| Literature DB >> 35805583 |
Sonia M López Villarreal1, Joel H Elizondo Luévano2, Raymundo A Pérez Hernández2, Eduardo Sánchez García2, María J Verde Star2, Roció Castro Ríos3, Marsela Garza Tapia3, Osvelia E Rodríguez Luis1, Abelardo Chávez Montes2.
Abstract
The usefulness of traditional plants in Mexico to treat human ailments has been known since ancient times. This work evaluated the antimicrobial, anticoagulant, antioxidant, cytotoxic, and anti-inflammatory potential of ethanolic extracts of Aloe vera, Equisetum arvense, Mimosa tenuiflora, Lippia graveolens, and Syzygium aromaticum. The antimicrobial activity of the extracts was evaluated against Streptococcus mutans and Streptococcus sorbinus; a significant inhibitory effect of the L. graveolens extract on both bacteria was observed at concentration levels of 250 µg/mL and greater. The anticoagulant activity was evaluated in terms of prothrombin time (PT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), A. vera and M. tenuiflora extracts showed no significant difference (p ˂ 0.05) in PT compared with the control, and for APTT the extracts of A. vera, L. graveolens, and S. aromaticum decreased the APTT significantly (p ˂ 0.05) compared with the control. The antioxidant potential by DPPH assay indicated that the E. arvense extract behaved statistically the same as the control. The cytotoxic activity was evaluated in HGF-1 cells using the fluorometric microculture cytotoxicity assay technique, and none of the extracts was toxic at 125 and 250 µg/mL concentrations. Finally, the anti-inflammatory activity was evaluated using ELISA, where the A. vera extract showed the best anti-inflammatory capacity. Further research on the search for bioactive metabolites and elucidation of action mechanisms of the most promising extracts will be carried out.Entities:
Keywords: anti-inflammatory properties; antibacterial activity; anticoagulant activity; interleukins; medicinal plants; natural extracts; traditional medicine
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35805583 PMCID: PMC9265615 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19137927
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Plants used.
| Family | Plant Species | Common Name | Part Used |
|---|---|---|---|
| Xanthorrhoeaceae | Aloe or Sabila | Leaves | |
| Equisetaceae | Horsetail | Aerial part | |
| Leguminosae | Tepezcohuite | Bark | |
| Verbenaceae | Mexican oregano | Leaves | |
| Myrtaceae | Clove | Buttons |
Phytochemical tests.
| Test | Chemical Groups |
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KMnO4 | Unsaturations | + | + | + | + | + |
| Antrone | Carbohydrates | + | + | + | + | − |
| Lieberman–Burchard | Sterols, triterpenes | − | + | + | + | + |
| Shinoda | Flavonoids | + | − | + | + | + |
| NaOH | Coumarins | − | + | − | + | + |
| Baljet | Sesquiterpene lactones | − | − | + | + | + |
| Sulfuric acid | Quinones | − | − | + | + | + |
| NaHCO3 | Carboxyl group | + | − | − | − | − |
| Ferric chloride | Tannins | − | − | + | + | + |
| Dragendorff | Alkaloids | − | − | + | − | − |
| Yield % | 11.16 | 5.23 | 17.84 | 8.81 | 7.20 |
+ Positive reaction.; − Negative reaction.
Activity of ethanol extracts against S. mutans.
| Plant Extracts vs. | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration (µg/mL) |
|
|
|
|
|
| 250 | 10.67 ± 0.88 | 15.33 ± 1.53 | 15.52 ± 0.33 | 25.33 ± 1.05 ** | 16.33 ± 0.58 |
| 500 | 13.67 ± 0.58 | 16.67 ± 3.06 | 16.00 ± 2.65 | 26.00 ± 0.41 ** | 17.00 ± 1.00 |
| 1000 | 16.00 ± 1.00 | 20.00 ± 2.00 * | 17.67 ± 0.80 * | 26.33 ± 1.15 ** | 18.00 ± 1.34 * |
| 2000 | 16.33 ± 0.85 | 22.67 ± 1.58 ** | 18.00 ± 1.00 * | 27.67 ± 1.85 ** | 19.67 ± 0.58 * |
| 3000 | 18.67 ± 1.15 * | 26.00 ± 2.04 ** | 18.33 ± 2.08 * | 28.48 ± 1.33 ** | 28.67 ± 0.98 ** |
| C+ | 15.10 ± 0.77 | 15.79 ± 0.58 | 15.00 ± 1.00 | 15.00 ± 1.67 | 16.00 ± 0.81 |
|
| >0.05 | >0.01 | >0.05 | >0.01 | >0.01 |
Data are expressed as the mean ± SD of three independent replicates. Significant difference compared with C+: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Activity of ethanol extracts against S. sorbinus.
