| Literature DB >> 34961166 |
Alison Green1, Guillermo Federico Padilla-Gonzalez1, Methee Phumthum1,2, Monique S J Simmonds1, Nicholas J Sadgrove1.
Abstract
Fruit from A. hippocastanum L. are used commercially for chronic venous insufficiency (CVI). The isomeric mixture of pentacyclic triterpenoid saponins (β-aescin) exert anti-inflammatory effects. Hence, research has focused on β-aescin, yet the diversity, accumulation, and bioactivity of organ-specific secondary metabolites represent missed pharmacological opportunities. To this end, we applied an untargeted metabolomics approach by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) to the chemical profiles of flowers, immature fruits, and pedicels from 40 specimens across 18 species of Aesculus. Principal component analysis (PCA), orthogonal partial least squares (OPLS-DA), and molecular networking revealed stronger chemical differences between plant organs, than between species. Flowers are rich in glycosylated flavonoids, pedicels in organic acids and flavonoid aglycones, and immature fruits in monomeric flavan-3-ols and procyanidins. Although a high diversity of flavonoids and procyanidins was observed, the relative amounts differed by plant organ. Fruit extracts demonstrated the strongest antifungal (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and antioxidant activity, likely from the procyanidins. Overall, secondary metabolite profiles are organ-specific, and fruits accumulate antifungal and antioxidant compounds. Due to the chemical similarity between species, similar effects may be achieved between species. This creates incentives for further exploration of the entire genus, in bioprospecting for potential therapeutic leads.Entities:
Keywords: Aesculus; bioactivity; liquid chromatography; mass spectrometry; metabolomics
Year: 2021 PMID: 34961166 PMCID: PMC8708636 DOI: 10.3390/plants10122695
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1OPLS-DA scores plot (a) and loadings plot (b) based on metabolic profiling of 106 plant extracts obtained from flowers, immature fruits, and pedicels of 40 taxa from 18 species of Aesculus. Discriminant metabolites of each organ are labelled with their m/z value in the loadings plot.
Discriminant metabolites of different plant organs in a selection of taxa from the genus Aesculus. Metabolites are selected based on the analysis of the OPLS-DA loadings plot. Metabolites sorted by their added contribution in the first two components. Negative ionization mode used.
| Rt (min) |
| Organ | Tentative Identification | MSn Ions | Conf Level * |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11.13 | 609.39 | flowers | rutin | 609 | 2 |
| 12.39 | 593.35 | flowers | kaempferol | 593 | 3 |
| 11.38 | 463.37 | flowers | quercetin 3- | 463 | 2 |
| 12.55 | 447.37 | flowers | quercetin 3- | 447 | 2 |
| 16.04 | 285.67 | flowers | kaempferol | 285 | 2 |
| 12.22 | 593.35 | flowers | kaempferol | 593 | 3 |
| 10.29 | 739.42 | flowers | kaempferol | 739 | 3 |
| 7.93 | 289.45 | fruits | epicatechin | 289 | 2 |
| 6.82 | 577.36 | fruits | procyanidin B | 577 | 3 |
| 7.94 | 579.32 | fruits | dimer of epicatechin | 579 | 2 |
| 7.62 | 865.39 | fruits | procyanidin trimer | 856 | 3 |
| 1.80 | 191.63 | fruits | quinic acid | 191 | 2 |
| 7.30 | 863.39 | fruits | aesculitannin or isomer | 863 | 3 |
| 1.80 | 383.31 | fruits | dimer of quinic acid | 383 | 2 |
| 1.69 | 387.31 | pedicels | sucrose [FA adduct] | 341 | 2 |
| 22.25 | 559.59 | pedicels | n.i. | 559 | 4 |
| 1.69 | 341.97 | pedicels | sucrose | 341 | 2 |
| 1.69 | 683.36 | pedicels | dimer of sucrose | 683 | 2 |
| 17.07 | 779.46 | pedicels | n.i. [FA adduct] | 733 | 4 |
| 1.77 | 533.28 | pedicels | quinic acid glucoside | 533 | 2 |
| 13.18 | 423.48 | pedicels | n.i. | 423 | 4 |
| 26.57 | 819.70 | pedicels | n.i. | 819 | 4 |
* Confidence level achieved in the identification of metabolites: 1 (high), identified by retention time (Rt) and accurate MS comparisons with a reference standard; 2 (intermediate), identified by accurate MS comparisons and database searches in our reference library of MS2 spectra (Kew Library), in the Dictionary of Natural Products and by interpretation of fragmentation patterns; 3 (low), identity or chemical class suggested by accurate MS comparisons with database searches; 4 (lowest), unknown metabolites. n.i.: not identified; FA: formic acid.
