| Literature DB >> 26288555 |
Gansukh Enkhtaivan1, K M Maria John1, Muniappan Ayyanar2, Thangavel Sekar3, Ki-Joun Jin1, Doo Hwan Kim1.
Abstract
Variations in antioxidant and anti-viral activities (against Influenza AP/R/8 (H1N1) virus) between the leaves and stem bark of selected medicinal plants were studied. Malin Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cells were used for the viral infection and the antiviral activity of the extracts was studied using sulphorhodamine B (SRB) assay. The stem bark of the plants including Strychnos minor, Diotacanthus albiflorus, Strychnos nux-vomica and Chloroxylon swietenia showed higher flavonoid contents as well as 2,2'-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulphonic acid) (ABTS) scavenging activity when compared with their leaves. In case of 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) activity, the stem bark of S. nux-vomica and leaf extract of C. swietenia showed the highest activity. Based on the IC50 values, the stem bark extracts of Cayratia pedata (20.5 μg/mL) and S. minor (22.4 μg/mL) showed high antiviral activity. In the mean-time S. nux-vomica, C. swietenia and C. swietenia bark extracts showed cytotoxicity to the MDCK cells. When comparing the stem bark and leaves the content of gallic acid, ferulic acid, o-coumaric acid, total flavonoids (TFC) and total phenols (TPC) was higher in stem bark and hence their anti-viral activity was high. Further study based on the metabolites against H1N1 can reveal the potential of therapeutic compounds against the viral disease.Entities:
Keywords: Cytotoxicity; H1N1; Influenza; MDCK cells; SRB assay; Traditional knowledge
Year: 2015 PMID: 26288555 PMCID: PMC4537874 DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.01.011
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi J Biol Sci ISSN: 1319-562X Impact factor: 4.219
Figure 1Comparative analysis between leaves and stem bark extracts of selected medicinal plants for their total flavonoid (A) and total phenolic (B) content.
Figure 2Comparative analysis between leaves and stem bark extracts of selected medicinal plants for their anti-oxidant activity against DPPH (A) and ABTS (B).
Cytotoxicity of the medicinal plant extracts against H1N1 virus.
| S. No. | Name | Toxicity of the extracts | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IC50 | CC50 | TI | ||
| 1 | MP-L1 | 46.69 | 1026.07 | 21.97 |
| 2 | MP-s1 | 22.43 | 100 | 4.45 |
| 3 | MP-L2 | 60.09 | 100 | 1.66 |
| 4 | MP-s2 | 33.98 | 50 | 1.47 |
| 5 | MP-L3 | 33.36 | 20 | 0.59 |
| 6 | MP-s3 | 23.60 | 40 | 0.59 |
| 7 | MP-L4 | ND | 50 | ND |
| 8 | MP-s4 | ND | 3.95 | ND |
| 9 | MP-L5 | 65.99 | 100 | 0.60 |
| 10 | MP-s5 | 20.50 | 18.30 | 0.89 |
| 11 | Oseltamivir | 6.44 | 100 | 15.51 |
Control drug – Oseltamivir; IC50 – inhibitory concentration of 50%; CC50 – cytotoxicity concentration of 50%; TI – therapeutic index.
Figure 3Comparative analysis between leaves and stem bark extracts of selected medicinal plants for their anti-viral activity against H1N1 by SRB assay. MP – medicinal plants; control drug – Oseltamivir.
Figure 4Metabolic variations of leaves and stem bark of medicinal plants analysed by HPLC. tR – retention time; log10 values of the peak area was plotted in the x-axis; MP – medicinal plants.
Figure 5Correlation study between metabolites and cytotoxicity against H1N1.