| Literature DB >> 34822503 |
Joana Alves1, Helena Gaspar1,2, Joana Silva1, Celso Alves1, Alice Martins3, Fernando Teodoro1, Patrícia Susano1, Susete Pinteus1, Rui Pedrosa3.
Abstract
Inflammation is a double-edged sword, as it can have both protective effects and harmful consequences, which, combined with oxidative stress (OS), can lead to the development of deathly chronic inflammatory conditions. Over the years, research has evidenced the potential of marine sponges as a source of effective anti-inflammatory therapeutic agents. Within this framework, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the antioxidant and the anti-inflammatory potential of the marine sponge Cliona celata. For this purpose, their organic extracts (C1-C5) and fractions were evaluated concerning their radical scavenging activity through 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl radical (DPPH), ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP), oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC), and anti-inflammatory activity through a (lipopolysaccharides (LPS)-induced inflammation on RAW 264.7 cells) model. Compounds present in the two most active fractions (F5 and F13) of C4 were tentatively identified by gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Even though samples displayed low antioxidant activity, they presented a high anti-inflammatory capacity in the studied cellular inflammatory model when compared to the anti-inflammatory standard, dexamethasone. GC-MS analysis led to the identification of n-hexadecanoic acid, cis-9-hexadecenal, and 13-octadecenal in fraction F5, while two major compounds, octadecanoic acid and cholesterol, were identified in fraction F13. The developed studies demonstrated the high anti-inflammatory activity of the marine sponge C. celata extracts and fractions, highlighting its potential for further therapeutic applications.Entities:
Keywords: RAW 264.7.6; chronic diseases; inflammation; marine natural products; marine sponges; oxidative stress
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34822503 PMCID: PMC8625174 DOI: 10.3390/md19110632
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mar Drugs ISSN: 1660-3397 Impact factor: 5.118
Antioxidant capacity of Cliona celata crude extracts (C1–C5).
| Extract | DPPH 1 | FRAP 2 | ORAC 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | 96.56 ± 0.85 | 24.32 ± 2.24 | 173.63 ± 7.07 |
| C2 | 95.56 ± 1.63 | 31.93 ± 5.45 | 120.22 ± 5.24 |
| C3 | 94.35 ± 1.02 | 35.41 ± 3.62 | 248.91 ± 6.74 |
| C4 | 89.98 ± 1.18 | 77.63 ± 4.10 | 239.37 ± 7.50 |
| C5 | 98.04 ± 0.71 | 38.54 ± 3.38 | 171.67 ± 6.17 |
| BHT | 39.10 ± 2.97 | 2821.50 ± 63.04 | 136.38 ± 9.09 |
1 Radical scavenging activity (% of DPPH); 2 FeSO4 equivalents per g of extract (μM FeSO4 eq·g−1); 3 Trolox equivalents per g of extract (µmol T eq·g−1).
Figure 1Cytotoxicity of Cliona celata crude extracts on RAW 264.7 macrophages. Cell viability was evaluated after 24 h of exposure to extracts (200 µg·mL−1) and the results are expressed as a percentage of the control. Bars correspond to mean ± SEM of at least three independent experiments carried out in triplicate. No significant differences (one-way ANOVA, Dunnett’s test; p < 0.05) were found when comparing the extracts to the vehicle.
Figure 2Evaluation of the inflammatory and anti-inflammatory potential of Cliona celata crude extracts (C1–C5) and DEX (dexamethasone) on RAW 264.7 macrophages. (a) NO production by RAW 264.7 macrophages when exposed to C. celata crude extracts (24 h) at 200 μg·mL−1; (b) NO production by LPS-induced RAW 264.7 macrophages in the presence of C. celata crude extracts (24 h) at 200 μg·mL−1. Bars correspond to mean ± SEM of at least three independent experiments carried out in triplicate. Symbols represent significant differences (one-way ANOVA, Dunnett’s test; p < 0.05) when compared to: # vehicle and * LPS.
Figure 3Evaluation of the concentration-dependent effect of C4 (24 h) in the NO production by LPS-induced RAW 264.7 macrophages, at concentrations ranging from 0 to 200 μg·mL−1. Bars correspond to mean ± SEM of at least three independent experiments carried out in triplicate. Symbols represent significant differences (one-way ANOVA, Dunnett’s test; p < 0.05) when compared to: # vehicle and * LPS.
Extraction yields (%) and effect on cell viability of Cliona celata fractions on RAW 264.7 macrophages.
| Fraction | Yield (%) | Cells Viability (% of Control) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 200 μg·mL−1 | 160 μg·mL−1 | 100 μg·mL−1 | ||
| F1 | 0.08 | - | - | - |
| F2 | 0.05 | - | - | - |
| F3 | 0.11 | - | - | - |
| F4 | 0.63 | - | - | - |
| F5 | 7.29 | 64.41 ± 7.23 * | 118.35 ± 2.83 | 101.00 ± 7.16 |
| F6 | 4.90 | 7.31 ± 2.89 * | 19.13 ± 2.84 * | 46.83 ± 2.09 * |
| F7 | 2.32 | 0.00 ± 0.00 * | 15.18 ± 3.96 * | 36.76 ± 3.46 * |
| F8.1 | 1.47 | 0.00 ± 0.00 * | 4.71 ± 1.36 * | 15.69 ± 1.88 * |
| F8.2 | 5.60 | 0.00 ± 0.00 * | 22.99 ± 3.81 * | 29.84 ± 3.76 * |
| F9 | 3.58 | 0.08 ± 0.09 * | 8.80 ± 1.72 * | 50.19 ± 11.71 * |
| F10 | 0.87 | - | - | - |
| F11 | 7.75 | 24.33 ± 7.65 * | 32.97 ± 5.84 * | 63.64 ± 3.79 * |
| F12 | 7.95 | 4.81 ± 2.07 * | 18.08 ± 4.06 * | 50.59 ± 3.51 * |
| F13 | 6.21 | 8.45 ± 1.71 * | 68.62 ± 2.98 * | 82.61 ± 4.46 |
| F14.1 | 30.25 | 82.50 ± 4.03 * | 79.91 ± 4.09 * | 68.39 ± 8.09 * |
| F14.2 | 14.25 | 82.30 ± 3.13 * | 71.40 ± 1.83 * | 61.43 ± 3.95 * |
* Significant differences (one-way ANOVA, Dunnett’s test; p < 0.05) when compared to the vehicle.
Figure 4Evaluation of the inflammatory and anti-inflammatory potential of Cliona celata selected C4 fractions (F5 and F13) and DEX (dexamethasone) on RAW 264.7 macrophages. (a) NO production by RAW 264.7 macrophages when exposed to C. celata selected fractions; (b) NO production by LPS-induced RAW 264.7 macrophages in the presence of C. celata selected fractions (24 h). Bars correspond to mean ± SEM of at least three independent experiments carried out in triplicate. Symbols represent significant differences (one-way ANOVA, Dunnett’s test; p < 0.05) when compared to: # vehicle and * LPS.
Figure 5Effect of F5 (160 μg·mL−1) and F13 (100 μg·mL−1) on the levels of inflammatory mediators IL-6 (a), IL-10 (b), and TNF-α (c) on LPS-induced RAW 264.7 macrophages after 18 h of exposure. Bars correspond to mean ± SEM of at least three independent experiments carried out in triplicate. Symbols represent significant differences (one-way ANOVA, Dunnett’s test; p < 0.05) when compared to: # vehicle and * LPS.
Figure 6Cliona celata collection sites. Samples were collected in five different sites and a distinct code name was given to samples originated from each location.