| Literature DB >> 30177614 |
Vandana Gautam1, Sukhmeen Kaur Kohli2, Saroj Arora3, Renu Bhardwaj4, Mohsin Kazi5, Ajaz Ahmad6, Mohammad Raish7, Majid Ahmad Ganaie8, Parvaiz Ahmad9,10.
Abstract
In this era of urbanization and environmental pollution, antioxidants and antimutagens derived from plants are promising safeguards for human health. In the current investigation, we analyzed the antioxidant and antimutagenic effects of the hexane, chloroform, and ethyl acetate fractions of Rhododendron arboreum Sm. leaves and determined their chemical composition. The different fractions inhibited lipid peroxidation, repressed the production of nitric oxide radicals, and prevented deoxyribose degradation. The antimutagenic activity of the leaf fractions was analyzed against 4-nitro-O-phenylenediamine, sodium azide and 2-aminofluorene mutagens in two test strains (TA-98 and TA-100) of Salmonella typhimurium. The experiment was conducted using pre- and co-incubation modes. The best results were obtained in the pre-incubation mode, and against indirect acting mutagen. The presence of a number of bioactive constituents was confirmed in the different fractions by GC-MS analysis. The study reveals the strong antioxidant and antimutagenic activity of R. arboreum leaves. We propose that those activities of R. arboreum might correspond to the combined effect of the phytochemicals identified by GC-MS analysis. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report on the antimutagenic activity of R. arboreum leaves.Entities:
Keywords: Ames assay; GC-MS; Rhododendron arboreum Sm.; antimutagenic activity; antioxidant activity; chemical composition
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30177614 PMCID: PMC6225473 DOI: 10.3390/molecules23092239
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Antioxidant activity of Rhododendron arboreum fractions: (A) Nitric oxide scavenging assay; (B) Lipid peroxidation assay; (C) Site specific deoxyribose deprivation assay and; (D) Non- site specific deoxyribose deprivation assay. (CF- chloroform fraction; HF- hexane fraction; EAF- ethyl acetate fraction; AA- ascorbic acid; GA- gallic acid).
Percent Inhibition, IC50 fold increase activity, one-way ANOVA F-ratio and HSD value of different fractions in antioxidant assays.
| Fractions | NO | LP | SS DDA | NSS DDA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chloroform Fraction | %I (20 µg/mL) | 12.749 ± 1.19 | 9.0 ± 2.266 | 4.862 ± 1.62 | 15.682 ± 1.318 |
| %I (1000 µg/mL) | 87.905 ± 0.224 | 89.91 ± 0.395 | 59.151 ± 2.122 | 89.803 ± 1.893 | |
| IC50 | 150.133 | 155.732 | 698.372 | 118.353 | |
| Fold Increase | 5.894 | 8.989 | 11.163 | 4.726 | |
| F-Ratio (9,20) | 295.564 * | 319.124 * | 247.581 * | 1298.927 * | |
| HSD | 7.61 | 8.03 | 5.773 | 3.647 | |
| Hexane Fraction | %I (20 µg/mL) | 13.106 ± 1.2 | 8.704 ± 0.617 | 13.758 ± 4.943 | 18.565 ± 1.674 |
| %I (1000 µg/mL) | 86.267 ± 0.895 | 86.844 ± 4.54 | 81.991 ± 1.689 | 74.753 ± 1.794 | |
| IC50 | 170.226 | 167.57 | 181.558 | 226.412 | |
| Fold Increase | 5.581 | 8.977 | 4.959 | 3.026 | |
| F-Ratio (9,20) | 1171.209 * | 505.111 * | 237.822 * | 460.541 * | |
| HSD | 4.033 | 6.251 | 7.27 | 4.608 | |
| Ethylacetate Fraction | %I (20 µg/mL) | 11.915 ± 0.917 | 14.54 ± 0.943 | 7.861 ± 1.441 | 28.745 ± 1.087 |
| %I (1000 µg/mL) | 75.930 ± 0.988 | 87.668 ± 0.317 | 85.22 ± 1.256 | 81.939 ± 0.823 | |
