| Literature DB >> 28725144 |
Perwez Alam1, Mohamed F Alajmi1, Ahmed H Arbab1,2, Mohammad K Parvez1, Nasir A Siddiqui1, Saleh I Alqasoumi1, Adnan J Al-Rehaily1, Mohammed S Al-Dosari1, Omer A Basudan1.
Abstract
The present study assessed the comparative antioxidant potential of the ethanol extract (EE) of leaves of four Acacia species (Acacia salicina, AS; Acacia laeta, AL; Acacia hamulosa AH; and Acacia tortilis, AT) grown in Saudi Arabia, including RP-HPTLC quantification of antioxidant biomarker rutin. In vitro DPPH radical scavenging and β-carotene-linoleic acid bleaching assays showed the promising antioxidant activities of Acacia extracts: ASEE (IC50: 60.39 and 324.65 μg/ml) >ALEE (IC50: 217.06 and 423.36 μg/ml) >ATEE (IC50: 250.13 and 747.50 μg/ml) >AHEE (IC50: 255.83 and 417.28 μg/ml). This was comparable to rutin tested at 500 μg/ml. Further, a RP- HPTLC densitometric method was developed (acetonitrile:water; 6:4; v/v) using glass-backed RP-18 silica gel F254 plate, and scanned at UV max 254 nm. The method was validated as per the ICH guidelines. Analysis of the validated RP-HPTLC displayed an intense peak (Rf = 0.65 ± 0.004) of rutin that was estimated (μg/mg dry weight) to be highest in ASEE (10.42), followed by ALEE (2.67), AHEE (1.36) and ATEE (0.31). Taken together, presence of rutin strongly supported the high antioxidant property of the tested Acacia species, especially Acacia salicina. The developed RP-HPTLC method therefore, affirms its application in the quality control of commercialized herbal drugs or formulation containing rutin.Entities:
Keywords: Acacia species; Antioxidant activity; Fabaceae; RPHPTLC; Rutin
Year: 2016 PMID: 28725144 PMCID: PMC5506739 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsps.2016.10.010
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi Pharm J ISSN: 1319-0164 Impact factor: 4.330
Figure 1Chemical structure of biomarker rutin.
Figure 2DPPH radical scavenging activity of different concentrations (31.25–500 μg/ml) of ASEE, ALEE, AHEE and ATEE. Values are means of three experiments.
Figure 3Antioxidant activity of ASEE, ALEE, AHEE and ATEE in comparison with the standard antioxidant (Rutin) assayed by the β-carotene bleaching method showing percentage of inhibition of lipid peroxidation by different concentrations (31.25–500 μg/ml) of the extracts. Values are means of three experiments.
Figure 4Chromatogram of standard rutin (Rf = 0.65; 800 ng/spot) at 254 nm.
Figure 5Quantification of rutin in ASEE, ALEE, AHEE and ATEE by RP-HPTLC. (A) Pictogram of developed RP-HPTLC plate at short UV length (254 nm) [mobile phase: acetonitrile: water, (4:6, v/v)]; (B) 3-D display of all tracks at 254 nm.
Rf, Linear regression data for the calibration curve of Rutin (n = 6).
| Parameters | Rutin |
|---|---|
| Linearity range (ng/spot) | 100–1800 |
| Regression equation | Y = 6.34x + 787.32 |
| Correlation ( | 0.9985 |
| Slope ± SD | 6.34 ± 0.057 |
| Intercept ± SD | 787.32 ± 13.723 |
| Standard error of slope | 0.023 |
| Standard error of intercept | 5.601 |
| 0.65 | |
| LOD | 29.77 ng/band |
| LOQ | 90.22 ng/band |
Recovery as accuracy studies of the proposed RP-HPTLC Method (n = 6).
| Percent (%) of rutin added to analyte | Theoretical concentration of rutin (ng/ml) | Concentration of rutin found (ng/mL) ± SD | %RSD | SEM | % Recovery |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 200 | 198.93 ± 2.29 | 1.151 | 0.934 | 99.46 |
| 50 | 300 | 295.97 ± 2.91 | 0.983 | 1.187 | 98.65 |
| 100 | 400 | 393.04 ± 3.67 | 0.933 | 1.497 | 98.25 |
| 150 | 500 | 494.64 ± 4.12 | 0.827 | 1.681 | 99.52 |
Precision of the proposed RP-HPTLC Method (n = 6).
| Conc. of Rutin (ng/band) | Intra-day Precision | Inter-day Precision | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average Conc. found ± SD | %RSD | SEM | Average Conc. found ± SD | %RSD | SEM | |
| 400 | 397.26 ± 2.59 | 0.651 | 1.057 | 394.58 ± 2.18 | 0.552 | 0.889 |
| 600 | 595.98 ± 3.65 | 0.612 | 1.489 | 592.03 ± 3.41 | 0.575 | 1.391 |
| 800 | 793.03 ± 4.13 | 0.528 | 1.710 | 790.51 ± 4.03 | 0.509 | 1.644 |
Robustness of the proposed RP-HPTLC Method (n = 6).
| Optimization condition | Rutin (300 ng/band) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| SD | %RSD | SEM | |
| (4:6) | 2.41 | 0.814 | 0.983 |
| (3.9:6.1) | 2.33 | 0.793 | 0.951 |
| (4.2:5.8) | 2.21 | 0.737 | 0.902 |
| 18 ml | 2.41 | 0.814 | 0.983 |
| 20 ml | 2.39 | 0.809 | 0.975 |
| 22 ml | 2.36 | 0.798 | 0.963 |
| 10 min | 2.35 | 0.798 | 0.959 |
| 20 min | 2.29 | 0.783 | 0.934 |
| 30 min | 2.23 | 0.759 | 0.910 |
Figure 6Chromatogram of rutin estimation in the extracts of Acacia species at 254 nm [mobile phase: acetonitrile: water, (4:6, v/v)]. (A) Acacia salicina ethanol extract (ASEE; spot 2, Rf = 0.65); (B) Acacia laeta ethanol extract (ALEE; spot 4, Rf = 0.65); (C) Acacia hamulosa ethanol extract (AHEE; spot 4, Rf = 0.65); (D) Acacia tortilis ethanol extract (ATEE; spot 2, Rf = 0.65).