| Literature DB >> 35208944 |
Xue Hua1, Hui-Jie Hong1, Dai-Yan Zhang1, Qiao Liu1, Fong Leong1, Qi Yang1, Yuan-Jia Hu1, Xiao-Jia Chen1,2.
Abstract
In this study, a high-performance thin layer chromatography (HPTLC) method by two step gradient elution with two mobile phases was developed for the simultaneous analysis of seven constituents in Ophiopogonis Radix. The chromatography was performed on silica gel 60 F254 plate with dichloromethane-methanol-ethyl acetate-water (70:25:12:3, v/v/v/v) and dichloromethane-methanol (300:1, v/v) as the mobile phase for two step gradient elution. Then, the HPTLC profiles were observed after derivatization with 10% sulfuric acid in ethanol solution. The obtained HPTLC images were further analyzed by chemometric approaches and the samples could be clustered based on regions and/or growth years, which were two important factors affecting the constituents in Ophiopogonis Radix. Furthermore, five compounds including ophiopogonin D, ophiopojaponin C, ophiopogonin D', ophiopogonin C' and methylophiopogonanone B were screened as potential lipase inhibitors from Ophiopogonis Radix by the HPTLC-bioautographic method. The binding modes and interactions between the five compounds and lipase were further explored by molecular docking analysis. The developed HPTLC method could be used for quality control of Ophiopogonis Radix and screening of the potential lipase inhibitors.Entities:
Keywords: Ophiopogonis Radix; bioautography; high-performance thin layer chromatography; lipase inhibitors; two step gradient elution
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35208944 PMCID: PMC8878968 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27041155
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Chemical structures of seven investigated compounds.
Figure 2Typical HPTLC chromatograms of mixed standards and Ophiopogonis Radix samples analyzed by two step gradient elution with two mobile phases. Plates were sprayed with 10% sulfuric acid in ethanol solution and viewed under UV 366 nm (A) and white light (B). CMD: CMD (one-year-old); ZMD 1Y: one-year-old ZMD; ZMD2Y: two-year-old ZMD; ZMD3Y: three-year-old ZMD; MS: mixed standards. 1. ophiopogonin D (Rf 0.18), 2. ophiopojaponin C (Rf 0.23), 3. ophiopogonin D’ (Rf 0.28), 4. l-borneol-7-O-[β-d-apiofuranosyl(1→6)]-β-d-glucopyranoside (Rf 0.30), 5. ophiopogonin C’ (Rf 0.34), 6. β-sitosterol (Rf 0.69), and 7. methylophiopogonanone B (Rf 0.78).
Figure 3Multivariate analysis based on the HPTLC profiles of CMD and ZMD. (A) PCA score plot of CMD and ZMD (R2X = 0.902, Q2 = 0.716), (B) OPLS-DA score plot of CMD and ZMD (R2X = 0.621, R2Y = 0.945, Q2 = 0.906), (C) OPLS-DA S-plot of CMD and ZMD, (D) OPLS-DA score plot of one-year-old CMD and ZMD (R2X = 0.772, R2Y = 0.983, Q2 = 0.917), (E) OPLS-DA S-plot of one-year-old CMD and ZMD. The variables with VIP > 1.5 in the S-plots were highlighted with red filled circles.
Figure 4OPLS based on the HPTLC profiles of CMD and ZMD samples with different growth years. (A) OPLS score plot of CMD and ZMD (R2X = 0.601, R2Y = 0.910, Q2 = 0.859), (B) OPLS S-plot of CMD and ZMD, (C) OPLS score plot of ZMD with different growth years (R2X = 0.849, R2Y = 0.978, Q2 = 0.897), (D) OPLS S-plot of ZMD with different growth years. The variables with VIP > 1.5 in the S-plots were highlighted with red filled circles.
