| Literature DB >> 31453127 |
Anil Upreti1, Bibek Byanju1, Muna Fuyal1, Apekshya Chhetri1, Paras Pandey2, Rajeswar Ranjitkar2, Jyoti Joshi Bhatta2, Bishnu Prasad Pandey3.
Abstract
In this present study, phytochemical screening, anti-ulcer assay, anti-diarrhea assay, anti-inflammatory assay, analgesic assay, lipase activity assay, amylase activity assay and the anti-bacterial activity of Eucalyptus camaladulensis Dehnh leaf extracted with methanol and 50% ethanol was analyzed for biological significance. Physical characterization of the non-volatile component revealed the higher yield of 16.92% in 50% ethanol expediting the use of 50% ethanol as a better alternative. Further use of crude extract revealed 33.89% (IC50 = 1.44 mg/ml) of α-amylase inhibition by methanol extract and 33.87% (IC50 = 3.21 mg/ml) lipase inhibition by 50% ethanol extract. Furthermore, 44.44% protective ratio towards ulcer was observed with the methanol extract, whereas 54.58% anti-inflammatory activity was shown by the 50% ethanol extract. The effectiveness of the extract was further enhanced by the presence of 62.54% motility and best analgesic property at 180 min of the exposure of the extract orally. The antioxidant activity of crude methanol extract revealed an IC50 value 601.8 μg/ml whereas, ethanol extract showed 1279.58 μg/ml in DPPH assay. Result revealed several health benefits of E. camaldulensis Dehnh leaf.Entities:
Keywords: Amylase; Analgesic activity; Anti-diarrhea; Anti-inflammatory; Anti-ulcer; Eucalyptus camaladulensis Dehnh; Lipase activity; Pharmacological activity
Year: 2018 PMID: 31453127 PMCID: PMC6702146 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcme.2018.07.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Tradit Complement Med ISSN: 2225-4110
Physical characteristics of the methanol and 50% ethanol extract of E. camaladulensis Dehnh.
| S.N | Extract | Color | Aroma | Yield (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 50% ethanol | Brownish green | Herbal | 16.92 |
| 2. | Methanol | Dark green | Herbal | 14.20 |
Phytochemical analysis of methanol and 50% ethanol extract of E. camaladulensis Dehnh.
| Phytonutrients | Methanol extract | |
|---|---|---|
| Carbohydrate | + | + |
| Protein | – | – |
| Starch | – | – |
| Saponin | – | + |
| Phenol | – | + |
| Flavonoids | + | + |
| Glycosides | + | + |
| Terpenoids | + | + |
| Cardiac Glycoside | + | + |
| Phytosterols | + | + |
| Diterpenes | + | + |
| Reducing Sugar | – | – |
| Tannin | – | – |
| Alkaloids | – | – |
Where, (+) is present and (−) indicates not detected.
Antibacterial activity of E. camaladulensis Dehnh leaf extract.
| Solvent | Concentration of the extract | Diameter of zone of growth inhibition (mm) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methanol | 5 mg/ml | 11 | 12 | 15 | 15 |
| 2.5 mg/ml | 11 | 11 | 11 | 12 | |
| 1.25 mg/ml | ND | 10 | 9 | 11 | |
| 0.75 mg/ml | ND | ND | ND | ND | |
| 5 mg/ml | 11 | 10 | 11 | 13 | |
| 2.5 mg/ml | 9 | 9 | 10 | 11 | |
| 1.25 mg/ml | ND | ND | ND | 10 | |
| 0.75 mg/ml | ND | ND | ND | ND | |
Where ND is not detected.
Fig. 1Gross appearance of gastric mucosa after various treatments. (a) Negative control: Ulcer inducer only, the maximum damage was observed as mucosal damage, spot ulcer, hemorrhagic streaks and bleeding ulcer. (b) Positive control: ranitidine treated, very few mucosal damage was observed along with all other parameters (c) Methanol extract treated (0.2 mL/20 g m), marked ulcer with mucosal damage, hemorrhagic streaks, and spot ulcer. Moderately reduced gastric ulcer as compared to the negative control. (d) Ethanol extract treated (0.2 mL/20 g m), marked ulcer with mucosal damage, hemorrhagic streaks, and spot ulcer. Moderately reduced gastric ulcer as compared to the negative control and less efficient than methanol extract.
Effect of various extract of E. camaladulensis Dehnh on pH and ulcer score in ulcer induced mice.
| Treatment (mg/kg) | pH | Ulcer score | Ulcer index | Percentage ulcer inhibition |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 3.67 ± 0.25 | 6.0 ± 2.44 | 1 ± 0.40 | – |
| Ranitidine-treated | 5.41 ± 0.37 | 1.0 ± 1.54 | 0.139 ± 0.23 | 86.1 |
| 4.67 ± 1.03 | 3.33 ± 1.25 | 0.56 ± 0.20 | 44.4 | |
| Methanol | 4.58 ± 1.06 | 3.5 ± 2.44 | 0.583 ± 0.40 | 41.67 |
Data were analyzed using ANOVA and expressed as mean ± S.D (n = 6) followed by Dunnett's test and difference between means were regarded significant at (P < 0.05).
Effect of various extract of E. camaladulensis Dehnh on carrageenan-induced rat paw edema.
| Group | Treatment (mg/Kg) | Mean increase in paw volume (ml) | % decrease in volume | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 h | 1 h | 2 h | 3 h | |||
| 1 | Control | 1.15 ± 0.08 | 1.67 ± 0.14 | 1.88 ± 0.14 | 1.96 ± 0.15 | – |
| 2 | Aspirine | 1.12 ± 0.16 | 1.27 ± 0.16 | 1.40 ± 0.17 | 1.35 ± 0.11 | 68.08 |
| 3 | 1.19 ± 0.06 | 1.39 ± 0.22 | 1.59 ± 0.20 | 1.52 ± 0.14 | 54.58 | |
| 4 | Methanol | 1.13 ± 0.18 | 1.44 ± 0.24 | 1.50 ± 0.14 | 1.69 ± 0.26 | 37.64 |
Data were analyzed using ANOVA and expressed as mean ± S.D (n = 6) followed by Dunnett's test and the difference between means was regarded significant at (P < 0.05). Here 0 h represent the volume of paw taken before the injection of carrageenan in rat paw whereas 1 h, 2 h and 3 h represents the volume of paw taken after 1 h, 2 h and 3 h of carrageen injection in planar surface of right hind paw.
An anti-spasmodic activity of E. camaladulensis Dehnh 50% ethanol and methanol extract.
| Test sample | Average distance traveled by charcoal (cm ± S.D) | % Mobility | % Inhibition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blank | 16 ± 0.63 | 78.13 | 21.86 |
| Loperamide | 5.07 ± 1.34 | 22.48 | 77.51 |
| 14.08 ± 1.18 | 60.36 | 39.63 | |
| Methanol extract | 14.91 ± 0.53 | 62.54 | 37.45 |
Data were analyzed using ANOVA and expressed as mean ± S.D (n = 6) followed by and difference between means was regarded significant at (P < 0.05).
Fig. 2Analgesic activity of methanol and 50% ethanol extract of E. camaladulensis Dehnh compared with aspirin as standard expressed in mean as per time of exposure plotted via Origin. The crude data are tested through one way ANOVA and found to be significant at 95% confidence level in SPSS.