| Literature DB >> 30012946 |
Raja Nur Asila Raja Mazlan1, Yaya Rukayadi2,3, M Maulidiani4, Intan Safinar Ismail5,6.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the effects of different solvents for extraction, liquid⁻liquid partition, and concentrations of extracts and fractions of Piper cubeba L. on anticariogenic; antibacterial and anti-inflammatory activity against oral bacteria. Furthermore, ¹H-Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) coupled with multivariate data analysis (MVDA) was applied to discriminate between the extracts and fractions and examine the metabolites that correlate to the bioactivities. All tested bacteria were susceptible to Piper cubeba L. extracts and fractions. Different solvents extraction, liquid⁻liquid partition and concentrations of extracts and fractions have partially influenced the antibacterial activity. MTT assay showed that P. cubeba L. extracts and fractions were not toxic to RAW 264.7 cells at selected concentrations. Anti-inflammatory activity evaluated by nitric oxide (NO) production in lipopolysaccharide (LPS) stimulated cells showed a reduction in NO production in cells treated with P. cubeba L. extracts and fractions, compared to those without treatment. Twelve putative metabolites have been identified, which are (1) cubebin, (2) yatein, (3) hinokinin, (4) dihydrocubebin, (5) dihydroclusin, (6) cubebinin, (7) magnosalin, (8) p-cymene, (9) piperidine, (10) cubebol, (11) d-germacrene and (12) ledol. Different extraction and liquid⁻liquid partition solvents caused separation in principal component analysis (PCA) models. The partial least squares (PLS) models showed that higher anticariogenic activity was related more to the polar solvents, despite some of the active metabolites also present in the non-polar solvents. Hence, P. cubeba L. extracts and fractions exhibited antibacterial and anti-inflammatory activity and have potential to be developed as the anticariogenic agent.Entities:
Keywords: 1H-Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR); anti-inflammatory; anticariogenic; dental caries; multivariate data analysis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30012946 PMCID: PMC6099612 DOI: 10.3390/molecules23071730
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Yield of P. cubeba L. extracts in different solvents.
| Dried Berries (g) | Solvent | Extraction Step | Yield (g) | Yield (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100 | Methanol | First extraction | 18.84 | 18.84 |
| 750 | Methanol | Second extraction | 164.46 | 21.93 |
| 100 | Ethanol | First extraction | 15.71 | 15.71 |
| 100 | Hexane | First extraction | 9.91 | 9.91 |
Results of disc diffusion assay (DDA) for P. cubeba L. extracts against oral bacteria.
| Inhibition Zone (mm) ± SD | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conc. (mg/mL) | |||||||||
| ME | EE | HE | ME | EE | HE | ME | EE | HE | |
| 6.3 | 9.33 ± 0.58 AB a | 10.00 ± 0.00 AB a | 8.33 ± 0.29 B b | 7.00 ± 0.00 C a | 7.00 ± 0.00 D a | 7.10 ± 0.17 C a | 9.00 ± 0.00 C a | 9.00 ± 0.00 C a | 9.67 ± 0.58 C a |
| 12.5 | 9.67 ± 0.58 AB a | 9.33 ± 0.58 AB a | 10.00 ± 0.00 A a | 9.00 ± 0.00 B a | 7.00 ± 0.00 D c | 8.10 ± 0.10 B b | 10.17 ± 0.29 BC a | 8.83 ± 0.76 C a | 9.67 ± 0.58 C a |
| 25.0 | 9.00 ± 0.00 B b | 9.17 ± 0.29 B b | 10.00 ± 0.00 A a | 9.00 ± 0.00 B a | 8.67 ± 0.58 C a | 8.43 ± 0.40 B a | 10.67 ± 0.58 AB a | 10.00 ± 0.00 BC a | 10.50 ± 0.50 BC a |
