| Literature DB >> 33954007 |
Yong-Qin Liu1, Chang-Yan Xu1, Fang-Yu Liang1, Pei-Chun Jin1, Zhi-Yao Qian2, Zhong-Sheng Luo3,4, Rong-Gui Qin1.
Abstract
Atractylodis macrocephalae Rhizoma (AMR) is a famous classical Chinese traditional medicine (CTM), which has been used as a tonic for many diseases for thousands of years. In ancient China, it was used as a supplementary food for beauty in the palace. In preliminary studies, the function of whitening skin and the significant inhibiting effect on tyrosinase (TYR) which is the reactive enzyme in the composition of melanin of AMR were discovered, and the relevant research was rarely reported. In this study, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) along with partial least squares regression analysis (PLS) was applied to survey the coherence between the chemical constituents and the inhibiting activity of 11 batches of AMR on TYR activity. The results of PLS showed that the chromatographic peaks 11 (atractylenolide III) and 15 could be important effective ingredients of the inhibition TYR activity as ascertained by spectrum-activity relationships. Furthermore, TYR inhibitory activity of atractylenolide III was validated by in vitro test by β-arbutin served as a positive control drug. The results of the in vitro test and the molecular docking showed that atractylenolide III has high TYR inhibitory activity and could link to the residues in TYR catalytic pocket. Therefore, bioassay, molecular docking, and spectrum-activity relationships are appropriate for linking the quality of samples with pharmaceutical-related active ingredients. And our studying would lay a theoretical foundation for applying the water extracts of AMR in whitening cosmetics.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33954007 PMCID: PMC8060085 DOI: 10.1155/2021/5596463
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anal Methods Chem ISSN: 2090-8873 Impact factor: 2.193
Information about the collected AMR.
| Number | Origin | Batch number |
|---|---|---|
| S1 | Hubei | 20190101 |
| S2 | Hunan | 180601 |
| S3 | Sichuan | 19050101 |
| S4 | Zhejiang | 20190401 |
| S5 | Hebei | 1908007 |
| S6 | Zhejiang | 181201 |
| S7 | Hunan | 1903105 |
| S8 | Zhejiang | 18110102 |
| S9 | Sichuan | 181104 |
| S10 | Zhejiang | 19062502 |
| S11 | Hubei | 1904005 |
The time program of gradient elution.
| Time (min) |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| 0–12 | 90–70 | 10–30 |
| 12–17 | 70 | 30 |
| 17–20 | 70–42 | 30–58 |
| 20–23 | 42–40 | 58–60 |
| 23–27 | 40–30 | 60–70 |
| 27–32 | 30–15 | 70–85 |
| 32–35 | 15–5 | 85–95 |
| 35–45 | 5 | 95 |
Composition of reaction liquid (company: μL).
| Sample |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.02% L-tyrosine | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| PBS | 300 | 200 | 200 | 100 |
| Sample solution | 0 | 0 | 100 | 100 |
| Tyrosinase solution | 0 | 100 | 0 | 100 |
Figure 1HPLC fingerprints of 11 batches of AMR. (a) Atractylodes III reference substance. (b) Shared mode. (c) Testing sample.
11 batches 0f AMR sample similarity evaluation.
| Number | S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | S6 | S7 | S8 | S9 | S10 | S11 | Contrast fingerprint |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | 1.000 | 0.974 | 0.982 | 0.988 | 0.981 | 0.983 | 0.796 | 0.975 | 0.932 | 0.969 | 0.969 | 0.982 |
| S2 | 0.974 | 1.000 | 0.949 | 0.958 | 0.971 | 0.988 | 0.755 | 0.962 | 0.895 | 0.990 | 0.954 | 0.964 |
| S3 | 0.982 | 0.949 | 1.000 | 0.987 | 0.972 | 0.952 | 0.831 | 0.986 | 0.968 | 0.936 | 0.964 | 0.985 |
| S4 | 0.988 | 0.958 | 0.987 | 1.000 | 0.975 | 0.970 | 0.825 | 0.986 | 0.956 | 0.947 | 0.973 | 0.987 |
| S5 | 0.981 | 0.971 | 0.972 | 0.975 | 1.000 | 0.978 | 0.841 | 0.985 | 0.942 | 0.959 | 0.984 | 0.989 |
| S6 | 0.983 | 0.988 | 0.952 | 0.970 | 0.978 | 1.000 | 0.762 | 0.961 | 0.904 | 0.984 | 0.964 | 0.969 |
| S7 | 0.796 | 0.755 | 0.831 | 0.825 | 0.841 | 0.762 | 1.000 | 0.858 | 0.916 | 0.681 | 0.896 | 0.882 |
| S8 | 0.975 | 0.962 | 0.986 | 0.986 | 0.985 | 0.961 | 0.858 | 1.000 | 0.966 | 0.942 | 0.980 | 0.993 |
| S9 | 0.932 | 0.895 | 0.968 | 0.956 | 0.942 | 0.904 | 0.916 | 0.966 | 1.000 | 0.857 | 0.963 | 0.974 |
| S10 | 0.969 | 0.990 | 0.936 | 0.947 | 0.959 | 0.984 | 0.681 | 0.942 | 0.857 | 1.000 | 0.924 | 0.940 |
| S11 | 0.969 | 0.954 | 0.964 | 0.973 | 0.984 | 0.964 | 0.896 | 0.980 | 0.963 | 0.924 | 1.000 | 0.993 |
| Contrast fingerprint | 0.982 | 0.964 | 0.985 | 0.987 | 0.989 | 0.969 | 0.882 | 0.993 | 0.974 | 0.940 | 0.993 | 1.000 |
11 batches of AMR samples common peak information.
