| Literature DB >> 35684497 |
Victoria Buza1, Mihaela Niculae2, Daniela Hanganu3, Emoke Pall2, Ramona Flavia Burtescu4, Neli-Kinga Olah4,5, Maria-Cătălina Matei-Lațiu1, Ion Vlasiuc6, Ilinca Iozon1, Andrei Radu Szakacs7, Irina Ielciu8, Laura Cristina Ștefănuț1.
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the antioxidant, antimicrobial, and cytotoxic potential of ethanolic extracts obtained from Gentiana asclepiadea L. and Inula helenium L. roots, in relation to their chemical composition. The total polyphenols, flavonoids, and phenolic acids were determined by spectrophotometric methods, while LC-MS analysis was used to evaluate the individual constituents. The antioxidant properties were tested using the FRAP and DPPH methods. The standard well diffusion and broth microdilution assays were carried out to establish in vitro antimicrobial efficacy and minimum inhibitory and bactericidal concentrations. The cytotoxicity was tested on rat intestinal epithelial cells using the MTT assay. The results pointed out important constituents such as secoiridoid glycoside (amarogentin), phenolic acids (caffeic acid, chlorogenic acid, trans-p-coumaric acid, salicylic acid), and flavonoids (apigenin, chrysin, luteolin, luteolin-7-O-glucoside, quercetin, rutoside, and naringenin) and promising antioxidant properties. The in vitro antimicrobial effect was noticed towards several pathogens (Bacillus cereus > Staphylococcus aureus > Enterococcus faecalis > Salmonella typhimurium and Salmonella enteritidis > Escherichia coli), with a pronounced bactericidal activity. Rat intestinal epithelial cell viability was not affected by the selected concentrations of these two extracts. These data support the ethnomedicinal recommendations of these species and highlight them as valuable sources of bioactive compounds.Entities:
Keywords: Gentiana asclepiadea L.; Inula helenium L.; antimicrobial; antioxidant; chemical profile; cytotoxic; ethanolic extracts; roots
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35684497 PMCID: PMC9182457 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27113560
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.927
Total polyphenolic (TPC), flavonoid (TFC), and phenolic acids (TPA) content of Gentiana asclepiadea and Inula helenium extracts.
| Sample | TPC | TFC | TPA |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 2.144 * ± 0.088 | 0.280 * ± 0.014 | 0.224 * ± 0.030 |
|
| 3.066 * ± 0.041 | 0.602 * ± 0.016 | 1.182 * ± 0.017 |
Note: Each value represents the mean ± standard deviations of three independent measurements. GAE: Gallic acid equivalents; RE: rutin equivalents, CAE: caffeic acid equivalents. * p < 0.05 G. asclepiadea vs. I. helenium.
The identified and quantified components in the G. asclepiadea and I. helenium root ethanolic extracts (µg/g dry vegetal material) by the LC-MS analysis.
| Compound | Retention Time, min | Concentration | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard | Separated Compound | Standard | Separated Compound | Value | |
|
| |||||
| Caffeic acid | 13.8 | 13.7 | 179.0 > 135.0 | 179.0 > 135.0 | 169 ± 1.2 |
| 17.5 | 17.6 | 163.0 > 119.0 | 163.0 > 119.0 | 192.8 ± 1.0 | |
