| Literature DB >> 31193360 |
Mamangam Subaraja1, Arambakkam Janardhanam Vanisree1.
Abstract
Asiaticoside-D (AD) was shown to efficacy of ganglionic degenerated Lumbricus terrestris as a pioneering observation in our earlier research. Though, extract molecular mechanisms of AD for degenerative diseases (DDs) remains largely unknown. We investigated the neuroprotective effects of AD against ROT in cerebral ganglions (CGs) of degenerative L. terrestris. Worms were exposed to 0.4 ppm ROT for 7 days were subjected to co- treatment with 15 ppm of AD. After, CGs was removed. The levels oxidant, non-antioxidant, antioxidant status, ganglioside, ceramide and ceramide glycanase (CGase) were estimated. The m-RNA levels of dopamine transporter (DAT), octopamine transporter (OAT), innexins-9 (inx-9), ionotropic glutamate receptor 3 (iGlu3), heat shock proteins (hsp70), XPRLamide neuropeptide precursor, tyramine beta-hydroxylase (tbh-1) and β- adrenergic receptor kinase-2 (β-ARK2-3) by semi-qRT- PCR. The expression pattern of tyramine beta hydroxylase (TBH), glutamate receptor (iGluR), serotonin transporter (SERT), dopamine transporters (DAT), nerve growth factors (NGF), cytochrome C oxidase (COC), NADH dehydogenase subunit-1 (ND-1), neurotrophin receptor p75 (p75NTR), neuronal nitric oxiside synthase (nNOs) interleukin 1- beta (IL1-β) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) by western blotting. Glutaminergic, serotogenic and dopaminergic toxicity variations were also performed. The levels of oxidant, non-antioxidant, antioxidant status, lipids, proteins and m-RNAs were significantly altered (p < 0.001) on ROT-induced (group II) and their levels were significantly changes (p < 0.05) by ROT+AD in CGs. The sensitive study plan concluded the neuroprotective effects of AD against ROT induced degeneration in worms and suggest that the AD deserves future studies for its use as an effective alternative medicine that could minimize the morbidity of ganglionic degenerative diseases patients.Entities:
Keywords: 5HT, serotonin; AD, Asitiacoside-D; AD’, Alzheimer disease; ALS, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; Asitiacoside-D; CGase, ceramide glycanase; CGs, cerebral ganglions; CNS, central nervous system; COC, cytochrome C oxidase; Cerebral ganglions; DA, dopamine; DAT, dopamine transporter; DDs, degenerative diseases; GABARB, gama amninobutric acids -B receptor; GDD, ganglionic degenerative disease; HD, Huntington disease; IL1β, interleukin-1beta; Inx-9, innexins-9; Lumbricus terrestris; ND, neurodegeneration; ND-1, NADH dehydogenase subunite-1; NGF, nerve growth factors; NS, nervous system; NT, neurotransmission; NTs, neurotransmitters; Neurotransmission pathway; OAT, octopamine transporter; P75NTR, P75 neurotrophin receptor; PD, Parkinson’s disease; ROT, rotenone; Rotenone; SERT, serotonin transporter; TBH, tyramine beta-hydroxylase; TNF-α, tumour necrosis factor-α; XPRL amide NP, XPR Lamide neuropeptide precursor; iGlu3, ionotropic glutamate receptor 3; nNOS, neuronal niticoxide synthase; Βeta-ARK2–3, β- adrenergic receptor kinase-2
Year: 2019 PMID: 31193360 PMCID: PMC6526298 DOI: 10.1016/j.ibror.2019.04.003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: IBRO Rep ISSN: 2451-8301
Fig. 1Banding patterns of (a) HSP70, DAT-1 and OAT, (c) TBH, INX-9 and β-ARK2–3 in CGs of control and experimental groups of worms. Banding intensity was quantification (b and d) by using image J software. Data were presented as mean ± SME of each 12 worms (n = 6) and were significant at *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001, Ns = Non-significant. Comparisons were made as follows: Control Vs ROT, ROT Vs ROT + AD; Control Vs AD and Control Vs Vehicle control.
Fig. 2Banding patterns of (a) GABAR, iGuR and nNOS, (c) DAT, SERT and TBH protein in CGs of control and experimental group of worms. Banding intensity was quantified by using image J software (figure b and d). Data were performed and were significant at *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001, NS-non-significant. Comparisons were made as follows: Control Vs ROT, ROT Vs ROT + AD; Control Vs AD and Control Vs Vehicle control.
Fig. 3Expression variations of level of dopaminergic toxicity in CGs of control and experimental group of worms. a. Control: b. ROT induced: c. ROT + AD: d. AD alone. e: Vehicle control. The arrows were indicated DAergnic expression in CGs and (f) expression variation was quantified by using image J software.
Fig. 4Expression variations of serotonergic toxicity in CGs of control and experimental group of worms. a. Control: b. ROT induced: c. ROT + AD: d. AD alone. e: Vehicle control. The arrows were indicated serotonergic expression in CGs and (f) expression variation was quantified by using image J software.
Fig. 5Expressional variations of glutaminergic toxicity in CGs of control and experimental groups of worms. a. Control: b. ROT induced: c. ROT + AD: d. AD alone. e: Vehicle control. The arrows were indicated glutaminergic expression in CGs and (f) expression variation was quantified by using image J software.
Fig. 6Banding patterns of (a) ionotropic glutamate receptor 3 (iGlu3) and XPRL amide neuropeptide precursor in CGs of control and experiment group of worms. Banding intensity was quantified (b) by using image J software. Each bar represented the mean ± SME of each 12 worms (n = 6) and were significant at *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001, NS-non significant. Comparison were made as Control Vs ROT, ROT Vs ROT + AD; Control Vs AD and Control Vs Vehicle control.
