| Literature DB >> 32843013 |
Olubunmi B Ajayi1, Folake L Oyetayo1, Seun F Akomolafe2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: African star apple (Chrysophyllum albidum) is a traditonal fruit, which is predominant in tropical regions with the fruit parts consumed by the populace and used in folklore to manage diabetes. However, the likely activity mechanism is still undetermined. The current study examined and compared the inhibitory abilities of African star apple fruit parts on selected key enzymes related to diabetes mellitus in the pancreas tissue of rat.Entities:
Keywords: Acarbose; African star apple fruit; Antioxidant; Diabetes mellitus; α-Amylase; α-Glucosidase
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32843013 PMCID: PMC7446214 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-020-03053-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Med Ther ISSN: 2662-7671
Fig. 1African star apple fruit parts (a) Pulp (b) cotyledon (c) Seed coat (d) Pulp coat (e) Fruit
The starch, sugar, amylose and amylopectin contents, amylose/amylopectin ratio, and glycemic index of African star apple fruit parts
| Sample | Pulp | Cotyledon | Seed coat | Pulp coat |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Starch (g/100 g) | 3.13 ± 0.05 | 4.24 ± 0.27 | 3.79 ± 0.03 | 3.58 ± 0.13 |
| Sugar (g/100 g) | 28.63 ± 0.00 | 21.48 ± 0.04 | 23.97 ± 0.02 | 21.66 ± 0.03 |
| Amylose (g/100 g) | 2.03 ± 0.03 | 2.31 ± 0.02 | 2.28 ± 0.03 | 2.01 ± 0.02 |
| Amylopectin (g/100 g) | 5.48 ± 0.02 | 5.25 ± 0.02 | 5.56 ± 0.00 | 5.15 ± 0.05 |
| Estimated glycemic index (%) | 15.79 ± 1.89 | 29.10 ± 0.67 | 20.21 ± 1.60 | 13.63 ± 0.42 |
| Amylose/amylopectin ratio | 0.37 | 0.44 | 0.41 | 0.39 |
Values represent mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Values with the same superscript letter within a row are not significantly (p < 0.05) different
Phytochemical contents, ABTS scavenging ability and Ferric reducing antioxidant property of African star apple fruit parts
| Samples | Pulp | Cotyledon | Seed coat | Pulp coat |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total phenolic content (mg GAE/g) | 14.11 ± 2.74 | 7.56 ± 2.74 | 12.26 ± 2.84 | 23.01 ± 2.65 |
| Total flavonoid content (mg QE/g) | 5.31 ± 0.05 | 2.27 ± 0.37 | 3.69 ± 0.18 | 5.79 ± 0.05 |
| Vitamin C content (mg/g) | 7.26 ± 0.11 | 5.48 ± 0.17 | 5.54 ± 0.28 | 13.03 ± 0.04 |
| ABTS scavenging ability (X 100) (mmol. TEAC/g) | 3.70 ± 0.03 | 4.00 ± 0.04 | 3.97 ± 0.02 | 3.87 ± 0.03 |
| Ferric reducing antioxidant property (mg AAE/g) | 10.23 ± 0.02 | 5.52 ± 0.58 | 9.75 ± 0.00 | 15.82 ± 1.14 |
Values represent mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Values with the same superscript letter within a row are not significantly (p < 0.05) different. GAE Gallic acid equivalent, QE Quercetin equivalent, TEAC Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity, AAE Ascorbic acid equivalent
Effective concentration causing 50% antioxidant ability (IC50 values) of 1,1-diphenyl-2 picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), hydroxyl (OH), nitric oxide (NO) radical scavenging abilities, iron chelating ability of fruits parts
| Sample | DPPH*(mg/Ml) | OH*(mg/ml) | NO*(mg/ml) | Fe2+ chelating ability (mg/ml) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pulp | 3.03 ± 0.48 | 6.12 ± 2.07 | 0.67 ± 0.23 | 0.38 ± 0.10 |
| Cotyledon | 3.70 ± 0.57 | 5.63 ± 1.77 | 0.40 ± ±0.26 | 0.26 ± 0.15 |
| Seed coat | 3.60 ± 0.55 | 5.73 ± 1.77 | 0.47 ± 0.26 | 0.16 ± 0.04 |
| Pulp coat | 1.32 ± 0.12 | 3.69 ± 1.94 | 0.39 ± 0.04 | 0.14 ± 0.05 |
| Ascorbic acid | 0.96 ± 0.17 | 2.25 ± 0.89 | 0.55 ± 0.12 | – |
| EDTA | – | – | – | 0.27 ± 0.09 |
