| Literature DB >> 34946539 |
Xin Wei1, Rui Guo2, Xiao Wang1,3, Jia-Jun Liang1, Hao-Fei Yu4, Cai-Feng Ding4, Ting-Ting Feng1, Li-Yan Zhang1, Xia Liu1,3, Xin-Yue Hu1, Ying Zhou1.
Abstract
The well-known toxic medicine Gelsemium elegans is widely and historically used to treat bone fracture and skin ulcers by the folk people of China. Two new monoterpenoid indole alkaloids, gelselegandines D and E, together with the known analogue gelegamine A were isolated from G. elegans. Their structures were elucidated by means of spectroscopic techniques and quantum chemical calculations. All isolated compounds were tested for the effects on RANKL-induced osteoclast formation. Interestingly, gelselegandine E and gelegamine A, respectively, showed significant promoting and inhibitory activities on osteoclastogenesis, while gelselegandine D had no activity under the same concentration. This work suggested the different configurations for the carbons near the C-19/20 oxygen rings of the isolated compounds may be the key active groups on osteoclast formation and provided the evidence for the rationality as the traditional treatment for bone-related diseases of G. elegans.Entities:
Keywords: Gelsemium elegans; gelselegandines D and E; indole alkaloids; natural products; osteoclast cells; osteoclastogenesis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34946539 PMCID: PMC8708120 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26247457
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Structures of compounds 1–3.
The 1 H (600 MHz) and 13 C NMR (150 MHz) data for 1–2 (δ in ppm, J in Hz).
| NO. | 1 a | 2 a | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 2 | 174.4 | 174.5 | ||
| 3 | 3.57 (d, | 74.8 | 3.63 (d, | 74.9 |
| 5 | 4.32 (tt, | 60.7 | 4.26 (tt, | 60.4 |
| 6 | 2.66 (dd, | 37.1 | 2.61 (dd, | 37.1 |
| 7 | 57.4 | 57.4 | ||
| 8 | 125.1 | 124.8 | ||
| 9 | 7.39 (d, | 127.0 | 7.40 (d, | 127.0 |
| 10 | 6.66 (dd, | 109.3 | 6.66 (dd, | 109.3 |
| 11 | 162.1 | 162.1 | ||
| 12 | 6.58 (d, | 95.4 | 6.58 (d, | 95.5 |
| 13 | 140.6 | 140.6 | ||
| 14 | 2.55 (m, 1H), | 25.0 | 2.57 (dd, | 25.5 |
| 15 | 1.91 (m, 1H) | 31.3 | 2.18 (m, 1H) | 25.1 |
| 16 | 2.56 (m, 1H) | 34.2 | 2.44 (m, 1H) | 34.2 |
| 17 | 4.41 (d, | 67.9 | 4.40 (d, | 67.8 |
| 18 | 1.45 (d, | 14.7 | 1.40 (d, | 13.9 |
| 19 | 3.24 (q, | 64.6 | 3.33 (m, 1H) | 60.1 |
| 20 | 63.4 | 62.3 | ||
| 21 | 7.61 (s, 1H) | 165.2 | 7.25 (s, 1H) | 167.6 |
| NOMe | 3.93 (s, 3H) | 64.2 | 3.93 (s, 3H) | 64.2 |
| ArOMe | 3.82 (s, 3H) | 56.2 | 3.82 (s, 3H) | 56.2 |
a Recorded in CD3OD.
Figure 2Selective HMBC (), 1H-1H COSY (), and ROESY () correlations of compounds 1 and 2.
Figure 3Calculated interproton distances near the epoxide for the two possible structures (1A and 1B) of compound 1.
Figure 4Regression analysis of the NMR calculations of the two possible configurations (1A and 1B) and ECD calculation curves of 1.
Figure 5Calculated interproton distances near the epoxide for the two possible structures (2A and 2B) of compound 2.
Figure 6Regression analysis of the NMR calculations of the two possible configurations (2A and 2B) and ECD calculation curves of 2.
Figure 7Effects of compounds 1–3 on RANKL-induced osteoclast formation; (A) osteoclast counts after compounds’ addition (## p < 0.01 versus control; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01 versus model); (B) representative TRAP staining images after compounds’ intervention; (C) dell viability of the compounds with various concentrations (5, 10, or 20 μg/mL) on macrophages RAW 264.7 (** p < 0.01 versus control). RANKL, receptor activator for NF-κB ligand; TRAP, tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase; Osteo, osteoclast.