| Literature DB >> 35736194 |
Lei Wang1, Jun-Geon Je2, Caoxing Huang3, Jae-Young Oh4, Xiaoting Fu1, Kaiqiang Wang1,5, Ginnae Ahn6, Jiachao Xu1, Xin Gao1, You-Jin Jeon2,7.
Abstract
In this study, the anti-inflammatory activity of sulfated polysaccharides isolated from the green seaweed Codium fragile (CFCE-PS) was investigated in lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-stimulated RAW 264.7 macrophages and zebrafish. The results demonstrated that CFCE-PS significantly increased the viability of LPS-induced RAW 264.7 cells in a concentration-dependent manner. CFCE-PS remarkably and concentration-dependently reduced the levels of inflammatory molecules including prostaglandin E2, nitric oxide (NO), interleukin-1 beta, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, and interleukin-6 in LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells. In addition, in vivo test results indicated that CFCE-PS effectively reduced reactive oxygen species, cell death, and NO levels in LPS-stimulated zebrafish. Thus, these results indicate that CFCE-PS possesses in vitro and in vivo anti-inflammatory activities and suggest it is a potential ingredient in the functional food and pharmaceutical industries.Entities:
Keywords: Codium fragile; RAW 264.7 cells; anti-inflammatory activity; sulfated polysaccharides; zebrafish
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35736194 PMCID: PMC9231178 DOI: 10.3390/md20060391
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mar Drugs ISSN: 1660-3397 Impact factor: 6.085
Figure 1Effect of CFCE-PS on LPS-induced cytotoxicity in RAW 264.7 cells. (A) The viability of LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells; the production levels of NO (B) and PGE2 (C) in LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells. The cells non-treated with CFCE-PS and LPS are referred to as the control group. The experiments were conducted in triplicate and the data are expressed as mean ± SE. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01 as compared to the LPS-stimulated group and ## p < 0.01 as compared to control group.
Figure 2Effect of CFCE-PS on the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines in LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells. (A) Production of TNF-α; (B) production of IL-1β; and (C) production of IL-6. The cells non-treated with CFCE-PS and LPS are referred to as the control group. The experiments were conducted in triplicate and the data are expressed as mean ± SE. ** p < 0.01 as compared to LPS-stimulated group and ## p < 0.01 as compared to control group.
Figure 3Survival rate of zebrafish after being treated with CFCE-PS or/and with LPS. The zebrafish non-treated with CFCE-PS and LPS are referred to as the control group. The experiments were conducted in triplicate and the data are expressed as the mean ± SE. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01 as compared to the LPS-stimulated group and ## p < 0.01 as compared to the control group.
Figure 4Effect of CFCE-PS on inflammatory responses in LPS-induced zebrafish. (A) ROS level of LPS-stimulated zebrafish; (B) cell death of LPS-stimulated zebrafish; and (C) NO production in LPS-stimulated zebrafish. The zebrafish non-treated with CFCE-PS and LPS are referred to as the control group. The relative amounts of ROS, cell death, and NO of zebrafish were measured using ImageJ software. The experiments were conducted in triplicate and the data are expressed as the mean ± SE. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01 as compared to the LPS-treated group and ## p < 0.01 as compared to control group.