| Literature DB >> 28274161 |
Peidong Chen1, Yudan Cao1, Beihua Bao1, Li Zhang1, Anwei Ding1.
Abstract
CONTEXT: The pollen of Typha angustifolia L. (Typhaceae) has been used as a traditional Chinese medicine for improving the microcirculation and promoting wound healing. Flavonoids are the main constituent in the plant, but little is known about the antioxidant activity of the principal constituent of the pollen in detail.Entities:
Keywords: Typha angustifolia; antioxidant; human umbilical vein endothelial cells; lipopolysaccharide
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28274161 PMCID: PMC7011981 DOI: 10.1080/13880209.2017.1300818
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharm Biol ISSN: 1388-0209 Impact factor: 3.503
Figure 1.The chromatograph chart at 354 nm (A) and the (−)-ESI total ion current (B) of Typha angustifolia.
The identification of flavone compounds in Typha angustifolia.
| Peak No. | tR/min | [M-H]− | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.05 | 755,133 | 255,354 Quercetin -3- |
| 2 | 8.25 | 609,483,363,155 | 255,354 Quercetin -3- |
| 3 | 8.92 | 769,269,113 | 254,354 Typhaneoside |
| 4 | 9.16 | 593,329,209,187 | 264,351 Kaempferol -3- |
| 5 | 9.18 | 623,593,463 | 253,354 Isorhamnetin -3- |
| 6 | 12.20 | 301,249,155,113 | 255,366 Quercetin |
| 7 | 12.70 | 271,177,151 | 287 Naringenin |
| 8 | 13.89 | 285,273,175,155 | 255,366 Kaempferol |
| 9 | 4.30 | 315,300 | 254,371 Isorhamnetin |
Figure 2.The DPPH scavenging activity (A) and Fe3+ absorbance (B) of the extract of Typha angustifolia.
Figure 3.Effect of typhaneoside and I3ON on the activities of normal HUVECs (n = 5).
Figure 4.Effect of typhaneoside and I3ON on HUVECs stimulated with LPS. (A) normal control. (B) HUVECs was treated with of LPS (100 μg/mL) stimulation for 24 h. (C) HUVECs induced by LPS was treated with typhaneoside (70 μmol/L). (D) HUVECs induced by LPS was treated with I3ON (70 μmol/L), magnification ×200. Data are expressed as the means ± SD. (standard deviation, n = 5). #p < 0.05, ##p < 0.01 vs. sham control; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 vs. LPS group. Con: sham control group, LPS: LPS group.
Figure 5.NO, SOD and MDA levels in all groups on HUVECs injury induced by LPS. Data are expressed as the means ± SD (n = 5). #p < 0.05, ##p < 0.01 vs. sham control; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 vs. LPS group. Con: sham control group, LPS: LPS group.