| Literature DB >> 35153761 |
Yamei Li1,2, Yifang Yang3,4, Xingdong Kang5, Xiaofeng Li6, Yongzhong Wu6, Junping Xiao6, Yang Ye5, Jianqiong Yang1, Yang Yang3, Hai Liu1,2.
Abstract
Callicarpa nudiflora (C. nudiflora) is widely used to treat inflammation-related diseases in China. C. nudiflora mainly contains phenylethanol glycosides, flavonoids, triterpenes, diterpenes, iridoid glycosides, volatile oils, and other small molecules. Therefore, it is necessary to screen out anti-inflammatory active substances from C. nudiflora. In this paper, high-performance liquid chromatography was used to establish the fingerprint of C. nudiflora extracts. The anti-inflammation of C. nudiflora extracts were evaluated by the experiment of toes swelling in inflammatory rats. Then, the spectrum-effect relationship between the fingerprints and anti-inflammatory activities was researched by Pearson analysis and orthogonal partial least squares analysis to identify a group of anti-inflammatory compounds of C. nudiflora extracts. The differences of extracts are illustrated by principal component analysis and cluster analysis in pharmacological effects. Finally, 12 compounds, including catalpol (P1), caffeic acid (P2), protocatechuic acid (P9), 3,4-dihydroxybenzaldehyde (P10), forsythiaside E (P12), protocatechualdehyde isomers (P14), forsythiaside B (P15), rutin (P16), alyssonoside (P21), verbascoside (P22), 2'-acetyl forsythoside B (P24), and isorhamnetin (P32) by HPLC-DAD and UPLC-Q-TOF MS/MS, were determined as potential compounds for anti-inflammatory activity in C. nudiflora. In particular, six compounds were identified as active substances with the greatest anti-inflammatory potential. Moreover, all compounds were tested for anti-inflammatory experiments or anti-inflammatory literature retrieval. In this study, a method for rapid screening of potential anti-inflammatory active ingredients of C. nudiflora was established, which can provide a reference for the future study of active compounds of C. nudiflora.Entities:
Keywords: Callicarpa nudiflora; anti-inflammatory; fingerprint; natural compounds; spectrum–effect relationship
Year: 2022 PMID: 35153761 PMCID: PMC8829221 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.806808
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pharmacol ISSN: 1663-9812 Impact factor: 5.810
FIGURE 1The chromatogram of the total extract obtained by conventional decocting (water) of C. nudiflora leaves.
FIGURE 2HPLC chromatogram overlay and feature peaks of six extracts.
Effect of different C. nudiflora extracts on carrageenan-induced swelling of rats ( ).
| Group | Swelling degree (mm) at different times after inflammation (h) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 h | 2 h | 3 h | 4 h | 5 h | 6 h | |
| Blank group | 2.91 ± 1.07 | 3.54 ± 0.86 | 4.03 ± 0.92 | 4.24 ± 0.87 | 4.27 ± 0.82 | 4.12 ± 0.49 |
| Dexamethasone acetate group | 1.27 ± 0.71** | 1.63 ± 1.33** | 1.78 ± 0.84** | 2.52 ± 0.91** | 2.56 ± 1.05** | 2.19 ± 0.88** |
| Granules of C. nudiflora | 1.55 ± 0.79** | 2.75 ± 0.91 | 2.87 ± 0.54** | 3.64 ± 0.86 | 3.76 ± 0.56 | 3.54 ± 0.72 |
| Extract 1 group | 1.83 ± 0.70* | 2.25 ± 0.57** | 2.66 ± 0.61** | 2.74 ± 1.00** | 3.64 ± 0.68 | 3.52 ± 0.65** |
| Extract 2 group | 1.59 ± 0.71** | 2.87 ± 0.51* | 3.49 ± 1.03 | 3.62 ± 0.64 | 3.84 ± 0.45 | 3.73 ± 1.15 |
| Extract 3 group | 1.99 ± 0.51* | 2.55 ± 1.15* | 3.80 ± 1.00 | 3.55 ± 1.02 | 3.79 ± 0.89 | 3.75 ± 0.96 |
| Extract 4 group | 2.65 ± 1.02 | 3.57 ± 0.78 | 3.72 ± 1.31 | 3.76 ± 1.04 | 3.82 ± 0.88 | 3.83 ± 0.78 |
| Extract 5 group | 1.57 ± 0.67** | 2.66 ± 0.68* | 3.55 ± 1.00 | 3.44 ± 1.12 | 3.77 ± 0.73 | 3.88 ± 0.91 |
| Extract 6 group | 2.25 ± 0.45 | 2.79 ± 0.46* | 3.80 ± 0.75 | 3.90 ± 0.55 | 3.95 ± 0.82 | 3.83 ± 0.95 |
Compared with the blank group *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
Effect of different C. nudiflora extracts on inhibition rate of carrageen-induced swelling of the foot in rats.
