| Literature DB >> 30733781 |
S Muthukrishnan1,2, T Senthil Kumar1, A Gangaprasad2, F Maggi3, M V Rao1.
Abstract
Ceropegia thwaitesii Hook (Asclepiadaceae), an endemic plant species, due to habitat destruction and over exploitation has a very restricted distribution in the Western Ghats of Tamil Nadu, India. The present wrok aimed to determine the chemical composition, the total phenolic (TPC), flavonoid (TFC) and tannin content (TEC), and to assess the antioxidant properties of various extracts of in vivo plants (IVP) and in vitro regenerated plants (IRP) of C. thwaitesii. Some phenolic compounds like gallic acid, cathechol, vanillin and salicylic acid were identified and quantified by HPLC. All the extracts possessed relevant radical scavenging activity on DPPH, Superoxide radical scavenging activity, and Nitric oxide radicals as well as total antioxidant ability. DPPH assay of in vitro methanol stems extracts and ethanol leaves extracts revealed the best antioxidant properties with important IC50 values of 0.248 ± 0.45 µg/mL and 0.397 ± 0.67 µg/mL, respectively, whereas in vivo chloroform stems extracts showed a lower antioxidant activity (IC50 of 10.99 ± 0.24 µg/mL). The IRP methanol extracts of stem and leaves had good inhibitory activity against all tested microorganisms in a dose-dependent manner. These results suggested that in vitro raised plants of C. thwaitesii are an excellent source of antioxidant compounds to be exploited on an industrial level as food additive.Entities:
Keywords: Antioxidant potential; Ceropegia thwaitesii; HPLC; In vitro and in vivo explants; Phytochemical analysis
Year: 2018 PMID: 30733781 PMCID: PMC6353861 DOI: 10.1016/j.jgeb.2018.06.003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Genet Eng Biotechnol ISSN: 1687-157X
Fig. 1RP-HPLC chromatograms of leaf and stem extracts of IVP and IRP of C. thwaitesii. a – Standard phenolic compounds at 1000 μg conc., (insert shows spectrum plot of individual standard); b – in vitro; stem; c – in vitro leaf; d – in vivo stem; e – in vivo leaf.
Fig. 2The quantified content of phenolics detected in the in vivo and in vitro samples.
Total phenolic, flavonoid and Tannin contents in Stem and leaf extracts of C. thwaitesii.
| S. No | Plant part | Solvents | Total phenolic content (mg GAE/g FW) | Total flavonoids content (mg RE/g FW) | Total tannins content (mg CE/g FW) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Stem | Ethanol | 9.06 ± 1.2i | 11.18 ± 1.1j | 3.02 ± 1.4l | 5.01 ± 1.2l | 5.33 ± 2.3b | 9.51 ± 2.2b |
| 2 | Acetone | 12.55 ± 1.2c | 15.34 ± 2.3d | 40.51 ± 1.3c | 45.08 ± 1.1de | 2.45 ± 2.1h | 4.95 ± 2.2gh | |
| 3 | Pet. ether | 10.41 ± 0.5ef | 19.38 ± 1.2bc | 31.92 ± 1.3ef | 16.51 ± 1.2g | |||
| 4 | Methanol | 10.27 ± 0.6ef | 14.94 ± 0.7e | 58.04 ± 1.2b | 60.27 ± 1.1b | 1.71 ± 0.6j | 2.34 ± 0.6j | |
| 5 | Chloroform | 13.23 ± 0.4b | 14.05 ± 0.7e | 9.31 ± 1.3hi | 11.21 ± 1.1i | 1.19 ± 0.7k | 1.21 ± 0.7k | |