*The radical scavenging abilities of the fruits parts were determined as described and expressed as percentage. The IC50 (effective concentration causing 50% antioxidant ability) were calculated using nonlinear regression analysis. Values represent mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Values with the same letter within a column are not significantly different (p > 0.05). Positive control: ascorbic acid and EDTA (Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid) were used for DPPH*, OH*, NO* and Fe2+ chelating ability respectively
Fig. 2(a) Fe2+-induced MDA inhibition and (b) SNP-induced MDA inhibition of extract from African star apple fruit parts in rat pancreas tissue homogenate. Values represent means ± standard deviation of triplicate readings
Effective concentration causing 50% antioxidant ability (IC50 values) of aqueous extract of different parts of ripe African star apple fruit on inhibition of FeSO4 and SNP-induced lipid peroxidation in rat’s pancreas
| Sample | FeSO4-Induced lipid peroxidation (mg/ml) | SNP-induced lipid peroxidation (mg/ml) |
|---|---|---|
| Pulp | 0.54 ± 0.08 | 0.63 ± 0.14 |
| Cotyledon | 0.64 ± 0.17 | 0.89 ± 0.13 |
| Seed coat | 0.68 ± 0.15 | 0.91 ± 0.15 |
| Pulp coat | 0.34 ± 0.07 | 0.49 ± 0.11 |
| EDTA | 0.48 ± 0.04 | 0.32 ± 0.10 |
The IC50 (effective concentration causing 50% antioxidant ability) were calculated using nonlinear regression analysis. Values represent mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Values with the same letter within a column are not significantly different (p > 0.05). Positive control: EDTA (Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid)
Effective concentration causing 50% inhibitory ability (IC50 values) of α-amylase and α-glucosidase inhibitory activities of fruits parts
| Sample | α-amylase inhibitory activity (mg/ml) | α-glucosidase inhibitory activity (mg/ml) |
|---|---|---|
| Pulp | 1.46 ± 0.16 | 1.48 ± 0.17 |
| Cotyledon | 3.96 ± 0.59 | 2.29 ± 0.35 |
| Seed coat | 4.16 ± 0.62 | 1.79 ± 0.25 |
| Pulp coat | 1.39 ± 0.14 | 1.35 ± 0.13 |
| Acarbose | 1.20 ± 0.08 | 1.55 ± 0.19 |
The IC50 (effective concentration causing 50% inhibitory ability) were calculated using nonlinear regression analysis. Values represent mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Values with the same letter within a column are not significantly different (p > 0.05)
Phenolic components of aqueous extract of African star apple fruit parts
| Compounds | African star apple fruit parts | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pulp mg/g | Cotyledon mg/g | Seed coat mg/g | Pulp coat mg/g | |
| Beta-amyrin acetate | 2.42 ± 0.03a | 4.24 ± 0.01a | 2.83 ± 0.02a | 2.66 ± 0.01a |
| Eleagnine | 0.86 ± 0.01b | 0.34 ± 0.03b | 1.46 ± 0.01a | 1.31 ± 0.01a |
| Epicatechin | 0.98 ± 0.02b | 1.39 ± 0.02c | 1.27 ± 0.02b | 1.24 ± 0.03a |
| Epigallocatechin | 0.78 ± 0.01b | 0.34 ± 0.01b | 0.97 ± 0.02c | 0.87 ± 0.02b |
| Gentisic Acid | – | 0.67 ± 0.02b | 0.44 ± 0.02c | 0.21 ± 0.01c |
| Myricetin rhamnoside | 0.50 ± 0.02c | – | 0.78 ± 0.02c | 0.64 ± 0.02b |
| Procyanidin B5 | – | – | 0.54 ± 0.01c | 0.54 ± 0.01b |
| Skatole | 0.84 ± 0.01b | 0.32 ± 0.01b | 1.59 ± 0.02b | 1.49 ± 0.02a |
| Stigmasterol | 3.74 ± 0.02a | 2.47 ± 0.02a | 5.82 ± 0.02d | 5.25 ± 0.02d |
| Tetrahydro-2-methylharman | 1.05 ± 0.01a | 0.35 ± 0.01b | 1.66 ± 0.03a | 1.59 ± 0.03a |
Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviations (SD) of three determinations. Averages followed by different letters differ by Tukey test at p < 0.05
Fig. 3Structures of compounds identified in Chrysophyllum albidum fruit parts, Source: ChemSpider