Figure 5Typical HPTLC bioautograms of lipase inhibition assays. Plates were viewed under white light. CMD: one-year-old CMD, ZMD 1Y: one-year-old ZMD, ZMD2Y: two-year-old ZMD, ZMD3Y: three-year-old ZMD, MS: mixed standards. 1. ophiopogonin D (Rf 0.18), 2. ophiopojaponin C (Rf 0.23), 3. ophiopogonin D’ (Rf 0.28), 5. ophiopogonin C’ (Rf 0.34), 7. methylophiopogonanone B (Rf 0.78), Orlistat: positive control.
Molecular docking results of lipase and the identified active compounds.
| Compounds | Binding Energy (kcal/mol) | Hydrogen Bonds | Other Amino Acid Residues |
|---|---|---|---|
| Orlistat | −7.2 | HIS151, GLY76, PHE77 | THR255, ARG256, TRP252, HIS263, ALA259, LEU264, ASP79, HIS75, ILE78, ALA260, SER152, PHE215, LEU153, ALA178, TYR114, ILE209, PRO180 |
| Ophiopogonin D | −9.6 | PHE77 | ILE78, HIS263, PHE215, PRO180, TYR114, ILE209 |
| Ophiopojaponin C | −6.7 | ASP79 | ALA259, PHE215, LEU213, ILE209, VAL210 |
| Ophiopogonin D’ | −6.5 | - | HIS151, PHE215, ALA259, ILE78, LEU213, LEU264, ALA260 |
| Ophiopogonin C’ | −8.4 | HIS151, ASP79, ARG256 | VAL210, LEU213, TYR114, HIS263, PHE77, PHE215, TRP252 |
| Methylophiopogonanone B | −9.4 | SER152, HIS263 | ILE209, PRO180, TYR114, ALA259, ALA260, PHE215, LEU264, HIS151 |
Figure 6Binding modes and interactions between orlistat (A), ophiopogonin D (B), ophiopojaponin C (C), ophiopogonin D’ (D), ophiopogonin C’ (E), methylophiopogonanone B, (F) and pancreatic lipase.
Information of Ophiopogonis Radix samples.
| No. | Code | Regions | Growth Years |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | C1 | Laoma, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 2 | C2 | Laoma, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 3 | C3 | Laoma, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 4 | C4 | Laoma, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 5 | C5 | Laoma, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 6 | C6 | Laoma, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 7 | C7 | Xinde, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 8 | C9 | Huanyuan, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 9 | C10 | Laoma, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 10 | C11 | Xinde, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 11 | C12 | Laoma, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 12 | C13 | Guangming, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 13 | C14 | Lingxing, Santai, Sichuan, China | 1 |
| 14 | ZA1 | Muliwan, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 1 |
| 15 | ZA2 | Muliwan, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 2 |
| 16 | ZA3 | Muliwan, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 17 | ZB1 | Kanxiajin, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 1 |
| 18 | ZB2 | Kanxiajin, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 2 |
| 19 | ZB3 | Kanxiajin, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 20 | ZC1 | Baixi, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 1 |
| 21 | ZC2 | Baixi, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 2 |
| 22 | ZC3 | Baixi, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 23 | ZD1 | Nanlin, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 1 |
| 24 | ZD2 | Nanlin, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 2 |
| 25 | ZD3 | Nanlin, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 26 | ZE1 | Xiyang, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 1 |
| 27 | ZE2 | Xiyang, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 2 |
| 28 | ZE3 | Xiyang, Sanmen, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 29 | ZF1 | Fuhai, Cixi, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 30 | ZF2 | Fuhai, Cixi, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 31 | ZF3 | Fuhai, Cixi, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 32 | ZG1 | Shengshan, Cixi, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 33 | ZG2 | Shengshan, Cixi, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 34 | ZG3 | Shengshan, Cixi, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 35 | ZG4 | Shengshan, Cixi, Zhejiang, China | 3 |
| 36 | ZG5 | Shengshan, Cixi, Zhejiang, China | 3 |