| 6 | water | 7.55 ± 0.3k | 6.65 ± 0.6jk | 7.56 ± 0.5k | 2.2 ± 0.6i | 8.87 ± 0.6c | ||
| 7 | Leaf | Ethanol | 9.08 ± 1.6ij | 9.41 ± 0.6h | 42.7 ± 0.6f | 5.16 ± 0.6c | 7.25 ± 0.6d | |
| 8 | Acetone | 10.65 ± 1.6ef | 12.32 ± 0.6h | 32.92 ± 0.6e | 45.7 ± 0.5d | 3.38 ± 1.1e | 5.87 ± 1.1e | |
| 9 | Pet. ether | 9.73 ± 1.5gh | 21.66 ± 1.1b | 58.62 ± 1.0c | 4.78 ± 1.2d | 5.73 ± 1.2ef | ||
| 10 | Methanol | 11.21 ± 2.3de | 13.82 ± 1.3f | 35.09 ± 1.1d | 3.21 ± 1.2ef | 4.21 ± 1.2i | ||
| 11 | Chloroform | 11.51 ± 1.1de | 13.32 ± 1.5fg | 10.41 ± 1.3g | 13.32 ± 1.1h | 3.12 ± 1.1fg | 5.22 ± 1.1fg | |
| 12 | water | 9.88 ± 0.8gh | 12.06 ± 1.6hi | 6.87 ± 1.3j | 8.45 ± 1.1j | 4.38 ± 1.1de | 4.69 ± 0.8h | |
Bold values indicate the higher amount of quantified phenolic, flavonoid and tannin contents in each sample and extracts.
Measurements are mean ± SE of three parallel determinations and expressed as tannic acid equivalent per gram fresh weight.
Measurements are mean ± SE of three parallel determinations and expressed as rutin equivalent per gram fresh weight.
Measurements are mean ± SE of three parallel determinations and expressed as catechin equivalent per gram fresh weight.
Mother plant.
In vitro raised plant; GAE – gallic acid equivalent; RE – Rutin equivalent; CE – catechin equivalen.
Fig. 3Antioxidant activity of in vitro and in vivo stem and leaf extras of Ceropegia thwaitesii: (a) DPPH activity of stem ; (b) DPPH activity of leaf; (c) Superoxide radical scavenging activity; (d) Nitro oxide radical scavenging assay; (e) Total antioxidant capacity (TAC).
The antioxidant activity with IC50 values of in vivo and in vitro of stem and leaf measured by DPPH radical-scavenging assays. Overall, in vitro raised plants revealed the best antioxidant properties (significant IC50 values = 0.248 µg/ml), and in vivo plants revealed the poor antioxidant property (significantly lower IC50 values = 10.99 µg/ml).
| Solvents | Stem (µg/ml) | Leaf (µg/ml) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methanol | 0.306 ± 1.02 | 0.248 ± 0.45 | 1.084 ± 2.03 | 1.39 ± 0.56 |
| Ethanol | 4.023 ± 0.08 | 1.797 ± 0.45 | 0.563 ± 0.98 | 0.397 ± 0.67 |
| Pet. ether | 1.725 ± 0.28 | 0.800 ± 0.56 | 2.447 ± 0.78 | 2.196 ± 0.76 |
| Acetone | 1.494 ± 0.23 | 1.952 ± 0.89 | 6.330 ± 0.78 | 5.438 ± 0.68 |
| Chloroform | 10.99 ± 0.24 | 8.998 ± 0.78 | 8.123 ± 0.24 | 5.347 ± 0.12 |
| Water | 9.225 ± 0.34 | 3.456 ± 0.67 | 6.124 ± 0.45 | 3.835 ± 0.23 |
Measurements are mean ± SE of triplicate determinations, IC50 concentration required for inhibit the radical formation by 50%.
Mother plant.
In vitro raised plant.
Fig. 4Antimicrobial activity of in vitro raised plant (IRP) stem and leaf methanol extract against various pathogenic bacterial strains: A–A3 effects of methanol stem extract ; B–B3 effects of leaf methanol extract : (a) 50 μg/ml; (b) 100 μg/ml; (c) 200 μg/ml; (d) 300 μg/ml; Standard antibiotic (Centre).