| Literature DB >> 35194457 |
Arzu Kavaz Yüksel1, Emrah Dikici2, Mehmet Yüksel3, Mesut Işik4, Fatih Tozoğlu5, Ekrem Köksal6.
Abstract
In the present study, the phenolic content by using LC MS/MS method, anticholinergic, antioxidant (metal reduction, radical and removal of lipid peroxidation), and antibacterial activities of Erica manipuliflora Salisb. (EMS) extract were determined. The amount of vanillic acid, fumaric acid, catechin hydrate, quercetin, and phloridzin dihydrate were found higher than other compounds. The ethanol extract of the EMS showed an inhibition effect on the Acetylcholinesterase (AChE) enzyme with IC50 value of 0.124 ± 0.008 mg mL-1. Also, this extract of the EMS indicated radical (DPPH and ABTS) scavenging activity (about 20%) and the reducing capacity for Cu(II) and Fe(III) close to trolox, and inhibited the oxidation of linoleic acid with 40.5% at 20 μg mL-1. Antibacterial activity of the extracts was investigated against Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, and Salmonella Typhimurium using agar disc diffusion and minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) methods. The EMS extract was found to be effective when used at least 312 mg mL-1 concentration on the pathogenic microorganisms. Consequently, it has an important non-synthetic natural content that can be used in the treatment of many diseases due to its many bioactivities such as anticholinergic, antioxidant (radical removal, lipid peroxidation prevention, etc.) and antibacterial.Entities:
Keywords: Acetylcholinesterase; Antibacterial; Antioxidant; Erica manipuliflora Salisb.; Lipid peroxidation; Phytochemical analysis
Year: 2021 PMID: 35194457 PMCID: PMC8842607 DOI: 10.22037/ijpr.2021.115270.15288
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran J Pharm Res ISSN: 1726-6882 Impact factor: 1.696
Quantitative determination of phenolic compound content of EMS by LC-MS/MS method
|
|
a
|
b
|
c
|
|
d
|
e
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quercetin | 301.1 > 151 | 0.0136 | 22.5/25.7 | 1.001 | 3.891 | 0.999 | Y = (13.7831) | 174.36 |
| Acetohydroxamic Acid | 76.10 > 43.10 | 0.0082 | 2.8/8.2 | 1.000 | 0.406 | 0.999 | Y = (150.982) | 84.37 |
| Catechin hydrate | 291.10 > 139.00 | 0.0236 | 8.2/11.4 | 0.994 | 2.532 | 0.999 | Y = (79.2933) | 261.27 |
| Vanillic Acid | 168.80 > 93.00 | 0.0062 | 125.5/142.2 | 1.001 | 2.762 | 0.998 | Y = (48.0522) | 520.01 |
| Resveratrol | 229.10 > 135.00 | 0.0131 | 9.0/13.6 | 0.998 | 3.606 | 0.998 | Y = (46.4361) | 26.06 |
| Fumaric Acid | 115.20 > 71.00 | 0.0047 | 25.2/31.3 | 0.997 | 0.809 | 0.999 | Y = (20.2986) | 411.06 |
| Gallic acid | 169.20 > 125.00 | 0.0136 | 0.90/1.6 | 1.000 | 1.278 | 0.999 | Y = (65.3835) | 14.87 |
| Caffeic Acid | 179.20 > 135.00 | 0.0137 | 6.3/10.7 | 1.009 | 2.836 | 0.996 | Y = (124.785) | 37.91 |
