| Literature DB >> 33227960 |
Katkam N Gangadhar1,2, Maria João Rodrigues1, Hugo Pereira3, Helena Gaspar4,5, F Xavier Malcata2, Luísa Barreira1,3, João Varela1,3.
Abstract
Tisochrysis lutea is a marine haptophyte rich in omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (e.g., docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)) and carotenoids (e.g., fucoxanthin). Because of the nutraceutical applications of these compounds, this microalga is being used in aquaculture to feed oyster and shrimp larvae. In our earlier report, T. lutea organic crude extracts exhibited in vitro cytotoxic activity against human hepatocarcinoma (HepG2) cells. However, so far, the compound(s) accountable for the observed bioactivity have not been identified. Therefore, the aim of this study was to isolate and identify the chemical component(s) responsible for the bioactivity observed. Bioassay-guided fractionation through a combination of silica-gel column chromatography, followed by preparative thin layer chromatography (PTLC), led to the isolation of two diastereomers of a monoterpenoid lactone, namely, loliolide (1) and epi-loliolide (2), isolated for the first time in this species. The structural elucidation of both compounds was carried out by GC-MS and 1D (1H and 13C APT) and 2D (COSY, HMBC, HSQC-ed, and NOESY) NMR analysis. Both compounds significantly reduced the viability of HepG2 cells and were considerably less toxic towards a non-tumoral murine stromal (S17) cell line, although epi-loliolide was found to be more active than loliolide.Entities:
Keywords: Tisochrysis lutea; hepatocellular carcinoma; loliolide
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33227960 PMCID: PMC7699183 DOI: 10.3390/md18110567
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mar Drugs ISSN: 1660-3397 Impact factor: 5.118
Figure 1Cytotoxicity of Tisochrysis lutea crude extracts of hexane (Hex), dichloromethane (DCM) and acetone (Ace) against HepG2 cell lines.
Figure 2Cell viabilities of fractions F1 to F5 (A) against HepG2 cells, and fractions F5–1 to F5–4 towards HepG2 and S17 cells, and the respective selectivity index (B). Etoposide was used as positive control. All samples were tested at a concentration of 125 µg/mL. Results are depicted in percentage (%) of cell viability, compared with a negative control (DMSO), tested at a concentration of 0.5% (v/v). Values show the mean ± SEM of at least three experiments (n = 9). Asterisks (*) indicate significant differences in cell viability between negative control and treated cell lines (p < 0.01).
Figure 3GC-MS chromatograms of sub-fractions F5–3 (A) and F5–4 (B), and mass spectra of the major peaks of both sub-fractions, at 17.991 min (C) and 18.797 min (D) and their identification by comparison with the spectrum at the NIST library (E).
Chemical shifts (1H and 13C NMR) of loliolide and epi-loliolide.
| Position | Loliolide (1) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 171.49 | - | 171.55 | - |
| 3 | 112.89 | 5.69 s, 1H | 113.24 | 5.71 s, 1H |
| 3a | 182.68 | - | 180.75 | - |
| 4 | 35.91 | - | 35.03 | - |
| 5 | 47.26 | 1.53 dd, 14.5, 3.3, 1H, α-H | 49.7 | 1.33 t, 12.8, 1H, β-H |
| 1.97 brd, 14.6, 1H, β-H | 2.04 brd, 12.8, 1H, α-H | |||
| 6 | 66.81 | 4.33 m, 1H, α-H | 65.03 | 4.13 tt, 11.5, 4.1, 1H, α-H |
| 7 | 45.56 | 1.79 m, 1H, α-H | 47.25 | 1.51 t, 11.9, 1H, β-H |
| 2.45 brd, 14.1, 1H, β-H | 2.54 brd, 11.8, 1H, α-H | |||
| 7a | 86.67 | - | 86.45 | - |
| 4α-Me | 30.63 | 1.27 s, 3H, Me | 25.04 | 1.26 s, 3H, Me |
| 4β-Me | 26.45 | 1.46 s, 3H, Me | 29.89 | 1.31 s, 3H, Me |
| 7a-Me | 26.96 | 1.78 s, 3H, β-Me | 25.55 | 1.58 s, 3H, α-Me |
Figure 4Structures of loliolide (1) and epi-loliolide (2).