| Literature DB >> 36080465 |
Junfeng Zhu1, Haiying Ding1, Like Zhong1, Wenxiu Xin1, Xiaojiao Yi2, Luo Fang1.
Abstract
Sceptridium ternatum is a herbaceous plant with significant potential for pharmaceutical and cosmetic applications. In this study, we established a spectrum-effect relationship-based strategy to investigate the bioactive basis and tissue distribution in S. ternatum. First, a phytochemical analysis on the ethanol extracts from roots, stems, and leaves of S. ternatum was performed using the colorimetric method, high-performance liquid chromatography-ultraviolet (HPLC-UV), and high-performance liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (HPLC-ESI-Q-TOF-MS/MS). Then, radical scavenging assays and the lipopolysaccharide-stimulated RAW 264.7 cell model were used to estimate the antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activities, respectively. Spectrum-effect relationship analysis and molecular docking were further employed to evaluate the correlation between the phytochemical profile and anti-inflammatory activity. Our results demonstrate that S. ternatum leaves contained the most abundant flavonoids and exerted the best biological activities. Their IC50 values for scavenging 2,2'-azino-bis (3-ethylbenzthiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) and 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl radicals were 2.43 ± 0.13 and 5.36 ± 0.54 mg/mL, respectively. In lipopolysaccharide-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells, the leaf extract caused the greatest reduction in nitric oxide production (38.15%) and interleukin-6 release (110.86%). Spectrum-effect relationship analysis and molecular docking indicated that quercetin 3-O-rhamnoside-7-O-glucoside possessed high anti-inflammatory activity by binding with interleukin-6. In conclusion, S. ternatum is a rich source of bioactive flavonoids with potential for exploitation in the prevention and treatment of oxidative stress and inflammation-related pathologies.Entities:
Keywords: Sceptridium ternatum; anti-inflammatory activity; antioxidant activity; molecular modeling; phytochemical analysis; spectrum-effect relationship
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36080465 PMCID: PMC9458115 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27175698
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.927
Extraction yields, total phenols, and total flavonoids of ethanol extracts from S. ternatum whole plants or specific organs.
| Plant Part | Yield | Total Phenols | Total Flavonoids |
|---|---|---|---|
| % | μg GA/mg Dry Extract | μg QE/mg Dry Extract | |
| Whole plants | 21.39 ± 1.05 | 20.32 ± 1.27 | 7.96 ± 0.87 |
| Roots | 17.99 ± 0.22 | 20.80 ± 0.35 b | 3.29 ± 0.19 d |
| Stems | 39.79 ± 4.93 | 14.49 ± 0.34 | 2.51 ± 0.09 |
| Leaves | 26.19 ± 2.39 | 22.24 ± 0.82 a,b | 12.87 ± 0.40 b,c |
GA: gallic acid; QE: quercetin. Data are shown as the means ± SD (n = 3). a p < 0.05 vs. roots; b p < 0.0001 vs. stems; c p < 0.0001 vs. roots; d p < 0.05 vs. stems.
Figure 1HPLC–UV chromatograms of ethanol extracts from whole plants, roots, stems, and leaves of S. ternatum.
Identification of the main phytochemicals in S. ternatum using HPLC–ESI-Q-TOF-MS/MS.
| No. | Identification | Formula | Selected Ion | Measured | Error (ppm) | MS2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | 16.188 | Quercetin 3- | C33H40O21 | [M + H]+ | 773.2142 | 0.9 | 611.1621, 465.1041, 303.0500 |
| [M − H]− | 771.1994 | 0.6 | 609.1544, 462.0839, 301.0360, 300.0283, 299.0198 | ||||
| C2 | 16.489 | Quercetin 3- | C27H30O16 | [M + H]+ | 611.1606 | −0.1 | 465.1004, 303.0486 |
| [M − H]− | 609.1461 | −0.7 | 463.0943, 462.0843, 447.0981, 301.0364, 300.0283, 299.0203 | ||||
| C3 | 16.925 | Kaempferol 3- | C39H50O25 | [M + H]+ | 919.2735 | 2.3 | 757.2162, 611.1598, 449.1068, 433.1130, 287.0541 |
| [M − H]− | 917.2578 | 1.0 | 593.1622 | ||||
| C4 | 18.026 | Kaempferol 3- | C33H40O20 | [M + H]+ | 757.2192 | 0.8 | 595.1667, 449.1080, 287.0545 |
| [M − H]− | 755.2044 | 0.5 | 593.1579, 446.0886, 285.0401, 284.0327, 283.0251 | ||||
| C5 | 22.354 | Kaempferol 3- | C39H50O24 | [M + H]+ | 903.2776 | 1.2 | 741.2276, 595.1672, 433.1132, 287.0551 |
| [M − H]− | 901.2629 | 1.1 | 755.2154, 284.0326 | ||||
| C6 | 23.036 | Kaempferol 3- | C33H40O19 | [M + H]+ | 741.2251 | 1.9 | 433.1141, 287.0552 |
| [M − H]− | 739.2095 | 0.5 | 593.1583, 430.0932, 413.0913, 285.0401, 284.0327, 283.0248 | ||||
| C7 | 24.855 | Kaempferol 3- | C57H62O29 | [M + H]+ | 1211.3524 | 6.1 | 903.2617, 763.2479, 595.1625, 455.1514, 449.1094, 419.1353, 309.0975, 287.0550 |
| [M − H]− | 1209.3324 | 1.7 | 1047.3040, 901.2650 |
Figure 2The radical scavenging ability of whole plants, roots, stems, and leaves from S. ternatum. ABTS (A) and DPPH (B) scavenging curves. The calculated IC50 values for ABTS (C) and DPPH (D). The data are shown as means ± SD (n = 3).
Figure 3Assessment of the anti-inflammatory activities of the whole plants, roots, stems, and leaves from S. ternatum. (A) RAW 264.7 cell viability detected through the CCK-8 assay. (B) NO level measurement. (C) IL-6 level measurement. The data are shown as means ± SD (n = 3). **** p < 0.0001 vs. the LPS-stimulated group.
Figure 4Spectrum-effect relationship analysis between the phytochemical profile and IL-6 level: (A) Regression coefficient. (B) VIP value.
Docking results between the main compounds in S. ternatum and IL-6.
| No. | PubChem CID | Binding Energy (kcal/mol) |
|---|---|---|
| C1 | 74978226 | −3.68 |
| C2 | 14484601 | −6.60 |
| C3 | 78100944 | −2.33 |
| C4 | 74978107 | −4.96 |
| C5 | 78100943 | −1.86 |
| C6 | 162950015 | −5.33 |
| C7 | 78100892 | −1.10 |
Figure 5(A) Correlation analysis of the binding energy and the coefficient. (B–H) Docking patterns of the seven compounds and IL-6. (B) C1; (C) C2; (D) C3; (E) C4; (F) C5; (G) C6; (H) C7.