| Literature DB >> 32748832 |
Htoo Tint San1,2, Tanawat Chaowasku3,4, Wanwimon Mekboonsonglarp5, Ratchanee Rodsiri6, Boonchoo Sritularak1,7, Hathairat Buraphaka8, Waraporn Putalun8, Kittisak Likhitwitayawuid1.
Abstract
The phytochemical investigation of Huberantha jenkinsii resulted in the isolation of two new and five known compounds. The new compounds were characterized as undescribed 8-oxoprotoberberine alkaloids and named huberanthines A and B, whereas the known compounds were identified as allantoin, oxylopinine, N-trans-feruloyl tyramine, N-trans-p-coumaroyl tyramine, and mangiferin. The structure determination was accomplished by spectroscopic methods. To evaluate therapeutic potential in diabetes and Parkinson's disease, the isolates were subjected to assays for their α-glucosidase inhibitory activity, cellular glucose uptake stimulatory activity, and protective activity against neurotoxicity induced by 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA). The results suggested that mangiferin was the most promising lead compound, demonstrating significant activity in all the test systems.Entities:
Keywords: Huberantha jenkinsii; Parkinsonism; diabetes; glucose uptake; α-glucosidase
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32748832 PMCID: PMC7435746 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25153533
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Chemical structures of compounds 1–7 isolated from Huberantha jenkinsii.
NMR data of compounds 1 and 2.
| Position | 1 * | 2 * | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| δH (Multiplicity, | δC | δH (Multiplicity, | δC | |
| 1 | 7.33 (1H, s) | 111.8 | 7.33 (1H, s) | 112.0 |
| 2 | 146.7 | 146.7 | ||
| 3 | 149.4 | 149.6 | ||
| 4 | 6.90 (1H, s) | 111.4 | 6.90 (1H, s) | 111.4 |
| 4a | 128.1 | 128.4 | ||
| 5 | 2.91 (2H, t, 6.0) | 28.6 | 2.89 (2H, dd, 6.5, 6.0) | 28.7 |
| 6 | 4.20 (2H, t, 6.0) | 40.1 | 4.16 (2H, dd, 6.5, 6.0) | 39.7 |
| 8 | 159.9 | 159.7 | ||
| 8a | 119.5 | 113.1 | ||
| 9 | 147.0 | 155.4 | ||
| 10 | 149.5 | 141.5 | ||
| 11 | 7.27 (1H, d, 8.4) | 122.6 | 155.2 | |
| 12 | 7.33 (1H, d, 8.4) | 123.7 | 6.85 (1H, s) | 107.3 |
| 12a | 132.9 | 136.9 | ||
| 13 | 6.91 (1H, s) | 101.5 | 6.80 (1H, s) | 100.7 |
| 14 | 136.1 | 137.9 | ||
| 14a | 123.6 | 123.4 | ||
| MeO-2 | ||||
| MeO-3 | 3.89 (3H, s) | 56.3 | 3.90 (3H, s) | 61.5 |
| MeO-9 | 3.91 (3H, s) | 62.2 | 3.90 (3H, s) | 61.9 |
| MeO-10 | 3.88 (3H, s) | 56.3 | ||
* Recorded in acetone-d6 at 500 and 125 MHz for 1H and 13C, respectively.
Figure 2COSY (bold line), NOESY (double arrow line), and HMBC (arrow line) correlations observed for 1.
Figure 3COSY (bold line), NOESY (double arrow line), and HMBC (arrow line) correlations observed for 2.
Neuroprotective activity of compounds 1–7.
