| Literature DB >> 33791002 |
Lijuan Zhang1, Mukadaisi Siyiti1, Jiang Zhang1, Meiqi Yao1, Feicui Zhao1,2.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to investigate the cell proliferation-inhibiting and anti-rheumatic activities of chemical components from Aconitum soongoricum Stapf. Chemical constituents of Aconitum soongoricum Stapf. were separated and purified by silica gel and Sephadex LH-20 chromatography. Structure was identified by spectroscopic technique, and physical/chemical properties were analyzed. The following four compounds were identified: i) Aconitine, ii) songorine, iii) 16, 17-dihydro-12β, 16β-epoxynapelline, and iv) 12-epi-napelline. Cell Counting kit-8 assay was performed to assess cell proliferation. ELISA was conducted to determine the cytokine contents, and reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction and Western blot analysis were performed to detect the mRNA and protein expression levels. Compared with the lipopolysaccharide (LPS) group, the contents of IL-6, IL-1β, TNF-α and PGE-2 in the culture supernatant were significantly declined in the leflunomide + LPS and intervention+LPS groups, as well as the mRNA expression levels of HIF-1α, VEGFA and TLR4. Treatments with songorine, benzoylaconine and aconitine (at different concentrations) significantly inhibited the proliferation of HFLS-RA cells. Compared with the LPS group, the contents of PGE-2, IL-6, IL-1β and TNF-α in the culture supernatant were significantly decreased in the intervention groups, and the mRNA expression levels of TLR4, HIF-1α and VEGFA in the cells in the intervention groups. Songorine, benzoylaconine and aconitine from Aconitum soongoricum Stapf. have anti-rheumatic activities in vitro, which may inhibit the proliferation of HFLS-RA cells, and the underlying mechanisms may be associated with inhibiting the inflammatory cytokine production and downregulating the expression levels of HIF-1α, VEGF and TLR4. Copyright: © Zhang et al.Entities:
Keywords: Aconitum soongoricum Stapf.; alkaloids; anti-inflammation; anti-rheumatism; chemical composition
Year: 2021 PMID: 33791002 PMCID: PMC8005664 DOI: 10.3892/etm.2021.9924
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Exp Ther Med ISSN: 1792-0981 Impact factor: 2.447
The 1H-NMR data of compounds 1-5.
| Compound | 1H-NMR | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aconitine | (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ ppm: 1.10 (t, J=7.0 Hz, 3H, NCH2CH3), 1.39 (s, 3H, COCH3), 3.11, 3.27, 3.34, 3.75 (s, each 3H, OCH3), 4.04 (d, J=6.5 Hz, 1H, 6-βH), 4.48 (s, 1H), 4.88 (d, J=4.8 Hz, 1H, 14-αH), 8.03 (d, J=7.6 Hz, 2H, Ar-H), 7.66-7.39 (m, 3H, Ar-H) |
| 2 | Songorine | (400 MHz, CDCl3) δppm: 0.77 (s, 4H, 18-CH3), 1.07 (t, J=6.8 Hz, 3H, NCH2CH3), 3.10 (d, J=2.4 Hz, 1H), 3.34 (dd, J=17.1, 11.7 Hz, 2H), 3.45 (s, 1H, 15-H), 3.85 (s, 1H, 1-βH), 4.36 (d, J=8.1 Hz, 1H, 15-αH), 5.20, 5.30 (s, 2H, 17-CH2) |
| 3 | 16, 17-dihydro-12β, 16β-epoxynapelline | (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ ppm: 0.74 (3H, s, 18-CH3), 1.04 (3H, t, J=8Hz, 22-H), 1.38 (3H, s, 17-CH3), 1.78 (1H, d, J=6Hz, 14α-H), 2.71 (1H, dd, J=4, 8Hz, 13-H), 3.42 (1H, brs, 20-H), 3.47 (1H, s, 15-H), 3.88 (1H, dd, J=16.3, 9.4Hz, 1-H), 4.83 (1H, dd, J=7.7, 3.9Hz, 12-H) |
| 4 | 12-epi-napellin | (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ ppm: 0.77 (3H, s, 18-CH3), 1.09 (3H, t, J=4 Hz, NCH2CH3), 3.91 (1H, br, s, 1-βH), 4.20 (1H, dd, J=15.9, 7.2Hz, 12-αH), 5.13, 5.34 (2H, s, 17-CH2) |
| 5 | Deoxyaconitine | (500 MHz, CDCl3) δppm: 1.09 (3H, t, J=7 Hz, NCH2CH3), 1.39 (3H, s, COCH3), 3.18, 3.29, 3.31, 3.76 (each 3H, s, 4x-OCH3), 4.39 (1H, d, J=3Hz, 15-αOH), 4.48 (1H, dd, J=3, 5.5Hz, 15-βH), 4.89 (1H, d, J=5Hz, 14-βH), 7.42-8.08 (5H, m, Ar-H) |
Comparison of 13C NMR data between compound 1 and aconitine (100 MHz).
