| Literature DB >> 35966725 |
Walid Sabri Hamadou1, Nouha Bouali1, Riadh Badraoui1,2,3, Ramzi Hadj Lajimi4,5, Assia Hamdi6, Mousa Alreshidi1,7, Mitesh Patel8, Mohd Adnan1, Arif Jamal Siddiqui1, Emira Noumi1,9, Visweswara Rao Pasupuleti10,11, Mejdi Snoussi1,12.
Abstract
In consideration of the emergence of novel drug-resistant microbial strains and the increase in the incidences of various cancers throughout the world, honey could be utilized as a great alternative source of potent bioactive compounds. In this context, this study pioneers in reporting the phytochemical profiling and the antimicrobial, antioxidant, and anticancer properties of Acacia honey (AH) from the Hail region of Saudi Arabia, assessed using in vitro and molecular docking approaches. The phytochemical profiling based on high-resolution liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (HR-LCMS) revealed eight compounds and three small peptide-like proteins as the constituents. The honey samples exhibited promising antioxidant activities (DPPH-IC50 = 0.670 mg/mL; ABTS-IC50 = 1.056 mg/mL; β-carotene-IC50 > 5 mg/mL). In the well-diffusion assay, a high mean growth inhibition zone (mGIZ) was observed against Staphylococcus aureus (48.33 ± 1.53 mm), Escherichia coli ATCC 10536 (38.33 ± 1.53 mm), and Staphylococcus epidermidis ATCC 12228 (39.33 ± 1.15 mm). The microdilution assay revealed that low concentrations of AH could inhibit the growth of almost all the evaluated bacterial and fungal strains, with the minimal bactericidal concentration values (MBCs) ranging from 75 mg/mL to 300 mg/mL. On the contrary, high AH concentrations were required to kill the tested microorganisms, with the minimal bactericidal concentration values (MBCs) ranging from approximately 300 mg/mL to over 600 mg/mL and the minimal fungicidal concentration values (MFCs) of approximately 600 mg/mL. The AH exhibited effective anticancer activity in a dose-dependent manner against breast (MCF-7), colon (HCT-116), and lung (A549) cancer cell lines, with the corresponding IC50 values of 5.053 μg/mL, 5.382 μg/mL, and 6.728 μg/mL, respectively. The in silico investigation revealed that the observed antimicrobial, antioxidant, and anticancer activities of the constituent compounds of AH are thermodynamically feasible, particularly those of the tripeptides (Asp-Trp-His and Trp-Arg-Ala) and aminocyclitol glycoside. The overall results highlighted the potential of AH as a source of bioactive compounds with significant antimicrobial, antioxidant, and anticancer activities, which could imply further pharmacological applications of AH.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35966725 PMCID: PMC9371847 DOI: 10.1155/2022/1518511
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.650
Phytochemical compounds identified by the HR-LCMS technique in AH from Hail region.
| No | Compound name | Chemical class | RT | MW | Chemical formula | [ | [ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 6-(alpha-D-Glucosaminyl)-1D-myo-inositol | Aminocyclitol glycosides | 0.929 | 341.1312 | C12 H23 N O10 | — | 342.1385 |
| 2 | L-Gulonate | Sugar acid | 1.062 | 196.0579 | C6 H12 O7 | 195.0507 | — |
| 3 | Pro-Arg | Dipeptide | 1.223 | 271.1647 | C11 H21 N5 O3 | — | 294.1539 |
| 4 | Anabasamine | Alkaloid | 1.666 | 253.1543 | C16 H19 N3 | — | 276.1435 |
| 5 | Bakankoside | Glycoside | 3.038 | 357.144 | C16 H23 N O8 | — | 380.133 |
| 6 | Asp-Trp-His | Tripeptide | 3.922 | 456.1732 | C21 H24 N6 O6 | — | 457.1808 |
| 7 | Trp-Arg-Ala | Tripeptide | 12.066 | 431.230 | C20 H29 N7 O4 | 432.237 | |
| 8 | Palmitic amide | Fatty acid amide | 17.145 | 255.2559 | C16 H33 N O | — | 256.263 |
| 9 | Stearamide | Fatty acid amide | 18.765 | 283.287 | C18 H37 N O | — | 284.2942 |
| 10 | 10,16-Heptadecadien-8-ynoic acid, 7-hydroxy, (E) | Fatty acid | 20.188 | 278.1935 | C17 H26 O3 | 277.1865 | — |
| 11 | 14-Fluoro-myristic acid | Fatty acid | 27.191 | 246.2011 | C14 H27 F O2 | 291.1997 | — |
Note. RT: retention time (mn); MW: molecular weight (g/mol); [m/z]−: mass-to-charge ratio in negative ionization mode; [m/z]+: mass-to-charge ratio in positive ionization mode.