Figure 2HCA based on metabolic profiling of 106 plant extracts obtained from flowers, immature fruits, and pedicels of 40 taxa from 18 species of Aesculus showing a clustering tendency more related to the plant organ than to the species identity. FR: immature fruits, PE: pedicels and FL: flowers.
Figure 3Molecular network showing the diversity of glycosylated flavonoids and accumulation patterns in the reproductive organs of 40 taxa from 18 species of Aesculus analyzed by LC–MS. Nodes represent the metabolites detected in the plant extracts with pie charts indicating the accumulation of each metabolite in the three organs (yellow shading for flowers, blue for pedicels, and green for immature fruits). The size of the node denotes the ion intensity detected in the negative ionization mode. Bar chart summarizes the percentage accumulation value of all nodes associated to the same “molecular family”.
Figure 4Molecular network showing the diversity of procyanidins and associated metabolites and their accumulation patterns in the reproductive organs of 40 taxa from 18 species of Aesculus analyzed by LC–MS. Nodes represent the metabolites detected in the plant extracts with pie charts indicating the accumulation of each metabolite in the three organs (yellow shading for flowers, blue for pedicels, and green for immature fruits). The size of the node denotes the ion intensity detected in the negative ionization mode. Bar chart summarizes the percentage accumulation value of all nodes associated to the same “molecular family”.
Mean DPPH IC50 values (µg·mL−1 of extract) and MIC values (µg·mL−1) for range extracts of Aesculus.
| Flowers | Fruits | Pedicel | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Authority | Replicate No. | Code | DPPH | MIC | DPPH | MIC | DPPH | MIC |
|
| L. | 1 | 11 | 20.5 | n.i * | 11.6 | n.i | 33.7 | n.i |
| 2 | 12 | 41 | n.i | 14.8 | n.i | 20 | n.i | ||
| 3 | 24 | 33.9 | n.i | - * | - | 138 | n.i | ||
| 4 | 25 | - | n.i | 11.7 | 125 | 12.1 | n.i | ||
|
| DC. | 1 | 10 | 38.5 | n.i | 19.9 | n.i | 42.2 | n.i |
| 2 | 30 | 29 | n.i | 12 | 20.85 | 30 | n.i | ||
|
| Sol. | 1 | 14 | 6 | n.i | 46.2 | 125 | 43.2 | n.i |
| 2 | 4 | 9.8 | n.i | 19.6 | 62.5 | 40.5 | n.i | ||
|
| (Wall. ex Cambess.) Hook | 1 | 33 | 29.8 | 208.35 | - | - | 14.3 | n.i |
| 2 | 23 | 22.1 | n.i | - | - | 23.1 | n.i | ||
|
| (Rehder) Turland and N.H.Xia | 1 | 28 | 22.6 | n.i | - | - | 5.5 | n.i |
| 2 | 35 | 14.1 | n.i | - | - | 35.4 | n.i | ||
|
| Griff | 1 | 38 | 41.5 | n.i | - | - | 52.1 | n.i |
| 2 | 31 | 35.7 | n.i | 15.2 | 62.5 | 16.7 | n.i | ||
|
| Blume | 1 | 34 | 9.1 | n.i | 15.4 | n.i | 12.2 | n.i |
| 2 | 6 | 52.3 | n.i | 13.6 | n.i | 23.5 | n.i | ||
|
| (Spach) Nutt. | 1 | 36 | 45.2 | 166.65 | - | - | 32.2 | n.i |
| 2 | 37 | 48.8 | 125 | - | - | 1289.7 | n.i | ||
|
| Walter | 1 | 39 | 53.3 | n.i | 16.2 | n.i | 34.1 | n.i |
| 2 | 40 | 47 | n.i | - | - | 43.3 | n.i | ||
|
| Lindl. | 1 | 7 | 11.1 | 62.5 | 33.9 | n.i | 5.5 | 166.65 |
