| Literature DB >> 35214828 |
Mejdi Snoussi1,2, Emira Noumi1,3, Hafed Hajlaoui4, Lamjed Bouslama5, Assia Hamdi6, Mohd Saeed1, Mousa Alreshidi1, Mohd Adnan1, Ayshah Al-Rashidi1, Kaïss Aouadi7,8, Siwar Ghannay7, Ozgur Ceylan9, Vincenzo De Feo10, Adel Kadri11,12.
Abstract
The present study was the first to evaluate the phytochemical composition, antioxidant, antimicrobial, antibiofilm, and anti-quorum sensing potential of Allium subhirsutum L. (hairy garlic) aqueous extract through in vitro and in silico studies. The phytochemical profile revealed the presence of saponins, terpenes, flavonols/flavonones, flavonoids, and fatty acids, particularly with flavonoids (231 ± 0.022 mg QE/g extract), tannins (159 ± 0.006 mg TAE/g extract), and phenols (4 ± 0.004 mg GAE/g extract). Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis identified 15 bioactive compounds, such as 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (37.04%), methyl methanethiolsulfonate (21.33%), furfural (7.64%), beta-D-glucopyranose, 1,6-anhydro- (6.17%), 1,6-anhydro-beta-D-glucofuranose (3.6%), trisulfide, di-2-propenyl (2.70%), and diallyl disulfide (1.93%). The extract was found to be non-toxic with 50% cytotoxic concentration higher than 30,000 µg/mL. The investigation of the antioxidant activity via DPPH (2, 2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl) and FRAP (IC50 = 1 μg/mL), ABTS (2,2'-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid); IC50 = 0.698 ± 0.107 μg/mL), and β-carotene (IC50 = 0.811 ± 0.036 mg/mL) was assessed. Nevertheless, good antimicrobial potential against a diverse panel of microorganisms with bacteriostatic and fungistatic effect was observed. Quorum sensing inhibition effects were also assessed, and the data showed the ability of the extract to inhibit the production of violacein by the mutant C. violaceum strain in concentration-dependent manner. Similarly, the biofilm formation by all tested strains was inhibited at low concentrations. In silico pharmacokinetic and toxicological prediction indicated that, out of the sixteen identified compounds, fourteen showed promising drug ability and could be used as lead compounds for further development and drug design. Hence, these findings support the popular use of hairy garlic as a source of bioactive compounds with potential application for human health.Entities:
Keywords: Allium subhirsutum L.; anti-quorum sensing; antibiofilm; antimicrobial; antioxidant; pharmacokinetics; phytochemistry; toxicological prediction
Year: 2022 PMID: 35214828 PMCID: PMC8878528 DOI: 10.3390/plants11040495
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Phytochemical composition of aqueous extract of A. subhirsutum L. (bulbs) using the GC–MS technique.
| N° | Identified Compound Name | RT [min] | Area (%) | Molecular Weight | Formula |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Methyl methanethiolsulfonate | 1.462 | 21.33 | 126.20 | C2H6O2S2 |
| 2 | Propanoic acid, 2-oxo-, methyl ester | 2.201 | 1.29 | 102.09 | C4H6O3 |
| 3 | Furfural | 3.131 | 7.64 | 96.08 | C5H4O2 |
| 4 | Diallyl disulfide | 6.725 | 1.93 | 146.27 | C6H10S2 |
| 5 | 2,4,5-trimethyl-1,3-dioxolane | 7.681 | 2.48 | 116.16 | C6H12O2 |
| 6 | 5-hydroxymethylfurfural | 8.857 | 37.04 | 126.11 | C6H6O3 |
| 7 | 1H-azonine, octahydro-1-nitroso- | 9.206 | 4.09 | 156.23 | C8H16N2O |
| 8 | Trisulfide, di-2-propenyl | 10.093 | 2.70 | 178.34 | C6H10S3 |
| 9 | Beta-D-fructofuranosyl alpha-D-glucopyranoside | 11.731 | 4.40 | 342.30 | C12H22O11 |
| 10 | Beta-D-glucopyranose, 1,6-anhydro- | 12.463 | 6.17 | 288.25 | C12H16O8 |
| 11 | Beta-D-glucofuranose, 1,6-anhydro- | 13.638 | 3.60 | 162.14 | C6H10O5 |
| 12 | Palmitic acid, methyl ester | 17.342 | 3.32 | 270.45 | C17H34O2 |
| 13 | n-hexadecanoic acid | 17.664 | 1.46 | 256.42 | C16H32O2 |
| 14 | 9,12-octadecadienoic acid, methyl ester | 18.974 | 1.32 | 294.47 | C19H34O2 |
| 15 | Octadecanoic acid, methyl ester | 19.270 | 1.24 | 298.5 | C19H38O2 |
Growth inhibition zone, as well as MIC, MBC, and MFC/MIC values obtained for all microorganisms tested using disc diffusion and microdilution assays tested using hairy garlic aqueous extract.
