| Literature DB >> 35884701 |
Fazal Wahid1, Tour Jan1, Fakhria A Al-Joufi2, Syed Wadood Ali Shah3, Mohammad Nisar1, Muhammad Zahoor4.
Abstract
Salvia moorcroftiana is medicinally used in various parts of the world to treat a number of diseases. In the literature, the antiamnesic activity of this plant has not yet been reported. Therefore, the current study was aimed at evaluating the in vivo antiamnesic (scopolamine-induced) potential of Salvia moorcroftiana. The major phytochemical groups such as total phenolic (TPC), total tannin (TTC), and total flavonoid content (TFC) in methanolic extract (SlMo-Crd) and subsequent fractions of Salvia moorcroftiana were quantified using standard methods. The in vitro anticholinesterase (against butyryl cholinesterase; BChE and acetylcholinesterase; AChE) and antioxidant (against 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl; DPPH and 2,2'-Azino-bis (3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid); ABTS free radicals) potentials of crude (SIMO-Crd) extract and fractions (hexane; SlMo-Hex, chloroform; SlMo-Chl, ethyl acetate; SlMo-Et) were also determined. The SlMo-Crd at doses of 100 and 200 mg/kg body weight compared to fractions of 75 and 150 mg/kg body weight (which were 1/10th of the highest dose tested in acute toxicity tests) were evaluated for their memory enhancement and learning behavior in normal and scopolamine-induced mental dysfunction in mice using behavioral memory tests such as the Y-maze test and novel object recognition test (NORT). Moreover, the samples were further evaluated for acetylcholine contents and biochemical markers such as MDA (malondialdehyde), SOD (superoxide dismutase), CAT (catalase), and GSH (glutathione peroxidase) levels. The maximum TPC with a value of 114.81 ± 1.15 mg GAE/g, TTC with a value of 106.79 ± 1.07 mg GAE/g, and TFC with a value of 194.29 ± 0.83 mg RE/g were recorded for the SlMo-Chl fraction. Against the DPPH free radical, the methanolic extract exhibited an IC50 value of 95.29 ± 1.06 µg/mL whereas, among the fractions, the best activity was observed for the SlMo-Chl fraction with an IC50 of 75.02 ± 0.91 µg/mL, followed by SlMoS-Et with an IC50 value of 88.71 ± 0.87 µg/mL. Among the extracts, the SlMo-Chl and SlMo-Et fractions inverted the amnesic effects of scopolamine in mice effectively. Additionally, the SlMo-Chl and SIMO-Et fractions considerably enhanced the percent spontaneous alteration performance in the Y-maze test with values of 65.18 ± 2.61/69.51 ± 2.71 and 54.92 ± 2.49/60.41 ± 2.69, respectively, for the tested doses. The discrimination index (DI) in experimental mice was considerably enhanced by the SlMo-Chl in the NORT with values of 59.81 ± 1.21/61.22 ± 1.31% DI correspondingly for the tested doses, as mentioned above, followed by the SlMo-Et extract. The selected plant in the form of extracts ameliorated the effects of amnesia in mice and could, therefore, be used as a therapy for amnesia; however, this is subject to further exploration in other animal models and the isolation of the responsible compounds.Entities:
Keywords: Salvia moorcroftiana; antiamnesic activity; discrimination index; enzyme inhibition; mice
Year: 2022 PMID: 35884701 PMCID: PMC9320495 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12070894
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Sci ISSN: 2076-3425
Figure 1Experimental design for the assessment of memory in scopolamine-induced amnesic mice.
