| Literature DB >> 26457224 |
Tekeshwar Kumar1, Vishal Jain1.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the impending antioxidant properties of different extracts of crude methanolic extract (CME) of leaves of Lannea coromandelica (L. coromandelica) and its two ethyl acetate (EAF) and aqueous (AqF) subfractions by employing various established in vitro systems and estimation of total phenolic and flavonoid content. The results showed that extract and fractions possessed strong antioxidant activity in vitro and among them, EAF had the strongest antioxidant activity. EAF was confirmed for its highest phenolic content, total flavonoid contents, and total antioxidant capacity. The EAF was found to show remarkable scavenging activity on 2,2-diphenylpicrylhydrazyl (DPPH) (EC50 63.9 ± 0.64 µg/mL), superoxide radical (EC50 8.2 ± 0.12 mg/mL), and Fe(2+) chelating activity (EC50 6.2 ± 0.09 mg/mL). Based on our in vitro results, EAF was investigated for in vivo antioxidant assay. Intragastric administration of the EAF can significantly increase levels of superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), glutathione (GSH), and glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px) levels, and decrease malondialdehyde (MDA) content in the liver and kidney of CCl4-intoxicated rats. These new evidences show that L. coromandelica bared antioxidant activity.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26457224 PMCID: PMC4589636 DOI: 10.1155/2015/203679
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Scientifica (Cairo) ISSN: 2090-908X
Phytoconstituents present in L. coromandelica.
| Extract/fractions | Phytoconstituents | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alkaloid | Steroid | Triterpenes | Glycoside | Phenolic | Flavonoid | Tannin | Sugar | Saponins | |
| Methanol |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Ethyl acetate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Aqueous |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+: present; −: absent.
Total extractable compounds (TEC), total phenolics contents (TPC), total flavonoid contents, and total antioxidant capacity (TOAC) of methanolic extract/fractions of L. coromandelica.
| Crude methanolic extract | Ethyl acetate fraction | Aqueous fraction | |
|---|---|---|---|
| (CME) | (EAF) | (AqF) | |
| Total extractable compounds (TEC) (mg/g) | 342.21 ± 0.02 | 256.7 ± 0.27 | 798.5 ± 0.19 |
| Total phenolics contents (TPC) (mg GAE/g) | 32.15 ± 0.18 | 48.18 ± 0.09 | 15.71 ± 0.17 |
| TPC/TEC (%) | 9.39 | 18.76 | 1.96 |
| Total flavonoid contents (TFC) (mg QE/g) | 29.1 ± 0.08 | 41.4 ± 0.12 | 13.8 ± 0.24 |
| Total antioxidant capacity (TOAC) (mg AAE/g) | 61.6 ± 0.06 | 88.6 ± 0.04 | 30.4 ± 0.09 |
All values were expressed as the mean of triplicates ± standard deviation (SD).
Figure 1HPLC chromatogram of L. coromandelica.
EC50 values in different in vitro antioxidant assay methods.
| Antioxidant assay methods | Standard | Crude methanolic extract | Ethyl acetate fraction | Aqueous fraction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (CME) | (EAF) | (AqF) | ||
| DPPH ( | 46.4 ± 0.23 | 86.5 ± 0.78 | 63.9 ± 0.64 | ND |
| Reducing power assay (mg/mL) | 1.3 ± 0.04 | 17.1 ± 0.24 | 8.2 ± 0.12 | 23.6 ± 1.2 |
| Superoxide anion radical scavenging assay (mg/mL) | 4.12 ± 0.18 | 18.72 ± 0.67 | 11.9 ± 0.23 | 23.89 ± 0.92 |
| Ferrous ion-chelating activity (mg/mL) | 0.23 ± 0.05 | 16.2 ± 0.25 | 6.2 ± 0.09 | 35.8 ± 0.57 |
Results were expressed as the averages of triplicates ± standard deviation (SD).
Figure 2ABTS•+ radical-scavenging assay of the extracts and fractions. EDTA was used as the positive control. Each value is expressed as a mean ± SD (n = 3). P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, compared to the standard with extract and fractions (one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett's test).
In vivo effects of ethyl acetate extract of L. coromandelica on liver and kidney SOD, CAT, MAD, GSH, and GSH-px in CCl4 treated rats.
| Group | Liver | Kidney | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOD | CAT | MAD | GSH | GSH-px | SOD | CAT | MAD | GSH | GSH-px | |
| (U/mg protein) | (U/mg protein) | (nmol/mg protein) | (U/mg protein) | (U/mg protein) | (U/mg protein) | (U/mg protein) | (nmol/mg protein) | (U/mg protein) | (U/mg protein) | |
| I | 307.34 ± 36.4 | 56.51 ± 8.26 | 6.44 ± 0.79 | 4.68 ± 0.74 | 783.45 ± 48.24 | 283.21 ± 35.23 | 38.67 ± 6.56 | 5.21 ± 1.32 | 4.24 ± 1.08 | 678.46 ± 56.72 |
| II | 198.54 ± 28.51 | 29.76 ± 5.34 | 11.87 ± 1.47 | 2.73 ± 0.36 | 319.78 ± 36.82 | 162.51 ± 28.12 | 21.36 ± 4.89 | 8.86 ± 1.08 | 2.18 ± 0.57 | 243.76 ± 45.29 |
| III | 287.54 ± 28.65 | 48.34 ± 3.76 | 7.32 ± 0.94 | 3.84 ± 0.24 | 674.25 ± 39.64 | 236.62 ± 18.53 | 33.82 ± 6.61 | 6.08 ± 0.87 | 3.69 ± 0.87 | 576.82 ± 29.76 |
| IV | 219.21 ± 31.17 | 34.22 ± 7.93 | 10.24 ± 1.32 | 3.16 ± 0.43 | 423.38 ± 42.81 | 178.64 ± 32.18 | 25.92 ± 3.78 | 7.35 ± 0.93 | 2.67 ± 0.24 | 352.34 ± 38.62 |
| V | 253.42 ± 23.67 | 39.56 ± 3.86 | 9.34 ± 0.84 | 3.45 ± 0.36 | 512.39 ± 42.54 | 202.53 ± 42.13 | 28.73 ± 5.48 | 7.06 ± 0.89 | 2.96 ± 0.38 | 408.13 ± 24.62 |
| VI | 279.31 ± 19.2 | 43.65 ± 9.65 | 8.67 ± 0.47 | 3.73 ± 0.21 | 612.75 ± 56.34 | 223.86 ± 29.64 | 31.28 ± 4.94 | 6.84 ± 0.76 | 3.29 ± 0.29 |
459.31 ± 21.8 |
Values are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 6) and evaluated by one-way ANOVA. Statistical significance is indicated by asterisks.
P < 0.05, P < 0.01, and P < 0.001, compared to CCl4 intoxicated group.