| Literature DB >> 28298934 |
Haddad A El Rabey1, Madeha N Al-Seeni2, Amal S Bakhashwain2.
Abstract
This study was conducted to compare the ameliorative effect of Nigella sativa and propolis methanol extract on streptozotocin-induced diabetic male rats and treating diabetic nephropathy. Forty male Albino rats were divided into four groups; the first group was the negative control fed standard diet. The other 30 rats were injected with streptozotocin to induce diabetes by a single intravenous injection and then divided equally into three groups; the second group was the positive diabetic control; the third and the fourth groups were treated orally with 20% w/w Nigella sativa seeds methanol extract and propolis methanol extract (20% w/w), respectively. The rats of the second group showed increased glucose levels and lipid peroxide accompanied with reduction in superoxide dismutase, catalase, and glutathione-S-transferase enzyme activities compared with the negative control. Carboxymethyl lysine, interleukin-6, and immunoglobulins were also increased as a result of diabetes. Kidney function parameters were also elevated, while potassium and sodium levels were decreased. Moreover, tissues of kidney and pancreas showed severe histopathological changes. Treating the diabetic rats with Nigella sativa and propolis methanol extract in the third and fourth groups, respectively, ameliorated all altered biochemical and pathological examinations approaching the negative control. Propolis was more effective than Nigella sativa.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28298934 PMCID: PMC5337387 DOI: 10.1155/2017/5439645
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Effect of treating diabetic rats with methanolic extracts of N. sativa and propolis for 4 weeks on fasting blood sugar, lipid peroxide, and antioxidants enzymes.
| Parameters | Statistics | G1 | G2 | G3 | G4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serum FBS (mL/dL) | Mean ± SE | 92.66 ± 1.14d | 283.33 ± 2.47a | 203.16 ± 3.71b | 139.00 ± 1.18c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 7.230 | |||||
|
| — | −63.63 | 15.32 | 59.03 | |
|
| |||||
| Serum MDA (nmol/mL) | Mean ± SE | 0.93 ± 0.03d | 4.50 ± 0.05a | 2.82 ± 0.03b | 1.94 ± 0.03c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 0.149 | |||||
|
| — | −52.66 | 20.35 | 27.91 | |
|
| |||||
| MDA (nmol/g) | Mean ± SE | 2.58 ± 0.06d | 16.08 ± 0.18a | 4.76 ± 0.05b | 3.54 ± 0.11c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 0.306 | |||||
|
| — | −70.12 | 67.64 | 62.91 | |
|
| |||||
| Serum CAT (U/mL) | Mean ± SE | 2.40 ± 0.19a | 0.15 ± 0.01d | 1.20 ± 0.01c | 1.89 ± 0.02b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 0.301 | |||||
|
| — | 11.49 | −71.53 | −58.72 | |
|
| |||||
| Serum SOD (U/mL) | Mean ± SE | 638.68 ± 1.56a | 120.83 ± 2.41d | 276.45 ± 2.37c | 520.18 ± 1.85b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 25.419 | |||||
|
| — | 178.65 | −48.94 | −116.79 | |
|
| |||||
| Serum GST (U/mL) | Mean ± SE | 813.20 ± 2.32a | 120.93 ± 2.38d | 421.56 ± 3.20c | 762.65 ± 1.74b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 6.450 | |||||
|
| — | 228.70 | −136.08 | −275.19 | |
|
| |||||
| CAT (U/g) | Mean ± SE | 5.02 ± 0.08a | 0.385 ± 0.02c | 2.86 ± 0.03d | 3.97 ± 0.06b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 0.144 | |||||
|
| — | 51.41 | −74.97 | −56.95 | |
|
| |||||
| SOD (U/g) | Mean ± SE | 917.18 ± 2.59a | 175.58 ± 4.53d | 675.98 ± 3.94c | 818.73 ± 4.78b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 12.818 | |||||
|
| — | 117.11 | −134.00 | −88.10 | |
|
| |||||
| GST (U/g) | Mean ± SE | 826.20 ± 2.75a | 315.68 ± 3.56c | 684.33 ± 1.99b | 771.88 ± 2.69ab |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 181.965 | |||||
|
| — | 109.14 | −71.07 | −103.53 | |
Data are represented as mean ± SE. t-test values: ∗∗∗: significant at P < 0.001. ANOVA analysis: within each row, means with different superscript (a, b, c, or d) are significantly different at P < 0.05, whereas means with the same superscript letters mean that there is no significant difference at P < 0.05. LSD: least significant difference; NS: nonsignificant.
