| Literature DB >> 35744961 |
Olusola Bodede1,2, Garland K More1, Roshila Moodley3, Paul Steenkamp4, Himansu Baijnath5, Vinesh Maharaj2, Gerhard Prinsloo1.
Abstract
This work presents the first report on the phytochemical investigation of Harpephyllum caffrum Bernh. gum exudate. A known cardanol, 3-heptadec-12'-Z-enyl phenol (1) and three new alk(en)ylhydroxycyclohexanes, namely, (1R,3R)-1,3-dihydroxy-3-[heptadec-12'(Z)-enyl]cyclohexane (2) (1S,2S,3S,4S,5R)-1,2,3,4,5-pentahydroxy-5-[octadec-13'(Z)-enyl]cyclohexane (3) and (1R,2S,4R)-1,2,4-trihydroxy-4-[heptadec-12'(Z)-enyl]cyclohexane (4) were isolated from the gum. The structures of the compounds were determined by extensive 1D and 2D NMR spectroscopy and HR-ESI-MS data. The ethanolic extract of the gum was found to be the most potent tyrosinase inhibitor with IC50 of 11.32 µg/mL while compounds 2 and 3, with IC50 values of 24.90 and 26.99 µg/mL, respectively, were found to be potential anti-tyrosinase candidates from the gum. Gum exudate may be a potential source for non-destructive harvesting of selective pharmacologically active compounds from plants. The results also provide evidence that H. caffrum gum may find application in cosmetics as a potential anti-tyrosinase agent.Entities:
Keywords: 1H NMR; Harpephyllum caffrum; anti-tyrosinase; cardanols; cyclohexanol
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35744961 PMCID: PMC9229927 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27123839
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.927
1H NMR [400 MHz, δH, mult. (J in Hz)] spectral data for compounds 1–4 isolated from H. caffrum gum and 5 and 6, structurally similar to 4.
| Position | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | * 5 | ** 6 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CDCl3 | CD3OD | CDCl3 | ||||||
| 1 | 1 | 4.07, bs | 3.91, m | 3.51, bs | 3.46, bs | 3.41, dd (10.5, 4.6) | ||
| 2 | 2 | 6.63, s | 1.83, m & 1.48, m | 4.01, bs | 3.90, m | 3.85, m | 1.91, bd (14.4) & | 4.01, bs |
| 3 | 3 | 4.47, bs | 1.46–1.57, m | 1.45–1.50, m | 4.31, bs | 1.96–1.98, m & | ||
| 4 | 4 | 6.74, d (7.5) | 1.38, bd (1.86) | 3.41, bd (9.8) | 2.29, bd (12.5) & | |||
| 5 | 5 | 7.11, t (7.9) | 1.95, m & | 1.89–1.97, m | 1.89–1.93, dt (13.9, 3.0) | 4.35, tt (11.4, 4.2) | 1.86, m & | |
| 6 | 6 | 6.61, dd (8.4, 2.3) | 1.60, m & 1.35, m | 1.93, m & | 1.74, bd (12.0) | 1.78, dd (12.9, 4.0) | 2.11, bd (12.5) & | 1.53, m |
| 1′ | 1′ | 2.54, t (7.5) | 1.75, m & 1.44, m | 1.42, m | 1.66–1.67, m & 1.54–1.59, m | 1.48, m & | 1.84, m & | |
| 2′–10′ | 2′–14′ | 1.24–1.57, m | 1.23–1.32, m | 1.10–1.26, m & | 1.29–1.36, m | 1.30–1.50, m | 1.20–1.30, m | |
| 11′ | 15′ | 1.99, m | 1.96–1.99, m | 1.23–1.44, m | 1.96–2.01, m | 2.02–2.05, m | 2.03, m | 1.98–2.02, m |
| 12′ | 16′ | 5.34, m | 5.31, m | 1.96–1.99, m | 5.32, m | 5.36, m | 5.37, m | 5.32, t (5.0) |
| 13′ | 17′ | 5.34, m | 5.31, m | 5.32, m | 5.32, m | 5.36, m | 5.37, m | 5.32, t (5.0) |
| 14′ | 18′ | 1.99, m | 1.96–1.99, m | 5.32, m | 1.96–2.01, m | 2.02–2.05, m | 2.03, m | 1.98–2.02, m |
| 15′ | 19′ | 1.24–1.30, m | 1.28–1.31, m | 1.96–1.99, m | 1.29–1.36, m | 1.30–1.50, m | 1.20–1.30, m | |
| 16′ | 20′ | 1.24–1.30, m | 1.28–1.31, m | 1.31, m | 1.30 1.42–1.44, m | 1.30–1.50, m | 1.20–1.30, m | |
| 17′ | 21′ | 0.88, t (6.8) | 0.87, t (6.8) | 1.28–1.31, m | 0.89, t (5.7) | 0.92, t (6.9) | 0.91 (6.6) | 0.86, t (6.8) |
| 18′ | 0.86, t (6.8) | |||||||
Compounds 1–3 were recorded in CDCl3 while 4 was recorded in both CDCl3 and CD3OD; * Laurent et al. 2003 [18]; ** Okoth et al. 2016 [16].