| Salicylic acid | 23.5 | 23.5 | 137.0 > 93.0 | 137.0 > 93.0 | <LOQ |
| Chlorogenic acid | 12.0 | 12.0 | 353.0 > 191.0 | 353.0 > 191.0 | 33.4 ± 0.5 |
| Amarogentin | 22.5 | 22.5 | 587.0 > 229.0 | 587.0 > 229.0 | 27.8 ± 0.3 |
| Apigenin | 28.2 | 28.1 | 269.0 > 117.0 | 269.0 > 117.0 | 18.0 ± 0.7 |
| Chrysin | 29.7 | 29.7 | 253.0 > 143.0 | 253.0 > 143.0 | <LOQ |
| Luteolin | 26.9 | 26.8 | 287.0 > 153.0 | 287.0 > 153.0 | 9.6 ± 0.2 |
| Luteolin-7- | 19.9 | 19.8 | 447.0 > 284.9 | 447.0 > 284.9 | 22.6 ± 0.5 |
| Quercetin | 25.7 | 25.5 | 300.9 > 151.0 | 300.9 > 151.0 | <LOQ |
| Rutoside | 20.3 | 20.2 | 609.0 > 300.0 | 609.0 > 300.0 | 30.8 ± 0.6 |
| Naringenin | 26.3 | 26.3 | 271.0 > 119.0 | 271.0 > 119.0 | 8.0 ± 0.2 |
|
| |||||
| Caffeic acid | 13.8 | 14.0 | 179.0 > 135.0 | 179.0 > 135.0 | 234.0 ± 2.1 |
| Chlorogenic acid | 12.0 | 12.2 | 353.0 > 191.0 | 353.0 > 191.0 | 2284.1 ± 11 |
| Chrysin | 29.7 | 29.9 | 253.0 > 143.0 | 253.0 > 143.0 | <LOQ |
| Luteolin | 26.9 | 27.5 | 287.0 > 153.0 | 287.0 > 153.0 | <LOQ |
| Luteolin-7- | 19.9 | 20.5 | 447.0 > 284.9 | 447.0 > 284.9 | <LOQ |
| Naringenin | 26.3 | 26.3 | 271.0 > 119.0 | 271.0 > 119.0 | 3.2 ± 0.03 |
| Hesperetin | 27.1 | 27.5 | 301.0 > 164.0 | 301.0 > 164.0 | <LOQ |
Note:
Figure 1LC-MS chromatogram peaks of G. asclepiadea ethanolic extract—amarogentin, apigenin, luteolin-7-O-glucoside, naringenin, rutoside (top to bottom).
Antioxidant capacity of G. asclepiadea and I. helenium root ethanolic extracts.
| Sample | FRAP | DPPH |
|---|---|---|
|
| 145.23 * ± 3.60 | 363.7 * ± 0.89 |
|
| 629.04 * ± 2.07 | 173.2 * ± 3.40 |
Note: Values represent the mean ± standard deviations of three independent measurements, * p < 0.05 G. asclepiadea vs. I. helenium.
Antibacterial activity of G. asclepiadea and I. helenium root ethanolic extracts (agar well-diffusion assay).
| Zone of Inhibition (mm) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15.33 ± 0.47 | 17.33 ± 0.47 | 11.33 ± 0.47 | 11.33 ± 0.47 | 10.00 ± 0.00 | 10.33 ± 0.47 |
|
| 16.33 ± 0.47 | 18.00 ± 0.00 | 8.67 ± 0.47 | 12.00 ± 0.82 | 12.00 ± 0.82 | 10.67 ± 0.47 |
|
| 18.33 ± 0.47 a,b | 21.00 ± 0.00 a,b | 10.33 ± 0.94 | 12.67 ± 0.47 | 12.67 ± 0.47 | 11.33 ± 0.47 |
| Gentamicin | 18 ± 0.00 a,b | 21 ± 0.00 a,b | 17 ± 0.00 a,b,c | 18 ± 0.00 a,b,c | 17 ± 0.00 a,b,c | 17 ± 0.00 a,b,c |
Note: Values represent the mean ± standard deviations of three independent measurements. a–c Means with different subscript letters within a row are significantly different at p < 0.05.
Antibacterial activity of G. asclepiadea and I. helenium root ethanolic extracts (broth microdilution assay).
| MIC Index | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 0.063 × 10−4/ | 0.0315 × 10−4/ | 0.063 × 10−4/ | 0.063 × 10−4/ | 0.063 × 10−4/ | 0.063 × 10−4/ | |
| 0.063 × 10−4 | 0.0315 × 10−4 | 0.063 × 10−4 | 0.063 × 10−4 | 0.063 × 10−4 | 0.063 × 10−4 | |
|
| 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 |
| 0.045 × 10−4/ | 0.0225 × 10−4/ | 0.0901 × 10−4/ | 0.045 × 10−4/ | 0.045 × 10−4/ | 0.0901 × 10−4/ | |
| 0.045 × 10−4 | 0.045 × 10−4 | 0.0901 × 10−4 | 0.0901 × 10−4 | 0.0901 × 10−4 | 0.0901 × 10−4 | |
Note: Values represent the mean ± standard deviations of three independent measurements.
