| Literature DB >> 36005528 |
Zhao Feng1, Xuexia Zhang1, Jingwan Wu1, Chengwen Wei1, Ting Feng1, Dongdong Zhou1, Zhenchang Wen1, Jing Xu1.
Abstract
Three new cytochalasins, phomoparagins A-C (1-3), along with five known analogs (4-8), were isolated from Phomopsis asparagi DHS-48, a mangrove-derived endophytic fungus. Their structures, including their absolute configurations, were elucidated using a combination of detailed HRESIMS, NMR, and ECD techniques. Notably, 1 possessed an unprecedented 5/6/5/8/5-fused pentacyclic skeleton. These compounds were tested for their inhibitory activity against concanavalin A (ConA)/lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced spleen lymphocyte proliferation and calcineurin (CN) enzyme. Several metabolites (2 and 4-6) exhibited fascinating inhibitory activities with a relatively low toxicity. Furthermore, 2 was demonstrated to inhibit ConA-stimulated activation of NFAT1 dephosphorylation and block NFAT1 translocation in vitro, subsequently inhibiting the transcription of interleukin-2 (IL-2). Our results provide evidence that 2 may, at least partially, suppress the activation of spleen lymphocytes via the CN/NFAT signaling pathway, highlighting that it could serve as an effective immunosuppressant that is noncytotoxic and natural.Entities:
Keywords: CaN/NFAT signaling pathway; Phomopsis sp.; cytochalasins; immunosuppressive activity; mangrove endophytic fungi
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36005528 PMCID: PMC9409992 DOI: 10.3390/md20080526
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mar Drugs ISSN: 1660-3397 Impact factor: 6.085
Figure 1Structures of the isolated Compounds 1–8.
1H NMR data (δ) for 1–3 in CD3OD (400 MHz) (δ in ppm, J in Hz).
| No. | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | |||
| 3 | 3.30, m | 3.43, q (5.0) | 3.32, m |
| 4 | 2.64, m | 2.76, d (6.9) | 2.67, m |
| 5 | 2.65, m | 2.53, m | 2.70, m |
| 6 | |||
| 7 | 4.13, d (9.8) | 4.19, d (8.3) | 3.90, d (11.1) |
| 8 | 2.19, t (10.0) | 1.98, m | 2.87, m |
| 9 | |||
| 10 | 2.76, dd (13.2, 5.7) | 2.84, dd (12.6, 4.9) | 2.83, m |
| 11 | 0.73, d (6.1) | 0.59, d (6.9) | 0.65, d (6.3) |
| 12 | 5.13, s | 4.97, s | 5.09, s |
| 13 | 1.52, m | 3.19, q (10.9) | 3.19, brs |
| 14 | 4.19, t (9.7) | 4.65, t (9.0) | 3.34, d (2.4) |
| 15 | 2.36, d (13.5) | 1.87, dt (14.2, 8.7) | 2.31, dd (12.5, 6.9) |
| 16 | 1.49, m | 2.13, m | 1.95, m |
| 17 | 1.95, m | 2.58, m | 2.86, m |
| 18 | |||
| 19 | 5.28, brs | 5.55, d (7.1) | 5.18, d (6.0) |
| 20 | 2.68, m | 2.50, m | |
| 21 | 2.99, d (2.4) | 3.71, d (5.0) | 5.53, s |
| 22 | 0.95, d (6.7) | 1.01, d (7.0) | 0.94, d (6.8) |
| 23 | 1.74, s | 1.78, s | 1.80, s |
| 24 | |||
| 25 | 1.99, s | ||
| 1′ | |||
| 2′, 6′ | 7.22, d (7.1) | 7.28, d (7.2) | 7.23, d (7.2) |
| 3′, 5′ | 7.30, t (7.2) | 7.30, t (7.6) | 7.25, d (7.2) |
| 4′ | 7.24, t (6.4) | 7.21, t (6.8) | 7.24, d (6.4) |
13C NMR data (δ) for 1–3 in CD3OD (100 MHz) (δ in ppm, J in Hz).
