| Literature DB >> 33324227 |
Sichen Ren1,2, Ying Wei1,2, Ruilin Wang3, Shizhang Wei1,2, Jianxia Wen1,2, Tao Yang2,4, Xing Chen1,2, Shihua Wu1,2, Manyi Jing2, Haotian Li2, Min Wang2, Yanling Zhao2.
Abstract
Background: Rutaecarpine (RUT), a major quinazolino carboline alkaloid compound from the dry unripe fruit Tetradium ruticarpum (A. Juss.) T. G. Hartley, has various pharmacological effects. The aim of this present study was to investigate the potential gastroprotective effect of rutaecarpine on ethanol-induced acute gastric mucosal injury in mice and associated molecular mechanisms, such as activating Nrf2 and Bcl-2 via PI3K/AKT signaling pathway and inhibiting NF-κB.Entities:
Keywords: anti-apoptosis; anti-inflammation; anti-oxidation; ethanol; gastric mucosal injury; rutaecarpine
Year: 2020 PMID: 33324227 PMCID: PMC7726440 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.600295
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pharmacol ISSN: 1663-9812 Impact factor: 5.810
FIGURE 1The chemical structure of rutaecarpine.
Antibodies information.
| Antibodies | Dilution | Manufacturers | Cat. No. |
|---|---|---|---|
| For western blot analysis | |||
| Rabbit anti-NF-κB p65 | 1:1,000 | Cell signaling technology | 8242T |
| Rabbit Anti-Nrf2 | 1:1,000 | Proteintech | 16396-1-AP |
| Rabbit anti-Bcl-2 | 1:1,000 | Cell signaling technology | 3498T |
| Rabbit anti-Bax | 1:1,000 | Cell signaling technology | 2772T |
| Rabbit anti-cleaved Caspase-3 | 1:5,000 | Abcam | ab214430 |
| Rabbit Anti-AKT | 1:1,000 | Proteintech | 10176-2-AP |
| Mouse Anti-pAKT | 1:5,000 | Proteintech | 66444-1-lg |
| Rabbit Anti-GAPDH | 1:10000 | Proteintech | 10494-1-AP |
| Rabbit anti-histone H3 | 1:2000 | Cell signaling technology | 4499T |
| For immunofluorescence analysis | |||
| Rabbit anti-NF-κB p65 | 1:500 | Cell signaling technology | 8242T |
Primers sequences for RT-PCR.
| Gene | Sense primer (5′-3′) | Antisense primer (5′-3′) |
|---|---|---|
| NF-κB p65 | TCCAGGCTCCTGTTCGAGTCTC | CGGTGGCGATCATCTGTGTCTG |
| PI3K | CTGAGAACGCCACCGCCTTG | TCCACCACGACTTGACACATTAGC |
| Nrf2 | GTAGATGACCATGAGTCGCTTGCC | CTTGCTCCATGTCCTGCTCTATGC |
| Nqo1 | AGGCTGCTGTAGAGGCTCTGAAG | GCTCAGGCGTCCTTCCTTATATGC |
| HO-1 | ACCGCCTTCCTGCTCAACATTG | CTCTGACGAAGTGACGCCATCTG |
| Bcl-2 | TCCTTCCAGCCTGAGAGCAACC | TCACGACGGTAGCGACGAGAG |
| Bax | CGTGAGCGGCTGCTTGTCTG | ATGGTGAGCGAGGCGGTGAG |
| β-actin | ATCACTATTGGCAACGAGCGGTTC | CAGCACTGTGTTGGCATAGAGGTC |
FIGURE 2Effect of RUT on ethanol-induced gastric mucosa injury in mice in different groups. Note: (A–E) Macroscopic representative images; (F) Ulcer index and ulcer inhibition; (G–K) Microscopic representative images (H&E stained, ×200 magnification; Scare bar: 100 μm. Blue →: loss of gastric epithelial cells; Black →: hemorrhagic injury; Yellow →: vascular congestion; Green →: edema; Red →: inflammatory cells infiltration). (A,G) Normal control group; (B,H) Model group; (C,I) RUT 450 μg/kg group; (D,J) RUT 900 μg/kg group; (E,K) OME 20 mg/kg group. Values are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 8). #p < 0.05 and ##p < 0.01 when compared with the control group. *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01 when compared with the model group.
FIGURE 3Effect of RUT on inflammatory factors levels in gastric damage induced by ethanol. Note: (A) Western blot images of cytosolic and nuclear NF-κB p65; (B) Cytosolic NF-κB p65 protein level; (C) Nuclear NF-κB p65 protein level; (D) NF-κB p65 mRNA level; (E) Tissue TNF-α level; (F) Tissue IL-1β level; (G) Tissue IL-6 level; (H) Tissue MPO level. Values are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 6). #p < 0.05 and ##p < 0.01 when compared with the control group. *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01 when compared with the model group.
FIGURE 4Immunofluorescence analysis for the effect of RUT on NF-κB nuclear translocation (IF ×400 magnification; Scare bar: 50 μm; n = 3).
FIGURE 5Effect of RUT on oxidative stress factors levels in gastric damage induced by ethanol. Note: (A) Western blot images of cytosolic and nuclear Nrf2; (B) Cytosolic Nrf2 protein level; (C) Nuclear Nrf2 protein level; (D) Nrf2 mRNA level; (E) Nqo1 mRNA level; (F) HO-1 mRNA level; (G) Serum SOD level; (H) Serum GSH level; (I) Tissue MDA level. Values are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 6). #p < 0.05 and ##p < 0.01 when compared with the control group. *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01 when compared with the model group.
FIGURE 6Effect of RUT on apoptosis factors levels and PI3K pathway in gastric damage induced by ethanol. Note: (A) Western blot images of Bcl-2, Bax, pAKT and total AKT; (B) Bcl-2 protein level; (C) Bcl-2 mRNA level; (D) Bax protein level; (E) Bax mRNA level; (F) Tissue Caspase 9 level; (G) Caspase 3 mRNA level; (H) Tissue Caspase 3 level; (I) PI3K mRNA level. (J) pAKT protein level; Values are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 6). #p < 0.05 and ##p < 0.01 when compared with the control group. *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01 when compared with the model group.
FIGURE 7Schematic diagram of signal pathway that mediates ethanol-induced gastric mucosal injury and the ameliorative effects of RUT on mice. (→: activate; ˧: inhibit).