) | Bucket Table | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ion | No. | Name | Loading Weight on PC1 | |
| 699.1985 (7) | [2M + Na]+ | 54 | 10.8 min: 699.19 | n.a. |
| 677.2157 (10) | [2M + H]+ | 67 | 10.9 min: 677.21 | n.a. |
| 501.1665 (11) | [2M − C10H8O3 + H]+ | 64 | 10.9 min: 501.18 | 0.218 |
| 377.0669 (2) | [M + K]+ | 62 | 10.9 min: 377.10 | 0.157 |
| 361.0930 (9) | [M + Na]+ | 61 | 10.9 min: 361.10 | n.a. |
| 356.1378 (3) | [M + NH4]+ | 60 | 10.9 min: 356.15 | 0.221 |
| 339.1117 (43) | [M + H]+ | 70 | 11.0 min: 339.12 | 0.202 |
| 321.1000 (4) | fragments of [M + H]+ | 59 | 10.9 min: 321.11 | 0.220 |
| 303.0907 (7) | 58 | 10.9 min: 303.10 | 0.238 | |
| 285.0785 (2) | 57 | 10.9 min: 285.09 | 0.192 | |
| 243.0685 (3) | 56 | 10.9 min: 243.08 | 0.231 | |
| 201.0576 (3) | 55 | 10.9 min: 201.06 | 0.205 | |
| 177.0570 (100) | 68 | 11.0 min: 177.06 | 0.187 | |
n.a.: Not available—buckets were excluded by Martens’ Uncertainty Test.
Figure 2Structure of hydrojuglone glucoside (1).
IC50 values against Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense (TB), T. cruzi (TC), Leishmania donovani (LD) and rat skeletal myoblasts (L6). Selectivity indices (SI) represent the ratio of cytotoxic over antiparasitic IC50 values.
| Compound | IC50 (μM) | SI | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TB | TC | LD | L6 | TB | TC | LD | |
| Hydrojuglone glucoside (1) | 6.12 | 169.40 | 16.65 | 122.48 | 20.0 | 0.7 | 7.4 |
| Juglone | 1.62 | >100 | 2.02 | 21.03 | 13.0 | <0.1 | 10.4 |
| 1,4-Naphthoquinone | 0.58 | 9.24 | 2.38 | 6.39 | 11.1 | 0.7 | 2.7 |
| Lawson | 101.15 | 37.36 | 1.99 | 20.63 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 10.3 |
| 2,2′-bis-(3-Hydroxy-1,4-naphthoquinone) | 68.79 | 236.99 | 7.34 | 61.56 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 8.4 |
| Plumbagin | 0.49 | 3.59 | 0.88 | 2.87 | 5.9 | 0.8 | 3.3 |
| Lapachol | 16.40 | 17.56 | 3.33 | 26.57 | 1.6 | 1.5 | 8.0 |
| Shikonin | 0.03 | 0.27 | 0.12 | 0.06 | 2.1 | 0.2 | 0.5 |
| Arbutin (1,4-benzoquinone glucoside) | 236.40 | 244.10 | >367 | >367 | >1.5 | >1.5 | n.a |
| Positive controls | 0.005 | 2.33 | 0.18 | 0.014 | |||
n.a.: Not accessible (IC50 not reached at highest tested concentration); Positive controls: TB: Melarsoprol; TC: Benznidazole; LD: Miltefosine; L6: Podophyllotoxin.