| Literature DB >> 32650498 |
Siwar Ben Ayache1,2, Emna Behija Saafi1, Fathi Emhemmed2, Guido Flamini3,4, Lotfi Achour1, Christian D Muller2.
Abstract
The present work describes the volatile compounds profile and phytochemical content of Ceratonia siliqua L. Fifty different components have been identified. Among them, three constituents are shared i.e., 2-methlybutanoic acid, methyl hexanoate and limonene by different common carob preparations: pulp decoction (PD), seeds decoction (SD) and Rob, a sweet syrup extracted from the pulp of the carob pod. Each extract exhibits different volatile aromatic emission profiles. The antioxidant activity of the extracts was evaluated using three methods, DPPH, ABTS and FRAP, producing a dose-dependent response. The IC50, when determined by FRAP, gave the lowest values (0.66 ± 0.01, 0.73 ± 0.05 and 0.55 ± 0.00 mg/mL PD, SD and Rob, respectively). The nociception essay, after intraperitoneal injection of acetic acid in mice, demonstrated that Rob, pulp and seeds decoction extracts showed an efficient inhibition of writhes over time, with persistence over 30 min. The SD decoction revealed the highest efficacy in decreasing the writhing reflex (90.3 ± 1.2%; p < 0.001). Furthermore, the proapoptotic activity of SD against three human cell line, THP-1, MCF-7 and LOVO, evaluated by flow cytometry, showed a significantly stronger proapoptotic activity on colon cancer (LOVO) than on the other cell lines, a phenomenon known as phenotypic selectivity.Entities:
Keywords: Ceratonia siliqua L.; analgesic; antioxidant; decoction; phytochemicals; proapoptotic activities; pulps; rob; seeds; volatiles
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32650498 PMCID: PMC7397290 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25143120
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Volatile compounds evaluated in Ceratonia siliqua L. pulps, seeds and Rob.
| Constituents a | l.r.i. b | Seeds | Pulps | Rob |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sulfur derivatives | ||||
| dimethyl disulfide | 747 | 3.8 | ||
| dimethyl trisulfide | 974 | 0.3 | ||
| Monoterpene hydrocarbons | ||||
| α-pinene | 941 | 1.7 | ||
| sabinene | 977 | 0.6 | ||
| β-pinene | 982 | 2 | ||
| myrcene | 993 | 2.9 | ||
| δ-3-carene | 1013 | 1.2 | ||
| 1028 | 1 | |||
| limonene | 1032 | 34 | 0.6 | 1 |
| γ-terpinene | 1063 | 1.3 | ||
| Oxygenated monoterpenes | ||||
| fenchone | 1089 | 1.2 | ||
| linalool | 1101 | 2.3 | ||
| carvone | 1244 | 1 | ||
| Non-terpene derivatives | ||||
| Non-terpene esters | ||||
| ethyl butyrate | 804 | 1.4 | 0.5 | |
| methyl valerate | 826 | 1.6 | ||
| ethyl 2-methylbutyrate | 842 | 0.8 | 5.6 | |
| isopentyl acetate | 877 | 0.6 | ||
| propyl butyrate | 915 | 1.8 | 0.6 | |
| isobutyl butyrate | 956 | 0.7 | ||
| 2-methylbutyl isobutyrate | 1015 | 1.7 | 0.6 | |
| methyl heptanoate | 1027 | 0.5 | ||
| pentyl isobutyrate | 1058 | 0.2 | ||
| methyl ( | 1120 | 0.5 | ||
| methyl octanoate | 1128 | 0.6 | 2.2 | |
| hexyl isobutyrate | 1152 | 0.2 | ||
| methyl nonanoate | 1228 | 0.2 | ||
| Non-terpene aldehydes/ketones/acids | ||||
| isobutyric acid | 772 | 79.5 | ||
| butyric acid | 799 | 1.4 | ||
| furfural | 834 | 5.1 | ||
| 2-methylbutanoic acid | 846 | 2.6 | 4.7 | 6.3 |
| 2-heptanone | 891 | 2.5 | 0.8 | |
| 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one | 987 | 1.2 | ||
| hexanoic acid | 988 | 0.3 | ||
| octanal | 1002 | 0.7 | ||
| 2-nonanone | 1093 | 0.2 | ||
| nonanal | 1102 | 3.1 | 0.5 | |
| 8-methylnonanal | 1172 | 0.6 | ||
| decanal | 1205 | 1 | ||
| Non-terpene hydrocarbons | ||||
| styrene | 897 | 7.1 | ||
| 4-methyldecane | 1059 | 0.7 | ||
| 2-methyldecane | 1064 | 0.6 | ||
| 1100 | 0.8 | |||
| 1200 | 1.9 | |||
| Non-terpene alcohols/ethers/phenols | ||||
| 1-hexanol | 869 | 2.3 | ||
| 4-heptanol | 876 | 1.2 | ||
| 2-heptanol | 897 | 5.6 | ||
| 2-acetylfuran | 916 | 0.2 | ||
| 4-octanol | 979 | 0.2 | ||
| Sulfur derivatives | 0 | 0 | 4.1 | |
| Non-terpene hydrocarbons | 11.1 | 0 | 0 | |
| Non-terpene aldehydes/ketones/acids | 11.7 | 6.5 | 92.3 | |
| Non-terpene alcohols/ethers/phenols | 7.9 | 0 | 1.6 | |
| Non-terpene esters subtotal | 16.9 | 91.8 | 0.2 | |
| Total identified | 96.8 | 98.9 | 99.2 |
a: Percentages obtained by FID peak area normalization. b: Linear retention indices (DB-5 column). Trace < 0.1% not reported.