Figure 1Chemical structure of eleven phytochemical compounds and small peptides identified in Acacia honey by using HR-LCMS technique.
Growth inhibition zone values expressed in mm of Acacia honey tested against bacteria, yeast, and molds strains using well-diffusion assay.
| Bacteria tested | Dilution tested | Ampicillin (10 mg/ml) | |||
| 25% | 50% | 75% | 100% | ||
| GIZ ± SD | GIZ ± SD | GIZ ± SD | GIZ ± SD | GIZ ± SD | |
|
| |||||
|
| 9.67 ± 0.58f | 11.00 ± 1.00h | 12.67 ± 0.58f | 14.00 ± 100f | 6.00 ± 0.00h |
|
| 20.67 ± 0.58d | 24.33 ± 1.53d | 26.00 ± 2.65d | 31.33 ± 1.15c | 31.00 ± 1.00c |
|
| 23.33 ± 1.15c | 27.00 ± 1.00c | 30.00 ± 2.00c | 39.33 ± 1.15b | 27.33 ± 1.15e |
|
| 9.33 ± 1.15f | 12.00 ± 1.00h | 14.33 ± 0.58f | 14.33 ± 1.15f | 28.67 ± 1.15d |
|
| 9.33 ± 0.58f | 13.33 ± 1.15g | 14.00 ± 1.00f | 15.33 ± 1.15e | 6.00 ± 0.00h |
|
| 29.00 ± 1.00b | 32.67 ± 2.08b | 37.33 ± 1.15b | 38.33 ± 1.53b | 31.67 ± 0.58c |
|
| 31.33 ± 1.15a | 35.00 ± 1.00a | 43.00 ± 1.00a | 48.33 ± 1.53a | 39.33 ± 1.154b |
|
| 15.00 ± 1.00e | 18.33 ± 1.53f | 25.33 ± 1.15d | 31.00 ± 1.00c | 50.67 ± 1.154a |
|
| 7.67 ± 0.58g | 9.33 ± 1.15i | 14.00 ± 1.00f | 13.00 ± 1.00f | 6.67 ± 0.58h |
|
| 6.00 ± 0.00h | 6.00 ± 0.00j | 6.00 ± 0.00g | 6.00 ± 0.00g | 21.00 ± 1.00f |
|
| 6.00 ± 0.00h | 13.00 ± 1.00g | 14.67 ± 1.15f | 17.00 ± 1.00d | 12.67 ± 0.58g |
|
| 14.00 ± 1.00e | 20.67 ± 0.58e | 23.00 ± 1.00e | 29.67 ± 1.53c | 26.00 ± 1.00e |
|
| |||||
| Yeasts and molds tested | Dilution tested | Amphotericin B (10 mg/ml) | |||
| 25% | 50% | 75% | 100% | ||
| GIZ ± SD | GIZ ± SD | GIZ ± SD | GIZ ± SD | GIZ ± SD | |
|
| |||||
|
| 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 14.00 ± 0.00a |
|
| 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00a | 14.00 ± 1.00a | 18.67 ± 1.15a | 7.67 ± 1.54d |
|
| 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 13.00 ± 1.00a |
|
| 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 12.00 ± 1.00b |
|
| 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 7.33 ± 0.57d |
|
| 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 11.00 ± 0.00c |
|
| 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00a | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 6.00 ± 0.00b | 6.00 ± 0.00e |
: growth inhibition zone ± standard deviation (expressed in mm); the letters (a–h) indicate a significant difference according to the Duncan test (p < 0.05).
