| Literature DB >> 35897906 |
Meng Yang1,2, Zhiyou Hao1,2, Xiaolan Wang2,3, Shiqi Zhou1,2, Denghui Zhu1,2, Ying Yang1,2, Junjun Wei1,2, Meng Li1,2, Xiaoke Zheng1,2, Weisheng Feng1,2.
Abstract
Four previously undescribed iridoid glycosides neocornuside A-D (1-4), along with six known ones (5-10), were isolated from Cornus officinalis fruit. Their structures were elucidated by extensive spectroscopic (NMR, UV, IR, and MS) analysis and comparison with data reported in the literature. All isolates were assessed for their antidiabetic activity on the relative glucose consumption in insulin-induced insulin-resistant HepG2 cells. The results showed that compounds 1, 3, and 7 exhibited significant antidiabetic activities with EC50 values of 0.582, 1.275, and 0.742 μM, respectively. Moreover, compounds 1, 3, and 7 could improve the ability of 2-NBDG uptake of insulin-induced HepG2 cells.Entities:
Keywords: Cornus officinalis; antidiabetic activity; iridoid glycosides; structure elucidation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35897906 PMCID: PMC9331380 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27154732
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.927
Figure 1Chemical structures of compounds 1–10 isolated from the fruits of Cornus officinalis.
1H NMR (500 MHz) and 13C NMR (125 MHz) data (δ in ppm, J in Hz) for compounds 1–2.
| 1 | 2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Position | 13C | 1H ( | 13C | 1H ( |
| 1 | 95.3 | 5.20 d (4.5) | 97.5 | 5.29 d (4.9) |
| 3 | 150.9 | 7.38 d (1.0) | 152.6 | 7.43d (1.3) |
| 4 | 111.4 | 113.1 | ||
| 5 | 30.7 | 2.94 m | 32.6 | 3.10 q (8.0) |
| 6 | 38.7 | 2.13 m | 40.3 | 2.37 ddd (14.7, 8.0, 1.5) |
| 7 | 77.0 | 5.04 m | 79.9 | 5.21 t (4.6) |
| 8 | 38.9 | 1.97 m | 40.9 | 2.14 m |
| 9 | 45.2 | 1.92 m | 46.9 | 2.07 td (8.9, 4.9) |
| 10 | 13.1 | 0.95 d (6.7) | 13.6 | 1.07 d (6.8) |
| 11 | 166.8 | 169.3 | ||
| 12 | 51.1 | 3.62 s | 52.3 | 3.69 s |
| 13 | 169.6 | 174.1 | ||
| 14 | 39.3 | 2.72 dd (15.6, 5.5) | 68.8 | 4.52 dd (7.0, 5.2) |
| 15 | 67.0 | 4.39, dd (12.3, 5.8) | 40.0 | 2.83 dd (16.0, 5.2) |
| 16 | 173.2 | 172.4 | ||
| 17 | 51.8 | 3.64 s | 51.7 | 3.70 s |
| 1′ | 98.7 | 4.46 d (7.9) | 100.2 | 4.66 d (7.9) |
| 2′ | 73.2 | 2.97 m | 74.7 | 3.19 m |
| 3′ | 76.8 | 3.15 m | 78.0 | 3.37 t (8.9) |
| 4′ | 70.1 | 3.03 m | 71.6 | 3.26 m |
| 5′ | 77.3 | 3.14 m | 78.4 | 3.32 m |
| 6′ | 61.2 | 3.68 m | 62.8 | 3.90 dd (11.9, 2.1) |
In DMSO-d6; In MeOD.
Figure 2The key HMBC and 1H-1H COSY correlations of compounds 1–4.
Figure 3The key NOESY correlations of compounds 1–4.
1H NMR (500 MHz) and 13C NMR (125 MHz) data (δ in ppm, J in Hz) for compounds 3–4 .