| Group | Inhibition rate (%) at different times after inflammation (h) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 h | 2 h | 3 h | 4 h | 5 h | 6 h | |
| Dexamethasone acetate Group | 56.4 | 53.9 | 56.0 | 40.5 | 40.1 | 46.7 |
| Granules of | 46.6 | 22.3 | 28.9 | 14.1 | 11.8 | 14.0 |
| Extract 1 group | 37.1 | 36.4 | 34.0 | 35.3 | 14.8 | 14.5 |
| Extract 2 group | 45.2 | 18.9 | 13.5 | 14.7 | 10.1 | 9.3 |
| Extract 3 group | 31.6 | 28.0 | 5.7 | 16.4 | 11.3 | 8.9 |
| Extract 4 group | 8.8 | −0.9 | 7.8 | 11.3 | 10.4 | 6.8 |
| Extract 5 group | 46.0 | 25.0 | 12.0 | 18.9 | 11.7 | 5.6 |
| Extract 6 group | 22.7 | 21.1 | 5.9 | 8.0 | 7.5 | 7.0 |
Pearson correlation analysis results.
| Peak number | Pearson correlation analysis | Swelling of feet at different time points | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 h | 2 h | 3 h | 4 h | 5 h | 6 h | ||
| P1 | Correlation | −0.702 | −0.465 | −0.820* | −0.724 | −0.624 | −0.677 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.120 | 0.352 | 0.046 | 0.104 | 0.185 | 0.140 | |
| P2 | Correlation | −0.735 | −0.027 | 0.072 | 0.105 | 0.081 | 0.176 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.096 | 0.959 | 0.892 | 0.843 | 0.879 | 0.738 | |
| P5 | Correlation | −0.515 | 0.220 | 0.104 | 0.201 | 0.148 | 0.154 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.296 | 0.675 | 0.845 | 0.702 | 0.779 | 0.771 | |
| P9 | Correlation | −0.357 | −0.785 | −0.742 | −0.913* | −0.874* | −0.732 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.487 | 0.064 | 0.091 | 0.011 | 0.023 | 0.098 | |
| P10 | Correlation | −0.613 | −0.610 | −0.950** | −0.884* | −0.756 | −0.814* |
| Distinctiveness | 0.195 | 0.199 | 0.004 | 0.019 | 0.082 | 0.049 | |
| P12 | Correlation | −0.423 | −0.745 | −0.908* | −0.956** | −0.856* | −0.941** |
| Distinctiveness | 0.404 | 0.089 | 0.012 | 0.003 | 0.030 | 0.005 | |
| P14 | Correlation | −0.252 | −0.515 | −0.924** | −0.873* | −0.772 | −0.982** |
| Distinctiveness | 0.629 | 0.295 | 0.009 | 0.023 | 0.072 | 0.000 | |
| P15 | Correlation | −0.911** | −0.686 | −0.612 | −0.721 | −0.703 | −0.447 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.012 | 0.133 | 0.197 | 0.106 | 0.120 | 0.375 | |
| P16 | Correlation | −0.291 | −0.744 | −0.855* | −0.954** | −0.875* | −0.844* |
| Distinctiveness | 0.576 | 0.090 | 0.030 | 0.003 | 0.022 | 0.035 | |
| P18 | Correlation | −0.744 | −0.703 | −0.488 | −0.640 | −0.635 | −0.615 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.090 | 0.119 | 0.327 | 0.171 | 0.176 | 0.194 | |
| P19 | Correlation | −0.699 | −0.751 | −0.679 | −0.787 | −0.742 | −0.776 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.123 | 0.085 | 0.138 | 0.063 | 0.092 | 0.070 | |
| P21 | Correlation | −0.035 | −0.540 | −0.841* | −0.884* | −0.823* | −0.900* |
| Distinctiveness | 0.948 | 0.269 | 0.036 | 0.019 | 0.044 | 0.014 | |
| P22 | Correlation | −0.612 | −0.771 | −0.844* | −0.913* | −0.833* | −0.882* |
| Distinctiveness | 0.196 | 0.073 | 0.034 | 0.011 | 0.040 | 0.020 | |
| P24 | Correlation | −0.247 | −0.751 | −0.656 | −0.835* | −0.801 | −0.774 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.636 | 0.086 | 0.157 | 0.039 | 0.055 | 0.071 | |
| P26 | Correlation | −0.734 | −0.657 | −0.366 | −0.524 | −0.528 | −0.534 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.097 | 0.156 | 0.476 | 0.286 | 0.282 | 0.276 | |
