| Literature DB >> 30174510 |
Vadivelu Bharathi1, R L Rengarajan2, Ramalingam Radhakrishnan3, Abeer Hashem4, Elsayed Fathi Abd Allah5, Abdulaziz A Alqarawi5, Arumugam Vijaya Anand2.
Abstract
Obesity is a global health burden due to lifestyle modifications that have a strong association with a high incidence of diseases, such as dyslipidemia, glucose intolerance, nonalcoholic fatty liver diseases, diabetes, hypertension, coronary heart disease and cancer. The aim of the present study is to investigate the protective effects of a Macrotyloma uniflurom formulation (MUF) against high-fat diet (HFD)-induced oxidative stress and inflammation in obese rats. Male albino Wistar rats were fed a high-fat diet for 6 weeks to facilitate fat-induced oxidative stress and were simultaneously treated with MUF (400 mg/kg b.w.) through oral gavage from the third week onwards during the treatment phase. At the end of the experimental period, hepatic and oxidative stress markers were examined. The mRNA expression levels of inflammatory marker genes [Tumor Necrosis Factor-α (TNF-α) and Interleukin-6 (IL-6)] were also determined by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction in liver tissue. Hepatic marker enzymes (aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase and gamma glutamyl transferase) and lipid peroxidation markers (Thiobarbituric acid reactive substances and LOOH) were significantly increased in HFD-fed rats, and administration of MUF resulted in remarkable suppression of these markers. Administration of MUF to HFD rats enhanced the activity of enzymatic (superoxide dismutase, catalase and glutathione peroxidase and non-enzymatic (vitamin E, vitamin C and glutathione) antioxidants compared to HFD-fed rats. An anti-inflammatory effect of MUF was demonstrated by attenuating gene expression of TNF-α and IL-6. Therefore, the results of this study indicate that MUF could be a strong herbal therapeutic alternative for the protection of the liver as well as prevention and treatment of high-fat-induced oxidative stress and inflammation.Entities:
Keywords: Antioxidants; Inflammation; Macrotyloma uniflurom; Medicinal plant; Obesity; Oxidative stress
Year: 2018 PMID: 30174510 PMCID: PMC6117251 DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2018.03.010
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi J Biol Sci ISSN: 1319-562X Impact factor: 4.219
Effect of M. uniflorum formulation on serum liver marker enzyme of control and HFD-fed rats.
| Groups | AST (IU@/L) | ALT (IU@/L) | ALP (IU*/L) | GGT (IU#/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 75.83 ± 2.43 | 28.46 ± 2.47 | 85.34 ± 2.14 | 21.88 ± 0.23 |
| MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 74.21 ± 2.98# | 26.31 ± 1.71# | 84.92 ± 2.51# | 21.99 ± 0.22# |
| HFD | 96.72 ± 2.06** | 42.90 ± 3.79** | 104.45 ± 6.47** | 34.48 ± 0.29* |
| HFD + MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 82.69 ± 5.32** | 35.74 ± 1.78** | 90.31 ± 4.02** | 23.86 ± 0.24* |
| HFD + Orlistat | 79.15 ± 2.24** | 32.89 ± 1.45** | 87.42 ± 3.68** | 22.05 ± 0.27* |
IU@-µmol of pyruvate liberated per hour; IU* - µmol of phenol liberated per minute; IU# - µmol of p-nitroanilideliberated per hour.
Effect of M. uniflorum formulation on TBARS level of control and HFD-fed rats.
| Groups | TBARS | TBARS (mmol/100 g wet tissue) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plasma (mmol/dL) | Liver | Adipose Tissue | |
| Control | 0.15 ± 0.01 | 0.80 ± 0.06 | 1.66 ± 0.09 |
| MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 0.15 ± 0.01# | 0.79 ± 0.05# | 1.63 ± 0.10# |
| HFD | 0.39 ± 0.04# | 2.22 ± 0.18** | 3.74 ± 0.27** |
| HFD + MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 0.17 ± 0.01# | 0.92 ± 0.05** | 1.92 ± 0.18** |
| HFD + Orlistat | 0.16 ± 0.01# | 0.87 ± 0.05** | 1.87 ± 0.15** |
Effect of M. uniflorum formulation on LOOH levels of control and HFD-fed rats.
| Groups | LOOH | LOOH (mmol/100 g wet tissue) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plasma (mmol/dL) | Liver | Adipose Tissue | |
| Control | 8.40 ± 0.67 | 72.19 ± 5.13 | 60.61 ± 1.98 |
| MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 7.92 ± 0.63# | 71.70 ± 5.00# | 61.32 ± 1.62# |
| HFD | 18.36 ± 0.99** | 112.14 ± 9.1** | 158.33 ± 7.60** |
| HFD + MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 10.05 ± 0.73** | 78.32 ± 5.19** | 66.76 ± 1.32** |
| HFD + Orlistat | 9.77 ± 0.75** | 75.37 ± 5.96** | 64.19 ± 1.14** |
Effect of M. uniflorum formulation on SOD, CAT and GPx activity of control and HFD-fed rats.
| Groups | Erythrocyte | Liver | Adipose |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 7.09 ± 0.52 | 8.50 ± 0.64 | 14.99 ± 1.19 |
| MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 7.22 ± 0.51 | 8.63 ± 0.63 | 15.14 ± 1.63 |
| HFD | 3.15 ± 0.22 | 4.17 ± 0.34 | 8.32 ± 0.64 |
| HFD + MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 6.16 ± 0.45 | 7.08 ± 0.41 | 12.18 ± 1.03 |
| HFD + Orlistat | 6.71 ± 0.50 | 7.90 ± 0.45 | 13.23 ± 0.96 |
| Control | 160.61 ± 8.99 | 70.08 ± 4.80 | 31.50 ± 2.92 |
| MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 161.03 ± 8.93 | 71.93 ± 4.20 | 32.15 ± 2.41 |
| HFD | 105.39 ± 6.30 | 58.21 ± 3.00 | 15.28 ± 1.17 |
| HFD + MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 153.30 ± 7.44 | 67.34 ± 3.45 | 27.14 ± 2.06 |
| HFD + Orlistat | 157.92 ± 7.64 | 68.94 ± 3.52 | 29.96 ± 1.39 |
| Control | 15.91 ± 1.55 | 7.58 ± 0.50 | 8.52 ± 0.65 |
| MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 16.86 ± 1.54 | 7.92 ± 0.62 | 8.93 ± 0.63 |
| HFD | 6.83 ± 0.57 | 4.69 ± 0.38 | 3.20 ± 0.24 |
| HFD + MUF (400 mg/kg BW) | 13.88 ± 1.08 | 6.30 ± 0.54 | 6.93 ± 0.54 |
| HFD + Orlistat | 14.33 ± 1.17 | 7.11 ± 0.58 | 7.47 ± 0.64 |
U@-enzyme concentration required to inhibit the NBTto 50%in one minute; U#- μmol of H2O2 consumed per minute/mg protein; U* - μg of GSH utilized per minute/mg protein; Values are means SD of six rats in each group;
Significant different at p < 0.05.
Highly significant different at p < 0.001.
Non-significant different at p > 0.05
Fig. 1(A–C) Effect of M. uniflorum formulation on Vitamin C (A), E (B) and GSH (C) contents in control and HFD-fed rats.
Fig. 2Effect of M. uniflorum formulation on inflammatory markers gene expression in the liver of HFD-fed rats using RT-PCR.