| Literature DB >> 35956506 |
Salama A Salama1,2, Zarraq E Al-Faifi3, Yasser A El-Amier4.
Abstract
The biggest challenges are locating effective, reasonably priced, and eco-friendly compounds to treat diseases caused by insects and microbes. The aim of this study was to employ GC-MS to assess the biological potency and chemical composition of the aerial parts of Reichardia tingitana (L.) Roth. Using this technique, 17 components were interpreted from the extracted plant, accounting for around 100% of total volatile compounds. Commonly, 6,10,14-trimethylpentadecan-2-one (21.98%) and methyl oleate (27.26%) were positioned as the major components, which were ascertained after 19.25, and 23.34 min, respectively. The major components were classified as hydrocarbons (23.82%), fatty acids, esters of fatty acids (57.46%), steroids (17.26%), and terpenes (1.48%). The DPPH antioxidant activity of the R. tingitana extracted components revealed that the shoot extract is the most powerful, with an IC50 value of 30.77 mg L-1 and a radical scavenging activity percentage of 71.91%. According to the current result, methanolic extract of R. tingitana had the maximum zone of inhibition against Salmonella typhimurium and Bacillus cereus (25.71 ± 1.63 and 24.42 ± 0.81 mm, respectively), while Clostridium tetani and Staphylococcus xylosus were the main resistant species. In addition, the 50% methanol crude shoot extract of R. tingitana showed greater potential anticancer activity with high cytotoxicity for two tumor cells HepG-2 and PC3 cells (IC50 = 29.977 and 40.479 µg mL-1, respectively) and noncytotoxic activity for WI-38 normal cells (IC50 = >100 µg mL-1). The MeOH extract of plant sample was more effective against Aedes aegypti larvae with LC50 of extract being 46.85, 35.75, and 29.38 mg L-1, whereas the LC90 is 82.66, 63.82, and 53.30 mg L-1 for the various time periods of 24, 48, and 72 h, respectively. R. tingitana is a possible biologically active plant. Future study will include pure chemical isolation and individual component bioactivity evaluation.Entities:
Keywords: Aedes aegypti; GC-MS; R. tingitana; biological activity; chemical components; tumor cells
Year: 2022 PMID: 35956506 PMCID: PMC9370821 DOI: 10.3390/plants11152028
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1Chromatogram and structures of main components of the methanol extract of R. tingitana shoot by GC-MS.
The characterized chemical components were isolated from the extracted shoots of R. tingitana.
| No. | RT a | Conc. % b | Compound | Molecular Weight | Molecular Formula |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hydrocarbons | |||||
| 1 | 13.56 | 1.84 ± 0.04 | 5,5,8a-trimethylhexahydro-2H-chromen-4a(5H)-yl acetate | 240.34 | C14H24O3 |
| 2 | 19.25 | 21.98 ± 0.22 | 6,10,14-trimethylpentadecan-2-one | 268.49 | C18H36O |
| Fatty Acid and Esters | |||||
| 3 | 16.62 | 2.16 ± 0.05 | (E)-octadec-9-enoic acid | 282.47 | C18H34O2 |
| 4 | 17.92 | 1.44 ± 0.03 | Ethyl (9Z,12Z)-octadeca-9,12-dienoate | 308.51 | C20H36O2 |
| 5 | 19.08 | 1.13 ± 0.02 | Oleic acid | 282.47 | C18H34O2 |
| 6 | 19.67 | 1.16 ± 0.02 | Isobutyl octadecyl phthalate | 474.73 | C30H50O4 |
| 7 | 20.6 | 3.29 ± 0.07 | Methyl palmitate | 270.46 | C17H34O2 |
| 8 | 21.68 | 14.85 ± 0.18 | Palmitic acid | 256.43 | C16H32O2 |
| 9 | 23.34 | 27.26 ± 0.24 | Methyl oleate | 296.5 | C19H36O2 |
| 10 | 23.74 | 1.06 ± 0.02 | Methyl stearate | 298.51 | C19H38O2 |
| 11 | 24.31 | 3.56 ± 0.06 | (Z)-octadec-11-enoic acid | 282.47 | C18H34O2 |
| 12 | 33.5 | 1.55 ± 0.03 | 2-hydroxypropane-1,3-diyl (9E,9′E)-bis(octadec-9-enoate) | 621 | C39H72O5 |
| Steroids | |||||
| 13 | 18.4 | 1.75 ± 0.04 | Estra-1,3,5(10)-trien-17α-ol | 256.39 | C18H24O |
| 14 | 34.45 | 1.31 ± 0.02 | Ethyl 3,7,12-trihydroxycholan-24-oate | 436.63 | C26H44O5 |
| 15 | 35.39 | 6.63 ± 0.05 | 3,7,12-trihydroxycholan-24-oic acid | 408.58 | C24H40O5 |
| 16 | 35.7 | 7.57 ± 0.08 | Stigmast-5-en-3-ol, (3α)- | 414.72 | C29H50O |
| Terpene | |||||
| 17 | 17.59 | 1.48 ± 0.02 | Corymbolone (4a-hydroxy-4,8a-dimethyl-6-(prop-1-en-2-yl) octahydronaphthalen-1(2H)-one) | 236.36 | C15H24O2 |
| Total | 100.0 | ||||
a retention time, b average concentration of three replications ± standard deviation.
