| Literature DB >> 35056679 |
Małgorzata Kikowska1, Justyna Chanaj-Kaczmarek2, Monika Derda3, Anna Budzianowska1, Barbara Thiem1, Halina Ekiert4, Agnieszka Szopa4.
Abstract
Three species from the Eryngium L. genus-E. campestre, E. maritimum, and E. planum, plants with a rich chemical composition, were selected for phytochemical and biological studies. The applied biotechnological methods allowed to obtain the biomass of these rare or protected species in the form of multiplied shoots (stationary system) and roots cultured in a liquid medium (agitated system). In the extracts from the raw material obtained under in vitro conditions, the content of selected phenolic acids and flavonoids (HPLC-DAD method) as well as the total of polyphenols (Folin-Ciocalteu assay) were quantified. The highest amount of all phenolic compounds was found in extracts from E. planum roots (950.90 ± 33.52 mg/100 g d.w.), and the lowest from E. campestre roots (285.00 ± 10.07 mg/100 g d.w.). The quantitatively dominant compound proved to be rosmarinic acid. The highest amounts were confirmed for E. planum root extract (694.58 mg/100 g d.w.), followed by E. planum (388.95 mg/100 g d.w.) and E. campestre (325.85 mg/100 g d.w.) shoot extracts. The total content of polyphenols was always increased in the biomass from in vitro cultures in comparison to the analogous organs of intact plants of each species. The obtained extracts were assessed for antiprotozoal activity against Acanthamoeba sp. The strength of biological activity of the extracts correlated with the content of phenolic compounds. To our knowledge, this is the first report on the amoebicidal activity of E. campestre, E. maritimum, and E. planum extracts from biomass produced by biotechnological methods.Entities:
Keywords: acanthamoebic activity; eryngo; extracts; flavonoids; in vitro cultures; phenolic acids
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35056679 PMCID: PMC8781403 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27020363
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1In vitro shoot and root cultures of: (a,b) Eryngium campestre L.; (c,d) Eryngium maritimum L.; (e,f) Eryngium planum L.
The growth parameters of stabilized in vitro shoot cultures of Eryngium species.
| Species Studied | Explants that Proliferated Buds (%) | Shoot Number per Explant (SE) | Shoot Length (cm SE) | Leaf Number Per Shoot (SE) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 100 | 11.34 ± 0.46 b | 3.56 ± 0.12 a | 5.15 ± 0.20 a |
|
| 96.3 | 4.1 ± 0.30 c | 3.1 ± 0.03 b | 3.90 ± 0.07 a |
|
| 100 | 14.56 ± 0.20 a | 4.52 ± 0.04 a | 5.29 ± 0.04 a |
The results are presented as the mean ± SE of three independent experiments with 30 explants per treatment. Mean values within a column with the same letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05 using Duncan’s multiple range test. The first letter of the alphabet for the highest values, the next for statistically significant decreasing values.
The root biomass (g ± SE) of Eryngium spp. in MS liquid medium after 24 weeks of in vitro culture.
| Species Studied | Fresh Weight [g] | Dried Weight [g] |
|---|---|---|
|
| 27.1 ± 0.60 a | 5.8 ± 0.21 a |
|
| 16.4 ± 0.78 b | 4.1 ± 0.43 b |
|
| 25.1 ± 1.45 a | 5.8 ± 0.16 a |
The results are presented as the mean ± SE of three independent experiments with 5 explants per treatment. Mean values within a column with the same letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05 using Duncan’s multiple range test. The first letter of the alphabet for the highest values, the next for statistically significant decreasing values.
