| Literature DB >> 32344601 |
Ngoc Hong Nguyen1, Thuy Trang Nguyen2, Phu Cuong Ma3, Qui Thanh Hoai Ta4, Thuc-Huy Duong5, Van Giau Vo6,7.
Abstract
Bouea macrophylla is a tree widely grown throughout South East Asia. It is used in folk medicine for the treatment of various illnesses. The present study aimed to identify the chemical constituents and to test the antimicrobial and anticancer activities of an ethanol extract from B. macrophylla leaves. The extract exhibited excellent antibacterial properties against 9 out of 10 target microorganisms. including four Gram-negative bacteria (Escherichia coli, Shigella flexneri, Vibrio cholera, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa) and four Gram-positive bacteria (Staphylococcus aureus, Listeria monocytogenes, Enterococcus faecalis, and Bacillus cereus), as well as a fungus (Candida albicans). In addition, the extract was also tested on HeLa and human colorectal carcinoma (HCT116) cells to evaluate its cytostatic effects. The ethanol extract was able to inhibit the proliferation of HeLa and HCT116 cells, showing IC50 = 24 ± 0.8 and 28 ± 0.9 µg/mL, respectively, whereas the IC50 values of doxorubicin (standard) were 13.6 ± 1.3 and 15.8 ± 1.1 µg/mL respectively. Also, we identified various bioactive compounds in the extract such as polyphenols, flavonoids, caryophyllene, phytol, and trans-geranylgeraniol by GC-MS, which could contribute to the extract's biological activities. Therefore, our findings strongly indicate that the constituents of the B. macrophylla ethanol extract could be active against the tested bacteria and fungi as well as cancer cells. Further investigation is needed to understand the mechanisms mediating the antimicrobial and anticancer effects and identify signaling pathways that could be targeted for therapeutic application.Entities:
Keywords: Bouea macrophylla; HCT116; HeLa; antimicrobial activity; extract
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32344601 PMCID: PMC7221966 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25081996
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Qualitative phytochemical screening of the Bouea macrophylla extract tested in this work.
| Phytochemical Constituents | Test Name | Results |
|---|---|---|
| Polyphenol | FeCl3 test |
|
| Tannins | Gelatin test |
|
| Flavonoids | Alkali test |
|
| Carbohydrates | Benedict ’s testFehling’s test |
|
| Steroids | Liebermann–Burchard reaction |
|
| Triterpenoid | Salkowski’s test |
|
| Fixed oils | Spot Tests |
|
| Saponins | Frothing test |
|
| Alkaloids | Mayer’ testWagner’s test |
|
+++ Appreciable amount (positive within 2 min..); ++ Moderate amount (positive after 2 min. but within 5 min.); + Trace amount (positive after 5 min. but within 10 min.); − Completely absent.
GC–MS-identified compounds from the B. macrophylla extract.
| Peak No. | Retention Time (min.) | Putative Identity | % Area | MW (Da) |
| Elemental | Biological Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 15.603 | Caryophyllene | 27.484 | 204 | 93, 105, 120, | C15H24 | Antifungal [ |
|
| 16.091 | Humulene | 3.871 | 204 | 93, 107, 121, | C15H24 | Antibacterial [ |
|
| 17.866 | Caryophyllene oxide | 5.75 | 220 | 79, 93, 121, | C15H24O | Antifungal [ |
|
| 20.723 | 2-Methyl-cis-7,8-epoxynonadecane | 1.603 | 296 | 57, 97, 127, | C20H40O | Unknown |
|
| 22.326 | Hexadecanoic acid, ethyl ester | 2.718 | 284 | 88, 101, 157, | C18H36O2 | Anti-inflammatory, anticancer, and hepatoprotective [ |
|
| 23.54 | Phytol | 2.791 | 296 | 71, 123, 151, | C20H40O | Anticancer, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, diuretic, antitumor, chemopreventive, antimicrobial, use in vaccine formulations [ |
|
| 24.08 | Oxiraneundecanoic acid, 3-pentyl-, methyl ester, | 1.132 | 312 | 74, 213, 155, | C19H36O3 | Unknown |
|
| 24.309 | Hexadecanoic acid, ethyl ester | 0.752 | 284 | 88, 101, 157, | C15H36O2 | Antioxidant, nematicidal activities, and hypocholesterolemic [ |
|
| 27.356 | Diisooctyl phthalate | 5.232 | 390 | 104, 149, 210, | C24H38O4 | Antimicrobial [ |
|
| 29.789 | Squalene | 32.114 | 410 | 69, 5, 191. | C30H50 | Antioxidant, antitumor, and cytoprotective effects [ |
|
| 30.808 | 1.725 | 290 | 41, 69, 93, | C20H34O | Anticancer [ | |
|
| 33.581 | Vitamin E | 4.889 | 430 | 71, 165, 205, | C29H50O2 | Antioxidant and anti-inflammatory [ |
|
| 37.166 | Retinol, acetate | 6.351 | 328 | 43, 69, 119, | C22H32O2 | Antioxidant [ |
|
| 37.895 | γ-himachalene | 3.587 | 284 | 41, 93, 119, | H15H24 | Antioxidant [ |
Figure 1Chromatogram of the B. macrophylla extract. The x-axis indicates the retention time in minutes, while the y-axis indicates the peak % signal intensity.