Effect of treating diabetic rats with methanolic extracts of N. sativa and propolis for 4 weeks on immunoglobulins and IL-6.
| Parameters | Statistics | G1 | G2 | G3 | G4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serum IgG (mg/dL) | Mean ± SE | 530.66 ± 1.05b | 754.33 ± 3.46a | 595.00 ± 100.64b | 572.33 ± 2.40b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 152.870 | |||||
|
| — | −63.91 | 1.55NS | 45.12 | |
|
| |||||
| Serum IgA (mg/dL) | Mean ± SE | 99.16 ± 1.88d | 359.83 ± 1.74a | 257.00 ± 1.73b | 126.00 ± 1.31c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 5.492 | |||||
|
| — | −85.42 | 52.10 | 92.71 | |
|
| |||||
| Serum IgM (mg/dL) | Mean ± SE | 129.83 ± 1.07d | 357.16 ± 2.24a | 220.00 ± 2.22b | 141.50 ± 1.78c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 5.614 | |||||
|
| — | −138.06 | 45.31 | 65.29 | |
|
| |||||
| Serum IL-6 (pg/mL) | Mean ± SE | 5.60 ± 0.26d | 24.48 ± 0.89a | 11.90 ± 0.34b | 8.78 ± 0.19c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 1.630 | |||||
|
| — | −17.24 | 11.26 | 20.71 | |
|
| |||||
| IL6 (pg/g) | Mean ± SE | 48.80 ± 2.01d | 90.43 ± 1.55a | 67.01 ± 0.69b | 55.43 ± 0.89c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 4.285 | |||||
|
| — | −14.14 | 16.67 | 19.38 | |
|
| |||||
| Carboxymethyl lysine (CML) (nmol/mL) | Mean ± SE | 188.16 ± 2.38d | 276.00 ± 2.58a | 234.33 ± 1.85b | 212.16 ± 2.35c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 6.574 | |||||
|
| — | −24.84 | 10.93 | 23.52 | |
Data are represented as mean ± SE. t-test values superscripts (a, b, c, or d) are significantly different at P < 0.05, whereas means with the same superscript letters mean that there is no significant difference at P < 0.05. LSD: least significant difference; NS: nonsignificant.
Effect of treating diabetic rats with methanolic extracts of N. sativa and propolis for 4 weeks on kidney functions and electrolytes.
