| Literature DB >> 32316213 |
Eugénia Solange Santos1,2, Ângelo Luís1,3, Joana Gonçalves1,3, Tiago Rosado1,3,4, Luísa Pereira5, Eugenia Gallardo1,3, Ana Paula Duarte1,3.
Abstract
Julbernardia paniculata and Pterocarpus angolensis are two plant species with important application in African traditional medicine, particularly in Angola, in the treatment of several diseases. However, scientific studies concerning these species are scarce. The goal of this work was to know better which medicinal approaches are used by the Huíla population in Angola by means of ethnobotanical surveys. Furthermore, extracts of both plants were phytochemically characterized. Antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, wound-healing activities, and potential cytotoxicity were also studied. With this study it was possible to verify that 67% of the individuals that use medicinal plants are women, and their main therapeutic uses are the treatment of problems of the digestive system and skin disorders. Barks of J. paniculata and leaves of P. angolensis are the most often used plant parts. Through high-performance liquid chromatography coupled to diode-array detector (HPLC-DAD) and GC-MS it was possible to characterize the chemical composition of the two species, which are rich in phenolic compounds, terpenes, terpenoids, sesquiterpenoids and fatty acids. Both plants showed to possess antioxidant, anti-inflammatory proprieties, and wound-healing activity. To the best of our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive study of these two species and the first ethnobotanical and ethnopharmacological study of medicinal plants from this region of Angola.Entities:
Keywords: GC-MS; HPLC-DAD; Julbernardia paniculata; Pterocarpus angolensis; ethnobotanical surveys; phytochemicals; wound-healing activity
Year: 2020 PMID: 32316213 PMCID: PMC7221604 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25081828
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Total phenolic compounds and flavonoids contents.
| Plant Species | Plant Part | Samples | Phenolic Compounds | Flavonoids |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Barks | Crude extract | 410.93 ± 16.72 g | 1.64 ± 0.19 a |
| Fraction 1 | 19.88 ± 2.72 a | 57.69 ± 3.25 f | ||
| Fraction 2 | 366.13 ± 7.94 f | 3.07 ± 0.18 a | ||
| Fraction 3 | 703.73 ± 13.29 h | 2.76 ± 0.02 a | ||
| Leaves | Crude extract | 77.60 ± 6.80 b | 18.65 ± 0.79 c | |
| Fraction 1 | 18.89 ± 0.84 a | 62.21 ± 0.82 g | ||
| Fraction 2 | 39.20 ± 2.26 a | 61.89 ± 2.81 f,g | ||
| Fraction 3 | 188.67 ± 4.41 c | 12.68 ± 0.18 b | ||
|
| Barks | Crude extract | 258.40 ± 5.81 d | 2.25 ± 0.20 a |
| Fraction 1 | 6.83 ± 1.00 a | 71.97 ± 2.17 h | ||
| Fraction 2 | 173.07 ± 13.48 c | 10.79 ± 0.31 b | ||
| Fraction 3 | 305.73 ± 13.71 e | 4.47 ± 0.21 a | ||
| Leaves | Crude extract | 262.00 ± 1.70 d | 28.48 ± 1.26 d | |
| Fraction 1 | 93.33 ± 6.07 b | 68.10 ± 3.05 h | ||
| Fraction 2 | 257.00 ± 18.95 d | 45.78 ± 3.18 e | ||
| Fraction 3 | 360.93 ± 12.17 f | 23.41 ± 0.90 c,d |
1 Mean values in a column with different letters (a to h) are significantly different (p-value < 0.05).
Phenolic profile of J. paniculata (n = 2; N.D. = not detected).