| Phloridzin dihydrate | 435.00 > 273.10 | 0.0564 | 61.0/207.0 | 1.00 | 3.594 | 0.999 | Y = (33.4069) | 98.31 |
| Oleuropein | 539.10 > 377.20 | 0.0694 | 0.05/1.0 | 0.997 | 3.567 | 0.999 | Y = (25.9240) | 14.31 |
| Ellagic Acid | 300.90 > 145.10 | 0.0856 | 0.101/0.333 | 1.002 | 3.681 | 1.000 | Y = (5.25903) | N.D. |
| Myricetin | 317.10 > 150.90 | 0.0079 | 55.4/59.6 | 0.999 | 3.644 | 0.999 | Y = (37.0934) | 131.18 |
| Protocatechuic acid | 181.20 > 108.00 | 0.0129 | 30.3/35.4 | 1.011 | 3.556 | 0.994 | Y = (526.954) | N.D. |
| Butein | 271.10 > 135.00 | 0.0145 | 22.7/28.6 | 0.096 | 3.935 | 0.999 | Y = (49.3543) | 61.67 |
| Naringenin | 271.10 > 150.90 | 0.0205 | 5.4/6.4 | 0.998 | 3.952 | 0.996 | Y = (317.241) | N.D. |
| Luteolin | 285.20 > 132.90 | 0.0057 | 0.5/2.5 | 1.007 | 4.069 | 0.998 | Y = (34.6668) | N.D. |
| Kaempferol | 285.10 > 116.90 | 0.0144 | 206.6/214.3 | 0.999 | 4.298 | 0.999 | Y = (2.63905) | 8.83 |
| Alizarin | 239.20 > 210.90 | 0.0351 | 65.2/77.5 | 0.966 | 4.594 | 0.998 | Y = (3.97487) | N.D. |
| 4-Hydroxybenzoic Acid | 137.20 > 93.00 | 0.0154 | 30.5/40.25 | 0.996 | 3.664 | 0.999 | Y = (735.804) | N.D. |
| Salicylic acid | 137.20 > 93.00 | 0.0124 | 4.2/7.6 | 1.009 | 3.558 | 0.999 | Y = (746.369) | N.D. |
aMRM: Multiple Reaction Monitoring; bRSD: Relative standard deviation; cLOD/LOQ (µg L-1): limit of detection/limit of quantitation; dRT: Retention time; eR2: Determination coefficient; N.D: Not detected.
The radical scavenging, reducing power activity, and inhibition effect on AChE of EMS
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||
| EMS | 18.31 ± 0.17 | 22.45 ± 0.43 | 0.251 ± 0.008 | 0.401 ± 0.009 | 0.124 ± 0.008 | 0.965 ± 0.002 |
| BHA | 71.82 ± 3.65 | 83.67 ± 2.62 | 0.454 ± 0.013 | |||
| BHT | 46.33 ± 2.36 | 48.35 ± 1.99 | 0.624 ± 0.021 | |||
| Trolox | 81.19 ± 6.63 | 80.06 ± 5.65 | 0.252 ± 0.009 | 0.516 ± 0.012 | ||
Standard antioxidants (BHA, butylated hydroxyanisole; BHT, butylated hydroxytoluene, trolox).
aValues are expressed as percent radical scavenging activity.
b Values are expressed as absorbance. High absorbance indicates high metal reduction capacity.
Figure 1Linoleic acid peroxidation inhibitory activity of standard antioxidants (α-tocopherol and troloks) and EMS extracts (20 µg mL-1).
Antibacterial effect of Erica manipuliflora Salib. extract (Inhibition zone, mm)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EMS | 312 mg mL-1 | 3 ± 0.28 | 4 ± 0.07 | 3 ± 0.21 |
| Control (Ciprofloxacin) | 5 μg | 19 ± 0.35 | 18 ± 0.14 | 16 ± 0.42 |
MIC result of Erica manipuliflora Salib. extract (mg mL-1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 312 | 10 | - | - | - | |
| 156 | 10 | + | + | + | |
| 78 | 10 | + | + | + | |
| 39 | 10 | + | + | + | |
| 19.5 | 10 | + | + | + | |
| 9.75 | 10 | + | + | + | |
| Medium+Inoculum | 0 | 10 | + | + | + |
| Medium+Solvent (DMSO) | 0 | 10 | + | + | + |
| Medium | 0 | 0 | - | - | - |
(+): Growth, (-): No Growth