Figure 2Inhibitory effects of (a) G. asclepiadea and (b) I. helenium root extracts on rat intestinal epithelial cells, at eight different concentrations C1–C8 calculated according to the TPC (μmol GAE/mL extract): ranging between 0.0079 and 0.4786 for G. asclepiadea extract, and from 0.0135 to 0.8068 for I. helenium extract. Control—untreated cells, Control ethanol—cells treated with ethanol. Values are represented as mean ± SD. Statistically significant differences between treated and untreated cells (control): * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.001; *** p < 0.0001.
LC-MS mobile phase gradient.
| Time, Min | Methanol | Water | 2% Formic Acid in Water |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 5 | 90 | 5 |
| 3.00 | 15 | 70 | 15 |
| 6.00 | 15 | 70 | 15 |
| 9.00 | 21 | 58 | 21 |
| 13.00 | 21 | 58 | 21 |
| 18.00 | 30 | 41 | 29 |
| 22.00 | 30 | 41 | 29 |
| 26.00 | 50 | 0 | 50 |
| 29.00 | 50 | 0 | 50 |
| 29.01 | 5 | 90 | 5 |
| 35.00 | 5 | 90 | 5 |
LC-MS standards identification parameters.
| Name of Standard | Retention Time, min | MRM | Other Transitions | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caffeic acid | 13.8 | 179.0 > 135.0 | Negative | 179.0 > 134.0 |
| 17.5 | 163.0 > 119.0 | Negative | 163.0 > 93.0 | |
| Salicylic acid | 23.5 | 137.0 > 93.0 | Negative | 137.0 > 75.0 |
| Chlorogenic acid | 12.0 | 353.0 > 191.0 | Negative | |
| Amarogentin | 22.5 | 587.0 > 229.0 | Positive | |
| Apigenin | 28.2 | 269.0 > 117.0 | Negative | |
| Chrysin | 29.7 | 253.0 > 143.0 | Negative | 253.0 > 119.0 |
| Luteolin | 26.9 | 287.0 > 153.0 | Positive | |
| Luteolin- | 19.9 | 447.0 > 284.9 | Negative | |
| Quercetin | 25.7 | 300.9 > 151.0 | Negative | 300.9 > 121.0 |
| Rutoside | 20.3 | 609.0 > 300.0 | Negative | 609.0 > 301.0 |
| Naringenin | 26.3 | 271.0 > 119.0 | Negative | 271.0 > 107.0 |
| Hesperetin | 27.1 | 301.0 > 164.0 | Negative | 301.0 > 136.0 |
Note: * m/z = mass-to-charge ratio.
LC-MS standards quantification parameters.
| Name of Standard | Concentration Range, mg/mL | Calibration Curve Equations | Correlation Factors | LOD, μg/mL | LOQ, μg/mL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caffeic acid | 0.11–1.10 | A = 4 × 107 × c − 319,689 | 0.9998 | 3.20 | 4.80 |
| 0.16–1.60 | A = 3 × 107 × c + 291,065 | 0.9993 | 1.90 | 3.90 | |
| Salicylic acid | 0.16–1.60 | A = 4 × 107 × c + 44,120 | 0.9997 | 1.50 | 2.00 |
| Chlorogenic acid | 0.13–1.30 | A = 2 × 108 × c − 269,699 | 0.9997 | 5.00 | 8.00 |
| Amarogentin | 0.10–1.00 | A = 3 × 108 × c − 36,887 | 0.9997 | 5.00 | 7.00 |
| Apigenin | 0.10–0.98 | A = 2 × 108 × c + 15,916 | 0.9999 | 0.20 | 0.30 |
| Chrysin | 0.10–1.00 | A = 1 × 108 × c − 82,818 | 0.9997 | 3.00 | 5.00 |
| Luteolin | 0.01–0.10 | A = 2 × 108 × c − 2295.4 | 0.9977 | 0.05 | 0.07 |
| Luteolin- | 0.07–0.70 | A = 1 × 109 × c − 700,317 | 0.9990 | 3.00 | 4.00 |
| Quercetin | 0.09–0.91 | A = 5 × 107 × c − 9556 | 0.9964 | 0.80 | 1.10 |
| Rutoside | 0.17–1.70 | A = 2 × 108 × c − 191,937 | 0.9996 | 4.00 | 6.00 |
| Naringenin | 0.16–1.60 | A = 3 × 108 × c − 43,443 | 0.9999 | 0.60 | 0.90 |
| Hesperetin | 0.10–1.00 | A = 6 × 107 × c − 49,247 | 0.9974 | 3.00 | 5.00 |
Note: A = Area; c = concentration (mg/mL).