| Literature DB >> 31590761 |
Fu-Chun Hsu1, Sheng-Fa Tsai1, Shoei-Sheng Lee1.
Abstract
The seed of Hyptis suaveolens, commonly known as wild flour ball (san fen yuan) in Taiwan, serves as a main refreshing drink substance in several regions. This study investigated firstly its secondary metabolites, leading to the isolation of five major caffeoylquinic acid derivatives (1-5) from the ethanol extract. In addition, ten minors, including three caffeoylquinic acid derivatives (12-14), were characterized via assistance of HPLC-SPE-NMR. Of these isolates, sodium 4,5-dicaffeoylquinate (2) and methyl 3,5-dicaffeoylquinate (4) showed moderate inhibitory activity against xanthine oxidase with the respective IC50 values of 69.4 μM and 92.1 μM (c.f. allopurinol IC50 28.4 μM). Quantitative HPLC analysis of the EtOH extract indicates the content of sodium 3,5-dicaffeoylquinate (1) and sodium 4,5-dicaffeoylquinate (2) to be 0.1% and 0.08% (w/w, dry seed), respectively. This study not only discloses the bioactive constituents, but also demonstrates the potential of H. suaveolens seed as an antihyperuricemic nutraceutical.Entities:
Keywords: Antihyperuricemic; Caffeoylquinic acid derivatives; HPLC-SPE-NMR; Hyptis suaveolens seed; Xanthine oxidase inhibitory activity
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31590761 PMCID: PMC9306982 DOI: 10.1016/j.jfda.2019.05.006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Food Drug Anal Impact factor: 6.157
Fig. 1Inhibitory activity of the H. suaveolens seeds against xanthine oxidase (allopurinol IC50 28.4 ± 1.1 μM): (a) the EtOH extract, soluble in CH2Cl2, EtOAc, n-BuOH, and water (100 and 10 μgmL−1); (b) compounds 1–4; (c) dose–response curve and IC50 values of compounds 2 and 4.
Fig. 2Structures of compounds 1–15 from H. suaveolens seeds.
1H NMR spectroscopic data (δ/ppm, m, J) of compounds 1 and 12–14.
| Proton | 1 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 2.31 dd (13.9, 3.8) | 2.31 dd (13.7, 3.7) | 2.31 dd (13.9, 3.5) | 2.32 dd (13.8, 3.8) |
| 2.15 dd (13.9, 6.9) | 2.15 dd (13.4, 7.1) | 2.16 dd (13.8, 6.8) | 2.15 dd (13.6, 6.7) | |
| 3 | 5.42 dt (6.8, 3.7) | 5.42 dt (6.8, 3.7) | 5.43 dt (6.5, 3.5) | 5.43 dt (7.0, 3.7) |
| 4 | 3.96 dd (7.4, 3.4) | 3.97 dd (7.3, 3.2) | 3.97 dd (7.4, 3.2) | 3.97 dd (7.2, 3.2) |
| 5 | 5.38 td (7.2, 4.7) | 5.38 td (6.7, 4.4) | 5.39 m | 5.38 td (7.1, 4.1) |
| 6 | 2.24 dd (13.6, 7.6) | 2.24 dd (13.9, 7.3) | 2.24 m | 2.25 dd (13.8, 7.2) |
| 2.20 dd (14.0, 4.1) | 2.20 dd (13.9, 3.6) | 2.20 m | 2.20 dd (13.5, 3.8) | |
| 2′ | 7.06 d (2.2) | 7.06 d (1.9) | 7.21 d (1.6) | 7.06 d (2.0) |
| 3′-OMe | – | – | 3.90 s | – |
| 5′ | 6.771 d (8.2) | 6.771 d (8.2) | 6.81 d (8.1) | 6.771 d (8.2) |
| 6′ | 6.96 dd (8.3, 2.0) | 6.96 dd (8.2, 1.9) | 7.08 dd (8.1, 1.6) | 6.96 dd (8.2, 2.0) |
| 7′ | 7.61 d (15.9) | 7.61 d (16.1) | 7.67 d (15.9) | 7.61 d (15.9) |
| 8′ | 6.34 d (15.9) | 6.34 d (15.8) | 6.44 d (15.9) | 6.34 d (15.9) |
| 2″ | 7.05 d (2.2) | 7.48 d (8.6) | 7.05 d (2.0) | 7.21 d (1.7) |
| 3″ | – | 6.80 d (8.6) | – | – |
| 3″-OMe | – | – | – | 3.90 s |
| 5″ | 6.773 d (8.2) | 6.80 d (8.6) | 6.774 d (8.2) | 6.81 d (8.2) |
| 6″ | 6.97 dd (8.3, 2.0) | 7.48 d (8.6) | 6.97 dd (8.2, 1.9) | 7.10 dd (8.2, 1.7) |
| 7″ | 7.57 d (15.8) | 7.64 d (16.1) | 7.57 d (15.8) | 7.63 d (15.8) |
| 8″ | 6.26 d (16.0) | 6.32 d (15.8) | 6.26 d (15.8) | 6.35 d (15.9) |
Data obtained from analyzing the general 1H NMR spectra (CD3OD, 600 MHz).
Data obtained from analyzing the 1H NMR spectra using a multiple solvent suppression pulse program (CD3OD, 600 MHz).
Fig. 3RP-18 HPLC chromatogram of fr. E4, detected at 280 nm, under an optimized condition as indicated in Section 2.4 for HPLC-SPE-NMR. Intens., intensity.
Fig. 41H NMR spectra of compounds 1, 3, 7, and 11–14 (CD3OD), adopted from HPLC-SPE-TT-NMR of fr. E4.
HPLC retention time, ESI-MS, and UV data of compounds in fr. E4.
| Compound | tR (min) | [M−H]−
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 20.0 | 152.9 | 228, 261, 294 |
|
| 27.2 | 178.8 | 239, 324 |
|
| 38.9 | 514.9 | 243, 324 |
|
| 42.4 | 514.9 | 242, 326 |
|
| 60.2 | 498.9 | 232, 316 |
|
| 63.9 | 528.9 | 240, 326 |
|
| 66.2 | 528.9 | 240, 326 |
Recorded in CH3CN-0.1% HCO2H(aq).
Fig. 51H NMR comparison of compounds 1 and 12–14 in the region of δ 6.22–7.72 ppm (CD3OD).
Regression equations, estimated amounts (in EtOH extract), and content (in dry seeds, w/w) of 1–3.
| Compound | Regression equation |
| In EtOH extract (50 μg) | Content (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Mean peak area (mAu × s) | Estimated amounts (μg) | ||||
|
| y = 8749x + 338.79 | 0.9999 | 16,681.69 | 1.9 | 0.10% |
|
| y = 7942.3x − 1004.8 | 0.9995 | 10,827.09 | 1.5 | 0.08% |
|
| y = 8405.9x + 187.82 | 0.9999 | 2546.27 | 0.3 | 0.02% |
The regression equation: y = ax + b; x, the amounts of compound (μg); y, peak area (mAu × s).
EtOH extract was prepared as 5.0 mg·mL−1 solution; 10 μL/injection (50 μg).
Content (%) of whole plant material, e.g. 1: 1.9/50*30.9 g (EtOH extract)/1.2 kg (seed weight) ≈0.1%.