| Literature DB >> 32665768 |
Mohammed Yosri1, Basma H Amin1, Nermine N Abed2, Amal S Elithy2, Sayed M Kareem1, Nagwa M Sidkey2.
Abstract
Gastric diseases are increasing with the infection of Campylobacter jejuni. Late stages of infection lead to peptic ulcer and gastric carcinoma. C. jejuni infects people within different stages of their life, especially childhood, causing severe diarrhea; it infects around two-thirds of the world population. Due to bacterial resistance against standard antibiotic, a new strategy is needed to impede Campylobacter infections. Plants provide highly varied structures with antimicrobial use which are unlikely to be synthesized in laboratories. A special feature of higher plants is their ability to produce a great number of organic chemicals of high structural diversity, the so-called secondary metabolites. Twenty plants were screened to detect their antibacterial activities. Screening results showed that Rheum officinalis was the most efficient against C. jejuni. Fractionation pattern was obtained by column chromatography, while the purity test was done by thin-layer chromatography (TLC). The chemical composition of bioactive compound was characterized using GC-MS, nuclear magnetic resonance, and infrared analysis. Minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of the purified compound was 31.25 µg/ml. Cytotoxicity assay on Vero cells was evaluated to be 497 µg/ml. Furthermore, the purified bioactive compound activated human lymphocytes in vitro. The data presented here show that Rheum officinalis could potentially be used in modern applications aimed at the treatment or prevention of foodborne diseases.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32665768 PMCID: PMC7349621 DOI: 10.1155/2020/3591276
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Screening of the anti-Campylobacter jejuni activity of different plant extracts.
| Collected plants | Inhibited zone H2O extract | Inhibited zone methanol extract | Inhibited zone hexane extract |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 8.03 ± 0.25 | 15.1 ± 0.00 | 12.0 ± 0.00 |
|
| 26.8 ± 0.51 | 18.0 ± 0.00 | 14.7 ± 0.00 |
|
| 11.2 ± 0.00 | 20.1 ± 0.00 | 11.5 ± 0.00 |
|
| 10.3 ± 0.00 | 15.1 ± 0.00 | 20.6 ± 0.00 |
|
| 31.7 ± 0.00 | 20.4 ± 0.00 | 18.6 ± 0.00 |
|
| 12.5 ± 0.00 | 15.2 ± 0.00 | 12.2 ± 0.00 |
|
| 7.7 ± 0.00 | 15.2 ± 0.00 | 17.3 ± 0.00 |
|
| 8.5 ± 0.00 | 10.6 ± 0.00 | 15.3 ± 0.00 |
|
| 16.4 ± 0.00 | 19.7 ± 0.00 | 30.2 ± 0.00 |
|
| 9.5 ± 0.00 | 9.3 ± 0.32 | 9.2 ± 0.00 |
|
| 8.4 ± 0.00 | 15.1 ± 0.00 | 8.0 ± 0.00 |
|
| 23.2 ± 0.00 | 8.2 ± 0.30 | 8.4 ± 0.00 |
|
| 10.2 ± 0.32 | 10.5 ± 0.00 | 11.4 ± 0.20 |
|
| 28.2 ± 0.30 | 15.7 ± 0.00 | 23.1 ± 0.20 |
|
| 24.1 ± 0.00 | 39.1 ± 0.00 | 20.2 ± 0.00 |
|
| 10.5 ± 0.00 | 15.4 ± 0.00 | 15.4 ± 0.00 |
|
| 10.4 ± 0.00 | 10.1 ± 0.00 | 13.2 ± 0.00 |
|
| 20.0 ± 0.2 | 9.9 ± 0.00 | 9.5 ± 0.35 |
|
| 16.8 ± 0.00 | 19.2 ± 0.1 | 30.4 ± 0.00 |
|
| 17.5 ± 0.15 | 22.4 ± 0.00 | 23.4 ± 0.00 |
Comparative antibacterial activity of different solvents extraction to Rheum officinalis.
| Solvent | Inhibition zone of crude (mm) | Inhibition zone of solvent (mm) |
|---|---|---|
| Hexane | 20.2 ± 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Chloroform | 12.3 ± 0.1 | 0.0 |
| Ethyl acetate | 15.1 ± 0.14 | 7.0 ± 0.0 |
|
| 15.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Benzene | 13.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Toluene | 18.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Methanol | 39.1 ± 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Fats | 9.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 |
Fractionation pattern of antibacterial agents produced by Rheum officinalis, using column chromatography, and their effect against C. jejuni NCTC11168.
| Fraction no. | Inhibited zone (mm) |
|---|---|
| 1 | 0.00 |
| 2 | 0.00 |
| 3 | 35 ± 0.00 |
| 4 | 33.3 ± 0.05 |
| 5 | 36.4 ± 0.11 |
| 6 | 0.00 |
| 7 | 0.00 |
| 8 | 0.00 |
| 9 | 0.00 |
| 10 | 0.00 |
| 11 | 32.1 ± 0.00 |
| 12 | 32.2 ± 0.00 |
| 13 | 37.7 ± 0.00 |
| 14 | 38.2 ± 0.00 |
| 15 | 31.2 ± 0.00 |
| 16 | 0.00 |
| 17 | 0.00 |
| 18 | 0.00 |
| 19 | 42.3 ± 0.1 |
| 20 | 39.1 ± 0.00 |
| 21 | 39.1 ± 0.00 |
| 22 | 39.3 ± 0.00 |
| 23 | 39.46 ± 0.15 |
| 24 | 0.00 |
Figure 1Fractionation pattern of antibacterial agents produced by Rheum officinalis, using column chromatography, and their effect against C. jejuni NCTC11168.
Screening of minimal inhibitory concentration of different concentrations of Rheum officinalis against C. jejuni NCTC11168.
| Concentration ( | Inhibited zone (mm) |
|---|---|
| 500 | 42.5 ± 0.0 |
| 250 | 37.5 ± 0.0 |
| 125 | 28.6 ± 0.0 |
| 62.50 | 17.5 ± 0.0 |
| 31.25 | 11.0 ± 0.0 |
| 15.62 | 0 |
| 7.81 | 0 |
| 3.90 | 0 |
| 1.95 | 0 |
| 0.97 | 0 |
Figure 2GC-MS of the purified bioactive compound from Rheum officinalis against C. jejuni NCTC11168.
Figure 3IR spectrum of the purified bioactive compound from Rheum officinalis against C. jejuni NCTC11168.
Figure 4NMR spectrum of the purified bioactive compound from Rheum officinalis against C. jejuni NCTC11168.
Figure 5Expected formula of the purified compound from Rheum officinalis tested against C. jejuni NCTC11168 (8-benzyl-2-methyl-3-phenyl-3,7,8,9-tetrahydro-6-oxa-3,8-diaza-cyclopenta[A]naphthalene-1-carboxylic acid ethyl ester).
Figure 6Effect of the purified compound from Rheum officinalis on isolated human lymphocytes. (a) Control. (b) Treated.