| Literature DB >> 35455463 |
Nurul Farah Adni Mat Zian1, Puspanjali Swain2, Siti Munirah Mohd Faudzi1,3, Norzalina Zakaria3, Wan Norhamidah Wan Ibrahim1,4, Noraini Abu Bakar4, Khozirah Shaari1, Johnson Stanslas5, Tae-Ik Choi2, Cheol-Hee Kim2.
Abstract
Clitoria ternatea Linn. (CT), or butterfly pea, is an Ayurvedic plant traditionally used as a brain tonic. Recently, it was reported to be of use in treating central nervous system (CNS) disorders, i.e., as an antistress treatment and antidepressant. In the present study, we report a detailed phytochemical profile of the ethyl acetate fraction of the flower of CT (CTF_EA) with significant neuroprotective and anti-neuroinflammatory properties in both LPS-activated BV-2 and SK-N-SH cells. Concurrently, the molecular network (MN) derived from the CTF_EA metabolome allows putative identification of flavonol 3-O-glycosides, hydrocinnamic acids, and primary metabolites. Molecular docking studies suggest that CTF_EA preferentially targets iNOS, resulting in a decrease in nitric oxide (NO). Furthermore, no toxic effects on normal embryonic development, blood vessel formation, and apoptosis are observed when CTF_EA is tested for in vivo toxicity in zebrafish models. The overall preliminary results suggest the anti-neuroinflammatory and neuroprotective effects of CT and provide scientific support for the efficacy of this medicinal plant at local and traditional levels. However, studies on the targeted isolation of bioactive metabolites, in-depth pharmacological efficacy, and safety in mammalian models are urgently needed to expand our understanding of this plant before it is developed into a promising therapeutic agent for brain-related diseases.Entities:
Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease; Clitoria ternatea; anti-neuroinflammation; butterfly pea; molecular networking; zebrafish toxicity
Year: 2022 PMID: 35455463 PMCID: PMC9032563 DOI: 10.3390/ph15040467
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8247
Figure 1NO in pathophysiological conditions. NO-mediated activation of cGMP, PKG, and VASP can cause platelet inhibition, whereas NO-mediated induction of pro-apoptotic proteins (PARP, AIF, cytochrome C, and cleaved caspase-3) can induce cell death. Furthermore, NO-mediated activation of cGMP, PKG, Rho A, and Rho kinase can alter smooth muscle relaxation, whereas inhibition of NAD, NADPH, and GSH by NO increases cell death. Moreover, lipid peroxidation caused by NO leads to oxidative stress or damage, and S-nitrosylation induced by NO may lead to neurotoxicity or neurodegeneration. In addition, NO-mediated induction of PKG and calcium signaling leads to excitotoxicity and contraction effects. NO is also involved in neutrophil infiltration and endothelial dysfunction through effects on mitochondrial respiration, NK cell toxicity, and activation of the GAPDH-PARP pathway and its functions [26].
Figure 2Cytotoxic effect of different parts of C. ternatea extracts (CTR, CTF, and CTL) on viability of (A) BV-2 microglial and (B) human neuroblastoma SK-N- SH cells after 24 h. Percentage cell viability is expressed as mean ± SD of three independent experiments. The value is statistically significant **** (p < 0.0001) compared to the untreated cells; ns means not significant.
Figure 3Effect of CTR, CTL, and CTF extracts on NO production in LPS-induced BV-2 cells for 24 h. The NO level is denoted as mean values ± SD, and n = 3. The extract showed dose-dependent inhibition of NO release. The value is statistically significant * (p < 0.05), ** (p < 0.01), and *** (p < 0.001) when compared with LPS alone.
Figure 4Cytotoxic effect of CTF fractions on viability of (A) BV-2 microglial and (B) human neuroblastoma SK-N-SH cells after 24 h. Percent cell viability is expressed as mean ± SD of three independent experiments. The value is statistically significant ** (p < 0.01), *** (p < 0.001), and **** (p < 0.0001) compared to the untreated cells; ns means not significant.
Figure 5Effect of (A) n-hexane, (B) chloroform, (C) ethyl acetate, (D) butanol, and (E) water fractions of CTF methanolic extract on the production of NO in BV-2 cells after 24 h stimulation by LPS. The NO levels are expressed as mean ± SD of three independent experiments. The extract showed a dose-dependent inhibition of NO release. The values are statistically significant *** (p < 0.001) compared to LPS alone.