Figure 2Antimicrobial activity of Acacia honey. (a) P. aeruginosa (clinical strain, SP-40), (b) S. epidermidis ATCC 12228 as compared to ampicillin (10 mg/ml), and (c) S. cerevisiae as compared to amphotericin B (10 mg/ml).
MICs, MBCs/MFCs expressed in mg/ml, and MBCs/MIC, MFC/MIC ratio of Acacia honey tested against bacteria, yeast, and molds using microdilution assay.
| Test systems |
| (BHT) | (AA) |
|
| |||
| Tested microorganisms |
| MBC/MIC ratio | |
| MIC | MBC | ||
|
| |||
|
| 150 | 300 | 2 |
|
| 75 | 600 | 8 |
|
| 75 | 600 | 8 |
|
| 150 | 300 | 2 |
|
| 75 | 300 | 4 |
|
| 150 | 300 | 2 |
|
| 150 | 300 | 2 |
|
| 75 | 600 | 8 |
|
| 75 | 300 | 4 |
|
| 300 | 600 | 2 |
|
| 150 | >600 | >4 |
|
| 300 | 600 | 2 |
|
| |||
| Tested microorganisms |
| MFC/MIC ratio | |
| MIC | MFC | ||
|
| |||
|
| 150 | 600 | 4 |
|
| 150 | >600 | >4 |
|
| 300 | >600 | >2 |
|
| 150 | >600 | >4 |
|
| 150 | >600 | >4 |
Antioxidant activities of Acacia honey sample as compared to butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) and ascorbic acid (AA).
| Test systems |
| (BHT) | (AA) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total flavonoids content (mg QE/g) extract) | 0.400 ± 0.053c | — | — |
| Total tannins content (mg TAE/g) extract) | 5.352 ± 0.964 b | — | — |
| Total phenols content (mg GAE/g) extract) | 6.546 ± 0.876a | — | — |
| DPPH IC50 (mg/ml) | 0.670 ± 0.015c | 0.023 ± 3 × 10−4 | 0.022 ± 5 × 10−4 |
| ABTS-IC50 (mg/ml) | 1.065 ± 0.116c | 0.018 ± 4 × 10−4 | 0.021 ± 0.001 |
|
| 5b | 0.042 ± 3.5 × 10−3 | 0.017 ± 0.001 |
The letters (a–c) indicate a significant difference between the different antioxidant methods according to the Duncan test (p < 0.05). Data are presented as mean ± SD.
Figure 3Effect of the Acacia honey cytotoxicity on breast (MCF-7), lung (A549), and colon (HCT-116) cancer cell lines according to concentration variation. Error bars indicate SEM (standard error of the mean) of three independent experiments. Significance; ns > 0.05, p < 0.05, p < 0.005, p < 0.0005.
Binding affinity of the identified compounds in honey (1–11) with the different targeted receptors (1JIJ, 2XCT, 2QZW, 1HD2, 4UYA, 1JNX, and 4BBG).