| Code | Strains | Ampicillin | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD * (mm) | MIC | MBC | MBC/MIC | Mean ± SD (mm) | ||
| B1 | 6.00 ± 0.00 fB | 12.5 | 50 | 4 | 7.00 ± 0.00 dA | |
| B2 | 11.67 ± 0.57 dA | 6.25 | 50 | 8 | 7.33 ± 0.57 dB | |
| B3 | 7.00 ± 0.00 eA | 12.5 | 100 | 8 | 6.33 ± 0.57 dA | |
| B4 | 6.00 ± 0.00 fA | 12.5 | 100 | 8 | 6.66 ± 0.57 dA | |
| B5 |
| 6.00 ± 0.00 fB | 12.5 | 100 | 8 | 21.00 ± 1.00 aA |
| B6 |
| 6.00 ± 0.00 fB | 12.5 | 100 | 8 | 7.00 ± 0.00 dA |
| B7 |
| 15.66 ± 0.57 aA | 6.25 | 50 | 8 | 16.00 ± 1.73 bA |
| B8 |
| 6.00 ± 0.00 fA | 12.5 | 100 | 8 | 6.66 ± 0.57 dA |
| B9 | 15.66 ± 0.57 aA | 6.25 | 50 | 8 | 7.33 ± 0.57 dB | |
| B10 |
| 13.33 ± 0.57 cA | 6.25 | 50 | 8 | 6.66 ± 0.57 dB |
| B11 |
| 6.00 ± 0.00 fB | 12.5 | 100 | 8 | 7.66 ± 0.57 dA |
| B12 |
| 14.33 ± 0.57 bA | 6.25 | 50 | 8 | 13.33 ± 0.57 cB |
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Y1 | 6.66 ± 0.57 cB | 3.12 | 50 | 16 | 22.66 ± 1.15 aA | |
| Y2 | 6.33 ± 0.57 cB | 3.12 | 50 | 16 | 15.33 ± 0.57 bA | |
| Y3 |
| 15.66 ± 0.57 aA | 1.56 | 25 | 16 | 6.66 ± 0.57 dB |
| Y4 |
| 6.00 ± 0.00 cB | 6.25 | 50 | 8 | 12.33 ± 0.57 cA |
| M1 | 10.33 ± 0.57 bB | (−) | (−) | (−) | 15.00 ± 1.00 bA | |
| M2 |
| 6.00 ± 0.00 cA | (−) | (−) | (−) | 6.00 ± 0.00 dA |
* Inhibition zone around the discs impregnated with A. subhirsutum L. aqueous extract expressed as the mean of three replicates (mm ± SD). SD: standard deviation. MIC: minimal inhibitory concentration (mg/mL). MBC: minimal bactericidal concentration (mg/mL). MFC: minimal fungicidal concentration (mg/mL). a–f,A,B: Each value represents the average of 3 repetitions. The means followed by the same letters are not significantly different at p = 0.05 based on Duncan’s multiple-range test. Small letters are used to compare aqueous extract and antibiotic means between different strains, while capital letters are used to compare means between aqueous extract and antibiotics for the same strain. (−): Not tested.
Antioxidant activities of aqueous extract of A. subhirsutum L. (bulbs), as compared to ascorbic acid and BHT.
| Test Systems | Hairy Garlic Extract | (BHT) | (AA) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total flavonoids content (mg QE/g extract) | 231 ± 0.022 | − | − |
| Total tannins content (mg TAE/g extract) | 159 ± 0.006 | − | − |
| Total phenols content (mg GAE/g extract) | 4 ± 0.004 | − | − |
| DPPH IC50 (mg/mL) | 1 a | 0.023 ± 3 × 10−4 b | 0.022 ± 5 × 10−4 b |
| ABTS IC50 (mg/mL) | 0.698 ± 0.107 a | 0.018 ± 4 × 10−4 b | 0.021 ± 0.001 b |
| β-carotene IC50 (mg/mL) | 0.811 ± 0.036 a | 0.042 ± 3.5 × 10−3 b | 0.017 ± 0.001 c |
| FRAP IC50 (mg/mL) | 1 a | 0,05 ± 0.003 c | 0.09 ± 0.007 b |
BHT: butylated hydroxytoluene, AA: ascorbic acid. The letters (a–c) indicate a significant difference between the different antioxidant methods according to Duncan’s test (p < 0.05). (−): Not tested.