| Plant Extracts vs. | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration (µg/mL) |
|
|
|
|
|
| 250 | 11.00 ± 1.05 | 8.77 ± 0.41 | 10.52 ± 1.80 | 15.67 ± 0.08 | 10.52 ± 0.05 |
| 500 | 16.67 ± 1.08 | 12.00 ± 0.89 | 14.00 ± 0.37 | 18.00 ± 1.03 * | 15.67 ± 0.50 |
| 1000 | 18.00 ± 1.11 * | 13.67 ± 1.58 | 15.67 ± 1.18 | 19.33 ± 1.53 * | 16.00 ± 0.46 |
| 2000 | 18.67 ± 1.53 * | 15.76 ± 0.85 | 16.33 ± 0.58 | 23.67 ± 2.33 ** | 19.41 ± 0.58 * |
| 3000 | 19.67 ± 0.58 * | 16.00 ± 1.14 | 19.67 ± 0.13 * | 25.67 ± 0.82 ** | 23.67 ± 1.53 ** |
| C+ | 15.10 ± 0.77 | 15.79 ± 0.58 | 15.00 ± 1.00 | 15.00 ± 1.67 | 16.00 ± 0.81 |
|
| >0.05 | >0.05 | >0.05 | >0.01 | >0.01 |
Data are expressed as the mean ± SD of three independent replicates. Significant difference compared with C+: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Figure 1In vitro evaluation of the prothrombin time (PT) caused by A. vera (Av), E. arvense (Ea), L. graveolens (Lg), M. tenuiflora (Mt), and S. aromaticum (Sa) extracts at 500 and 1000 µg/mL. Data represent means in seconds (s) taken to control a healthy patient’s times (C). Differences between treatments were determined using Tukey’s post hoc test. Significant differences between treatment groups are represented by different letters, and equal letters indicate no significant difference between treatments.
Figure 2In vitro evaluation of the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) caused by A. vera (Av), E. arvense (Ea), L. graveolens (Lg), M. tenuiflora (Mt), and S. aromaticum (Sa) extracts at 500 and 1000 µg/mL. Data represent means in seconds (s) taken to control a healthy patient’s times (C). Differences between treatments were determined using Tukey’s post hoc test. Significant differences between treatment groups are represented by different letters, and equal letters indicate no significant difference between treatments.
Antioxidant activity.
| Plant extract | DPPH Scavenging (IC50 in μg/mL) |
|---|---|
|
| 8.66 ± 1.42 b |
|
| 2.73 ± 0.87 a |
|
| 464.06 ± 8.58 e |
|
| 19.80 ± 1.37 c |
|
| 37.20 ± 2.88 d |
| C+ (Vitamin C) | 2.23 ± 0.42 a |
Data are expressed as the mean ± SD (p < 0.05). Differences between treatments were determined using Tukey’s post hoc test. Significant differences between treatment groups are represented by different letters, and equal letters indicate no significant difference between treatments.
Cellular viability in percentage (%) and IC50 for each evaluated extract.
| Plant Extracts | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration (µg/mL) |
|
|
|
|
|
| 125 | 99.00 ± 0.11 a | 89.42 ± 3.52 d | 91.11 ± 3.71 b | 84.60 ± 3.21 b | 88.04 ± 1.36 d |
| 250 | 99.00 ± 2.28 a | 81.68 ± 4.34 c | 86..99 ± 5.69 b | 79.53 ± 3.50 b | 75.89 ± 0.42 c |
| 500 | 99.04 ± 3.29 a | 61.12 ± 1.40 b | 58.07 ± 3.72 a | 72.31 ± 0.81 ab | 50.71 ± 0.34 b |
| 1000 | 96.71 ± 3.90 a | 8.03 ± 1.08 a | 55.95 ± 4.52 a | 62.50 ± 2.26 a | 6.10 ± 1.02 a |
| C− | 100.00 ± 0.00 a | 100.00 ± 0.00 e | 99.32 ± 0.65 c | 100.00 ± 0.00 c | 97.26 ± 0.92 e |
| IC50 (μg/mL) | >3000 | 560.62 | 1037.43 | 1384.70 | 497.51 |
| LL | ND | 510.51 | 953.25 | 1217.02 | 449.46 |
| UL | ND | 590.42 | 1161.09 | 1552.65 | 550.93 |
Data are expressed as the mean ± SD (p < 0.05). Differences between treatments were determined using Tukey’s post hoc test. Significant differences between treatment groups are represented by different letters, and equal letters indicate no significant difference between treatments. ND: Not determined.
Anti-inflammatory activity.
| IL Levels (pg/mL) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Extract | Hr | TNF- | IL-1 | IL-10 |
|
| 0 | 128.35 | 303.17 | 85.40 |
| 24 | 0.00 | 154.83 | 19.40 | |
| 48 | 0.00 | 219.83 | 0.00 | |
| 72 | 0.00 | 251.50 | 0.00 | |
|
| >0.001 | >0.05 | >0.001 | |
|
| 0 | 39.10 | 105.67 | 62.90 |
| 24 | 0.00 | 156.36 | 20.90 | |
| 48 | 68.60 | 181.08 | 85.40 | |
| 72 | 222.62 | 410.25 | 138.40 | |
|
| >0.001 | >0.01 | >0.01 | |
|
| 0 | 378.63 | 21.92 | 0.00 |
| 24 | 376.10 | 64.42 | 0.00 | |
| 48 | 156.60 | 100.25 | 24.90 | |
| 72 | 7.66 | 189.00 | 60.40 | |
|
| >0.05 | >0.05 | >0.01 | |
|
| 0 | 0.00 | 251.50 | 17.40 |
| 24 | 0.00 | 236.92 | 28.90 | |
| 48 | 19.11 | 117.33 | 76.40 | |
| 72 | 116.10 | 112.33 | 97.40 | |
|
| >0.01 | >0.01 | >0.05 | |
|
| 0 | 354.61 | 179.83 | 5.90 |
| 24 | 327.10 | 156.08 | 0.00 | |
| 48 | 304.35 | 132.75 | 26.40 | |
| 72 | 239.60 | 110.25 | 0.00 | |
|
| >0.05 | >0.05 | >0.01 | |
Data are expressed as the mean (p < 0.05) of the Interleukin (IL) expression levels in pg/mL.