| Phenolic Compounds | Barks | Leaves | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crude Extract | Fraction 1 | Fraction 2 | Fraction 3 | Crude Extract | Fraction 1 | Fraction 2 | Fraction 3 | |
| Gallic acid | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 0.13 ± 0.04 | 0.11 ± 0.03 | N.D. | 0.16 ± 0.01 |
| Chlorogenic acid | 0.21 ± 0.05 | N.D. | 0.20 ± 0.06 | 0.20 ± 0.05 | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| Caffeic acid | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 0.16 ± 0.01 | N.D. |
| Vanillic acid | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 0.96 ± 0.04 | N.D. |
| Syringic acid | 0.14 ± 0.04 | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 0.12 ± 0.01 | 0.10 ± 0.01 | 0.15 ± 0.02 | N.D. |
| 0.16 ± 0.01 | N.D. | 0.20 ± 0.02 | 0.15 ± 0.01 | N.D. | N.D. | 0.54 ± 0.03 | 0.18 ± 0.02 | |
| Taxifolin | 0.07 ± 0.01 | N.D. | 0.16 ± 0.04 | 0.11 ± 0.01 | 0.12 ± 0.02 | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| Rutin | N.D. | N.D. | 0.11 ± 0.02 | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 0.90 ± 0.15 | 0.39 ± 0.03 |
| Ferulic acid | 0.28 ± 0.02 | N.D. | 0.28 ± 0.02 | N.D. | 0.32 ± 0.03 | 0.28 ± 0.01 | 0.87 ± 0.02 | 0.38 ± 0.02 |
| Ellagic acid | N.D. | N.D. | 0.09 ± 0.01 | N.D. | 0.15 ± 0.03 | 0.06 ± 0.01 | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.14 ± 0.02 |
| Rosmarinic acid | 0.08 ± 0.01 | N.D. | 0.12 ± 0.03 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | N.D. | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.12 ± 0.02 | 0.07 ± 0.01 |
| Quercetin | 0.25 ± 0.03 | N.D. | 0.20 ± 0.01 | 0.19 ± 0.02 | N.D. | 0.18 ± 0.02 | N.D. | N.D. |
| Total | 1.18 ± 0.04 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 1.36 ± 0.01 | 0.73 ± 0.09 | 0.84 ± 0.01 | 0.81 ± 0.08 | 3.78 ± 0.22 | 1.33 ± 0.09 |
Phenolic profile of P. angolensis (n = 2; N.D. = not detected).
| Phenolic Compounds | Barks | Leaves | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crude Extract | Fraction 1 | Fraction 2 | Fraction 3 | Crude Extract | Fraction 1 | Fraction 2 | Fraction 3 | |
| Gallic acid | 0.13 ± 0.01 | N.D. | 0.15 ± 0.03 | 0.12 ± 0.01 | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| Chlorogenic acid | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| Caffeic acid | 0.13 ± 0.02 | N.D. | 0.21 ± 0.01 | 0.13 ± 0.02 | 0.15 ± 0.01 | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| Vanillic acid | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 0.07 ± 0.01 | N.D. | 0.91 ± 0.07 | N.D. |
| Syringic acid | 0.11 ± 0.03 | N.D. | 0.14 ± 0.03 | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| N.D. | N.D. | 0.17 ± 0.03 | N.D. | 0.34 ± 0.04 | N.D. | 0.39 ± 0.03 | 0.28 ± 0.04 | |
| Taxifolin | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| Rutin | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 39.87 ± 4.43 | 12.07 ± 1.44 | 14.50 ± 0.28 | 17.83 ± 2.64 |
| Ferulic acid | 0.27 ± 0.04 | 0.28 ± 0.05 | 0.34 ± 0.05 | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 0.57 ± 0.03 | N.D. |
| Ellagic acid | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 0.11 ± 0.01 | 0.28 ± 0.02 | N.D. |
| Rosmarinic acid | N.D. | N.D. | 0.18 ± 0.01 | 0.06 ± 0.01 | 0.43 ± 0.01 | N.D. | 0.71 ± 0.06 | N.D. |
| Quercetin | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| Total | 0.65 ± 0.01 | 0.28 ± 0.05 | 1.18 ± 0.03 | 0.31 ± 0.05 | 40.87 ± 4.47 | 12.18 ± 1.42 | 17.35 ± 0.12 | 18.12 ± 2.60 |
Phytocomponents identified in the Fraction 2 (diethyl ether) of J. paniculata leaves by GC-MS.
