| Literature DB >> 35161369 |
Nguyen Ngoc Tuan1, Huong Nguyen Thi2,3, Chau Le Thi My4, Tang Xuan Hai5, Hieu Tran Trung2, Anh Nguyen Thi Kim1, Thanh Nguyen Tan4, Tan Le Van6, Cuong Quoc Nguyen7, Quang De Tran7, Ping-Chung Kuo8, Quang Le Dang9,10, Tran Dinh Thang1.
Abstract
The phytochemical constituents from the roots of Millettia speciosa were investigated by chromatographic isolation, and their chemical structures were characterized using the MS and NMR spectroscopic methods. A total of 10 compounds, including six triterpenoids, two flavonoids, and two phenolic compounds, were identified from the roots of M. speciosa. Out of the isolated compounds, eight showed inhibitory effects on NO production in lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells, with IC50 values ranging from 43.9 to 449.5 µg/mL. Ursane-type triterpenes significantly suppressed NO production compared to the remaining compounds. In addition, these compounds also exhibited remarkable inhibitory effects on α-glucosidase. Among the tested compounds, 4, 5, and 10 exhibited excellent α-glucosidase inhibition, with IC50 values ranging from 1.1 to 2.2 µg/mL. Almost all of the test compounds showed little or no acetylcholinesterase inhibition, except for 5, which showed moderate anti-acetylcholinesterase activity in vitro. The molecular docking study of α-glucosidase inhibition by 3-5 and 10 was conducted to observe the interactions of these molecules with the enzyme. Compounds 4, 5, and 10 exhibited a better binding affinity toward the targeted receptor and the H-bond interactions located at the entrance of the enzyme active site pocket in comparison to those of 3 and the positive control acarbose. Our findings evidence the pharmacological potential of this species and suggest that the phytochemicals derived from the roots of M. speciosa may be promising lead molecules for further studies on the development of anti-inflammatory and anti-diabetes drugs.Entities:
Keywords: Millettia speciosa; NO production; anti-acetylcholinesterase; anti-glucosidase; molecular docking
Year: 2022 PMID: 35161369 PMCID: PMC8840612 DOI: 10.3390/plants11030388
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1Chemical structures of the isolated compounds from the roots of Milletia speciosa. Compounds—1: friedelin; 2: rotundic acid; 3: pedunculoside; 4: uvaol; 5: ursolic acid; 6: gypenoside XVII; 7: pterocarpin; 8: syringin; 9: daidzin; 10: rutin.
Figure 2NO production inhibition of the isolated compounds from Millettia speciosa. Compounds—(A): (1: friedelin; 2: rotundic acid; 3: pedunculoside; 4: uvaol; 5: ursolic acid); (B): (6: gypenoside XVII; 7: pterocarpin; 8: syringin; 9: daidzin; 10: rutin). The test compounds were evaluated for their inhibition at a concentration range of 0.8–500 µg/mL. PC: positive control treated with L-NMMA at a concentration range of 0.8–100 µg/mL.
Half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) for the inhibition of NO production by the isolated compounds from Millettia speciosa.
| Compound 1 | IC50 (µg/mL) 2 |
|---|---|
|
| >500 |
|
| 241.3 ± 8.2 |
|
| 273.1 ± 8.2 |
|
| 246.5 ± 18.7 |
|
| 43.9 ± 3.7 |
|
| 93.9 ± 5.4 |
|
| 228.9 ± 18.6 |
|
| 303.1 ± 11.0 |
|
| >500 |
|
| 449.5 ± 5.2 |
| PC | 8.6 ± 0.9 |
1 Compounds—1: friedelin; 2: rotundic acid; 3: pedunculoside; 4: uvaol; 5: ursolic acid; 6: gypenoside XVII; 7: pterocarpin; 8: syringin; 9: daidzin; 10: rutin. PC: positive control with L-NMMA. 2 Values are the means of three replicates ± standard deviation (SD).
Figure 3Viability of RAW264.7 cell line treated with the isolated compounds from Millettia speciosa. (A): (Compounds—1: friedelin; 2: rotundic acid; 3: pedunculoside; 4: uvaol; 5: ursolic acid); (B): (6: gypenoside XVII; 7: pterocarpin; 8: syringin; 9: daidzin; 10: rutin). The cells were incubated at 37 °C under CO2 atmosphere.
Half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) for inhibition of α-glucosidase by the isolated compounds from Millettia speciosa.
| Compound 2 | IC50 (µg/mL) 1 | Fold Change |
|---|---|---|
|
| >256 | <0.663 |
|
| >256 | <0.663 |
|
| 184.9 ± 10.05 | 0.918 |
|
| 1.96 ± 0.09 | 86.632 |
|
| 1.1 ± 0.05 | 154.363 |
|
| >256 | <0.663 |
|
| >256 | <0.663 |
|
| >256 | <0.663 |
|
| >256 | <0.663 |
|
| 2.2 ± 0.09 | 77.534 |
| Positive control 3 | 169.8 ± 7.05 | 1.000 |
1 Values are the means of three replicates ± standard deviation (SD). 2 Compounds—1: friedelin; 2: rotundic acid; 3: pedunculoside; 4: uvaol; 5: ursolic acid; 6: gypenoside XVII; 7: pterocarpin; 8: syringin; 9: daidzin; 10: rutin. 3 Acarbose was used as a positive control in the evaluation of α-glucosidase inhibition activity.
Figure 4Compound 5 (green—most active) and acarbose (gray—control) at the active site of α-glucosidase.
Interaction residues of compounds obtained from molecular docking simulation.
| Compound 1 | Hydrogen Bond Interacting Residues 2 |
|---|---|
|
| Ser157, Tyr158 (unfavorable bump), Asp242, His280, Asp307 (unfavorable bump), Pro312, Phe314, Arg315, Glu411 (unfavorable bump). |
|
| Leu313 (unfavorable bump), Arg315, Asp352, Gln353. |
|
| Tyr158 (pi–alkyl), Asp215, Val216 (alkyl), Glu277, Phe303 (pi–alkyl), Arg315, Glu411 (unfavorable bump). |
|
| Ser157, Ser240, Asp242, Phe303 (pi–pi stacked), Asp307 (pi–anion), Phe314, Ser311, Agr315, Asp352, Gln353, Glu411, Arg442. |
| Acarbose | Asp69, Asp215, Ser240, Asp242, His280, Phe303, Pro312, Arg315 (unfavorable bump), Arg442 (unfavorable bump). |
1 Compounds—3: pedunculoside; 4: uvaol; 5: ursolic acid; 10: rutin; acarbose: control. 2 Ser: serine; Tyr: tyrosine; Asp: aspartic acid; His: histidine; Pro: proline; Phe: phenylalanine; Glu: glutamic acid; Arg: arginine; Val: valine; Gln: glutamine; Leu: leucine.
Figure 5Compounds docked to the binding pocket of α-glucosidase. (A) Compound 5—most active; (B) Compound 10; (C) Compound 4; (D) Compound 3—least active.
Figure 6(A) Compound 4 (blue) and Compound 5 (green) in the binding site of human intestinal α-glucosidase; (B) pharmacophore model. HBA: Hydrogen bond acceptors are depicted as yellow-brown arrows; HP: hydrophobic areas are depicted as green spheres.