Figure 6Total ion chromatograms (TICs) of the ethyl acetate fraction of flower methanolic extract of C. ternatea (CTF_EA) in (A) positive mode, (B) negative mode, and (C) negative modes in between 3rd to 10th minutes. The number above each peak represents peak numbers, corresponding to the peak numbers in Table 1.
The metabolites identified in the ethyl acetate fraction of flower Clitoria ternatea extract (CTF_EA).
| Peak No. | Putative Identification | Molecular Formula | RT (min) | Precursor Ion ( | Ion Type | Main Fragments ( | Wavelength (nm) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cluster A: Flavonol 3- | ||||||||
|
| Kaempferol-3- | C27H30O15 | 5.59 | 593.1503 | [M-H]− | 284, 285, 255, 227, 151 | 208, 220, 266, 350 | GNPS |
|
| Kaempferol-3- | C21H20O11 | 6.28 | 447.1345 | [M-H]− | 284, 285, 255, 227, 151 | 218, 266, 294, 344 | GNPS |
|
| Kaempferol 3-(6″-acetyl-glucoside) | C23H22O12 | 6.80 | 489.1045 | [M-H]− | 285, 284, 255, 227 | 220, 272, 294 | Metabolomics workbench |
|
| Kaempferol 3-(6G-malonyl-neohesperidoside) | C30H32O18 | 6.16 | 679.1527 | [M-H]− | 635, 285, 284, 255, 227 | 220, 268, 298, 314, 344 | Metabolomics workbench |
|
| Kaempferol-3- | C27H30O14 | 7.28 | 577.269 | [M-H]− | 285, 284, 255, 227 | 220, 268, 298 | Metabolomics workbench |
|
| Kaempferol 3- | C29H32O16 | 6.89 | 635.162 | [M-H]− | 284, 285, 255, 227, 151 | 220, 268, 298, 368 | |
|
| Kaempferol-3- | C33H40O19 | 5.20 | 739.1042 | [M-H]− | 284, 285, 255, 227, 151 | 198, 266, 350 | GNPS |
|
| Avicularin | C20H18O11 | 5.82 | 433.0780 | [M-H]− | 301, 300, 271, 255, 151 | 220,268,312 | GNPS |
|
| Quercetin-3- | C26H28O15 | 5.70 | 579.1364 | [M-H]− | 301, 300, 271, 255, 151 | 218, 266, 350 | GNPS |
|
| Rutin | C27H30O16 | 5.40 | 609.1461 | [M-H]− | 301, 300, 271, 255, 151 | 206, 258, 354 | GNPS |
|
| Isoquercetin | C21H20O12 | 5.51 | 463.0887 | [M-H]− | 301, 300, 271, 255, 151 | 206, 266, 350 | GNPS |
|
| Quercetin 3-(2G-glucosyl-rutinoside) | C33H40O21 | 5.84 | 771.1786 | [M-H]− | 609, 463, 301, 300, 271, 255, 151 | 220, 268, 314 | Pubchem |
|
| Manghaslin | C33H40O20 | 4.72 | 755.2035 | [M-H]− | 301, 300, 271, 255, 151 | 206, 256, 354 | Metabolomics workbench |
| Cluster B: Hydrocinnamic acids and derivatives | ||||||||
|
| 3-Phenyl-2-[(2 | C24H24O10 | 7.19 | 471.1300 | [M-H]− | 307, 163, 145, 119 | 220, 296, 368 | GNPS |
|
| Dimer 3-phenyl-2-[(2 | 6.84 | 941.2737 | [M2-H]− | 779, 471, 163, 145 | 220, 272, 296, 368 | Putative annotation | |
|
| 3-(benzoyloxy)-2-hydroxypropyl β- | C16H20O10 | 2.04 | 371.0984 | [M-H]− | 370, 304, 174, 163, 146, 119 | 194, 298, 368 | GNPS |
|
| Feruloylquinic acid isomer | C17H20O9 | 6.23 | 367.1036 | [M-H]− | 303, 254, 193, 175, 160, 149, 134 | 218, 266, 346 | GNPS |
|
| Caffeic acid | C15H18O9 | 2.24 | 341.0877 | [M-H]− | 179, 135 | 214, 292, 368 | |
|
| C15H18O8 | 3.28 | 325.1843 | [M-H]− | 163, 145, 119 | 214, 290, 368 | (1) | |
|