| C | Aconitine ( | Compound 1 |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 82.00 | 82.38 |
| 2 | 33.10 | 33.63 |
| 3 | 71.00 | 71.55 |
| 4 | 43.10 | 43.14 |
| 5 | 46.30 | 46.85 |
| 6 | 83.20 | 83.38 |
| 7 | 44.60 | 44.70 |
| 8 | 91.70 | 92.06 |
| 9 | 44.00 | 44.21 |
| 10 | 40.70 | 40.90 |
| 11 | 49.90 | 50.00 |
| 12 | 35.60 | 35.83 |
| 13 | 73.90 | 74.05 |
| 14 | 78.70 | 78.92 |
| 15 | 78.60 | 78.85 |
| 16 | 89.80 | 89.97 |
| 17 | 61.10 | 61.15 |
| 18 | 76.50 | 76.69 |
| 19 | 47.20 | 46.86 |
| 20 | 48.10 | 48.93 |
| 21 | 13.00 | 13.35 |
| 1' | 55.80 | 55.94 |
| 6' | 58.00 | 58.00 |
| 16' | 61.10 | 61.02 |
| 18' | 59.00 | 59.13 |
| 172.30 | 172.43 | |
| CO | 21.30 | 21.45 |
| Ar | 166.00 | 166.08 |
| 1'' | 129.60 | 129.78 |
| 2'' | 129.50 | 129.61 |
| 3'' | 128.60 | 128.65 |
| 4'' | 133.20 | 133.29 |
Figure 1Chemical structures of alkaloids isolated and identified from Aconitum soongoricum Stapf. (A) Aconitine. (B) Songorine. (C) 16,17-dihydro-12β,16β-epoxynapelline. (D) 12-epi-napelline. (E) Deoxyaconitine.
Comparison of 13C NMR data between compound 2 and songorine (100 MHz).
| C | Songorine ( | Compound 2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 70.40 | 70.37 |
| 2 | 31.50 | 31.66 |
| 3 | 31.90 | 32.24 |
| 4 | 34.10 | 34.11 |
| 5 | 49.10 | 49.19 |
| 6 | 23.60 | 23.23 |
| 7 | 43.70 | 43.51 |
| 8 | 49.90 | 50.03 |
| 9 | 35.10 | 35.21 |
| 10 | 52.10 | 52.42 |
| 11 | 37.20 | 37.33 |
| 12 | 209.00 | 209.9 |
| 13 | 53.60 | 53.79 |
| 14 | 38.00 | 38.13 |
| 15 | 77.30 | 77.22 |
| 16 | 150.90 | 151.08 |
| 17 | 111.60 | 111.42 |
| 18 | 26.00 | 26.07 |
| 19 | 57.20 | 57.41 |
| 20 | 66.00 | 66.01 |
| N- | 50.80 | 50.91 |
| N-CH2 | 13.50 | 13.63 |
Comparison of 13C NMR data between compound 3 and 16,17-dihydro-12β, 16β-epoxynapelline (100 MHz).