| 3 | 4 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Position | 13C | 1H ( | 13C | 1H ( |
| 1 | 97.9 | 5.24 d (5.3) | 95.4 | 5.91 d (3.2) |
| 3 | 152.4 | 7.41 s | 154.5 | 7.53 s |
| 4 | 113.3 | 111.7 | ||
| 5 | 31.2 | 2.88 m | 28.0 | 3.10 dt (12.9, 4.7) |
| 6 | 41.9 | 2.51 dt (12.9, 7.4) | 33.8 | 1.93 dd (13.9, 4.7) |
| 7 | 79.5 | 3.68 m | 99.5 | 4.74 d (3.7) |
| 8 | 44.3 | 1.72 q (7.5) | 66.3 | 4.29 qd (6.6, 2.1) |
| 9 | 46.9 | 1.84 m | 40.4 | 1.83 m |
| 10 | 17.6 | 1.16 d (6.7) | 19.6 | 1.34 d (6.9) |
| 11 | 169.5 | 168.7 | ||
| 12 | 51.8 | 3.69 s | 51.8 | 3.70 s |
| 13 | 55.0 | 3.35 s | ||
| 1′ | 100.6 | 4.65 d (8.0) | 99.7 | 4.87 d (8.7) |
| 2′ | 74.7 | 3.22 m | 73.5 | 3.25 m |
| 3′ | 78.5 | 3.29 m | 86.8 | 3.57 t (8.9) |
| 4′ | 71.0 | 3.40 m | 70.4 | 3.38 m |
| 5′ | 78.0 | 3.38 m | 78.0 | 3.37 m |
| 6′ | 68.7 | 4.02 m | 62.6 | 3.90 dd (12.2, 1.8) |
| 1″ | 95.9 | 5.82 d (9.2) | 96.1 | 5.89 d (3.3) |
| 3″ | 154.5 | 7.52 s | 154.6 | 7.52 s |
| 4″ | 110.8 | 110.8 | ||
| 5″ | 31.9 | 2.85 m | 32.1 | 2.87 dt (12.9, 4.6) |
| 6″ | 35.7 | 2.07 ddd (13.2, 4.6, 2.2) | 35.4 | 2.26 ddd (13.4, 4.6, 2.4) |
| 7″ | 104.0 | 4.71 dd (9.7, 2.2) | 103.8 | 4.80 dd (9.7, 2.4) |
| 8″ | 74.3 | 3.98 dd (6.9, 2.3) | 74.5 | 4.05 qd (6.4, 1.7) |
| 9″ | 40.1 | 1.81 m | 40.0 | 1.81 m |
| 10″ | 19.7 | 1.41 d (6.80) | 19.7 | 1.45 d (6.8) |
| 11″ | 168.6 | 168.6 | ||
| 12″ | 51.7 | 3.70 s | 51.7 | 3.71 s |
| 1‴ | 100.0 | 4.78 d (7.8) | 100.4 | 4.79 d (7.9) |
| 2‴ | 75.1 | 3.23 m | 75.1 | 3.22 m |
| 3‴ | 77.7 | 3.39 m | 78.6 | 3.28 d (2.3) |
| 4‴ | 71.7 | 3.27 m | 71.6 | 3.27 m |
| 5‴ | 77.0 | 3.41 m | 78.4 | 3.33 m |
| 6‴ | 62.9 | 3.89 dd (12.2, 2.2) | 62.7 | 3.66 m |
In MeOD.
Figure 4Effect of compounds 1–10 on cell viability in insulin-induced HepG2 cells ( ± s, n = 4).The impact of compounds 1–10 on cell viability measured by CCK-8 assay.* p < 0.05 or ** p < 0.01, versus insulin group.
Figure 5Effect of compounds 1–10 on the relative glucose consumption in insulin-induced HepG2 cells ( ± s, n = 4). The impact of compounds 1–10 on the relative glucose consumption measured by a glucose assay kit. < 0.05, versus control group; * p < 0.05 or ** p < 0.01, versus insulin group.
Effect of compounds 1, 3, and 7 on the relative glucose consumption in insulin-induced HepG2 cells ( ± s, n = 6).
| Compound | EC50
|
|---|---|
|
| 0.582 |
|
| 1.275 |
|
| 0.742 |
| Rosiglitazone | 1.127 |
EC50value of each compound was defined as the concentration (μM) for 50% maximal effect of the relative glucose consumption in insulin-induced HepG2 cells. Rosiglitazone: positive control.
Figure 6Effect of compounds 1, 3 and 7 on glucose uptake in insulin-induced HepG2 cells ( ± s, n = 4). The 2-NBDG fluorescence measured by flow cytometry.
Figure 7Effect of compounds 1, 3 and 7 on glucose uptake in insulin-induced HepG2 cells ( ± s, n = 4). (A) Compound 1 corresponding histograms of the mean fluorescence intensity of 2-NBDG; (B) Compound 3 corresponding histograms of the mean fluorescence intensity of 2-NBDG; (C) Compound 7 corresponding histograms of the mean fluorescence intensity of 2-NBDG. < 0.01, versus control group; * p < 0.05 or ** p < 0.01, versus insulin group.