| 3,5-Di- | C34H30O14 | 6.78 | 661.1782 | [M-H]− | 205,163, 145, 119 | 220, 292, 368 | Metabolomics workbench (accessed on 25 August 2021) |
| Cluster C: Glycerophospholipid | ||||||||
|
| Lysophosphatidylmyoinositol | C27H53O12P | 21.89 | 599.3205 | [M-H]− | 283, 241, 152 | 224 | GNPS |
|
| Dipalmitoylphosphatidylglycerol | C38H75O10P | 35.31 | 721.3657 | [M-H]− | 255 | 220 | GNPS |
|
| Phosphatidylinositol lyso 16:0 | C25H49O12P | 18.61 | 571.2889 | [M-H]− | 255, 241, 152 | 224 | |
|
| 1,2-Dioctanoyl-sn-glycero-3-phospho-1 | C25H47O13P | 20.18 | 585.3047 | [M-H]− | 269, 241, 152 | 224 | Pubchem |
| Cluster D: Amino acids | ||||||||
|
| C11H17NO8 | 0.66 | 290.0803 | [M-H]− | 200. 128 | 196, 264, 370 | (1) | |
|
| Diglucoside pyroglutamate | C17H27NO13 | 0.72 | 470.1507 | [M-H]− | 128 | 266 | Putative annotation (accessed on 7 September 2021) |
|
| Fructosylvaline | C11H21NO7 | 0.74 | 278.1246 | [M-H]− | 214, 128, 116 | 256, 266 | Pubchem |
|
| Agropinic acid | C11H19NO8 | 0.86 | 292.8916 | [M-H]− | 274, 128 | 204, 260 | Pubchem |
| Cluster E: Carbohydrates | ||||||||
|
| Sucrose | C12H22O11 | 2.24 | 341.0877 | [M-H]− | 179, 135 | 214, 292, 368 | GNPS |
|
| Sucrose adduct chloride | C12H22O11 | 0.64 | 377.0854 | [M+Cl]− | 341, 215, 179, 89, 59 | 194, 266, 370 | Literature |
|
| 6-epi-7-Isocucurbic acid glucoside | C18H30O8 | 7.33 | 373.1871 | [M-H]− | 174, 119, 113, 101, 89, 71, 59 | 220, 268, 298, 368 | Pubchem |
|
| (2 | C17H30O13 | 5.62 | 441.1745 | [M-H]− | 330, 139, 119, 113, 101, 89, 71, 59 | 208,266, 350 | Pubchem |
|
| Methyl 2-[(1 | C19H32O8 | 3.71 | 387.1152 | [M-H]− | 352, 274, 163, 113, 101, 89, 71, 59 | 216, 272, 298 | Pubchem |
| Cluster F: Mono-methoxylflavonol 3- | ||||||||
|
| Isorhamnetin-3-galactoside-6’’-rhamnoside | C28H32O16 | 5.70 | 623.1410 | [M-H]− | 315, 314, 299, 271, 151 | 218, 266, 350 | GNPS |
|
| Rhamnetin-3- | C28H32O17 | 5.03 | 639.2764 | [M-H]− | 315, 314, 299, 271, 255, 165, 121 | 204, 258, 354 | GNPS |
|
| 3-((6-(((3,5-Dihydroxy-6-methyl-4-((3,4,5-trihydroxy-6-methyl-tetrahydro-2 | C34H42O20 | 5.32 | 769.2203 | [M-H]− | 605, 314, 299, 271, 151 | 206, 258, 354 | Putative annotation |
| Cluster G: Saccharolipid | ||||||||
|
| 1- | C42H64O17 | 4.69 | 885.1616 | [M+HCOO-]− | 839, 793, 491, 399, 356, 303 | 206, 256, 354 | |
Figure 7Full visualization of the molecular network in negative ion mode of the flower extract (CTF) and ethyl acetate fraction (CTF_EA) of C. ternatea. The annotated classes of metabolites are: (A) flavonol 3-O-glycosides, (B) hydrocinnamic acids and derivatives, (C) glycerophospholipid, (D) amino acids, (E) carbohydrates, (F) mono-methoxylflavonol 3-O-glycoside and (G) saccharolipid.
Figure 8Flavonol 3-O-glycoside (cluster A in negative mode) from the full molecular network (MN) of ethyl acetate fraction of flower C. ternatea (CTF_EA) extract. The metabolites in red boxes were annotated based on the GNPS library matching.