| C | 16,17-dihydro-12β, 16β-epoxynapelline ( | Compound 3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 70.90 | 70.86 |
| 2 | 32.10 | 31.97 |
| 3 | 38.00 | 38.22 |
| 4 | 33.80 | 33.88 |
| 5 | 51.30 | 51.29 |
| 6 | 22.50 | 22.52 |
| 7 | 43.40 | 43.39 |
| 8 | 49.20 | 49.22 |
| 9 | 38.10 | 38.03 |
| 10 | 51.40 | 51.53 |
| 11 | 26.00 | 26.00 |
| 12 | 77.40 | 77.51 |
| 13 | 38.50 | 38.55 |
| 14 | 28.70 | 28.76 |
| 15 | 79.70 | 79.73 |
| 16 | 89.20 | 89.33 |
| 17 | 21.80 | 21.84 |
| 18 | 25.90 | 26.00 |
| 19 | 57.30 | 57.28 |
| 20 | 66.40 | 66.54 |
| 21 | 50.90 | 50.79 |
| 22 | 13.60 | 13.61 |
Comparison of 13C NMR data between compound 4 and 12-epi-napelline (100 MHz).
| C | 12-epi-napelline ( | Compound 4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 67.20 | 67.10 |
| 2 | 29.70 | 29.57 |
| 3 | 31.70 | 31.60 |
| 4 | 33.80 | 33.77 |
| 5 | 48.80 | 48.58 |
| 6 | 23.60 | 23.58 |
| 7 | 44.00 | 43.84 |
| 8 | 51.10 | 51.04 |
| 9 | 37.20 | 37.02 |
| 10 | 52.60 | 52.54 |
| 11 | 32.70 | 32.64 |
| 12 | 70.00 | 69.89 |
| 13 | 44.00 | 43.88 |
| 14 | 36.30 | 36.05 |
| 15 | 77.00 | 77.23 |
| 16 | 155.00 | 155.00 |
| 17 | 111.40 | 111.55 |
| 18 | 26.30 | 26.40 |
| 19 | 58.30 | 58.29 |
| 20 | 66.20 | 66.33 |
| 21 | 50.90 | 50.93 |
| 22 | 13.30 | 13.47 |
Comparison of 13C NMR data between compound 5 and deoxyaconitine (100 MHz).
| C | Deoxyaconitine ( | Compound 5 |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 85.10 | 85.29 |
| 2 | 26.20 | 26.41 |
| 3 | 35.10 | 35.30 |
| 4 | 39.00 | 39.08 |
| 5 | 49.10 | 49.26 |
| 6 | 83.10 | 83.25 |
| 7 | 45.00 | 45.12 |
| 8 | 91.90 | 92.11 |
| 9 | 44.40 | 44.61 |
| 10 | 40.80 | 40.99 |
| 11 | 49.80 | 49.94 |
| 12 | 36.20 | 36.66 |
| 13 | 73.90 | 74.15 |
| 14 | 78.80 | 78.86 |
| 15 | 78.60 | 78.85 |
| 16 | 89.90 | 90.16 |
| 17 | 61.30 | 61.47 |
| 18 | 80.10 | 80.30 |
| 19 | 53.00 | 53.14 |
| 20 | 49.10 | 49.02 |
| 21 | 13.30 | 13.51 |
| 1' | 56.10 | 56.35 |
| 6' | 57.90 | 58.03 |
| 16' | 60.90 | 61.05 |
| 18' | 58.90 | 59.09 |
| 172.30 | 172.45 | |
| CO | 21.30 | 21.45 |
| ArCO | 166.00 | 166.18 |
| 1'' | 129.70 | 129.86 |
| 2'' | 129.50 | 129.64 |
| 3'' | 128.50 | 128.66 |
| 4'' | 133.10 | 133.27 |
Figure 2Growth curve of HFLS-RA cells. The proliferation of HFLS-RA cells was detected using a Cell Counting kit-8 assay, at indicated time points. Experiments were repeated five times. OD, optical density.