Fig. 7Banding patterns of (a) NGF, IL1-β and TNF-α, (b) ND-1, CCO-1 and p75NTR protein control and experiment group of worms. Banding intensity was quantified (b and d) by using image J software. Dates were performed and were presented as mean ± SEM for 12 worms. Comparisons were made as follows: Control Vs ROT, ROT Vs ROT + AD; Control Vs AD and Control Vs Vehicle control.
Fig. 8Expression variations of TβH protein in CGs of control and experimental groups of worm. a. Control: b. ROT induced: c. ROT + AD: d. AD alone. e: Vehicle control. The arrows were indicated TβH expression in CGs and (f) expression variation was quantified by using image J software.
Fig. 9Level of NGF expression variation in CGs of control and experimental groups of worm. a. Control: b. ROT induced: c. ROT + AD: d. AD alone. e: Vehicle control. The arrows were indicated NGF expression in CGs and (f) expression variation was quantified by using image J software.
Fig. 10Level of nNOS expression variations in CGs of control and experimental groups of worm. a. Control: b. ROT induced: c. ROT + AD: d AD alone e: Vehicle control. The arrows were indicated nNOS expression in CGs and (f) expression variation was quantified by using image J software.
Fig. 11Level of ILβ1 expression variations in CGs of control and experimental group of worms. a. Control: b. ROT induced: c. ROT + AD: d AD alone e: Vehicle control. The arrows were indicated IL1-β expression in CGs and (f) expression variation was quantified by using image J software.
Fig. 12Level of TNF -α expression variation in CGs of control and experimental groups of worm. a. Control: b. ROT induced: c. ROT + AD: d AD alone e: Vehicle control. The arrows were indicated TNF -α expression in CGs and (f) expression variation was quantified by using image J software.
Levels of oxidants, non-antioxidant and antioxidant profile of CGs of control and experimental groups of Lumbricus terrestris.
| Biochemicals | CONTROL | ROT | ROT + AD | AD | VC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LOP | 1.57 ± 0.03 | 2.90 ± 1.05*** | 2.01 ± 1.03** | 1.56 ± 0.03 NS | 1.54 ± 0.04 NS |
| POC | 2.57 ± 1.03 | 3.20 ± 1.05*** | 2.90 ± 1.04** | 2.55 ± 1.02 NS | 2.58 ± 1.04 NS |
| SOD | 5.20 ± 1.08 | 2.11 ± 1.02*** | 3.99 ± 2.03** | 5.21 ± 1.08NS | 5.20 ± 1.07 NS |
| CATS | 13.12 ± 3.05 | 9.06 ± 2.04*** | 10.11 ± 2.06** | 13.11 ± 3.06NS | 13.12 ± 3.08 NS |
| GR | 6.39 ± 1.09 | 3.59 ± 1.03*** | 4.21 ± 1.04** | 6.40 ± 0.08NS | 6.40 ± 1.07 NS |
| GST | 1.33 ± 0.08 | 0.20 ± 0.04*** | 0.97 ± 0.05** | 1.33 ± 1.07 NS | 1.32 ± 1.06 NS |
| GPx | 4.48 ± 1.09 | 2.10 ± 1.05*** | 3.05 ± 1.07** | 4.49 ± 1.08 NS | 4.48 ± 1.08 NS |
| GSH | 4.89 ± 1.03 | 1.99 ± 0.04*** | 2.78 ± 1.06** | 4.87 ± 1.04 NS | 4.89 ± 1.09 NS |
| GSSG | 1.29 ± 0.04 | 2.50 ± 1.03*** | 3.20 ± 2.08** | 1.28 ± 0.05 NS | 1.27 ± 0.08 NS |
| GSH/GSSG | 9.85 ± 2.06 | 5.57 ± 2.03*** | 5.20 ± 2.08** | 9.84 ± 2.08 NS | 9.27 ± 2.08 NS |
| Vit.C | 9.85 ± 2.06 | 6.06 ± 2.04*** | 7.21 ± 2.05** | 9.85 ± 2.07 NS | 9.88 ± 2.07NS |
| Vit.E | 3.21 ± 1.05 | 1.56 ± 0.03*** | 2.20 ± 1.04** | 3.20 ± 0.04 NS | 3.20 ± 1.05NS |
The levels were expressed as: LPO: nmoles of TBARS/mg protein, POC: nmoles of DPNH/mg protein, GSH: nmoles of DTNB/mg protein. Activity is expressed as: SOD: 1 unit of SOD activity is the amount of protein required to give 50% inhibition of epinephrine autoxidation, CAT: nmoles of H2O2 decomposed per min mg protein, GST: μmoles of CDNB conjugated per min per mg protein, GR: nmoles of NADPH oxidized /min/mg protein, Gpx: nmoles of GSH oxidized per min per mg protein. GSSG: μmoles of NADPH oxidized/mg protein. Data were presented as mean ± SME of 12 worms (n = 6) and comparison were made follows: ***Control Vs ROT (p < 0.001), **ROT Vs ROT + AD (p < 0.05), Control Vs AD (NS-Non-significant).
Fig. 13Quantification of (a) cereamide and ganglioside, (b) CGases and (c) serotonin and dopamine in CGs of control and experimental groups of worm. Comparisons were made as follows: Control Vs ROT, ROT Vs ROT + AD; Control Vs AD and Control Vs Vehicle control. Data were performed and were presented as mean ± SEM for twelve worms and significant at < 0.05, < 0.01, < 0.001, NS-non-significant.