| Literature DB >> 32019201 |
Adil Farooq Wali1, Jayachithra Ramakrishna Pillai1, Yusra Al Dhaheri2, Muneeb U Rehman3, Ambreen Shoaib4, Omar Sarheed1, Salma Jabnoun1, Maryam Razmpoor1, Saiema Rasool5, Bilal Ahmad Paray6, Parvaiz Ahmad7,8.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to analyze the polyphenolic rich extract of Crocus sativus L. petals (CSP) in modulating liver oxidative stress and inflammatory response status against rifampicin isoniazid (INH-RIF) drug-induced liver injury. The INH-RIF was administered for 14 days with varying doses in Wistar rats, while silymarin was administered as standard dose. We report the defensive impacts of CSP against INH-RIF induced liver oxidative stress and proinflammatory cytokine. The CSP treatment at both doses significantly controlled all modulating biochemical hepatic injury indicators and resulted in the attenuation of arbitral INH-RIF damage. The components present in CSP identified by LC-ESI-Q-TOF-MS were found to be flavonoids and fatty acids. It can be inferred that CSP possesses a hepatoprotective capacity against INH-RIF-mediated hepatic injury, which may prove to be a medically beneficial natural product for the management of drug-induced liver injury.Entities:
Keywords: Crocus sativus; anti-tuberculosis; cytokines; hepato-toxicity; polyphenols; silymarin
Year: 2020 PMID: 32019201 PMCID: PMC7076685 DOI: 10.3390/plants9020167
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Chromatographic condition and characterization of chemical profiling of Crocus sativus L. petals (CSP) by LC–ESI-Q-TOF–MS.
| Peak No. | Retention Time | Molecular Formula | Theoretical | Measured | Compound Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 7.241 | C25H37NO5 | 431.2722 | 432.2796 | Hydroxysalmeterol |
| 2 | 7.417 | C15H10O7 | 302.0417 | 303.0490 | Morin |
| 3 | 7.704 | C21H20O11 | 448.0995 | 449.1068 | Quercetin |
| 4 | 7.903 | C27H30O16 | 610.1523 | 611.1595 | Rutin |
| 5 | 8.107 | C30H44O3 | 452.335 | 454.3459 | 1alpha,25-dihydroxy-26,27-dimethyl-20,21,22,22,23,23-hexadehydro-24ahomovitaminD3 |
| 6 | 8.499 | C15H10O6 | 286.047 | 287.0543 | Fisetin |
| 7 | 12.887 | C13H20O3 | 224.1408 | 225.1481 | Methyl jasmonate |
| 8 | 13.477 | C10H8O3 | 176.0473 | 177.0546 | 10-Hydroxy-8E-Decene-2,4,6-triynoic acid |
| 9 | 13.526 | C17H26O5 | 310.1768 | 311.1841 | Methyl 8-[2-(2-formyl-vinyl)-3-hydroxy-5- |
| 10 | 15.085 | C12H25NO | 200.2003 | 199.193 | Odecanamide |
Figure 1Representative full scan chromatographic profile of CSP and the extracted ion chromatograms.
Total phenolic content and flavonoids content of CSP.
| Methods | CSP | R2 |
|---|---|---|
| Total phenolic content (mg GAEa/g of extract) | 89.63 ± 0.99 | 0.992 |
| Total flavonoids content (μg QEb/g of extract) | 65 ± 1.09 | 0.989 |
a Total phenolics content is expressed in terms of gallic acid equivalent (μg of GAE/g); b Total flavonoids content is expressed in terms of quercetin equivalent (μg of QE/g). Values are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3).
Antioxidant activity of CSP.
| CSP IC50 (μg/mL) |
| BHA IC50 (μg/mL) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DPPH Assay | 99.53 ± 0.63 | 0.992 | 65.46 ± 1.22 | 0.901 |
| ABTS Assay | 116.63 ± 1.93 | 0.990 | 87.42 ± 0.990 | 0.989 |
All values are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3).
