| Literature DB >> 35164114 |
Anouar Hmamou1, Noureddine Eloutassi1, Samar Zuhair Alshawwa2, Omkulthom Al Kamaly2, Mohammed Kara3, Ahmed Bendaoud1, El-Mehdi El-Assri4, Sara Tlemcani1, Mostafa El Khomsi5, Amal Lahkimi1.
Abstract
The objective of this study is to valorize Papaver rhoeas L. from the Taounate region of Morocco by determining the total polyphenol content (TPC), the total flavonoid content (TFC) and the antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of four organs. The quantification of TPC and TFC in root, stem, leaf and flower extracts (RE, SE, LE and FE, respectively) was estimated by the Folin-Ciocalteu reaction and the aluminum trichloride method, respectively. Two tests were used to assess antioxidant power: the DPPH test and TAC assay. The antimicrobial activity was studied against five pathogenic bacteria and yeast, using two methods: disk diffusion and microdilution. The TPC in LE and LF was twice as high as that in RE and SE (24.24 and 22.10 mg GAE/g, respectively). The TFC values in the four extracts were very close and varied between 4.50 mg QE/g in the FE and 4.38 mg QE/g in the RE. The LE and FE showed low DPPH values with IC50 = 0.50 and 0.52 mg/mL, respectively. The TAC measurement revealed the presence of a significant amount of antioxidants in the studied extracts, mainly in LE and FE (6.60 and 5.53 mg AAE/g, respectively). The antimicrobial activity results revealed significant activity on almost all of the tested strains. The MIC of FE and SE against E. coli 57 was 1.56 and 0.78 mg/mL, respectively, while against the S. aureus it was 50 and 25 mg/mL, respectively. The low MLC value (1.56 mg/mL) was recorded against E. coli 57 by RE and SE.Entities:
Keywords: Papaver rhoeas L.; antimicrobial activity; antioxidant activity; total flavonoid content; total polyphenol content
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35164114 PMCID: PMC8840091 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27030854
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Extraction yield of P. rhoeas extracts.
| Sample | Mass of Dry Matter (g) | Mass of The Extract (g) | Yield (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| RE | 20 | 2.46 | 12.30 |
| SE | 20.84 | 2.35 | 11.77 |
| LE | 20.20 | 3.75 | 18.77 |
| FE | 20.70 | 3.72 | 18.60 |
RE—root extract; SE—stem extract; LE—leaf extract; FE—flower extract.
Total polyphenol contents and total flavonoid contents in the P. rhoeas extracts.
| Sample | TPC (mg GAE/g of Extract) | TFC (mg QE/g of Extract) |
|---|---|---|
| RE | 10.229 ± 0.183 b | 4.381 ± 0.090 a |
| SE | 10.585 ± 0.980 b | 4.493 ± 0.082 a |
| LE | 24.240 ± 4.960 a | 4.391 ± 0.075 a |
| FE | 22.100 ± 2.220 a | 4.500 ± 0.072 a |
RE—root extract; SE—stem extract; LE—leaf extract; FE—flower extract; a and b—values with a significant difference.
Figure 1Antiradical activity (IC50) of Papaver rhoeas extracts; a, b, c, d and e—values with a significant difference.
Figure 2TAC of P. rhoeas extracts. a, b and c—values with a significant difference.
Diameter of the inhibition zone of P. rhoeas extracts and antibiotics (mm).
| Sample/Antibiotic | Gram-Negative Bacteria | Gram-Positive Bacteria | Yeast | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||
| RE | 12.66 ± 1.15 a | 12.00 ± 0.00 b | ND | 13.66 ± 0.57 a | R |
| SE | 13.00 ± 1.00 a | 13.00 ± 0.00 ab | 8.33 ± 0.57 a | 11.00 ± 0.00 b | R |
| LE | 13.00 ± 0.00 a | 13.33 ± 0.57 a | 8.67 ± 1.15 a | 13.66 ± 0.57 a | R |
| FE | 13.33 ± 1.52 a | 12.33 ± 0.57 ab | ND | 12.33 ± 0.57 c | R |
| Streptomycin | R | R | R | 9.61 ± 0.20 | --- |
| Ampicillin | R | R | R | R | --- |
| Fluconazole | --- | --- | --- | --- | 21.20 ± 04.20 |
R—resistant; ND—none detected; “---“—antibiotic does not match this strain; a, b and c—values with a significant difference.
Minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum lethal concentration (MLC) of P. rhoeas extracts (mg/mL).
| Sample | Gram-Negative Bacteria | Gram-Positive Bacteria | Yeast | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
| MIC | MLC | MIC | MLC | MIC | MLC | MIC | MLC | MIC | MLC | |
| RE | 0.78 | 1.56 | 3.12 | 6.25 | ND | ND | 25 | 25 | ND | ND |
| SE | 0.78 | 1.56 | 1.56 | 3.12 | 6.25 | 6.25 | 6.25 | 12.5 | 12 | 12.5 |
| LE | 50 | >50 | 50 | >50 | ND | ND | 50 | >50 | ND | ND |
| FE | 1.56 | 3.12 | 3.12 | 6.25 | ND | ND | 50 | >50 | ND | ND |
| Streptomycin | 0.25 | 0.50 | 0.003 | 0.062 | --- | |||||
| Ampicillin | R | R | R | R | --- | |||||
| Fluconazole | --- | --- | --- | --- | 0.40 | |||||
R—resistant; ND—none detected; “---“—antibiotic does not match this strain.
Pearson correlation coefficients between different parameters of Papaver rhoeas.
| TPC | TFC | IC50 | TAC |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TFC | 0.014 | ||||||
| IC50 | −0.959 | −0.272 | |||||
| TAC | 0.748 | 0.302 | −0.861 | ||||
| 0.653 | 0.763 | −0.813 | 0.665 | ||||
| 0.406 | 0.040 | −0.503 | 0.858 | 0.224 | |||
|
| 0.333 | −0.881 | −0.052 | −0.203 | −0.426 | −0.191 | |
|
| 0.118 | −0.003 | −0.226 | 0.679 | 0.000 | 0.955 |
|
Figure 3Principal component analysis of different studied parameters.