Figure 3Effects of interventions on the proliferation of HFLS-RA cells. Effects of (A) songorine (900 µg/ml), (B) benzoylaconine (3,000 µg/ml), (C) aconitine (2,000 µg/ml) and (D) leflunomide (150 µg/ml) on the proliferation of HFLS-RA cells were observed at indicated time points using an optical microscope (Eclipse TS100-F; Nikon). Scale bar, 100 µm. (E) Cell proliferation was also assessed using a Cell Counting kit-8 assay. The inhibition rate was calculated using the following formula: Inhibition rate=(ODblank control-ODsample)/(ODblank control-ODreagent control) x100%. Experiments were repeated five times. **P<0.01, compared with 0 µg/ml. OD, optical density.
Intervention effects on the cytokine content of the culture supernatant.
| Group | IL-6 (pg/ml) | IL-1β (pg/ml) | TNF-α (pg/ml) | PGE-2 (pg/ml) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blank | 39.927±0.239 | 10.062±0.503 | 9.862±0.158 | 8.846±0.096 |
| LPS | 67.528±1.311[ | 17.594±0.658[ | 21.368±0.863[ | 25.886±3.028[ |
| Leflunomide + LPS | 42.204±0.906[ | 11.540±0.566[ | 11.802±0.394[ | 9.226±1.146[ |
| Songorine+LPS | 47.510±1.759[ | 12.910±0.482[ | 13.878±0.360[ | 10.966±0.846[ |
| Benzoylaconine + LPS | 51.746±1.098[ | 13.641±0.722[ | 13.836±0.566[ | 14.185±1.225[ |
| Aconitine + LPS | 45.590±1.392[ | 11.816±0.489[ | 12.341±0.596[ | 14.765±0.586[ |
One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's test was performed for group comparisons.
aP<0.05 vs. the blank group;
bP<0.01 vs. the LPS group;
cP<0.01 vs. the the leflunomide + LPS group;
dP<0.05 vs. the the songorine + LPS group;
eP<0.05 vs. the benzoylaconine + LPS group. LPS, lipopolysaccharide.
Figure 4Effects of interventions on mRNA and protein expression levels of TLR4, HIF-1α and VEGF. Cells were treated with LPS, in combination with songorine, benzoylaconine, aconitine and leflunomide. Next, the (A) mRNA and (B) protein expression levels of TLR4, HIF-1α and VEGF were detected by Western blot analysis. Experiments were performed in triplicate. One-way analysis of variance, followed by Tukey's test, was performed for group comparison. *P<0.01, compared with the control; #P<0.01; compared with LPS; sP<0.01, compared with leflunomide + LPS. LPS, lipopolysaccharide.
Effect of interventions on HIF-1α, VEGFA, and TLR4 protein expression levels.
| Group | HIF-1α | VEGFA | TLR4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blank | 0.592±0.149 | 0.745±0.157 | 0.736±0.138 |
| LPS | 1.287±0.304[ | 1.409±0.139[ | 1.426±0.296[ |
| Leflunomide + LPS | 0.662±0.159[ | 0.850±0.040[ | 0.685±0.196[ |
| Songorine + LPS | 0.903±0.190 | 1.154±0.163[ | 0.854±0.253 |
| Benzoylaconine + LPS | 0.951±0.268 | 1.141±0.215 | 0.857±0.141 |
| Aconitine + LPS | 0.852±0.208 | 1.164±0.116[ | 0.845±0.213 |
One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's test was performed for group comparisons. Compared with the blank group,
aP<0.05 vs. the blank group; compared with the LPS group,
bP<0.01 vs. the LPS group. TLR, toll-like receptor; LPS, lipopolysaccharide.