| Literature DB >> 34174945 |
Nidal Jaradat1, Hanaa Dacca2, Mohammed Hawash2, Murad N Abualhasan2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Discovering and screening for potential anti-obesity, anti-diabetic, anticancer, and antioxidant treatments from natural products still in recent times the main goal for many pharmaceutical scientists. The present investigation aimed to evaluate the chemical constituents of Ephedra alata fruits various extracts and to assess their antioxidant, antiobesity, antidiabetic, and cytotoxic effects. RESULT: In this work, high content of flavonoids and phenols were observed in the methanol fraction of E. alata fruits, which reached 98.95 mg of RUE/g and 33.22 mg of GAE/g, respectively. The methanol fraction has significant inhibitory activity against DPPH, α-amylase, α-glucosidase, and lipase with an IC50 value of 1.07, 9.43, 46.16, and 66.48 µg/mL. respectively. Also has anticancer activity against HeLa cancer cell line. While the acetone fraction has potent antioxidant activity with IC50 5 µg/mL.Entities:
Keywords: Cytotoxicity; DPPH; Ephedra alata; Lipase; Phytochemical; α-Amylase; α-Glucosidase
Year: 2021 PMID: 34174945 PMCID: PMC8235566 DOI: 10.1186/s13065-021-00768-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Chem ISSN: 2661-801X
Fig. 1Ephedra alata plant red fruits
Phytochemical screening tests for different extract fractions of E. alata fruits
| Phytochemical active constituent | Hexane extract | Acetone extract | Methanol extract | Aqueous extract |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Protein & amino acids Biuret test | − | − | + | + |
Reducing sugars Fehling’s test | − | − | − | + |
Complex polysaccharides Molisch’s test | + | + | – | − |
Starch Iodine test | − | − | − | + |
Phenols Ferric chloride test | + | + | + | + |
Tannins Gelatin test | + | + | + | + |
Flavonoids Shinoda reagent | − | + | + | + |
Saponin Foam test | − | − | − | + |
Glycosides Keller-Killani Test | − | − | − | − |
| Steroids | + | − | − | − |
Terpenoids Salkowski’s test | + | − | − | − |
Alkaloids Wagner’s test | + | + | + | + |
Volatile oil KOH test | − | − | + | − |
Where ( +) means the presence of phytochemicals and (−) absence of phytochemicals
The yield percentage for four extract fractions of E. alata fruits
| Extract Fractions | Extract (g) | Yields (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Hexane | 2.15 g | 8.6% |
| Acetone | 3.9 g | 15.6% |
| Methanol | 7.25 g | 29% |
| Aqueous | 3.77 g | 15.08% |
Absorbance values of the STDs at different concentrations
| Conc. of STDs and λmax | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conc. of Gallic acid (μg/mL) | 0 | 10 | 40 | 50 | 70 |
| Abs. at λmax = 765 nm | 0 | 0.142 | 0.496 | 0.557 | 0.798 |
| Conc. of Rutin (μg/mL) | 0 | 10 | 30 | 50 | 60 |
| Abs. at λmax = 415 nm | 0 | 0.049 | 0.11 | 0.17 | 0.2 |
| Conc. of Catechin (μg/mL) | 0 | 10 | 30 | 50 | 70 |
| Abs. at λmax = 500 nm | 0 | 0.028 | 0.041 | 0.056 | 0.077 |
Quantitation of phenols, tannins, and flavonoids in hexane, acetone, methanol, and aqueous fractions of E. alata fruits
| Total flavonoids contents, mg of RUE/g of dry extract ± SD | Total phenol contents, mg of GAE/g of dry extract ± SD | Total tannin contents, mg of CAE/g of dry extract ± SD | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hexane | – | 5.72 ± 0.39 | 2.5 ± 0.70 |
| Acetone | 58.95 ± 2.33 | 19.85 ± 1.62 | 10.5 ± 0.70 |
| Methanol | 98.95 ± 2.3 | 33.22 ± 1.56 | 17.5 ± 0.70 |
| Aqueous | 32.3 ± 2.4 | 25.9 ± 0.78 | 1.5 ± 0.70 |
Fig. 2The DPPH inhibition percentage of the different E. alata fruit extract fractions compared to Trolox (positive control)
The IC50 for different extracts fractions against DPPH, Lipase, α‑Amylase, and α-glucosidase in comparison of IC50 of positive controls
| Target enzymes | Reference | Hexane fraction | Acetone fraction | Methanol fraction | Aqueous fraction | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IC50 (µg/mL) | DPPH | 2.04 ± 0.74a | 44.05 ± 0.39 | 5.00 ± 0.51 | 1.70 ± 0.25 | 15.25 ± 0.30 |
| Lipase | 12.3 ± 0.33b | 277.25 ± 0.79 | 77.56 ± 0.34 | 66.48 ± 0.50 | 274.407 ± 0.49 | |
| α‑Amylase | 28.84 ± 1.22c | 55.01 ± 1.23 | 189.94 ± 2.32 | 9.43 ± 0.6 | 16.37 ± 0.58 | |
| α-Glucosidase | 37.15 ± 0.33C | 167.68 ± 0.38 | NI | 46.16 ± 0.63 | 201.77 ± 0.48 |
a Trolox, b Orlistat, c Acarbose, NI: no inhibition (inhibition at concentration higher than 400 µg/mL)
Fig. 3The lipase inhibition percentage of the different E. alata fruit extract fractions compared to Orlistat (positive control)
Fig. 4α-Amylase inhibition percentage of the different E. alata fruit extract fractions compared to Acarbose (positive control)
Fig. 5α-Glucosidase inhibition percentage of the different E. alata fruit extract fractions compared to Acarbose (positive control)
Fig. 6Effects of the fractions in comparison with negative control (untreated) and positive control (Dox) on HeLa Cell Viability
Fig. 7PCA results of E. alata fruit bioactivity inhibition results using different solvents A Score scatter plot B Loading scatter plot
Fig. 8PCA results of E. alata fruit chemical constituents using different solvents A Score scatter plot B Loading scatter plot