13C NMR (400 MHz, δC, Type) spectral data for compounds 1–4.
| Position | 1 | 2 | 4 | Position | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 155.4, C | 67.8, CH | 70.9, CH | 1 | 67.6, CH |
| 2 | 115.3, CH | 41.2, CH2 | 67.7, CH | 2 | 66.8, CH |
| 3 | 144.9, C | 72.9, C | 40.6, CH2 | 3 | 65.9, CH |
| 4 | 120.9, CH | 43.7, CH2 | 76.1, C | 4 | 72.7, CH |
| 5 | 129.3, CH | 16.0 | 28.3, CH2 | 5 | 73.6, C |
| 6 | 112.4, CH | 36.9 | 41.9, CH2 | 6 | 45.9, CH2 |
| 1′ | 35.8, CH2 | 32.8, CH2 | 29.8, CH2 | 1′ | 44.5, CH2 |
| 2′ | 31.3, CH2 | 22.8, CH2 | 23.3, CH2 | 2′ | 35.3, CH2 |
| 11′ | 27.2, CH2 | 27.2, CH2 | 28.1, CH2 | 12′ | 27.2, CH2 |
| 12′ | 129.8, CH | 129.8, CH | 130.8, CH | 13′ | 129.8, CH |
| 13′ | 129.9, CH | 129.9, CH | 130.8, CH | 14′ | 129.9, CH |
| 14′ | 26.9, CH2 | 26.9, CH2 | 27.9, CH2 | 15′ | 26.9, CH2 |
| 15′ | 31.9, CH2 | 31.9, CH2 | 33.1, CH2 | 16′ | 31.9, CH2 |
| 16′ | 22.3, CH2 | 22.3, CH2 | 23.1, CH2 | 17′ | 22.3, CH2 |
| 17′ | 14.0, CH3 | 13.9, CH3 | 14.3, CH3 | 18′ | 13.9, CH3 |
Compounds 1–3 were recorded in CDCl3 while 4 was recorded in CD3OD.
Figure 1Structures of compounds isolated from H. caffrum gum (compounds 1–4) and two (5 and 6) closely related compounds to 4.
Figure 2Major correlations, COSY (thick black line), HMBC (red arrow) and NOESY (blue arrow), observed for compounds 2, 3 and 4.
Figure 3ECD spectra of compounds 2, 3 and 4.
Figure 41H NMR spectra of compound 4 (comparing the run in CDCl3 with CD3OD).
Tyrosinase inhibitory activity of different extracts and compounds from Harpephyllum caffrum (HCG-EtOH) compared with the positive control: arbutin and kojic acid.
| Test Samples | Anti-Tyrosinase | Correlation |
|---|---|---|
| HCG-EtOH | b 11.32 ± 0.80 | 0.9892 |
| Compound | e 41.77 ± 0.62 | 0.9813 |
| Compound | c 24.90 ± 1.10 | 0.9470 |
| Compound | c 26.99 ± 1.30 | 0.9659 |
| Compound | d 34.90 ± 0.73 | 0.9731 |
| Arbutin | b 9.85 ± 0.42 | 0.9577 |
| Kojic acid | a 4.34 ± 0.37 | 0.9969 |
IC50 values are presented as mean ± SD and the lower the IC50 value, the better the anti-tyrosinase effect. IC50 values with the same superscript letter are not significantly different.