Figure 1Qualitative method for the determination of the effect of different concentrations of A. subhirsutum aqueous extract on violacein production by C. violaceum CV026.
Violacein inhibition anti-quorum sensing activities of A. subhirsutum aqueous extract. (−): No activity.
| Test | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | 2.5 | 1.25 | 0.625 | |
| Violacein inhibition (%) | 37.43 ± 0.85 | 24.05 ± 0.68 | (−) | (−) |
| Anti-quorum sensing activity (mm) | 13 ± 0.5 | 10 ± 1 | 8 ± 1 | (−) |
Anti-swarming and anti-swimming activities of A. subhirsutum extracts.
| Tests | 100 | 75 | 50 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Swarming inhibition (%) | 23.66 ± 0.5 | 16.96 ± 1 | 8.93 ± 0 |
| Swimming inhibition (%) | 13.67 ± 1 | (−) | (−) |
Concentration is expressed as µg/mL; (−): no activity; %: percentage.
Anti-biofilm results (inhibition %) of A. subhirsutum L. aqueous extract tested against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and yeast strains.
| Microorganisms Tested | Concentration Used | |
|---|---|---|
| MIC = 10 mg/mL | 56.21 ± 2.55 b | |
| MIC/2 = 5 mg/mL | 20.50 ± 1.78 b | |
| MIC/4 = 2.5 mg/mL | 2.82 ± 0.13 c | |
| MIC = 10 mg/mL | 12.18 ± 1.24 e | |
| MIC = 10 mg/mL | 18.50 ± 1.35 d | |
| MIC = 10 mg/mL | 32.97 ± 2.56 c | |
| MIC/2 = 5 mg/mL | 18.49 ± 1.84 c | |
| MIC/4 = 2.5 mg/mL | 5.24 ± 0.32 b | |
| MIC = 10 mg/mL | 62.48 ± 5.50 a | |
| MIC/2 = 5 mg/mL | 35.40 ± 4.25 a | |
| MIC/4 = 2.5 mg/mL | 15.23 ± 2.52 a | |
| MIC = 5 mg/mL | 54.81 ± 4.08 b | |
| MIC/2 = 2.5 mg/mL | 17.95 ± 2.20 c | |
| MIC/4 = 1.25 mg/mL | 5.20 ± 0.62 b |
Each value represents the average of 3 repetitions. The means followed by the same letters are not significantly different at p = 0.05 based on Duncan’s multiple-range test. Small letters are used to compare the means between strains for each concentration of aqueous extract.
ADMET properties of the identified compounds.
| Entry | Compounds * | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | |
| Physicochemical Properties/Lipophilicity/Drug-likeness | ||||||||||||||
| Molecular Weight | 126.20 | 102.09 | 96.08 | 146.27 | 116.16 | 126.11 | 156.23 | 178.34 | 288.25 | 162.14 | 270.45 | 256.42 | 294.47 | 298.50 |
| Num. heavy atoms | 6 | 7 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 9 | 11 | 9 | 11 | 19 | 18 | 21 | 21 | 21 |
| Num. arom. heavy atoms | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Fraction Csp3 | 1.00 | 0.50 | 0.00 | 0.33 | 1.00 | 0.17 | 1.00 | 0.33 | 1.00 | 0.94 | 0.94 | 0.74 | 0.95 | 0.95 |
| Num. rotatable bonds | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 15 | 14 | 15 | 17 | 17 |
| Num. H-bond acceptors | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Num. H-bond donors | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Molar refractivity | 28.28 | 22.83 | 24.10 | 45.19 | 31.01 | 30.22 | 50.00 | 52.78 | 32.38 | 85.12 | 80.80 | 93.78 | 94.73 | 94.73 |
| TPSA (Ų) | 67.82 | 43.37 | 30.21 | 50.60 | 18.46 | 50.44 | 32.67 | 75.90 | 79.15 | 26.30 | 37.30 | 26.30 | 26.30 | 26.30 |
| Lipinski’s rule | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Bioavailability score | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.55 |
| Pharmacokinetics/Toxicity prediction | ||||||||||||||
| GI absorption | High | High | High | High | High | High | High | High | High | High | High | High | High | High |
| BBB permeant | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | No | No |
| P-gp substrate | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | No |
| CYP1A2 inhibitor | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| CYP2C19 inhibitor | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No |
| CYP2C9 inhibitor | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| CYP2D6 inhibitor | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No |
| CYP3A4 inhibitor | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No |
| AMES toxicity | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No |
| Hepatotoxicity | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No |
| hERG I/II inhibitors | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No | No |
* Compound name is the same as listed in Table 1.