| 50.0 | 10.00 ± 0.00 A a | 10.00 ± 0.00 AB a | 10.00 ± 0.00 A a | 11.67 ± 0.58 A a | 10.00 ± 0.00 B b | 12.03 ± 0.06 A a | 11.50 ± 0.50 A a | 11.33 ± 0.58 A a | 11.33 ± 0.58 AB a |
| 100 | 10.00 ± 0.00 A a | 10.33 ± 0.58 A a* | 10.00 ± 0.00 A a | 12.17 ± 0.06 A a | 11.13 ± 0.15 A b | 12.07 ± 0.12 A a | 11.67 ± 0.58 A ab | 11.17 ± 0.29 AB b | 12.67 ± 0.58 A a* |
| CHX (0.05 mg/mL) | 11.00 ± 0.00 * | 11.00 ± 0.00 * | 11.00 ± 0.00 * | 14.00 ± 0.00 * | 14.00 ± 0.00 * | 14.00 ± 0.00 * | 13.33 ± 0.58 * | 13.33 ± 0.58 * | 13.33 ± 0.58 * |
Values are the mean ± SD of replications (n = 3). Values with different superscript capital letters within the same columns are significantly different (p < 0.05). Values with different superscript small letters within the same rows are significantly different (p < 0.05). Means not labelled with asterisk (*) within same column are significantly different from the positive control mean (CHX). ME: methanol extract; EE: ethanol extract; HE: hexane extract.
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) of P. cubeba L. extracts.
| Bacteria | ME | EE | HE | CHX (µg/mL) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIC (mg/mL) | 0.23 ± 0.15 | 0.10 ± 0.00 | 0.10 ± 0.00 | 1.14 ± 0.75 | |
| MIC (mg/mL) | 0.93 ± 0.61 | 0.80 ± 0.69 | 0.87 ± 0.70 | 0.49 ± 0.00 | |
| MIC (mg/mL) | 0.80 ± 0.69 | 0.47 ± 0.31 | 0.87 ± 0.70 | 1.14 ± 0.75 |
Values are the mean ± SD of replications (n = 3). ME: methanol extract; EE: ethanol extract; HE: hexane extract; CHX: chlorhexidine.
Liquid–liquid partition of P. cubeba L. methanol extract.
| Methanol Extract (g) | Solvent | Yield (g) | Yield (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 120 | Hexane | 46.56 | 35.82 |
| Ethyl acetate | 13.96 | 10.74 | |
| Aqueous methanol | 2.33 | 2.59 |
Disc diffusion assay of P. cubeba L. fractions against oral bacteria.
| Inhibition Zone (mm) ± SD | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conc. (mg/mL) | |||||||||
| HF | EAF | AMF | HF | EAF | AMF | HF | EAF | AMF | |
| 6.3 | 7.00 ± 0.00 B a | 7.00 ± 0.00 B a | 7.00 ± 0.00 D a | 7.10 ± 0.17 C a | 7.07 ± 0.06 D a | 7.00 ± 0.00 C a | 7.00 ± 0.00 C a | 7.00 ± 0.00 C a | 7.00 ± 0.00 D a |
| 12.5 | 9.33 ± 0.58 A a | 9.17 ± 0.29 A a | 9.33 ± 0.58 C a | 7.13 ± 0.06 C a | 7.10 ± 0.10 CD a | 7.10 ± 0.10 C a | 7.67 ± 0.58 C b | 9.33 ± 0.58 B a | 9.33 ± 0.58 C a |
| 25.0 | 9.00 ± 0.00 A b | 10.00 ± 0.00 A a | 9.83 ± 0.29 BC a | 7.33 ± 0.58 C b | 7.27 ± 0.06 C b | 8.67 ± 0.58 B a | 9.33 ± 0.58 B b | 10.33 ± 0.58 AB ab | 11.00 ± 0.00 B a |
| 50.0 | 9.00 ± 0.00 A b | 9.83 ± 0.29 A ab | 10.50 ± 0.50 AB a* | 10.00 ± 0.00 B a | 10.00 ± 0.00 B a | 10.67 ± 0.58 A a | 10.00 ± 0.00 B b | 10.33 ± 0.58 AB ab | 11.17 ± 0.29 B a |
| 100 | 9.33 ± 0.58 A b | 9.66 ± 0.58 A b | 11.00 ± 0.00 A a* | 11.13 ± 0.12 A a | 11.07 ± 0.06 A a | 11.20 ± 0.17 A a | 12.00 ± 0.00 A a | 10.83 ± 0.29 A b | 12.33 ± 0.58 A a* |
| CHX (0.05 mg/mL) | 11.00 ± 0.00 * | 11.00 ± 0.00 * | 11.00 ± 0.00 * | 14.00 ± 0.00 * | 14.00 ± 0.00 * | 14.00 ± 0.00 * | 13.33 ± 0.58 * | 13.33 ± 0.58 * | 13.33 ± 0.58 * |
Values are the mean ± SD of replications (n = 3). Values with different superscript capital letters within the same columns are significantly different (p < 0.05). Values with different superscript small letters within the same rows are significantly different (p < 0.05). Means not labelled with asterisk (*) within same column are significantly different from the positive control mean (CHX). HF: hexane fraction; EAF: ethyl acetate fraction; AMF: aqueous methanol fraction.