| P27 | Correlation | −0.767 | −0.698 | −0.764 | −0.800 | −0.727 | −0.772 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.075 | 0.123 | 0.077 | 0.056 | 0.102 | 0.072 | |
| P28 | Correlation | −0.634 | −0.672 | −0.621 | −0.755 | −0.759 | −0.744 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.176 | 0.144 | 0.189 | 0.083 | 0.080 | 0.090 | |
| P29 | Correlation | −0.776 | −0.613 | −0.457 | −0.535 | −0.500 | −0.595 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.069 | 0.195 | 0.363 | 0.274 | 0.313 | 0.213 | |
| P31 | Correlation | −0.743 | −0.708 | −0.457 | −0.590 | −0.560 | −0.619 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.091 | 0.115 | 0.362 | 0.218 | 0.248 | 0.190 | |
| P32 | Correlation | −0.396 | −0.649 | −0.899* | −0.918** | −0.809 | −0.642 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.437 | 0.163 | 0.015 | 0.010 | 0.051 | 0.169 | |
| P33 | Correlation | −0.697 | −0.697 | −0.446 | −0.559 | −0.510 | −0.651 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.124 | 0.124 | 0.376 | 0.249 | 0.301 | 0.161 | |
| P34 | Correlation | −0.803 | −0.648 | −0.478 | −0.568 | −0.532 | −0.593 |
| Distinctiveness | 0.054 | 0.164 | 0.338 | 0.240 | 0.277 | 0.215 | |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
FIGURE 3Scatterplot of some correlation peaks and drug efficacy data.
Identification results of spectral efficiency related peaks by UPLC-DAD-Q/TOF-MS.
| Peak number | Formula | Precise of molecular mass | MS1 adduct ( | MS2 ( |
| Compound |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | C15H22O10 | 362.1213 | [M + HCOO]-407.1189 | 197.8561 [M-H-Glc]- | 384.5 | Catalpol |
| [M-H]-361.1133 | 150.9148 [M-H-Glc-CH2O-H2O]- | |||||
| P2 | C9H8O4 | 180.0422 | [M-H]-179.0341 | 179.0341 [M-H]- | 218.0, 323.6 | Caffeic acid |
| 135.0443 [M-H-CO2]- | ||||||
| P9 | C7H6O4 | 154.0266 | [M-H]-153.0189 | 153.0189 [M-H]- | 213.3, 318.8 | Protocatechuic acid |
| 108.0211 [M-COO]- | ||||||
| P10 | C7H6O3 | 138.0317 | [M-H]-137.0236 | 108.5072 [M-H-CHO]- | 254.2, 324.8 | 3,4-dihydroxybenzaldehyde |
| 92.5135 [M-H-CHO-O]- | ||||||
| P12 | C20H30O12 | 462.1737 | [M-H]-461.1688 | 461.1688 [M-H]- | 281.9 | forsythiaside E |
| 135.0435 [caffeoyl]- | ||||||
| P14 | C7H6O3 | 138.0317 | [M-H]-137.0244 | 108.5046 [M-H-CHO]- | 242.8, 327.2 | protocatechualdehyde isomers |
| 92.5129 [M-H-CHO-O]- | ||||||
| P15 | C34H44O19 | 756.2476 | [M-H]-755.2398 | 755.2398 [M-H]- | 329.6 | Forsythiaside B |
| 593.2086 [M-H- caffeoyl]- | ||||||
| 179.0343; 161.0231; 135.0446 [caffeoyl]- | ||||||
| P16 | C27H30O16 | 610.1533 | [M-H]-609.1456 | 609.1456 [M-H]- | 254.2, 324.8 | Rutin |
| 300.0271 [M-H-glu- | ||||||
| P21 | C35H46O19 | 770.2633 | [M-H]-769.2548 | 769.2548 [M-H]- | 254.6, 347.5 | Alyssonoside |
| 593.2085 [M-H-caffeoyl]- | ||||||
| P22 | C29H36O15 | 624.205 | [M-H]-623.1978 | 623.1978 [M-H]- | 329.6 | Verbascoside |
| 461.1659 [M-H- caffeoyl]- | ||||||
| 161.0240 [caffeoyl]- | ||||||
| P24 | C36H46O20 | 798.2582 | [M-H]-797.2506 | 797.2506 [M-H]- | 328.4 | 2′-Acetyl forsythiaside B |
| 161.0239; 179.0346 [caffeoyl]- | ||||||
| 133.02 [C5H9O4]- | ||||||
| P32 | C16H12O7 | 316.0583 | [M-H]-315.0587 | 315.0587 [M-H]- | 254.6, 349.9 | Isorhamnetin |
| 151.0030 [C7H3O4]- |
FIGURE 4OPLS analysis results [(A) Score scatter Plot; (B) Loading Scatter Plot; (C) Coefficient overview Plot; (D) VIP value graph].