Figure 2Antioxidant potential determined by Ferric Reducing Antioxidant Power (FRAP) assay (A) and DPPH radical-scavenging capacity (B) of the B. macrophylla extract. Data are shown as mean ± SD of three independent experiments (*p < 0.01; the mean difference is significant at the 0.01 level compared to the control by one-way ANOVA).
Antimicrobial screening test of the ethanolic leaf extract of B. macrophylla using various bacterial strains.
| Bacterial Strains | Inhibition Zones (mm) | Ciprofloxacin | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Gram (−) |
| 20.50 ± 0.60 | 17.20 ± 0.31 | 11.50 ± 0.50 | No antimicrobial activity | 30.33 ± 1.15 | ||
|
| 22.50 ± 0.50 | 17.83 ± 0.29 | 15.5 ± 0.83 | No antimicrobial activity | 33.50 ± 0.86 | |||
|
| 22.16 ± 1.25 | 17.50 ± 0.50 | 13.16 ± 1.26 | 11.17 ± 0.29 | No antimicrobial activity | 28.33 ± 0.29 | ||
|
| 16.66 ± 0.29 | 14.83 ± 0.29 | 12.83 ± 0.76 | No antimicrobial activity | 25.42 ± 0.41 | |||
| Gram (+) |
| 12.86 ± 0.15 | No antimicrobial activity | 18.66 ± 1.54 | ||||
|
| 17.83 ± 0.76 | 16.16 ± 1.04 | 14.83 ± 0.29 | 13.5 ± 0.50 | 11.50 ± 0.50 | Not observed | 30.66 ± 0.58 | |
|
| 24.83 ± 0.29 | 22.5 ± 0.5 | 17.83 ± 0.29 | 18.17 ± 0.29 | 17.5 ± 0.5 | 17.83 ± 0.76 | 26.12 ± 0.15 | |
|
| 16.00 ± 0.50 | 13.00 ± 0.60 | No antimicrobial activity | 20.66 ± 0.29 | ||||
|
| No antimicrobial activity | 23.66 ± 0.29 | ||||||
| Mycete |
| 21.5 ± 1.3 | 21 ± 1 | 17.83 ± 0.76 | 11.83 ± 0.76 | No antimicrobial activity | 25.66 ± 0.34 | |
Figure 3Growth inhibition of some pathogenic bacterial strains caused by the B. macrophylla extract at concentrations of 10−2, 10−1, 1, 10, 100, and 500 mg/mL. PC, positive control (ciprofloxacin); NC, negative control.
Figure 4Cell survival curves of HeLa (A) and HCT116 (B) cell lines treated for 48 h with Doxorubicin and the B. macrophylla ethanol extract at difference concentrations. Data are shown as mean ± SD of three independent experiments (* p < 0.05; the mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level compared to the control by one-way ANOVA).
Figure 5Morphological changes of (A) HeLa and (B) HCT116 cells treated with the B. macrophylla ethanol extract at difference concentrations for 48 h. Morphological changes corresponding to cell shrinkage re indicated by red arrows.