Quantitative phytochemical analysis of S. moorcroftiana.
| Samples | TPC | TFC | TTC |
|---|---|---|---|
| SlMo-Crd | 108.20 ± 1.10 | 188.39 ± 0.81 | 76.98 ± 1.01 |
| SlMo-Hex | 33.71 ± 1.01 | 36.26 ± 0.56 | 28.11 ± 0.70 |
| SlMo-Chl | 114.81 ± 1.15 | 194.29 ± 0.83 | 106.79 ± 1.07 |
| SlMo-Et | 109.72 ± 0.97 | 190.13 ± 0.79 | 89.93 ± 1.03 |
| SlMo-Bt | 44.31 ± 0.81 | 39.62 ± 0.77 | 29.73 ± 0.67 |
| SlMo-Aq | 46.48 ± 0.73 | 40.74 ± 0.62 | 22.89 ± 0.56 |
All values are determined as mean ± SEM, n = 3, TPC: total phenolic content, TTC: total flavonoid content, TFC: total tannin content. SlMo-Crd: crude extract, SIMo-Hex: hexane fraction, SlMo-Chl: chloroform fraction, SlMo-Et: ethyl acetate fraction, SlMo-Bt: butanol fraction, SlMo-Aq: aqueous fraction.
Antioxidant potential extracts of S. moorcroftiana.
| Test Sample | Antioxidant Activity | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| (DPPH) | (ABTS) | ||
|
| SlMo-Crd | 95.29 ± 1.06 | 120.11 ± 1.01 |
| SlMo-Hex | 221.84 ± 1.05 | 249.73 ± 1.13 | |
| SlMo-Chl | 75.02 ± 0.91 | 90.57 ± 0.91 | |
| SlMo-Et | 88.71 ± 0.87 | 94.21 ± 0.81 | |
| SlMo-Bt | 137.62 ± 0.95 | 176.07 ± 1.01 | |
| SlMo-Aq | 164.95 ± 0.91 | 167.23 ± 1.04 | |
| Standard | Ascorbic Acid | 8.21 ± 0.39 | 10.04 ± 0.41 |
| Tochopherol | 6.89 ± 0.31 | 5.36 ± 0.29 | |
All values are presented as mean ± SEM, n = 3, SlMo-Crd: crude extract, SlMo-Chl: chloroform fraction, SlMo-Et: ethyl acetate SlMo-Bt: butanol and SlMo-Aq: aqueous fraction of S. moorcroftiana.
Figure 2Effect of crude methanolic extract and fractions of S. moorcroftiana on mice for memory in behavioral Y-maze test. Mean ± SEM (n = 6). One-way ANOVA followed Dunnett’s post hoc multiple comparison test to calculate the values of p. ### p ˂ 0.001 is comparison of scopolamine-treated (amnesic) group with normal control, * p ˂ 0.05, ** p ˂ 0.01 and *** p ˂ 0.001 represents comparison of scopolamine-treated (amnesic) group vs Donepezil, crude extract and fractions-treated groups.
Effects of crude extract and various fractions of S. moorcroftiana on mice in behavioral NORT on long-term memory.
| Treatment/Dose (mg) | Sample Phase | Test Phase | DI (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identical Object | Identical Object | Novel Object | Familiar Object | |||
| Control | 19.88 ± 1.01 | 20.92 ± 0.91 | 13.17 ± 0.92 | 11.89 ± 0.85 | 52.55 ± 1.67 | |
| Amnesic control (Scopolamine) | 12.91 ± 0.77 | 11.70 ± 0.90 | 6.13 ± 0.47 | 13.37 ± 0.73 | 31.43 ± 1.56 | |
| SlMo-Crd | 100 | 18.31 ± 1.02 | 17.14 ± 0.97 | 12.46 ± 0.93 ** | 11.04 ± 0.81 | 53.02 ± 1.51 |
| 200 | 17.98 ± 0.81 | 18.96 ± 0.83 | 14.05 ± 0.87 *** | 11.89 ± 0.83 | 54.16 ± 1.67 | |
| SlMo-Hex | 75 | 18.75 ± 0.79 | 17.61 ± 0.92 | 10.88 ± 0.84 ** | 17.30 ± 0.93 | 38.61 ± 1.57 |
| 150 | 17.34 ± 0.92 | 19.11 ± 1.01 | 10.95 ± 0.89 *** | 16.54 ± 0.91 | 39.83 ± 1.49 | |