| IC50 | 267.067 | 116.029 | 191.907 | 96.817 | |
| Fold Increase | 5.372 | 5.029 | 9.84 | 1.85 | |
| F-Ratio (9,20) | 2410.284 * | 452.876 * | 1787.76 * | 506.233 * | |
| HSD | 2.337 | 5.865 | 3.194 | 4.063 | |
| Standard | %I (20 µg/mL) | 45.755 ± 0.852 | 15.924 ± 4.532 | 31.376 ± 1.214 | 19.789 ± 0.792 |
| %I (1000 µg/mL) | 98.599 ± 0.449 | 98.615 ± 0.395 | 92.577 ± 2.763 | 91.948 ± 1.585 | |
| IC50 | 25.648 | 95.185 | 83.86 | 132.597 | |
| Fold Increase | 1.154 | 5.192 | 1.95 | 3.646 | |
| F-Ratio (9,20) | 698.461 * | 317.475 * | 1028.868 * | 721.773 * | |
| HSD | 3.388 | 8.537 | 3.192 | 4.54 | |
| NO = Nitric oxide scavenging assay | LP = Lipid peroxidation assay | ||||
| SS DDA = Site specific deoxyribose deprivation assay | NSS DDA = Non site specific deoxyribose deprivation assay | ||||
| %I = Percent Inhibition | IC50 = 50% Inhibition concentration (µg/mL) | ||||
| Values are given as mean±standard error | HSD = Honestly significant difference | ||||
| * significant at | ANOVA = Analysis of variance | ||||
Figure 2Assay wise fold increase in antioxidant activity of different fractions. [CF: chloroform fraction; HF: hexane fraction; EAF: ethyl acetate fraction; NO: Nitric oxide scavenging assay; LP: Lipid peroxidation assay; SSD: Site specific deoxyribose deprivation assay and; NSSD: Non- site specific deoxyribose deprivation assay].
Figure 3Antimutagenic activity of Rhododendron arboreum fractions in TA-98 and TA-100 strains of Salmonella typhimurium. Pre-incubation (PI) and co-incubation (Co-I) modes of experimentation; without metabolic activation against direct acting mutagens, 4-nitro-O-phenylenediamine for TA-98 & sodium azide for TA-100 and with metabolic activation against 2-aminofluorene using rat liver homogenate (S9). (A) Chloroform fraction (CF) without metabolic activation; (B) Chloroform fraction (CF) with metabolic activation; (C) Hexane fraction (HF) without metabolic activation; (D) Hexane fraction (HF) with metabolic activation; (E) Ethyl acetate fraction (EAF) without metabolic activation; (F) Ethyl acetate fraction (EAF) with metabolic activation.
The honestly significant difference (HSD) values and F ratio for treatment, dose and, interaction between treatment and dose obtained from 2-way analysis of variance.
| Degree of Freedom | F-Ratio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (TA-98) | (TA-98+S9) | (TA-100) | (TA-100+S9) | ||
|
| |||||
| F ratio Treatment | 1, 40 | 23.19 *** | 482.9 *** | 97.69 *** | 160.8 *** |
| F ratio Dose | 3, 40 | 1017 *** | 1384 *** | 3484 *** | 2267 *** |
| F ratio Treatment × Dose | 3, 40 | 3.171 ** | 13.14 *** | 0.748 | 25.08 *** |
| HSD | 154.2 | 131.8 | 115.7 | 116.2 | |
|
| |||||
| F ratio Treatment | 1, 40 | 24.84 *** | 2.475 | 373.4 *** | 88.68 *** |
| F ratio Dose | 3, 40 | 611.1 *** | 398.5 *** | 1367 *** | 707.1 *** |
| F ratio Treatment × Dose | 3, 40 | 0.67 | 2.606 * | 3.294 ** | 18.11 *** |
| HSD | 297.4 | 159 | 142.2 | 187.3 | |
|
| |||||
| F ratio Treatment | 1, 40 | 42.24 *** | 2.399 * | 37.12 *** | 22.94 *** |
| F ratio Dose | 3, 40 | 1407 *** | 319.1 *** | 1607 *** | 791 *** |
| F ratio Treatment × Dose | 3, 40 | 4.286 ** | 0.018 | 1.502 | 3.663 ** |
| HSD | 153.2 | 370.1 | 164.5 | 240.4 | |
* significant at p ≤ 0.100; ** significant at p ≤ 0.05; *** significant at p ≤ 0.001 level of significance.