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) of P. cubeba L. fractions.
| Bacteria | HF | EAF | AMF | CHX (µg/mL) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIC (mg/mL) | 0.10 ± 0.00 | 0.13 ± 0.06 | 0.10 ± 0.00 | 1.14 ± 0.75 | |
| MIC (mg/mL) | 0.67 ± 0.23 | 3.15 ± 2.68 | 1.07 ± 0.46 | 0.49 ± 0.00 | |
| MIC (mg/mL) | 1.58 ± 1.35 | 1.20 ± 0.69 | 1.07 ± 0.46 | 1.14 ± 0.75 |
Values are the mean ± SD of replications (n = 3). HF: hexane fraction; EAF: ethyl acetate fraction; AMF: aqueous methanol fraction.
Figure 1NO production by P. cubeba L. extracts and fractions of in lipopolysaccharide (LPS) stimulated RAW 264.7 cells at 62.5 µg/mL.ME: methanol extract; EE: ethanol extract; HE: hexane extract; HF: hexane fraction; EAF: ethyl acetate fraction; AMF: aqueous methanol fraction.
Figure 2The representative 1H-NMR spectrum of methanol extract of P. cubeba L. The numbers indicate the identified putative metabolites. 1: cubebin; 2: yatein; 3: hinokinin; 4: dihydrocubebin; 5: dihydroclusin; 6: cubebinin; 7: magnosalin; 8: p-cymene; 9: piperidine; 10: cubebol; 11: d-germacrene; 12: ledol.
Figure 3The biplot demonstrates the correlation between extracts and fractions of P. cubeba L. with antibacterial activity of minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) towards S. sobrinus. MeOH: methanol extract; EtOH: ethanol extract; Hex: hexane extract; HF: hexane fraction; EA: ethyl acetate fraction; AqMe: aqueous methanol fraction. The numbers indicate the identified putative metabolites. 1: cubebin; 2: yatein; 3: hinokinin; 4: dihydrocubebin; 5: dihydroclusin; 6: cubebinin; 7: magnosalin; 8: p-cymene; 9: piperidine; 10: cubebol; 11: d-germacrene; 12: ledol. X: metabolites in P. cubeba L., Y: 1/MBC.
Figure 4The biplot demonstrates the correlation between extracts and fractions of P. cubeba L. at concentration 62.5 µg/mL with anti-inflammatory activity on nitrite oxide (NO) production. MeOH: methanol extract; EtOH: ethanol extract; Hex: hexane extract; HF: hexane fraction; EA: ethyl acetate fraction; AqMe: aqueous methanol fraction. The numbers indicate the identified putative metabolites. 1: cubebin; 2: yatein; 3: hinokinin; 4: dihydrocubebin; 5: dihydroclusin; 6: cubebinin; 7: magnosalin; 8: p-cymene; 9: piperidine; 10: cubebol; 11: d-germacrene; 12: ledol. X: metabolites in P. cubeba L., Y: 1/NO.