| Retention Time (min) | Compounds | Peak Area (% of Total) |
|---|---|---|
| 3.416 | Linalool oxide | 0.331 |
| 4.276 | 2,6-Di( | 2.638 |
| 4.792 | Phenol | 3.076 |
| 5.223 | 2(4H)-Benzofuranone | 0.348 |
| 6.458 | 1-Hexadecene | 0.637 |
| 8.129 | 1-(P-Methoxyphenyl)-2-methoxyprop-1-ene | 0.729 |
| 8.597 | Loliolide | 1.849 |
| 8.890 | Atropine | 0.651 |
| 8.939 | Megastigma-5,7-diene-3,4,9-triol | 0.580 |
| 9.594 | Neophytadiene | 6.087 |
| 10.726 | 1,4-Dihydrophenanthrene | 0.506 |
| 11.085 | Hexadecanoic acid | 0.479 |
| 11.793 | 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid | 0.317 |
| 13.224 | 4-Oxazolecarboxylic acid | 0.135 |
| 13.447 | Menthol | 0.545 |
| 14.164 | Linolenic acid methyl ester | 0.253 |
| 14.367 | Phytol | 1.996 |
| 15.501 | Dodecanamide | 0.383 |
| 18.427 | Linoleic acid | 0.485 |
| 18.521 | 9-Octadecenamide | 3.376 |
| 21.848 | Medicarpin | 0.690 |
| 22.021 | 6H-Benzofuro [3,2-c][1]benzopyran-6a(11aH)-ol | 0.377 |
| 26.436 | 1-Docosene | 0.407 |
| 31.523 | Stigmasta-5,22-dien-3-ol | 1.003 |
| 32.557 | 23S-Ethylcholest-5-en-3-β-ol | 6.932 |
| 32.721 | 3-Keto-urs-12-ene | 3.758 |
| 32.830 | Alnulin | 1.112 |
| 33.171 | β-Amyrin | 5.714 |
| 33.646 | D:C-Friedoolean-8-en-3-one | 17.602 |
| 34.114 | Lup-20(29)-en-3β-ol | 28.860 |
Phytocomponents identified in the crude methanolic extract of P. angolensis leaves by GC-MS.
| Retention Time (min) | Compounds | Peak Area (% of Total) |
|---|---|---|
| 9.590 | Neophytadiene | 0.584 |
| 11.087 | 7,9-Di-tert-butyl-1-oxaspiro [4.5]deca-6,9-diene-2,8-dione | 0.275 |
| 12.092 | Eicosamethylcyclodecasiloxane | 0.901 |
| 15.483 | Hexadecanamide | 0.257 |
| 17.246 | Eseroline | 1.191 |
| 18.518 | 9-Octadecenamide | 3.303 |
| 20.845 | Hexadecanoic acid | 1.409 |
| 32.534 | Pregn-5-en-3-ol | 1.578 |
| 34.079 | Lup-20(29)-en-3β-ol | 10.332 |
Antioxidant properties of the samples.
| Plant Species | Plant Part | Samples | DPPH Free Radical Scavenging Assay | β-Carotene Bleaching Test | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IC50 (mg/L) 1 | AAI 1 | Antioxidant Activity | IC50 (mg/L) 1 | |||
|
| Barks | Crude extract | 5.51 ± 0.93 a | 8.21 ± 0.19 e | Very strong | 422.67 ± 18.53 a |
| Fraction 1 | 39.06 ± 7.91 a | 1.15 ± 0.19 a | Strong | 1350.79 ± 287.89 a,b,c | ||
| Fraction 2 | 6.60 ± 1.56 a | 6.52 ± 0.52 d | Very strong | 493.19 ± 34.15 a,b | ||
| Fraction 3 | 7.35 ± 1.20 a | 6.86 ± 0.44 d | Very strong | 533.83 ± 1.55 a,b | ||
| Leaves | Crude extract | 57.62 ± 7.41 ab | 0.75 ± 0.05 a | Moderate | 1231.00 ± 269.36 a,b,c | |
| Fraction 1 | 184.54 ± 36.43 c | 0.28 ± 0.05 a | Poor | 8222.58 ± 186.22 f | ||
| Fraction 2 | 68.71 ± 14.93 a,b,c | 0.64 ± 0.08 a | Moderate | 1504.58 ± 300.00 b,c | ||
| Fraction 3 | 48.97 ± 9.09 a,b | 1.02 ± 0.11 a,b | Strong | 1188.85 ± 229.66 a,b,c | ||
|
| Barks | Crude extract | 7.11 ± 1.19 a | 6.21 ± 0.33 d | Very strong | 526.91 ± 101.74 a,b |
| Fraction 1 | 165.84 ± 7.09 b,c | 0.33 ± 0.08 a | Poor | 4396.88 ± 226.40 e | ||
| Fraction 2 | 74.39 ± 9.01 a,b,c | 0.63 ± 0.05 a | Moderate | 3021.61 ± 522.29 d | ||
| Fraction 3 | 11.30 ± 1.90 a | 4.46 ± 0.16 c | Very strong | 2162.85 ± 44.19 c,d | ||
| Leaves | Crude extract | 8.67 ± 1.22 a | 5.09 ± 0.32 c | Very strong | 578.55 ± 18.85 a,b | |
| Fraction 1 | 21.33 ± 3.19 a | 2.00 ± 0.43 b | Strong | 1480.34 ± 252.16 a,b,c,f | ||
| Fraction 2 | 10.46 ± 2.38 a | 4.29 ± 0.02 c | Very strong | 757.36 ± 68.61 a,b | ||
| Fraction 3 | 10.45 ± 1.74 a | 4.72 ± 0.11 c | Very strong | 583.24 ± 130.35 a,b | ||
1 Mean values in a column with different letters (a to f) are significantly different (p-value < 0.05); AAI—antioxidant activity index, DPPH—2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl.