Phytochemical analysis of pulps, seeds decoction extracts and Rob.
| Compounds | Pulps | Seeds | Rob |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anthocyanins x | 158.1 ± 0.7 b | 51.2 ± 0.1 a | 188.5 ± 5 c |
| Phenolic y | 1.8 ± 0.1 a | 0.9 ± 0.1 a | 13 ± 0.8 b |
| Flavonoid z | 0.6 ± 0.0 a | 0.6 ± 0.1 a | 2.4 ± 0.1 b |
| Condensed tannins z | 0.3 ± 0.0 a | 0.2 ± 0.0 a | 1.2 ± 0.1 b |
x: as mg/100 g DW y: as Eg AC/100 g DW; z: as Eg C/100 g DW. Values not followed by the same letters (a, b and c), in the same line are significantly different for p < 0.05 (SPSS 22, ANOVA, post hoc test, Duncan).
Figure 1DPPH. scavenging activity based on the concentration of phenolic extracts of carob from Teboulba. DP: decoction pulps extract from Teboulba, DS: decoction seeds extract and Rob: traditional Tunisian preparation.
Figure 2ABTS radical scavenging depending on concentrations of extracts (mg/mL) from Teboulba. DP: decoction pulps extract from Teboulba, DS: decoction seeds extract and Rob: traditional Tunisian preparation.
Summary of antioxidant activity evaluated by three methods (FRAP, DPPH and ABTS).
| DP | DS | Rob | |
|---|---|---|---|
| DPPH | 1.04 ± 0.0 c | 0.86 ± 0.0 a | 0.97 ± 0.1 b |
| ABTS | 3.49 ± 0.0 c | 1.61 ± 0.1 b | 0.94 ± 0.1 a |
| FRAP | 0.66 ± 0.0 b | 0.73 ± 0.1 c | 0.55 ± 0.0 a |
Values not followed by the same letters (a, b and c), in the same line, are significantly different for p < 0.05 (SPSS 22, ANOVA, post hoc test, Duncan).
Analgesic activity of carob pulps (DP), seeds (DS) and Rob.
| Groups | Times (min) | 5 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 30 | Total (Cumulative) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Number of cramps | 50 ± 3 | 151 ± 2 | 177 ± 5 | 125 ± 2 | 111 ± 2.3 | 62 ± 1.2 | 676 ± 3 |
| Lysine | Number of cramps | 5 ± 2 | 98 ± 6 | 60 ± 5 | 75 ± 3 | 79 ± 4.4 | 52 ± 2.9 | 369 ± 10 *** |
| Acetyl | ||||||||
| salicylate (200 mg/kg) | % inhibition | 90 ± 1 *** | 35.1 ± 3 | 66.1 ± 4 * | 40.0 ± 2 | 28.8 ± 2.6 | 16.1 ± 1.3 | 45.40% |
| Number of cramps | 26 ± 3 | 97 ± 2 | 61 ± 3 | 49 ± 4 | 31 ± 3 | 23 ± 1 | 287 ± 4 *** | |
| DP (50 mg/kg) | % inhibition | 48 ± 1.7 | 35.8 ± 0.9 | 65.5 ± 1.7 * | 60.8 ± 2.5 | 72 ± 1.3 ** | 62.9 ± 0.4 * | 57.50% |
| DP (100 mg/kg) | Number of cramps | 23 ± 2 | 89 ± 4 | 47 ± 2 | 41 ± 2 | 29 ± 3 | 24 ± 2 | 253 ± 5 *** |
| % inhibition | 54.0 ± 1.2 | 41.1 ± 2,4 | 73.5 ± 1 ** | 67.2 ± 0.7 * | 73.9 ± 1.4 ** | 61.3 ± 0.7 ** | 62.60% | |
| DP (150 mg/kg) | Number of cramps | 34 ± 4 | 81 ± 5 | 63 ± 5 | 46 ± 4 | 23 ± 2 | 12 ± 3 | 249 ± 10 *** |
| % inhibition | 52.00 ± 1.1 | 46.36 ± 3 | 64.4 ± 2.6 * | 63.2 ± 2.2 * | 79.28 ± 0.9 ** | 80.64 ± 1.3 ** | 63.20% | |
| DP (200 mg/kg) | Number of cramps | 35 ± 3 | 96 ± 5 | 43 ± 3 | 39 ± 3 | 22 ± 1 | 10 ± 2 | 226 ± 5 *** |
| % inhibition | 30 ± 1.7 | 49 ± 1.4 | 75.7 ± 1.7 ** | 68.8 ± 1.9 * | 80.2 ± 0.6 ** | 83.9 ± 0.6 ** | 66.60% | |