| Peak number |
| S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | S6 | S7 | S8 | S9 | S10 | S11 | RRT RSD (%) | RPA RSD (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Peak 1 | 6.620 | 10.565 | 8.111 | 13.276 | 12.917 | 11.528 | 8.416 | 36.269 | 13.539 | 20.265 | 5.847 | 14.694 | 0.25 | 58.68 |
| Peak 2 | 9.643 | 1.246 | 1.175 | 1.728 | 1.979 | 1.571 | 1.129 | 2.306 | 1.437 | 2.245 | 1.437 | 1.952 | 0.04 | 25.26 |
| Peak 3 | 12.542 | 4.416 | 2.262 | 4.605 | 3.358 | 2.031 | 1.528 | 5.389 | 1.923 | 3.348 | 1.988 | 2.345 | 0.04 | 42.95 |
| Peak 4 | 16.750 | 1.447 | 1.112 | 1.624 | 1.857 | 1.316 | 1.234 | 0.977 | 1.510 | 1.223 | 1.406 | 1.255 | 0.06 | 18.08 |
| Peak 5 | 17.630 | 3.942 | 2.800 | 5.235 | 5.444 | 3.393 | 2.923 | 2.270 | 4.777 | 4.383 | 3.175 | 3.145 | 0.05 | 28.01 |
| Peak 6 | 18.249 | 5.042 | 3.519 | 6.590 | 6.371 | 4.059 | 3.437 | 2.119 | 5.797 | 6.246 | 3.850 | 3.757 | 0.06 | 31.89 |
| Peak 7 | 18.758 | 3.640 | 3.204 | 3.948 | 3.649 | 2.466 | 2.641 | 1.970 | 3.227 | 4.269 | 2.854 | 3.487 | 0.06 | 21.25 |
| Peak 8 | 19.246 | 1.205 | 1.233 | 1.291 | 1.258 | 0.805 | 1.070 | 0.783 | 0.894 | 1.579 | 0.960 | 1.225 | 0.07 | 21.57 |
| Peak 9 | 23.801 | 2.960 | 3.207 | 1.778 | 3.012 | 2.642 | 2.408 | 4.352 | 2.941 | 1.702 | 2.942 | 3.171 | 0.06 | 25.59 |
| Peak 10 | 26.749 | 2.223 | 1.626 | 2.239 | 1.528 | 1.557 | 1.658 | 2.268 | 1.625 | 1.733 | 1.350 | 1.787 | 0.03 | 17.82 |
| Peak 11 | 32.644 | 3.569 | 1.465 | 1.976 | 2.390 | 4.204 | 2.947 | 3.392 | 1.855 | 1.167 | 2.287 | 3.747 | 0.02 | 37.91 |
| Peak 12 | 33.610 | 2.371 | 2.462 | 2.311 | 2.367 | 2.449 | 2.373 | 2.383 | 2.371 | 2.254 | 2.480 | 2.357 | 0.02 | 2.76 |
| Peak 13 | 35.588 | 1.379 | 1.262 | 1.352 | 1.280 | 1.234 | 1.278 | 1.300 | 1.278 | 1.333 | 1.219 | 1.277 | 0.02 | 3.74 |
| Peak 14 | 37.167 | 1.165 | 1.144 | 1.164 | 1.175 | 1.151 | 1.154 | 1.151 | 1.140 | 1.163 | 1.130 | 1.139 | 0.02 | 1.18 |
| Peak 15 | 37.997 | 15.766 | 16.490 | 15.791 | 15.794 | 15.594 | 15.655 | 15.626 | 15.739 | 15.827 | 15.739 | 15.573 | 0.02 | 1.59 |
| Peak 16 | 39.807 | 4.336 | 2.337 | 5.824 | 4.489 | 3.834 | 2.666 | 1.746 | 4.792 | 5.106 | 3.292 | 2.386 | 0.02 | 35.52 |
Figure 2Cluster analysis of 11 batches of AMR.
Figure 3PCA analysis of 11 batches of AMR. (a) PCA scatter plot of 11 batches of AMR. (b) PCA load diagram of 11 batches of AMR.
Figure 4OPLS-DA analysis of 11 batches of AMR. (a) OPLS-DA scatter plot. (b) VIP values. (c) Load scatter plot.
Inhibition of the AMR from different producing areas on tyrosinase activity.
| Number | Inhibition rate (%) |
|---|---|
| S1 | 20.17 ± 1.38 |
| S2 | 41.36 ± 2.64 |
| S3 | 30.47 ± 2.22 |
| S4 | 25.31 ± 1.80 |
| S5 | 79.23 ± 0.93 |
| S6 | 17.39 ± 3.21 |
| S7 | 49.21 ± 2.54 |
| S8 | 74.35 ± 1.67 |
| S9 | 33.51 ± 2.35 |
| S10 | 21.15 ± 3.11 |
| S11 | 64.76 ± 1.02 |
Figure 5Correlation analysis between common peak area of the AMR and its inhibition rate of tyrosinase activity. (a) Normalized regression coefficient diagram. (b) VIP values.
Figure 6(a) Docking model of atractylenolide III in the mushroom tyrosinase ligand binding pocket. (b) 3D ligand-receptor interactions of atractylenolide III with the mushroom tyrosinase. (c) 2D ligand-receptor interactions of atractylenolide III with the mushroom tyrosinase.