| Sample | % Cell Survival | Sample | % Cell Survival |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 100 | ||
| 10 μM | 56.7 ± 1.2 | 10 μM | 48.9 ± 4.9 |
| 25 μM | 59.7 ± 1.1 | 25 μM | 49.8 ± 3.3 |
| 50 μM | 65.0 ± 2.1 * | 50 μM | 51.8 ± 1.1 |
| 100 μM | 72.4 ± 1.1 * | 100 μM | 60.9 ± 2.5 * |
| 6-OHDA (100 µM) | 56.8 ± 0.8 | 6-OHDA (100 µM) | 48.4 ± 3.3 |
| Oxyresveratrol (50 µM) | 66.0 ± 0.6 * | Oxyresveratrol (50 µM) | 56.1 ± 3.3 * |
| 10 μM | 53.6 ± 0.3 | 10 μM | 39.3 ± 1.4 |
| 25 μM | 55.3 ± 1.3 | 25 μM | 40.2 ± 0.3 |
| 50 μM | 57.1 ± 0.8 | 50 μM | 43.5 ± 0.8 |
| 100 μM | 60.9 ± 0.9 * | 100 μM | 45.5 ± 1.0 |
| 6-OHDA (100 µM) | 54.7 ± 0.4 | 6-OHDA (100 µM) | 42.5 ± 0.7 |
| Oxyresveratrol (50 µM) | 62.9 ± 1.2 * | Oxyresveratrol (50 µM) | 54.7 ± 1.5 * |
| 10 μM | 49.7 ± 1.0 | 10 μM | 54.8 ± 3.5 |
| 25 μM | 50.5 ± 2.3 | 25 μM | 60.5 ± 1.7 * |
| 50 μM | 51.3 ± 1.9 | 50 μM | 65.7 ± 2.5 * |
| 100 μM | 54.2 ± 1.0 | 100 μM | 70.7 ± 1.8 * |
| 6-OHDA (100 µM) | 52.2 ± 1.2 | 6-OHDA (100 µM) | 53.1 ± 0.5 |
| Oxyresveratrol (50 µM) | 57.1 ± 1.6 * | Oxyresveratrol (50 µM) | 57.9 ± 1.8 * |
| 10 μM | 45.5 ± 1.0 | ||
| 25 μM | 56.5 ± 1.0 | ||
| 50 μM | 57.2 ± 1.9 | ||
| 100 μM | 57.0 ± 0.8 | ||
| 6-OHDA (100 µM) | 58.4 ± 0.9 | ||
| Oxyresveratrol (50 µM) | 61.0 ± 1.2 * |
* (p < 0.05) Significantly different when compared to 6-OHDA (100 µM).
Figure 4(a) Cell viability (● = 24 h incubation with test sample without 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA)) and (b) cell survival (■ = 2 h incubation with 6-OHDA after 1 h of pretreatment with test sample); * A p < 0.05 is considered to be significantly different from the negative control (6-OHDA 100 µM); # less than 80% cell viability is considered cytotoxic; (−) = negative control (6-OHDA 100 µM); (+) = positive control (6-OHDA 100 µM and oxyresveratrol 50 µM).
Figure 5Cytotoxicity (a) and glucose uptake stimulation (b) of compounds from H. jenkinsii. * (p < 0.05) Significantly different when compared to the control (DMSO); Ins = insulin (positive control).
Glucose uptake stimulatory activity of compounds 3–7.
| Sample | % Glucose Uptake | % Enhancement |
|---|---|---|
| DMSO | 100 | 0 |
| Insulin (0.5 µM) | 246.6 ± 35.8 * | 146.6 |
| Allantoin ( | ||
| 1 μg/mL (6.32 µM) | 186.5 ± 34.3 * | 86.5 |
| 10 μg/mL (63.24 µM) | 228.4 ± 37.7 * | 128.4 |
| 100 μg/mL (632.44 µM) | 318.2 ± 35.5 * | 218.2 |
| Oxylopinine ( | ||
| 1 μg/mL (4.73 µM) | 150.7 ± 57.1 | NA |
| 10 μg/mL (47.34 µM) | 210.1 ± 29.6 * | 110.1 |
| 100 μg/mL (473.44 µM) | 321.0 ± 14.6 * | 221.0 |
| 1 μg/mL (3.19 µM) | 148.7 ± 39.7 | NA |
| 10 μg/mL (31.91 µM) | 123.7 ± 84.6 | NA |
| 100 μg/mL (319.13 µM) | NC | NA |
| 1 μg/mL (3.53 µM) | 221.0 ± 12.5 * | 121.0 |
| 10 μg/mL (35.29 µM) | 225.7 ± 67.3 * | 125.7 |
| 100 μg/mL (352.95 µM) | 279.7 ± 49.9 * | 179.7 |
| Mangiferin ( | ||
| 1 μg/mL (2.32 µM) | 169.6 ± 14.9 * | 69.6 |
| 10 μg/mL (23.68 µM) | 216.9 ± 16.4 * | 116.9 |
| 100 μg/mL (236.77 µM) | 300.7 ± 12.9 * | 200.7 |
* (p < 0.05) Significantly different from the control (DMSO); NA = not applicable; NC = not calculated due to toxicity.