Figure 2Bioavailability radar of identified compounds based on the physicochemical indices ideal for oral bioavailability. LIPO, lipophilicity: −0.7 < XLOGP3 < þ 5; SIZE, molecular size: 150 g/mol < molecular weight < 500 g/mol; POLAR, polarity: 20 Å2 < TPSA (Topological Polar Surface Area) < 130 Å2; INSOLU, insolubility: 0 < Log S (Insolubility in water: ESOL) < 6; INSATU, Insaturation: 0.25 < Fraction of carbons in the sp3 hybridization < 1; FLEX, flexibility: 0 < the number of rotatable bonds < 9. The colored zone is the suitable physicochemical space for oral bioavailability.
Figure 3(BOILED–Egg) model of the selected compound. The names of the compounds are listed in Table 1.
Review of the phytochemical compounds identified in A. subhirsutum L. (bulbs and aerial parts) extracts from different origins.
| Organ Tested/Origin | Solvent and | Identified Molecules | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh bulbs | Methanol | Tripeptides: Tyr Trp Phe, Asn Asn Asn, Cys Tyr Trp, Thr Asp Asn, Cys Tyr Trp, Phe Glu, Asp Arg Tyr, Val Ser Cys, Asn Gln Ala, Val Glu Asp, Gly Tyr Lys, Lys Arg Lys; Dipeptides: Pro Leu, His Asp, Glu Thr, Phe Pro. Bioactive compounds: methyl | [ |
| Dried pulverized flowering aerial parts/Bulbs | Absolute ethanol (≥99.8%) | Sulfur compounds: allicin, gamma-glutamyl (S)-allylcysteine, gamma-glutamyl-S-methylcysteine, gamma-glutamyl-S-trans-propenyl cysteine, alliin, cycloalliin. Flavonoids and polyphenols: methoxy quercetin trisaccharide isomer, methoxy quercetin isomer, quercetin, methoxy quercetin trisaccharide isomer, luteolin, methoxy quercetin isomer, glucosyl gallate, kaempferol, methoxy quercetin isomer, 3,7-dimethylquercetin, tamarixetin (3,30,5,7-Tetrahydroxy-40-methoxyflavanone), 5,3´,4´-T-trihydroxy-3-methoxy-6,7-methylenedioxy flavone. Amide phenylpropanoid derivatives: coumaroyl-tyramine, | [ |
| Air-dried powdered aerial parts/bulbs | Methanol | Phenolic compounds: benzoic acid; 3-hydroxybenzoic acid; 4-hydroxybenzoic acid; | [ |
LC-ESI-MSn: liquid chromatography electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometric; HR-LCMS **: high-resolution liquid chromatography mass spectroscopy.
Review of the distribution of some identified bioactive compounds in some Allium plant species.
| Bioactive Molecule | References | |
|---|---|---|
| Methyl methanethiolsulfonate |
| [ |
|
| [ | |
|
| [ | |
|
| [ | |
| Furfural |
| [ |
| Black garlic | [ | |
| Diallyl disulfide |
| [ |
| Black garlic | [ | |
|
| [ | |
|
| [ | |
| 2,4,5-trimethyl-1,3-dioxolane |
| [ |
| 5-hydroxymethylfurfural |
| [ |
| Black garlic | [ | |
|
| [ | |
| [ | ||
| Trisulfide, di-2-propenyl |
| [ |
| Black garlic | [ | |
| [ | ||
|
| [ | |
| Beta-D-fructofuranosyl alpha-D-glucopyranoside | [ | |
| Palmitic acid, methyl ester | [ | |
| n-hexadecanoic acid |
| [ |
|
| [ | |
|
| [ | |
| [ | ||
| 9,12-octadecadienoic acid, methyl ester |
| [ |
| [ | ||
| Octadecanoic acid, methyl ester |
| [ |
Figure 4Allium subhirsutum L. (bulbs) purchased from a local market in Hail region.