Concentration of elements in CSP using inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry (ICP OES).
| S. No | Name of the Element | Concentration (mg/Kg) |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Silver | 0.2 |
| 2. | Aluminum | 555 |
| 3. | Arsenic | 0.2 |
| 4. | Boron | 17.2 |
| 5. | Barium | 3.9 |
| 6. | Beryllium | <0.1 |
| 7. | Calcium | 4584 |
| 8. | Cadmium | <0.1 |
| 9. | Cobalt | 0.2 |
| 10. | Chromium | 1.6 |
| 11. | Copper | 9.6 |
| 12. | Iron | 1192 |
| 13. | Potassium | 22,256 |
| 14. | Magnesium | 1751 |
| 15. | Manganese | 33.9 |
| 16. | Molybdenum | 0.6 |
| 17. | Sodium | 211 |
| 18. | Nickel | 3.4 |
| 19. | Phosphorous | 3569 |
| 20. | Lead | 0.7 |
| 21. | Tin | 0.1 |
| 22. | Selenium | 0.1 |
| 23. | Strontium | 9.1 |
| 24. | Vanadium | 1.2 |
| 25. | Zinc | 60.2 |
Effects of the CSP on hepatic enzyme markers.
| Groups | ALT (IUL−1) | AST (IUL−1) | ALP (IUL−1) | TP (g/dL) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group I | 62.23 ± 5.32 | 87.21 ± 5.23 | 100.43 ± 5.98 | 9.34 ± 0.21 |
| Group II | 143.90 ± 3.54 *** | 302.43 ± 4.32 *** | 278.21 ± 3.65 *** | 3.18 ± 0.53 *** |
| Group III | 90.98 ± 2.98 ### | 95.01 ± 8.93 ### | 138.32 ± 2.43 ### | 7.02 ± 0.39 ### |
| Group IV | 132.76 ± 4.34 ## | 289.83 ± 8.93 # | 193.43 ± 3.64 ## | 3.98 ± 0.53 # |
| Group V | 99.21 ± 7.03 ## | 145.83 ± 6.83 ### | 143.29 ± 4.83 ### | 5.08 ± 0.98 ## |
Annotation: *** p < 0.001 vs control, # p < 0.05, ## p < 0.01, ### p < 0.001 vs group II.
Figure 2Effect of different doses of CSP and INH-RIF in vivo antioxidant enzymes (a) superoxide dismutase (SOD), (b) catalase (CAT), and (c) malondialdehyde (MDA). Values are mean ± S.E.M; n = 6; ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 vs. control, # p < 0.05, ## p < 0.01 vs. group II, n.s stands for not statistically significant.
Figure 3Effect of different doses of CSP on INH-RIF induced proinflammatory cytokines (a) TNF-α and (b) COX-2. INH-RIF showed steep rise in both the proinflammatory cytokines, administrated with CSP and silymarin decreased TNF-α and COX-2 levels significantly and dose dependently. Values are mean ± S.E.M; n = 6; *** p < 0.001 vs. control, # p < 0.05, ## p < 0.01, ### p < 0.001 vs. group II, n.s stands for not statistically significant.
Figure 4Effect of different doses of CSP on liver histoarchitecture in INH-RIF induced liver injury. Photomicrographs of staining of histological sections of colon depicting different experimental groups, group I exhibited the normal integrated cellular architecture. Group-II shows extensive disintegration of cells, which is the hallmark of INH-RIF toxicity. In groups III, IV and V CSP treatment showed protection against INH-RIF-induced histopathological damage. magnification: 40×.
Chromatographic condition (gradient system).
| Time (min) | Function | Parameter |
|---|---|---|
| 2.00 | Change Solvent Composition | Solvent composition A: 95.00% B: 5.00% |
| 2.00 | Change Flow | Flow: 0.2 mL/min |
| 2.00 | Change Max. Pressure Limit | Max. Pressure Limit: 1200.00 bar |
| 15.00 | Change Solvent Composition | Solvent composition A: 5.00% B: 95.00% |
| 15.00 | Change Flow | Flow: 0.2 mL/min |
| 24.00 | Change Solvent Composition | Solvent composition A: 5.00% B: 95.00% |
| 24.00 | Change Flow | Flow: 0.2 mL/min |
| 25.00 | Change Solvent Composition | Solvent composition A: 95.00% B: 5.00% |
| 25.00 | Change Flow | Flow: 0.2 mL/min |
| 30.00 | Change Solvent Composition | Solvent composition A: 95.00% B: 5.00% |