Phytochemicals present in chloroform, hexane and ethyl acetate fractions of Rhododendron arboreum leaves.
| No. | Chloroform Fraction | Hexane Fraction | Ethyl Acetate Fraction |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1-Dodecene | 3,7,11,15-Tetramethyl-2-hexa-decen-1-ol | 1-Dodecene |
| 2 | 1-Tetradecene | 14-Methylpentadecanoic acid, methyl ester | 1-Tetradecene |
| 3 | Docosanoic acid | 9-Octadecenoic acid | |
| 4 | 1-Nonadecene | 3,7,11,15-tetramethyl-2-hexadecen-1-ol, | 2,4-DI-Tert-butylphenol, |
| 5 | Neophytadiene | Linoleic acid | 9-( |
| 6 | 3,7,11,15-Tetramethyl-2-hexa-decen-1-ol | Docosanoic acid | 9-Octadecenoic acid |
| 7 | Pentadecanoic acid | 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, ditridecyl ester | 3-( |
| 8 | 3-( | 2-Hexyl-1-decanol | Neophytadiene |
| 9 | 3,7,11,15-Tetramethyl-, 2-hexadecen-1-ol, [ | 2,6,10,14,18,22-Tetracosa-hexaene | 3,7,11,15-Tetramethyl-2-hexadecen-1-ol |
| 10 | Linoleic acid | Octadecyl Chloroacetate | 2-Methyl-7-octadecyne |
| 11 | 9-Octadecenoic acid | Vitamin E | Butyl-2-methylpropylphthalate |
| 12 | 9-( | 3,10-Epoxy-D:B-friedo-18,19-secolup-19-ene | Pentadecanoic acid |
| 13 | Heptadecyl trifluoroacetate | 3-Bromo-(3β)-cholest-5-ene | Pentadecyl trifluoroacetate |
| 14 | Hexatriacontane | Methyl commate C | 3,7,11,15-Tetramethyl-2-hexadecen-1-ol |
| 15 | 2-Hexyl-1-decanol, | Methyl commate B | Linoleic acid |
| 16 | Docosyl pentafluoropropionate | Methyl commate D | Eicosanoic acid |
| 17 | Farnesol isomer a | Olean-12-en-28-al | 9-Tricosene |
| 18 | Octadecyl Chloroacetate | 1-Docosanol behenic alcohol | |
| 19 | 3,10-Epoxy-D:B-friedo-18,19-secolup-19-ene | 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, | |
| 20 | Cholest-5-ene | Nonadecyl pentafluoropropionate | |
| 21 | Methyl commate C | Vitamin E | |
| 22 | Methyl commate B | 3,10-Epoxy-(3β,10β)-D:B-friedo-18,19-secolup-19-ene | |
| 23 | Methyl commate D | 3β-Stigmast-5-en-3-ol | |
| 24 | Olean-12-en-28-al | Methyl commate C | |
| 25 | Methyl commate D | ||
| 26 | Urs-12-en-28-ol |
Pearson’s correlation coefficients (R) among antioxidant activity (NO = Nitric oxide scavenging, LP = Lipid peroxidation, SSDD = Site specific deoxyribose deprivation, NSSDD = Non-site specific deoxyribose deprivation).
| NO | LP | SSDD | NSSDD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NO | 1 | |||
| LP | 0.9979 * | 1 | ||
| SSDDA | 0.9971 * | 0.9946 * | 1 | |
| NSSDDA | 0.9983 * | 0.9980 * | 0.9923 * | 1 |
* Correlations significant at p ≤ 0.01.