The contents (mg/100 g d.w. ± SD) of estimated phenolic acids and flavonoids in the shoot and root in vitro cultures of different Eryngium species.
| Compounds |
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shoot Culture | Root Culture | Shoot Culture | Root Culture | Shoot Culture | Root Culture | |
| Phenolic acid | ||||||
| Chlorogenic acid | 154.47 ± 5.44 a | 13.20 ± 0.47 e | 30.51 | 140.56 ± 4.95 b | 107.91 ± 3.80 c | 99.67 ± 3.51 c |
| Isochlorogenic acid | n.d. | n.d | n.d. | n.d. | 46.30 ± 1.63 a | 17.34 ± 0.61 b |
| Ferulic acid | 23.25± 0.82 b | 9.35 ± 0.33 b | 7.76 ± 0.27 d | 8.33 ± 0.29 c | 3.17 ± 0.11 f | 3.51 ± 0.12 e |
| 3,4-Dihydroxyphenylacetic acid | 88.88 ± 3.13 b | 50.91 ± 1.79 c | 40.76 ± 1.44 d | 108.92 ± 3.84 a | 104.05 ± 3.67 a | 52.21 ± 1.84 c |
| Caffeic acid | 4.03 ± 0.14 e | n.d. | 4.77 ± 0.17 d | 8.81 ± 0.31 c | 16.51 ± 0.58 a | 14.78± 0.52 b |
| Protocatechuic acid | 8.12 ± 0.29 a | 1.81 ± 0.06 e | 3.61 ± 0.13 d | 7.41 ± 0.26 b | 8.57 ± 0.30 a | 4.07 ± 0.14 c |
| Rosmarinic acid (RA) | 325.85 ± 11.48 c | 100.91 ± 3.56 e | 174.51 ± 6.15 d | 181.27 ± 6.39 d | 388.95 ± 13.70 b | 694.58 ± 24.47 a |
| Syringic acid | 0.99 ± 0.04 c | 5.45 ± 0.19 a | 1.87 ± 0.07 b | 1.86 ± 0.07 b | 0.37 ± 0.01 e | 0.88 ± 0.03 d |
| Vanillic acid | n.d. | n.d. | 2.54 ± 0.09 b | 2.34 ± 0.08 c | 5.68 ± 0.20 a | n.d. |
| 4-Feruloylquinic acid | 9.83 ± 0.35 d | 46.90 ± 1.65 b | 8.44 ± 0.30 e | 64.96 ± 2.29 a | 47.59 ± 1.68 b | 38.17 ± 1.34 c |
| 4-Dihydroxybenzoic acid | 122.84 ± 4.33 a | n.d. | 7.56 ± 0.27 b | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
| Sum of phenolic acids | 738.26 ± 26.02 b | 228.53 ± 8.05 e | 282.33 ± 9.90 d | 524.46 ± 20.77 c | 729.10 ± 25.68 b | 925.21 ± 32.58 a |
| Flavonoids | ||||||
| Kaempferol | 14.53 ± 0.51 a | 5.85 ± 0.20 e | 13.10 ± 0.46 b | 6.41 ± 0.22 d | 3.71 ± 0.13 f | 8.82 ± 0.31 c |
| Quercitrin | n.d. | 21.45 ± 0.75 a | 6.95 ± 0.24 d | 10.55 ± 0.37 c | 11.25 ± 0.40 c | 14.41 ± 0.51 b |
| Rutoside | 29.51 ± 1.04 a | n.d. | 14.32 ± 0.50 b | 12.16 ± 0.43 c | n.d. | n.d. |
| Quercetin | 6.92 ± 0.24 b | 22.96 ± 0.81 a | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
| Astragalin | 57.05 ± 1.44 a | 6.21 ± 0.26 c | n.d. | n.d. | 15.49 ± 0.63 b | 2.46 ± 0.12 d |
| Sum of flavonoids | 108.01 ± 3.23 a | 56.47 ± 2.02 b | 34.37 ± 1.20 c | 29.12 ± 1.02 d | 30.45 ± 1.16 d | 25.69 ± 0.94 e |
| Sum of phenolic acids and flavonoids | 846.27 ± 29.25 b | 285.00 ± 10.07 f | 316.70 ± 11.10 e | 553.65 ± 21.79 d | 759.55 ± 26.84 c | 950.90 ± 33.52 a |
n.d.—not detected. Mean values within a raw with the same letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05 using Duncan’s multiple range test. The first letter of the alphabet for the highest values, the next for statistically significant decreasing values.