| No. | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 179.1, C | 181.9, C | 179.1, C |
| 3 | 54.5, CH | 54.5, CH | 54.0, CH |
| 4 | 47.6, CH | 44.4, CH | 47.1, CH |
| 5 | 33.4, CH | 31.5, CH | 33.1, CH |
| 6 | 150.9, C | 153.4, C | 152.5, C |
| 7 | 76.0, CH | 74.1, CH | 72.8, CH |
| 8 | 41.9, CH | 53.4, CH | 38.2, CH |
| 9 | 53.8, C | 58.0, C | 52.7, C |
| 10 | 44.9, CH2 | 43.9, CH2 | 45.0, CH2 |
| 11 | 13.1, CH3 | 13.4, CH3 | 13.0, CH3 |
| 12 | 113.4, CH2 | 111.8, CH2 | 113.7, CH2 |
| 13 | 42.5, CH | 47.7, CH | 47.5, CH |
| 14 | 76.8, CH | 80.7, CH | 73.2, CH |
| 15 | 44.4, CH2 | 41.3, CH2 | 42.3, CH2 |
| 16 | 33.5, CH | 32.0, CH | 35.2, CH |
| 17 | 43.4, CH2 | 38.9, CH2 | 37.5, CH2 |
| 18 | 138.9, C | 136.0, C | 138.1, C |
| 19 | 128.5, CH | 129.1, CH | 123.2, CH |
| 20 | 43.4, CH | 54.4, CH | 137.9, C |
| 21 | 75.6, CH | 83.1, CH | 120.1, CH |
| 22 | 25.4, CH3 | 24.8, CH3 | 22.1, CH3 |
| 23 | 27.7, CH3 | 27.2, CH3 | 28.2, CH3 |
| 24 | 173.1, C | ||
| 25 | 21.9, CH3 | ||
| 1′ | 138.7, C | 139.4, C | 138.9, C |
| 2′,6′ | 131.1, CH | 130.8, CH | 131.0, CH |
| 3′,5′ | 129.5, CH | 129.4, CH | 129.5, CH |
| 4′ | 127.7, CH | 127.5, CH | 127.7, CH |
Figure 2Key COSY and HMBC correlations of Compounds 1–3.
Figure 3Key NOESY correlations of Compounds 1–3.
Figure 4Experimental and calculated electronic circular dichroism (ECD) spectra of 1–3.
Figure 5Plausible biogenetic relationship of isolated compounds.
Immunosuppressive activities of isolated compounds a.
| Compound | IC50 (μM) b | |
|---|---|---|
| ConA-Induced T-Cell Proliferation | LPS-Induced B-Cell Proliferation | |
| 2 | 21.6 ± 1.7 | 78.5 ± 1.3 |
| 4 | 32.8 ± 2.4 | 144.9 ± 2.2 |
| 5 | 31.2 ± 2.5 | 154.4 ± 0.4 |
| 6 | 11.2 ± 0.3 | 102.8 ± 1.1 |
| cyclosporin A c | 4.4 ± 0.0 | 25.1 ± 0.4 |
a Compound 1, 3, 7–8 were inactive (IC50 > 200 μM). b Data are presented as mean ± SD from three separate experiments. c Positive control.
Cytotoxicity data of immunosuppressive compounds a.
| Cell Line | Compound | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 4 | 5 | 6 | CsA | Cytochalasin D | |
| murine splenocytes | 111.7 ± 1.1 | 373.7 ± 3.3 | 84.4 ± 0.3 | 42.17 ± 1.7 | 10.9 ± 0.8 | 1.0 ± 0.0 |
a Results are expressed as IC50 values of mean ± SD (n = 7) in μM.
Figure 6The effect of 2 on calcineurin activity (A). Effects of 2 on the expression of ConA-induced NFAT1 protein and analyzed by Western blot (B). Effects of 2 on the expression of ConA-induced NFAT protein and analyzed by Western blot (C). Effect of 2 in ConA-induced mouse T lymphocytes on IL-2 mRNA expression by q-PCR (D) and IL-2 secretion by ELISA (E). Molecular docking analysis of the binding of 2 to calcineurin (F). ** p < 0.01 compared to the stimulated group. ## p < 0.01 compared to the control group.
Figure 7Schematic view of 2 acting on the CN/NFAT signaling pathway.