| Parameters | Statistics | G1 | G2 | G3 | G4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serum urea (mg/dL) | Mean ± SE | 24.50 ± 1.11d | 74.83 ± 0.87a | 47.33 ± 0.88b | 33.33 ± 0.98c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 2.705 | |||||
|
| — | −29.16 | 25.28 | 27.26 | |
|
| |||||
| Serum creatinine (mg/dL) | Mean ± SE | 0.68 ± 0.03d | 3.63 ± 0.18a | 2.60 ± 0.09b | 1.21 ± 0.04c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 0.318 | |||||
|
| — | −14.90 | 6.70 | 11.66 | |
|
| |||||
| Serum uric acid (mg/dL) | Mean ± SE | 3.33 ± 0.08d | 6.68 ± 0.04a | 5.15 ± 0.07b | 4.20 ± 0.05c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 0.179 | |||||
|
| — | −59.53 | 31.01 | 28.46 | |
|
| |||||
| Urinary albumin (mg/dL) | Mean ± SE | 22.16 ± 1.70d | 411.50 ± 7.74a | 216.66 ± 3.71d | 122.66 ± 3.27b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 14.333 | |||||
|
| — | −47.24 | 20.85 | 29.03 | |
|
| |||||
| Urinary creatinine (mg/dL) | Mean ± SE | 85.00 ± 0.85a | 27.00 ± 0.36c | 35.16 ± 1.16b | 73.16 ± 0.60c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 2.405 | |||||
|
| — | 84.90 | −7.57 | −70.58 | |
|
| |||||
| Serum Na+ (mmol/L) | Mean ± SE | 143.83 ± 0.94a | 118.33 ± 0.88d | 127.83 ± 0.60c | 138.66 ± 0.42b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 1.996 | |||||
|
| — | 19.85 | −8.99 | −24.11 | |
|
| |||||
| Serum K+ (mmol/L) | Mean ± SE | 4.86 ± 0.03a | 3.03 ± 0.08d | 3.76 ± 0.04c | 4.25 ± 0.04b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 0.169 | |||||
|
| — | 17.39 | −10.25 | −13.37 | |
Data are represented as mean ± SE. t-test values: ∗∗∗: significant at P < 0.001. ANOVA analysis: within each row, means with different superscript (a, b, c, or d) are significantly different at P < 0.05, whereas means with the same superscript letters mean that there is no significant difference at P < 0.05. LSD: least significant difference; NS: nonsignificant.
Effect of treating diabetic rats with methanolic extracts of N. sativa and propolis for 4 weeks on food intake.
| Food intake (g/day) | Statistics | G1 | G2 | G3 | G4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st week | Mean ± SE | 15.50 ± 0.22a | 15.50 ± 0.22a | 15.50 ± 0.22a | 15.50 ± 0.22a |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 0.674 | |||||
|
| — | 0.00NS | 0.00NS | 0.00NS | |
|
| |||||
| 2nd week | Mean ± SE | 16.50 ± 0.22a | 16.33 ± 0.21a | 16.66 ± 0.21a | 16.50 ± 0.22a |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 0.648 | |||||
|
| — | 0.54NS | −1.58NS | −0.54NS | |
|
| |||||
| 3rd week | Mean ± SE | 19.16 ± 0.54a | 18.16 ± 0.40b | 17.00 ± 0.44c | 15.50 ± 0.22c |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 0.933 | |||||
|
| — | 3.87 | 2.90 | 6.32 | |
|
| |||||
| 4th week | Mean ± SE | 16.41 ± 0.39a | 16.12 ± 0.30ab | 15.95 ± 0.23b | 15.91 ± 0.24b |
| LSD | — | 1.77 | 0.81NS | 1.15NS | |
| 0.05 = 0.426 | |||||
|
| |||||
Data are represented as mean ± SE. t-test values: ∗: significant at P < 0.05, ∗∗: significant at P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗: significant at P < 0.001. ANOVA analysis: within each row, means with different superscript (a, b, c, or d) are significantly different at P < 0.05, whereas means with the same superscript letters mean that there is no significant difference at P < 0.05. LSD: least significant difference; NS: nonsignificant.
Effect of treating diabetic rats with methanolic extracts of N. sativa and propolis for 4 weeks on water consumption.