Total phenolic content in Eryngium species dry plant material evaluated by Folin–Ciocalteau method, expressed as gallic acid equivalent (mg/100 g).
| Species Studied | Plant Origin | Organ | Polyphenols Content (mg GAE/100 g) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| Intact plant | Shoots | 945 ± 4 f |
| In vitro culture | Shoots | 1507 ± 11 b | |
| Intact plant | Roots | 1030 ± 20 e | |
| In vitro culture | Roots | 2254 ± 10 a | |
|
| Intact plant | Shoots | 1120 ± 17 d |
| In vitro culture | Shoots | 1551 ± 17 b | |
| Intact plant | Roots | 150 ± 1 h | |
| In vitro culture | Roots | 1179 ± 4 d | |
|
| Intact plant | Shoots | 1221 ± 12 c |
| In vitro culture | Shoots | 1584 ± 18 b | |
| Intact plant | Roots | 245 ± 1 g | |
| In vitro culture | Roots | 1507 ± 11 b |
The results are presented as the mean ± SD of six independent repetitions. Mean values within a column with the same letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05 using Duncan’s multiple range test. The first letter of the alphabet for the highest values, the next for statistically significant decreasing values.
Effect of extract from Eryngium campestre shoot and root in vitro cultures on inhibition of Acanthamoeba trophozoites during four days treatment.
| Extracts Concentration | Duration of Treatment [days] | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2nd Day | 3rd Day | 4th Day | ||||
| Shoot culture | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] |
| Control | 10.11 ± 2.05 a,C | 0 | 15.72 ± 3.36 a,B | 0 | 38.39 ± 7.77 a,A | 0 |
| 0.5 mg/mL | 5.81 ± 2.07 b,B | 42.54 | 9.06 ± 2.09 b,B | 42.37 | 23.88 ± 6.49 b,A | 37.80 |
| 2.5 mg/mL | 1.71 ± 1.18 c,B | 83.09 | 4.33 ± 1.63 c,B | 72.46 | 10.75 ± 3.47 d,A | 72.00 |
| 5.0 mg/mL | 0.72 ± 0.65 d,A | 92.88 | 1.11 ± 0.81 d,A | 92.94 | 1.41 ± 1.15 e,A | 96.33 |
| Root culture | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] |
| Control | 11.11 ± 1.85 a,C | 0 | 20.33 ± 3.80 a,B | 0 | 27.81 ± 3.64 a,A | 0 |
| 0.5 mg/mL | 10.28 ± 2.84 ab,B | 7.48 | 15.50 ± 2.91 ab,AB | 23.76 | 20.5 ± 3.80 a,A | 27.55 |
| 2.5 mg/mL | 7.78 ± 2.25 ab,B | 29.98 | 11.42 ± 3.07 b,AB | 43.83 | 12.44 ± 3.28 b,A | 55.27 |
| 5.0 mg/mL | 6.23 ± 2.28 b,A | 43.93 | 7.20 ± 2.14 b,A | 64.59 | 7.93 ± 5.66 b,A | 71.49 |
Mean values within a raw (capital letters) and a column (small letters) with the same letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05 using Duncan’s multiple range test. The first letter of the alphabet for the highest values, the next for statistically significant decreasing values. n = 18. MN—mean number of trophozoites; GI—growth inhibition.
Effect of extract from Eryngium maritimum shoot and root in vitro culture on inhibition of Acanthamoeba trophozoites during four days treatment.