| Number of cramps | 10 ± 1 | 73 ± 1 | 48 ± 1 | 54 ± 2 | 27 ± 2 | 30 ± 1 | 242 ± 4 *** | |
| DS | ||||||||
| (50 mg/kg) | % inhibition | 87.3 ± 2 *** | 51.7 ± 2 | 72.9 ± 2.5 ** | 56.8 ± 4.5 | 75.7 ± 2.6 ** | 51.6 ± 0.9 | 64.20% |
| DS (100 mg/kg) | Number of cramps | 13 ± 1 | 56 ± 3 | 30 ± 2 | 19 ± 1 | 17 ± 1 | 16 ± 2 | 151 ± 6 *** |
| % inhibition | 83.54 ± 2.5 ** | 63 ± 6.3 | 83 ± 3 ** | 84.8 ± 2.1 ** | 84.7 ± 2.3 ** | 74.2 ± 2.8 ** | 77.70% | |
| DS (150 mg/kg) | Number of cramps | 35 ± 2 | 64 ± 1 | 51 ± 1 | 23 ± 1 | 18 ± 1 | 15 ± 1 | 206 ± 4 *** |
| % inhibition | 55.7 ± 3.5 | 57.6 ± 2.6 | 71.2 ± 2.7 ** | 81.6 ± 3.1 ** | 83.8 ± 3.7 ** | 75.8 ± 1.6 ** | 69.50% | |
| DS (200 mg/kg) | Number of cramps | 41 ± 1.4 | 72 ± 1 | 48 ± 2 | 35 ± 1 | 23 ± 1 | 6 ± 1 | 225 ± 4 *** |
| % inhibition | 48.1 ± 3.4 | 52.3 ± 2.9 | 72.9 ± 3.2 ** | 72 ± 2 ** | 79.3 ± 2 ** | 90.3 ± 1.1 *** | 66.70% | |
| Number of cramps | 24 ± 1.1 | 46 ± 1 | 38 ± 1 | 41 ± 1 | 27 ± 0.6 | 20 | 196 ± 8 *** | |
| Rob (50 mg/kg) | % inhibition | 69.6 ± 7 * | 69.5 ± 4.1 | 78.5 ± 3 ** | 67.2 ± 3.8 * | 75.7 ± 3 ** | 67.7 ± 2.6 * | 72.20% |
| Number of cramps | 25 ± 2.8 | 53 ± 2 | 29 ± 2 | 25 ± 2 | 16 ± 1.2 | 7 ± 1 | 155 ± 6 *** | |
| Rob (100 mg/kg) | % inhibition | 68.4 ± 1.6 * | 62.9 ± 4.35 * | 83 ± 2.8 ** | 84.8 ± 3.4 ** | 84.7 ± 1.9 ** | 74.2 ± 0.8 ** | 78% |
| Rob (150 mg/kg) | Number of cramps | 28 ± 1 | 62 ± 2 | 47 ± 2 | 43 ± 2 | 31 ± 1 | 10 ± 1 | 221 ± 3 *** |
| % inhibition | 64.6 ± 0.8 * | 58.9 ± 4 | 73.5 ± 2.6 ** | 65.6 ± 1.2 * | 72.1 ± 1.3 ** | 83.9 ± 1.97 ** | 68.70% | |
| Rob (200 mg/kg) | Number of cramps | 32 ± 1 | 73 ± 2 | 46 ± 1 | 43 ± 0.5 | 33 ± 0.5 | 10 ± 0.8 | 237 ± 4 *** |
| % inhibition | 63.5 ± 2.7 * | 51.5 ± 2.6 | 75.6 ± 2.9 | 67.4 ± 1.9 * | 71.9 ± 3.6 ** | 82.6 ± 1.5 ** | 66.40% |
Results are expressed as mean ± SD for 6 rats in each group. The asterisks ** and *** indicate significant differences respectively at p < 0.01 and p < 0.001 relative to control (ANOVA, post hoc LSD test) DP: decoction pulps, DS: decoction seeds.
Figure 3THP-1 monocytic leukemia cells treated with increasing doses of carob extracts. DS: Cells treated with seeds decoction extract; DP: Cells treated with pulp decoction extract and Rob: Cells treated with Rob. Results are expressed as mean ± SD with n = 3 independent experiments.
Figure 4Breast cancer cells (MCF-7) treated with increasing doses of carob extracts. DS: Cells treated with seeds decoction extract; DP: Cells treated with pulp decoction extract and Rob: Cells treated with Rob. Results are expressed as mean ± SD with n = 3 independent experiments.
Figure 5Adenoma colon cells (LOVO) treated with increasing doses of carob extracts. DS: Cells treated with seeds decoction extract; DP: Cells treated with pulp decoction extract and Rob: Cells treated with Rob. Results are expressed as mean ± SD with n = 3 independent experiments.