| No | Compounds | Binding affinity (kcal × mol−1) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1JIJ | 2XCT | 2QZW | 1HD2 | 4UYA | 1JNX | 4BBG | ||
| 1 | 6-(alpha-D-Glucosaminyl)-1D-myo-inositol | −11.0 | −7.7 | −8.0 | −7.7 | −7.9 | −7.1 | −7.8 |
|
| L-Gulonate | −7.8 | −5.6 | −6.5 | −5.6 | −6.3 | −5.8 | −7.3 |
|
| Pro-Arg | −8.1 | −6.7 | −7.3 | −6.0 | −6.8 | −6.1 | −6.4 |
|
| Anabasamine | −9.4 | −6.6 | −7.9 | −6.4 | −6.9 | −6.2 | −6.3 |
|
| Bakankoside | −9.0 | −7.0 | −8.7 | −6.6 | −6.8 | −6.5 | −7.6 |
|
| Asp-Trp-His | −8.9 | −6.8 | −8.2 | −6.4 | −7.4 | −6.1 | −7.7 |
|
| Trp-Arg-Ala | −5.7 | −4.4 | −5.2 | −4.0 | −4.4 | −4.5 | −4.1 |
|
| Palmitic amide | −6.7 | −5.3 | −6.0 | −5.3 | −5.0 | −4.4 | −4.9 |
|
| Stearamide | −6.5 | −4.3 | −5.1 | −4.9 | −4.7 | −4.5 | −6.0 |
|
| 10,16-Heptadecadien-8-ynoic acid, 7-hydroxy, (E) | −6.8 | −5.3 | −5.9 | −5.1 | −5.6 | −4.0 | −4.4 |
|
| 14-Fluoro-myristic acid | −5.9 | −4.7 | −4.8 | −4.5 | −4.5 | −3.8 | −4.2 |
Conventional hydrogen-bonding, the number of closest interacting residues and distance to closest interacting residue (Å) of the compound with best scores (1, 5, and 6) with the different targeted receptors (1JIJ, 2XCT, 2QZW, 1HD2, 4UYA, 1JNX, and 4BBG).
| No. | Chemical structure | Receptor | Conventional H-bonds | No. closest interacting residues | Closest interacting residue | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Residue | Distance (Å) | |||||
| 1 |
| 1JIJ | 4 | 6 | Thr75 | 1.864 |
| 2XCT | 4 | 6 | Met1113 | 2.617 | ||
| 2QZW | 5 | 6 | Arg192 | 2.088 | ||
| 1HD2 | 7 | 4 | Arg86 | 2.139 | ||
| 4UYA | 7 | 7 | Gly346 | 1.987 | ||
| 1JNX | 6 | 6 | Glu1836 | 2.028 | ||
| 4BBG | 5 | 6 | Arg221 | 2.154 | ||
|
| ||||||
| 5 |
| 1JIJ | 12 | 12 | Asp195 | 2.037 |
| 2XCT | 6 | 9 | Ser1098 | 2.334 | ||
| 2QZW | 9 | 7 | Thr222 | 2.179 | ||
| 1HD2 | 9 | 7 | Asn76 | 1.818 | ||
| 4UYA | 4 | 5 | Asp289 | 1.877 | ||
| 1JNX | 7 | 5 | Gly1710 | 2.079 | ||
| 4BBG | 8 | 8 | Ser235 | 2.180 | ||
|
| ||||||
| 6 |
| 1JIJ | 9 | 11 | Asp177 | 1.891 |
| 2XCT | 11 | 5 | Gly1111 | 1.912 | ||
| 2QZW | 10 | 12 | Thr222 | 1.840 | ||
| 1HD2 | 9 | 5 | Leu140 | 2.072 | ||
| 4UYA | 7 | 6 | Phe290 | 2.422 | ||
| 1JNX | 11 | 8 | Arg1753 | 2.020 | ||
| 4BBG | 10 | 11 | Ala218 | 1.956 | ||
Figure 43D illustrations of the selected honey compounds (5 and 6), which possessed the highest binding scores and the targeted receptors (a); the corresponding closest 3D interactions for compounds nos. 5 (b) and 6 (c).
Figure 52D diagrams of the closest interactions exhibited by the complexes compound 5-1JIJ (a) and compound 6-1JNX (b), which showed the most significant molecular interactions.
Figure 63D illustrations of the selected honey compounds (5 and 6), which possessed the highest binding scores and the targeted receptors (a); the corresponding closest 3D interactions for compounds nos. 5 (b) and 6 (c).