| Literature DB >> 29633076 |
Kuniaki Nerome1, Kazufumi Shimizu2, Shiori Zukeran3, Yasuhiro Igarashi4, Kazumichi Kuroda2, Shigeo Sugita5, Toshikatsu Shibata6, Yasuhiko Ito7, Reiko Nerome3.
Abstract
We evaluated the anti-influenza-virus effects of Melia components and discuss the utility of these components. The effects of leaf components of Melia azedarach L. on viruses were examined, and plaque inhibition tests were performed. The in vivo efficacy of M. azedarach L. was tested in a mouse model. Leaf components of Melia azedarach L. markedly inhibited the growth of various influenza viruses. In an initial screening, multiplication and haemagglutination (HA) activities of H1N1, H3N2, H5, and B influenza viruses were inactivated by the liquid extract of leaves of M. azedarach L. (MLE). Furthermore, plaque inhibition titres of H1N1, H3N2, and B influenza viruses treated with MLE ranged from 103.7 to 104.2. MLE possessed high plaque-inhibitory activity against pandemic avian H5N1, H7N9, and H9N2 vaccine candidate strains, with a plaque inhibition titre of more than 104.2. Notably, the buoyant density decreased from 1.175 to 1.137 g/cm3, and spikeless particles appeared. We identified four anti-influenza virus substances: pheophorbide b, pheophorbide a, pyropheophorbide a, and pheophytin a. Photomorphogenesis inside the envelope may lead to removal of HA and neuraminidase spikes from viruses. Thus, MLE could efficiently remove floating influenza virus in the air space without toxicity. Consistent with this finding, intranasal administration of MLE in mice significantly decreased the occurrence of pneumonia. Additionally, leaf powder of Melia (MLP) inactivated influenza viruses and viruses in the intestines of chickens. MLE and MLP may have applications as novel, safe biological disinfectants for use in humans and poultry.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29633076 PMCID: PMC6096724 DOI: 10.1007/s00705-018-3830-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Virol ISSN: 0304-8608 Impact factor: 2.574
Screening of the anti-influenza virus activity of MLE
| Sample treatment | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Test viruses | PBS | MLE | |
| HA subtypes | Strains | HA titre | HA titre |
| 1. Human strains | |||
| H1N1 | A/PR/8/34 | 256 | ‒* |
| H3N2 | A/Moscow/1/00 | 64 | 8 |
| B/Yamagata/16/88 | 128 | 8 | |
| 2. Avian strain | |||
| H5N3 | A/duck/singapore-Q/F119-3/97 (H5N3) | 128 | ‒* |
*: HA titre less than 32
Fig. 1Buoyant density analysis and electron microscopic examination of MLE-treated and untreated influenza viruses. (a) Estimation of the buoyant density of A/PR-8 (H1N1) influenza virus particles treated with or without MLE. Samples were subjected to 10–50% sucrose (w/w) density gradient centrifugation at 142,190 xg for 4 h and separated into 21 fractions. Examination of the linearity of the sucrose concentration and confirmation of virus bands. Fractionation patterns of MLE-treated virus and fractionation patterns of untreated normal virus. (b) Electron microscopic examination of virus particles treated with and without MLE. Untreated viruses were two pictures on the left and MLE-treated viruses were two on the right
Fig. 2Chemical analysis of MLE and antiviral activity of purified components. (a) Identification, purification, and structure of MLE components. (b) Antiviral activity of each purified component, alone or in combination, against PR-8 virus
Fig. 3Spraying and powder treatment efficacy of MLE and MLP against virus inactivation. (a) Plaque titration of the three sprayed samples. Distilled water-sprayed virus (left), 50-fold-diluted MLE-sprayed samples (centre) and 100-fold-diluted MLE-sprayed sample (right). (b) Virus inactivation efficacy in the air space with MLE spray. (c) Virus inactivation efficacy of MLE powder (MLP), Bamboo and Wood powder. Challenge viruses possessing 5 × 106 PFU infectivity were mixed with MLP on the plates and allowed to stand at room temperature. After 30 min their infectivity were measured. (d) Virus infectivity in the chicken intestine, which ate MLP including bait. (e) Safety test MLE toxicity in MDCK cells and mice
Fig. 4Preventive efficacy of MLE against influenza-related pneumonia in mice. (a)–(c) Mean body weights in mice pretreated with PBS (a) or MLE (b) or prior to infection, mice treated with MLE containing PR-8 virus (MLE + virus) (c). (d) Macropathological comparison of pneumonia occurrence in mice treated with or without MLE. Morphological and colour changes in the dorsal and abdominal sides of the lung. (e) Mean pneumonia score in the lungs of three mouse groups treated with MLE, MLE-virus mixture (MLE + V), and PBS. (f) Survival rates in the three mouse groups treated with PBS (control), MLE, and MLE + V samples