Figure 9Proposed fragmentation mechanism of (A) kaempferol 3-O-glycoside and (B) quercetin 3-O-glycoside in negative ion mode.
Figure 10Hydrocinnamic acids and derivatives (cluster B in negative mode) from the full molecular network (MN) of ethyl acetate fraction of flower C. ternatea (CTF_EA) extract. The metabolites in red boxes were annotated based on the GNPS library matching.
Figure 11Fragmentation pathway for (A) coumaroyl, (B) caffeoyl, and (C) feruloyl derivatives.
Figure 12Mono-methoxyl flavonol 3-O-glycosides (cluster F in negative mode) from the full molecular network (MN) of ethyl acetate fraction of flower C. ternatea (CTF_EA) extract. The metabolites in the red box were annotated based on GNPS library matching.
Figure 13Proposed fragmentation mechanism in the MS/MS spectra recorded for the (A) mono-methoxyl group in negative ion mode of (B) isorhamnetin and (C) rhamnetin.
Comparison of binding energy between compound 1, 7, and 10 with target enzyme inhibitors.
| Enzyme | Binding Energy (kcal/mol) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Co-Crystallized Ligand | Compound 1 | Compound 7 | Compound 10 | |
| P38 | −8.85 | −7.82 | −2.29 | −6.79 |
| ERK-2 | −7.55 | −7.08 | −6.04 | −5.78 |
| iNOS | −7.64 | −10.11 | −8.78 | −8.33 |
| JNK | −9.24 | −7.95 | −7.79 | −6.69 |
| COX-2 | −10.55 | −4.98 | −4.59 | −3.47 |
Figure 14Binding pocket (red color) from the CASTp 3.0 tool, along with the sequence showing the residues highlighted in blue that form the binding pocket.
Binding energy and intermolecular interactions of compound 1, 7, and 10 against iNOS enzyme.
| Compound | Binding Energy (kcal/mol) | Interactions | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hydrogen Bond | Hydrophobic | ||||
| π–Alkyl | π–Sigma | π–π Stacked | |||
|
| −10.11 | Thr184, 3 Arg193, Cys194, Gly196, Pro344, Asn364 | 2 Cys194, Leu203 | Ala191 | 2 Trp188, |
|
| −8.78 | Arg193, Cys194, Trp366, 3 Glu371, Asp376 | Ala191, Arg193 | Val346 | |
|
| −8.33 | Arg193, Pro344, Ala345, Asn364, Tyr367, Tyr483 | Ala191, Arg193, Cys194, Met149 | Ala191, Cys194 | Trp188, |
Figure 15Binding interactions of major active metabolites 1, 7, and 10 against the iNOS enzyme with (A) 3D and (B) 2D representations. Each hydrogen distance (Å) is labeled in blue color near its respective hydrogen bond. For clarity, only ligands and interacting residues are shown.
Figure 16Morphological characteristics of zebrafish larvae at different developmental stages of (A) 24 hpf, (B) 24 hpf (dechorionated zebrafish), (C) 48 hpf, and (D) 72 hpf with CTF_EA fraction at concentrations of 200 µg/mL, 100 µg/mL, and 50 µg/mL. The changes in body size, yolk expansion, somite boundary, and pigment cell development, as well as heart rate and blood circulation (data not shown), were observed and measured. Scale bar, 200 µm.
Figure 17Tail-coiling rate in zebrafish embryos exposed to CTF_EA at different concentrations (200 µg/mL, 100 µg/mL, 50 µg/mL, 25 µg/mL, and 12.5 µg/mL) at 24 hpf developmental stage. Each dot represents the number of spontaneous tail coils per individual animal (n = 10 for each concentration). Mean values were expressed as bar graphs; ns means not significant.
Figure 18Effects of CTF_EA at different concentrations of 100 µg/mL, 50 µg/mL, and 25 µg/mL on blood vessel development in transgenic zebrafish, Tg(kdrl:egfp) at 30 hpf. Vasculogenesis and angiogenesis in the trunk region were normal in both control and CTF_EA-treated zebrafish. Scale bar, 200 µm.
Figure 19Visualization of apoptosis on CTF_EA-treated zebrafish larvae at different concentrations of 100 μg/mL, 50 μg/mL, and 25 μg/mL, respectively, using the vital fluorescent acridine orange staining. Signals in yolk and lens are autofluorescence. Scale bar, 200 µm.