Figure 2Chemical structure of the major identified compounds in the MeOH extract of R. tingitana.
Figure 3The categorized chemical constitutes identified from the extracted R. tingitana by GC-MS analysis.
Radical scavenging activity percent (%), and IC50 values (mg L−1) at various concentrations of the methanol extracted of R. tingitana and the standard ascorbic acid by DPPH assay.
| Treatment | Conc. (mg L−1) | Radical Scavenging Activity (%) | IC50 (mg L−1) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 5 | 8.32 ± 0.42 F | 30.77 |
| 10 | 23.84 ± 1.64 E | ||
| 20 | 42.27 ± 2.37 D | ||
| 30 | 51.61 ± 2.88 C | ||
| 40 | 62.33 ± 3.20 B | ||
| 50 | 71.91 ± 3.72 A | ||
| LSD0.05 | 1.62 *** | ||
| Ascorbic acid | 1 | 2.81 ± 0.01 F | 12.02 |
| 2.5 | 11.38 ± 0.03 E | ||
| 5 | 38.57 ± 0.19 D | ||
| 10 | 47.92 ± 0.51 C | ||
| 15 | 61.34 ± 1.42 B | ||
| 20 | 72.61 ± 1.55 A | ||
| LSD0.05 | 1.40 *** |
Values are average (n = 3) ± standard deviation. LSD0.05 expressed the calculated least of the smallest significance between two means, as each test was run on those two means (calculated by Factorial ANOVA). Different superscript letters within each treatment (column) express significant variation at a probability level of 0.05 (Duncan’s test). ***: significant at p ≤ 0.001.
Antibacterial activity of the methanol extract from the aerial parts of R. tingitana and some selected reference antibiotics at a concentration of 10 mg mL−1.
| Microbes | Standard Antibiotic (10 mg L−1) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cephradin | Tetracycline | Azithromycin | Ampicillin | ||
| Gram-Negative Bacteria | |||||
|
| 22.85 ± 0.87 B | 17.81 ± 0.82 D | 20.34 ± 0.71 BC | 20.45 ± 0.51 B | 20.51 ± 0.73 C |
|
| 11.36 ± 0.44 E | 0.00 F | 0.00 F | 14.56 ± 0.63 C | 0.00 F |
|
| 25.71 ± 1.63 A | 0.00 F | 12.82 ± 0.54 D | 9.35 ± 0.07 D | 0.00 F |
|
| 15.13 ± 0.51 D | 12.08 ± 0.42 E | 20.17 ± 0.68 C | 13.75 ± 0.49 C | 8.03 ± 0.09 E |
| Gram-Positive bacteria | |||||
|
| 24.42 ± 0.81 AB | 20.33 ± 0.55 BC | 12.09 ± 0.50 D | 19.44 ± 0.42 B | 10.62 ± 0.42 D |
|
| 9.25 ± 0.04 F | 0.00 F | 8.54 ± 0.05 E | 0.00 D | 10.51 ± 0.27 D |
|
| 18.62 ± 0.64 C | 21.82 ± 0.57 B | 22.77 ± 0.61 AB | 20.08 ± 0.91 B | 30.67 ± 1.92 A |
|
| 13.66 ± 0.32 D | 25.60 ± 1.31 A | 23.63 ± 1.58 A | 23.74 ± 0.87 A | 22.07 ± 1.37 C |
|
| 10.54 ± 0.51 E | 19.73 ± 0.98 C | 21.15 ± 1.65 ABC | 22.81 ± 0.69 A | 25.32 ± 1.51 B |
| LSD0.05 | 0.0001 *** | 0.0001 *** | 0.0001 *** | 0.0001 *** | 0.0001 *** |
Value is the diameter of the inhibition zone (mm) as an average of three replications ± standard error. Different superscript letters within each treatment (column) express significant variation at a probability level of 0.05 (Duncan’s test). LSD: least significant difference. *** p < 0.001.