| Extracts Concentration | Duration of Treatment [days] | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2nd Day | 3rd Day | 4th Day | ||||
| Shoot culture | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] |
| Control | 5.89 ± 2.71 a,C | 0 | 19.72 ± 3.40 a,B | 0 | 27.22 ± 4.59 a,A | 0 |
| 0.5 mg/mL | 4.53 ± 2.63 ab,C | 23.09 | 11.02 ± 1.71 b,B | 34.49 | 17.40 ± 4.17 b,A | 36.05 |
| 2.5 mg/mL | 3.72 ± 1.59 ab,C | 36.85 | 7.08 ± 0.86 c,B | 44.10 | 14.00 ± 2.28 b,A | 48.57 |
| 5.0 mg/mL | 2.00 ± 1.15 b,A | 66.05 | 2.17 ± 1.57 d,A | 89.00 | 2.27 ± 1.62 c,A | 91.67 |
| Root culture | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] |
| control | 5.89 ± 2.71 a,B | 0 | 9.72 ± 3.40 a,B | 0 | 17.22 ± 4.09 a,A | 0 |
| 0.5 mg/mL | 4.45 ± 1.28 a,B | 24.32 | 7.44 ± 3.04 a,AB | 23.46 | 11.88 ± 4.01 a,A | 31.02 |
| 2.5 mg/mL | 2.38 ± 0.38 b,B | 59.60 | 1.00 ± 0.50 b,A | 89.72 | 2.99 ± 2.45 b,A | 92.61 |
| 5.0 mg/mL | 0.61 ± 0.45 c,A | 89.65 | 0.38 ± 0.06 c,A | 96.10 | 0.61 ± 0.39 b,A | 96.46 |
Mean values within a raw (capital letters) and a column (small letters) with the same letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05 using Duncan’s multiple range test. The first letter of the alphabet for the highest values, the next for statistically significant decreasing values. n = 18. MN—mean number of trophozoites; GI—growth inhibition.
Effect of extract from Eryngium planum shoot and root in vitro culture on inhibition of Acanthamoeba trophozoites during four days treatment.
| Extracts Concentration | Duration of Treatment [days] | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2nd Day | 3rd Day | 4th Day | ||||
| Shoot culture | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] |
| Control | 10.50 ± 1.83 a,B | 0 | 20.67 ± 3.37 a,A | 0 | 25.12 ± 4.34 a,A | 0 |
| 0.5 mg/mL | 4.00 ± 2.57 b,B | 61.91 | 10.92 ± 3.00 b,A | 47.17 | 13.80 ± 4.55 b,A | 46.07 |
| 2.5 mg/mL | 3.39 ± 2.31 b,A | 67.72 | 4.00 ± 2.31 c,A | 80.65 | 4.33 ± 1.93 c,A | 82.77 |
| 5.0 mg/mL | 2.35 ± 1.35 b,A | 77.62 | 1.56 ± 1.30 c,A | 92.02 | 1.50 ± 1.17 c,A | 94.03 |
| Root culture | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] | MN ± SD | GI [%] |
| Control | 9.18 ± 2.26 a,C | 0 | 21.89 ± 4.15 a,B | 0 | 32.89 ± 4.14 a,A | 0 |
| 0.5 mg/mL | 6.06 ± 1.95 a,B | 33.99 | 11.47 ± 4.26 b,AB | 47.61 | 18.33 ± 2.62 b,A | 44.27 |
| 2.5 mg/mL | 3.68 ± 1.03 b,B | 59.92 | 4.35 ± 2.35 c,B | 80.13 | 10.83 ± 2.80 c,A | 67.08 |
| 5.0 mg/mL | 2.11 ± 1.59 b,A | 77.02 | 1.57 ± 1.06 c,A | 92.83 | 4.41 ± 2.30 d,A | 86.61 |
Mean values within a raw (capital letters) and a column (small letters) with the same letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05 using Duncan’s multiple range test. The first letter of the alphabet for the highest values, the next for statistically significant decreasing values. n = 18. MN—mean number of trophozoites; GI—growth inhibition.
Determination of IC50 [mg/mL] for the studied extracts of Eryngium extracts on Acanthamoeba trophozoites proliferation in the culture medium.
| In Vitro Culture | IC50 2nd Day | IC50 3rd Day | IC50 4th Day | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| shoot culture | 0.72 | 0.80 | 1.05 |
| root culture | >5.00 | 3.20 | 2.00 | |
|
| shoot culture | 3.70 | 2.90 | 2.60 |
| root culture | 1.85 | 1.15 | 1.00 | |
|
| shoot culture | 0.45 | 0.25 | 0.70 |
| root culture | 1.50 | 0.60 | 0.75 |
Figure 2Correlation between IC50 values and the sum of phenolic acids and flavonoids determined by HPLC method in Eryngium species.