Anti-inflammatory and cytotoxicity results.
| Plant Species | Plant Part | Samples | Anti-Inflammatory Activity—IC50 (mg/L) 1 | Cytotoxicity | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration (mg/L) | Cell Viability (%) 2 | |||||
| Negative Control a | 100 (100–100) | - | ||||
|
| Barks | Crude extract | 784.24 ± 73.25 a | 250 b | 74.90 | 0.037 a,b
|
| 500 c | 103.62 | 0.487 a,c | ||||
| 750 d | 74.09 | 0.037 ad
| ||||
| Fraction 3 | 274.86 ± 30.12 b | 250 e | 76.24 | 0.053 a,e | ||
| 500 f | 82.69 | 0.037 a,f
| ||||
| 750 g | 77.05 | 0.053 a,g | ||||
|
| Leaves | Crude extract | N.D. | 250 h | 59.60 | 0.037 a,h
|
| 500 i | 54.50 | 0.037 a,i
| ||||
| 750 j | 53.69 | 0.037 a,j
| ||||
| Fraction 3 | N.D. | 250 k | 63.89 | 0.037 a,k
| ||
| 500 l | 58.79 | 0.037 a,l
| ||||
| 750 m | 91.01 | 0.037 a,m
| ||||
1 Mean values in a column with different letters (a and b) are significantly different (p-value < 0.05); 2 Results expressed as median and range; 3 Upper letters (a to m) were used to identify the statistical comparisons, * indicates significant results (p-value < 0.05); N.D.—not detected.
Figure 1Calculated distance between the margins of the injury (upper letters were used to identify the statistical comparisons, indicating in the samples the pairs that presented significant results (p-value < 0.05)).
Calculated mean difference between the distance of the injury of the negative control and the samples.
| Plant Species | Plant Part | Samples | Concentration (mg/L) | Mean Difference | 95% C.I. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Barks | Crude extract | 250 | 0.544 | 0.297–0.792 | <0.001 |
| 500 | 0.422 | 0.175–0.670 | <0.001 | |||
| 750 | 0.333 | 0.086–0.581 | 0.001 | |||
| Fraction 3 | 250 | 0.644 | 0.397–0.892 | <0.001 | ||
| 500 | 0.533 | 0.286–0.781 | <0.001 | |||
| 750 | 0.656 | 0.408–0.903 | <0.001 | |||
|
| Leaves | Crude extract | 250 | 0.344 | 0.097–0.592 | 0.001 |
| 500 | 0.300 | 0.053–0.547 | 0.006 | |||
| 750 | 0.389 | 0.142–0.636 | <0.001 | |||
| Fraction 3 | 250 | 0.622 | 0.375–0.870 | <0.001 | ||
| 500 | 1.189 | 0.942–1.436 | <0.001 | |||
| 750 | 0.656 | 0.408–0.903 | <0.001 |
C.I.—Confidence interval; * Indicates significant results (p-value < 0.05).
Microscopic images obtained from the scratch wound-healing assay with the selected samples of J. paniculata (Magnification: 100×).
| Representative Image of the Cells at the Initial Moment (0 h) | Samples | 2 h | 24 h |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| Negative control |
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
| ||
|
|
| ||
|
|
| ||
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
Microscopic images obtained from the scratch wound-healing assay with the selected samples of P. angolensis (Magnification: 100×).
| Samples | 2 h | 24 h |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Figure 2Study area showing Huíla province and Bicuari National Park (adapted from Google Maps, https://www.google.pt/maps/preview).
Figure 3Schematic diagram showing the sequential liquid-liquid partition of the crude methanolic extracts.
Chromatographic conditions (retention time and wavelength) of the selected phenolic compounds.
| Phenolic Compounds | Retention Time (min) | Wavelength (nm) |
|---|---|---|
| Gallic acid | 3.826 | 280 |
| Chlorogenic acid | 10.710 | 322 |
| Caffeic acid | 13.540 | 322 |
| Vanillic acid | 13.597 | 263 |
| Syringic acid | 16.171 | 280 |
| 20.774 | 291 | |
| Taxifolin | 24.973 | 291 |
| Rutin | 25.569 | 255 |
| Ferulic acid | 25.865 | 322 |
| Ellagic acid | 27.266 | 255 |
| Rosmarinic acid | 32.852 | 322 |
| Quercetin | 41.964 | 360 |