Cytotoxic activity and the IC50 values of the R. tingitana MeOH extract against the tumor and normal cells at different concentrations, and doxorubicin as standard. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HePG-2), human prostate cancer (PC3), and normal cell (WI-38).
| Samples | Conc. (µg mL−1) | In Vitro Cytotoxicity (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HePG-2 | PC3 | WI-38 | ||
|
| 100 | 93.14 | 91.41 | 9.55 |
| 50 | 88.34 | 81.62 | 8.33 | |
| 25 | 85.07 | 75.31 | 5.58 | |
| 12.5 | 68.52 | 58.22 | 3.67 | |
| 6.25 | 50.59 | 41.72 | 1.48 | |
| 3.125 | 38.99 | 25.38 | 1.32 | |
| 1.56 | 25.62 | 22.93 | 0.95 | |
| IC50 | 29.977 | 40.479 | >100 | |
| Doxorubicin | 100 | 63.15 | 70.07 | 12.23 |
| 50 | 54.03 | 46.83 | 9.52 | |
| 25 | 49.58 | 37.61 | 6.31 | |
| 12.5 | 41.39 | 32.42 | 4.98 | |
| 6.25 | 34.56 | 24.27 | 3.32 | |
| 3.125 | 23.14 | 14.65 | 2.45 | |
| 1.56 | 6.47 | 3.87 | 1.13 | |
| IC50 | 5.274 | 8.303 | >100 | |
IC50: inhibitory concentration (µg): 1–10 (very strong), 11–20 (strong), 21–50 (moderate), 51–100 (weak), and above 100 (noncytotoxic).
Figure 4IC50 values of the tested plant sample and doxorubicin as standard against human cancer cells.
Larvicidal effect of the methanol extract from the aerial parts of R. tingitana on 3rd larval instar of A. aegypti.
| Conc. (mg L−1) |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 24 h Post-Treatment | 48 h Post-Treatment | 72 h Post-Treatment | |
| 300 | 32.54 ± 1.41 A | 41.28 ± 2.03 A | 50.81 ± 2.37 A |
| 250 | 28.33 ± 1.23 A | 31.51 ± 1.39 B | 42.17 ± 1.83 AB |
| 200 | 18.16 ± 0.79 B | 29.37 ± 1.25 B | 34.62 ± 1.44 BC |
| 150 | 11.32 ± 0.42 C | 19.09 ± 0.83 C | 28.06 ± 1.07 C |
| 100 | 6.35 ± 0.31 CD | 10.13 ± 0.44 CD | 15.74 ± 0.52 D |
| Control | 1.05 ± 0.05 D | 1.05 ± 0.05 D | 1.05 ± 0.05 E |
| F-value | 166.13 *** | 110.75 *** | 142.10 *** |
| <0.0001 *** | <0.0001 *** | <0.0001 *** | |
| LC50 | 46.85 | 35.75 | 29.38 |
| LC90 | 82.66 | 63.82 | 53.30 |
Mortality was expressed as mean ± SE (standard error) of 3 replicates. LC50: median lethal concentration; LC90: lethal concentration. Different superscript letters within each treatment (column) express significant variation; *** all F-values are significant at p ≤ 0.001 (Duncan’s test).
Figure 5Reichardia tingitana (L.) Roth plant. (a) Overview of the growing herb, (b,c) close view of vegetative stage and flowering branch.