| 2 | 18 | - | - | 19.4 | 83.35 | 33.2 | n.i | ||
|
| (Spach) Scheele | 1 | 8 | 15.4 | n.i | - | - | 22.2 | 166.65 |
| 2 | 17 | 24.8 | n.i | 23.5 | 41.65 | 31.7 | n.i | ||
|
| Zeyh ** | 1 | 21 | 42.3 | n.i | 29.3 | 31.25 | 22 | n.i |
| 2 | 32 | 19.3 | n.i | 15.9 | 62.5 | 7.8 | n.i | ||
| 3 | 9 | 28.2 | n.i | 15.2 | n.i | 43.3 | 208.35 | ||
| 4 | 9 | 37.2 | n.i | - | - | - | - | ||
| 5 | 29 | 46.1 | n.i | 9.4 | 83.35 | 37.4 | n.i | ||
|
| W.Bartram | 1 | 16/20 | 19.3 | n.i | - | - | - | - |
| 2 | 20 | 19.7 | n.i | - | - | 28.4 | 83.35 | ||
| 3 | 16 | 8.2 | n.i | - | - | 48.1 | 125 | ||
|
| (Buckley) Rob. | 1 | 29 | 26 | n.i | - | - | - | - |
| 2 | 26 | 45.3 | n.i | 18.3 | 62.5 | 39.9 | n.i | ||
| 3 | 19 | 18.1 | n.i | 23.2 | 31.25 | 48 | n.i | ||
| 4 | 22 | 40.3 | n.i | 10.5 | 62.5 | 24.4 | n.i | ||
| 5 | 2 | 4.1 | n.i | - | - | 24.6 | n.i | ||
| 6 | 3 | 5.6 | n.i | - | - | 69.3 | 166.65 | ||
|
| Sealy ** | 1 | 13 | 98.6 | n.i | - | - | 48 | n.i |
| 2 | 27 | 16.2 | n.i | 16.7 | 125 | 51.8 | n.i | ||
|
| Booth ex Dippel | 1 | 5 | 3.7 | n.i | 27.5 | 62.5 | 30.6 | n.i |
|
| C.K.Schneid | 1 | 15 | 45.8 | n.i | 19.2 | 41.65 | - | 83.35 |
|
| L. | 1 | 1 | 12.5 | n.i | 15 | 41.65 | 24 | 62.5 |
* n.i = No inhibition, which indicates that the extract was not tested or a value has not been possible to calculate. ** indicates that there is taxonomic uncertainty about this determination according to the world checklist of vascular plants. MIC represent the mean minimum inhibitory concentration to inhibit growth of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in µg·mL−1. DPPH represent the mean inhibitory value at which 50% of DPPH radicals are quenched (IC50) in µg·mL−1 of extract.
Figure 5Plate 1: Number of active and inactive extracts against Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Extracts of Aesculus were tested against Saccharomyces cerevisiae in an MIC assay. Extracts that produced some form of inhibition at starting concentration of 250 µg·mL−1 were reported as active (red bars) whereas extracts that did not inhibit S. cerevisiae were recorded as inactive (blue bars). N = 111, FL = flowers, FR = fruits, PE = pedicels. Plate 2: mean IC50 values (a) and MIC values (b) for extracts of Aesculus, grouped according to organs. Antioxidant assays were performed in triplicate using the DPPH radical with the amount of color change measure spectrometrically using a plate reader at 517 nM. MIC assays were also performed in triplicate against Saccharomyces cerevisiae with the lowest concentration to produce inhibition recorded as the MIC value. FL (white) represent flowers, PE (blue) represents pedicels, FR (fushcia) represents fruits. Graphs are plotted as the mean +/− standard deviation. Some error bars are clipped at the axis limit. * denote the degrees of significance difference in a Kruskal–Wallis multiple comparison test; ns, not significant, * p < 0.5, ** p < 0.1 **** p < 0.0001.