| Literature DB >> 28911609 |
Sheng-Kuo Hsieh1, Jun-Rui Xu1, Nan-Hei Lin1, Yue-Chiun Li1, Guan-Heng Chen1, Ping-Chung Kuo2, Wen-Ying Chen3, Jason T C Tzen1.
Abstract
Strictinin, the major phenolic compound in Pu'er teas produced from young leaves and buds of wild trees, was isolated to evaluate its antibacterial and laxative activities. The minimum inhibitory concentrations of strictinin against Propionibacterium acnes and Staphylococcus epidermidis were determined as 250 μM and 2000 μM, respectively, apparently higher than those of several antibiotics commonly used for bacterial infections. The additive and synergistic effects on the inhibitory activities of strictinin combined with other commercial antibiotics were observed in two bacteria tested in this study via the analysis of fractional inhibitory concentrations. Laxative activity was observed on defecation of the rats fed with strictinin. Further analysis showed that the laxative effect of strictinin was presumably caused by accelerating small intestinal transit, instead of enhancing gastric emptying, increasing food intake, or inducing diarrhea in the rats. Taken together with the antiviral activities demonstrated previously, it is suggested that strictinin is one of the active ingredients responsible for the antiviral, antibacterial, and laxative effects of wild Pu'er tea, and has the potential to be developed as a mild natural substitute for antibiotics and laxatives.Entities:
Keywords: Pu'er tea; antibacterial activity; laxative effect; strictinin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 28911609 PMCID: PMC9337302 DOI: 10.1016/j.jfda.2016.03.014
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Food Drug Anal Impact factor: 6.157
Figure 1High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) profiles of (A) Pu’er tea infusion and (B) isolated strictinin at 254 nm. Chemical constituents in the infusion of Pu’er tea were separated by HPLC (0–100 minutes). The peaks of caffeine, strictinin, and epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) are indicated.
Inhibitory activities of strictinin and 10 antibiotics against Propionibacterium acnes.
| Inhibition on | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| MIC (μM) | FICindex | Combined activity | |
| Strictinin | 250 | — | — |
| Erythromycin | 0.085 | 0.75 | Additive |
| Gentamicin | 20.938 | 0.375 | Synergistic |
| Neomycin | 16.269 | 0.75 | Additive |
| Flomoxef | 0.065 | 1 | Additive |
| Cefepime | 0.82 | 0.75 | Additive |
| Cefmetazole | 0.162 | 0.5 | Synergistic |
| Ceftazidime | 39.268 | 0.625 | Additive |
| Tetracycline | 0.900 | 0.75 | Additive |
| Piperacillin | 0.123 | 0.75 | Additive |
| Amoxicillin | 0.068 | 0.75 | Additive |
FIC = fractional inhibitory concentration; MIC = minimum inhibitory concentration.
Inhibitory activities of strictinin and 10 antibiotics against Staphylococcus epidermidis.
| Inhibition on | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| MIC (μM) | FIC index | Combined activity | |
| Strictinin | 2000 | — | — |
| Erythromycin | 0.681 | 0.75 | Additive |
| Gentamicin | 2.617 | 0.75 | Additive |
| Neomycin | 4.067 | 0.75 | Additive |
| Flomoxef | 1.289 | 1.25 | Additive |
| Cefepime | 1.664 | 075 | Additive |
| Cefmetazole | 5.5065 | 1.25 | Additive |
| Ceftazidime | ND | — | — |
| Tetracycline | ND | — | — |
| Piperacillin | ND | — | — |
| Amoxicillin | ND | — | — |
FIC = fractional inhibitory concentration; MIC = minimum inhibitory concentration; ND = not detectable.
Figure 2Effects of strictinin on defecation. Rats were orally administrated with vehicle (control) or aqueous solutions containing strictinin (0.25 g/kg or 0.5 g/kg). (A) Feces weight at 6 hours, 12 hours, and 24 hours. (B) Total food intake at 24 hours. (C) Fecal water content at 24 hours after oral administration. Data represent mean ± SEM of six replicates. Significance levels seen by one-way ANOVA were *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01 versus the control. ANOVA =analysis of variance; SEM =standard error of the mean.
Figure 3Effects of strictinin on gastrointestinal motility. Rats were orally administrated with vehicle (control) or aqueous solutions containing strictinin of 0.5 g/kg. (A) Percentage of gastric emptying. (B) Percentage of small intestinal transit. Data represent mean ± SEM of six replicates. A significance level seen by one-way ANOVA was *p < 0.01 versus the control. ANOVA =analysis of variance; SEM =standard error of the mean.