| SlMo-Chl | 75 | 18.47 ± 0.70 | 17.56 ± 0.89 | 16.43 ± 0.77 ** | 11.02 ± 0.72 | 59.81 ± 1.21 |
| 150 | 18.09 ± 0.79 | 18.97 ± 0.85 | 17.45 ± 0.70 *** | 11.05 ± 0.95 | 61.22 ± 1.31 | |
| SlMo-Et | 75 | 19.02 ± 1.02 | 18.15 ± 0.98 | 13.57 ± 0.81 ** | 11.01 ± 0.78 | 55.20 ± 1.72 |
| 150 | 17.87 ± 0.93 | 19.02 ± 0.83 | 14.76 ± 0.67 *** | 10.98 ± 0.82 | 57.33 ± 1.48 | |
| SlMo-But | 75 | 18.24 ± 1.04 | 17.87 ± 0.98 | 9.81 ± 0.65 ** | 15.28 ± 0.81 | 39.11 ± 1.61 |
| 150 | 17.89 ± 0.97 | 18.92 ± 0.91 | 10.15 ± 0.80 *** | 15.07 ± 0.62 | 40.24 ± 1.31 | |
| SlMo-Aq | 75 | 18.75 ± 1.05 | 17.69 ± 0.90 | 10.16 ± 0.73 ** | 15.22 ± 0.96 | 40.03 ± 1.53 |
| 150 | 17.89 ± 0.96 | 19.01 ± 1.06 | 10.40 ± 0.78 *** | 14.82 ± 0.93 | 41.23 ± 1.68 | |
| Donepezil | 2 | 17.55 ± 0.99 | 18.07 ± 0.93 | 23.47 ± 0.90 *** | 10.41 ± 0.85 | 69.27 ± 1.61 |
Mean ± SEM (n = 6). One-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc multiple comparison test has been used to estimate the values of p; ** p ˂ 0.01 and *** p ˂ 0.001.
Figure 3Effect of SlMo-Crd and fractions on (A) AChE and (B) ACh level in brain. Mean ± SEM (n = 6). Oneway ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc multiple comparison test have been used to estimate the values of p; §§§ p < 0 001, ‡‡‡ p < 0 001 has been used for comparison of scopolamine- treated (amnesic) group vs normal control group, * p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ***p < 0.001 compare the scopolamine-treated (amnesic) group vs Donepezil, crude extract and fractions-treated groups.
Effects of extracts on different biomarker levels in brain of mice.
| Sample | SOD | CAT | MDA | GSH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 14.29 ± 1.29 | 31.22 ± 1.49 | 9.88 ± 0.98 | 46.91 ± 1.54 | |
| Amnesic control (Scopolamine) | 5.21 ± 0.87 ### | 7.12 ± 1.22 ### | 27.19 ± 1.51 ### | 14.82 ± 1.71 ### | |
| SlMo-Crd | 100 | 7.21 ± 1.33 ** | 22.09 ± 1.41 ** | 18.21 ± 1.39 *** | 33.02 ± 1.33 ** |
| 200 | 8.16 ± 1.21 ** | 23.11 ± 1.23 ** | 18.05 ± 1.42 ** | 34.11 ± 1.49 ** | |
| SlMo-Chl | 75 | 8.89 ± 1.41 *** | 24.03 ± 1.39 *** | 14.23 ± 1.38 ** | 36.47 ± 1.53 *** |
| 150 | 9.46 ± 1.67 *** | 25.37 ± 1.42 *** | 13.57 ± 1.67 *** | 39.13 ± 1.38 *** | |
| SlMo-Et | 75 | 8.06 ± 1.12 ** | 24.27 ± 1.57 ** | 16.09 ± 1.56 ** | 34.69 ± 1.30 ** |
| 150 | 8.91 ± 1.21 *** | 24.51 ± 1.39 *** | 15.97 ± 1.31 ** | 35.89 ± 1.46 *** | |
| Donepezil | 2 | 12.87 ± 1.39 *** | 32.01 ± 1.31 *** | 11.29 ± 1.31 *** | 46.81 ± 1.43 ** |
Mean ± SEM (n = 6). One-way ANOVA followed Dunnett’s post hoc multiple comparison test have been used to estimate the values of p. ### p < 0 001 represents a comparison of scopolamine-treated (amnesic) group vs normal control, ** p < 0.01 and *** p < 0.001 are comparison of scopolamine-treated (amnesic) group with Donepezil, crude extract and fractions-treated groups.