| Water consumed (mL/day) | Statistics | G1 | G2 | G3 | G4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st week | Mean ± SE | 33.33 ± 1.05b | 42.50 ± 1.11a | 36.33 ± 0.88b | 36.33 ± 0.88b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 3.257 | |||||
|
| — | −4.56 | 7.40 | 4.01 | |
|
| |||||
| 2nd week | Mean ± SE | 35.33 ± 1.17b | 42.50 ± 1.11a | 34.83 ± 0.90b | 37.16 ± 0.79b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 2.943 | |||||
|
| — | −4.73 | 5.54 | 4.54 | |
|
| |||||
| 3rd week | Mean ± SE | 29.16 ± 1.53b | 42.50 ± 1.11a | 26.66 ± 1.66b | 26.66 ± 1.05b |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 3.725 | |||||
|
| — | −8.00 | 7.88 | 19.00 | |
|
| |||||
| 4th week | Mean ± SE | 27.50 ± 1.11a | 29.16 ± 1.53a | 28.00 ± 1.00a | 27.50 ± 1.11a |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 4.453 | |||||
|
| — | −1.58NS | 0.63NS | 1.00NS | |
Data are represented as mean ± SE. t-test values: ∗∗: significant at P < 0.01 and ∗∗∗: significant at P < 0.001. ANOVA analysis: within each row, means with different superscript (a, b, c, or d) are significantly different at P < 0.05, whereas means with the same superscript letters mean that there is no significant difference at P < 0.05. LSD: least significant difference; NS: nonsignificant.
Effect of treating diabetic rats with methanolic extracts of N. sativa and propolis for 4 weeks on body weight gain (BWG) and food efficiency ratio (FER).
| Biological evaluation | Statistics | G1 | G2 | G3 | G4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BWG (g/day) | Mean ± SE | 0.494 ± 0.040a | 0.466 ± 0.024a | 0.316 ± 0.044a | 0.444 ± 0.126a |
| LSD | — | 0.57NS | 3.08 | 0.17NS | |
| 0.05 = 0.191 | |||||
|
| |||||
|
| |||||
| BWG (g/4 week) | Mean ± SE | 14.833 ± 1.222a | 14.000 ± 0.730a | 9.500 ± 1.335a | 13.333 ± 3.783a |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 5.735 | |||||
|
| — | 0.57NS | 3.09 | 0.17NS | |
|
| |||||
| BWG% | Mean ± SE | 8.305 ± 0.685a | 7.059 ± 0.436ab | 5.012 ± 0.889b | 6.818 ± 1.988a |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 2.178 | |||||
|
| — | 1.52NS | 2.15 | 0.12NS | |
|
| |||||
| FER (g/day) | Mean ± SE | 0.030 ± 0.002a | 0.029 ± 0.001a | 0.020 ± 0.002a | 0.028 ± 0.007a |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 0.011 | |||||
|
| — | 0.32NS | 3.09 | 0.12NS | |
|
| |||||
| FER% | Mean ± SE | 3.013 ± 0.248a | 2.894 ± 0.151a | 1.985 ± 0.279a | 2.793 ± 0.792a |
| LSD | |||||
| 0.05 = 1.199 | |||||
|
| — | 0.40NS | 2.99 | 0.12NS | |
Data are represented as mean ± SE. t-test values: ∗∗: significant at P < 0.01. ANOVA analysis: within each row, means with different superscript (a, b, c, or d) are significantly different at P < 0.05, whereas means with the same superscript letters mean that there is no significant difference at P < 0.05. LSD: least significant difference; NS: nonsignificant.
Figure 1(a) Kidney of rats of the negative control group reveals the normal histological structure of renal tissue with normal parenchyma, normal blood vessels, and being interstitial with no histopathological changes, (b) kidney of rat from the positive control group showing collapsed glomerular tuft with marked tubular atrophy, interstitial inflammation, and interstitial hemorrhage, (c) kidney of diabetic rat treated with N. sativa methanol extract showing normal glomeruli and regenerated tubules with interstitial hemorrhage, and (d) kidney of diabetic rat treated with propolis methanol extract (G4) showing near normal renal cortical tissue. G: glomerulus (H&E stain ×200).
Figure 2(a) Pancreas of control negative group showing normal pancreatic acini, Langerhans cells, and interductal glands. (b) Pancreas of control positive group showing mild degeneration of pancreatic acini cells with periductal inflammation, edema, and congestion. (c) Pancreas of Nigella sativa treated group showing improvement and degeneration of pancreatic tissues with nearly normal tissues. (d) Pancreas of propolis treated group showing restored pancreatic tissues to the normal with no evidence of inflammation in islets or around the large ducts. (H&E, ×200).