Composition matrix.
| Ingredient | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| P1 | 0.793 | 0.201 | 0.567 |
| P2 | 0.241 | 0.926 | 0.245 |
| P5 | 0.133 | 0.925 | 0.303 |
| P9 | 0.803 | −0.525 | −0.137 |
| P10 | 0.852 | −0.095 | 0.509 |
| P12 | 0.919 | −0.372 | 0.082 |
| P14 | 0.821 | −0.347 | 0.241 |
| Forsythiaside B | 0.85 | 0.259 | 0.188 |
| P16 | 0.805 | −0.588 | 0.013 |
| P18 | 0.928 | 0.267 | −0.252 |
| Luteolin | 0.989 | 0.095 | −0.109 |
| P21 | 0.703 | −0.673 | 0.028 |
| Verbascoside | 0.99 | −0.123 | 0.049 |
| P24 | 0.79 | −0.519 | −0.319 |
| P26 | 0.869 | 0.363 | −0.335 |
| P27 | 0.975 | 0.167 | 0.144 |
| P28 | 0.967 | 0.107 | −0.187 |
| P29 | 0.884 | 0.438 | −0.134 |
| P31 | 0.911 | 0.305 | −0.271 |
| P32 | 0.647 | −0.535 | 0.442 |
| P33 | 0.897 | 0.298 | −0.294 |
| P34 | 0.9 | 0.414 | −0.125 |
FIGURE 5Cluster diagram of six extracts.
Cyclooxygenase (COX-1 and COX-2) inhibition results.
| Chemical compound | Concentration/(mg/ml) | Inhibition rate (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| COX-1 | COX-2 | ||
| Verbascoside | 0.1 | 102.81 | 108.27 |
| 2′-acetyl forsythiaside B | 0.1 | 94.89 | 103.31 |
| Forsythiaside B | 0.1 | 91.04 | 104.38 |
| Alyssonoside | 0.1 | 80.54 | 103.15 |
| Extract 1 | 0.1 | 79.84 | 99.38 |
| Extract 2 | 0.1 | 81.00 | 100.93 |
| Extract 3 | 0.1 | 76.31 | 104.34 |
| Extract 4 | 0.1 | −12.05 | 54.27 |
| Extract 5 | 0.1 | 98.01 | 108.38 |
| Extract 6 | 0.1 | 68.24 | 97.61 |
IC50 effect on cyclooxygenase (COX-1 and COX-2).
| Chemical compound | IC50/(mg/ml or μmol/L) | |
|---|---|---|
| COX-1 | COX-2 | |
| Granules of | 0.036 | 0.02 |
| Extract 1 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| Extract 2 | 0.03 | 0.01 |
| Extract 3 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| Extract 4 | 0.06 | 0.03 |
| Extract 5 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| Extract 6 | 0.01 | 0.003 |
| Verbascoside | 0.02 or 31.14 | 0.002 or 3.14 |
| 2′-acetyl forsythiaside B | 0.004 or 5.01 | 0.001 or 1.25 |
| Forsythiaside B | 0.01 or 13.22 | 0.002 or 2.64 |
| Alyssonoside | 0.03 or 38.94 | 0.008 or 10.40 |