| Literature DB >> 36091586 |
Achenef Bogale1, Haile Alemayehu2, Teshome Nedi3, Ephrem Engidawork3.
Abstract
Background: Calpurnia aurea is believed to have antidiarrheal potential but with limited scientific evidence. This study aimed investigating antidiarrheal and antibacterial activity of aqueous and 80% methanol seed extracts of the plant in mice and selected diarrhea-causing bacterial strains, respectively.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36091586 PMCID: PMC9451978 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9582687
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.650
Effect of the aqueous and 80% methanol seed extracts of C. aurea on castor oil-induced diarrhea model in mice.
| Groups | Onset of diarrhea | Total stool frequency in 4 hrs | Total weight of wet diarrhea | % Inhibition of total wet fecal output | Weight of watery content of wet stools | % Inhibition of watery content of wet stool |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DW | 79.83 ± 2.78 | 9.17 ± 1.11 | 1.29 ± 0.08 | — | 0.69 ± 0.11 | — |
| L3 | 147.00 ± 2.89a1 | 2.33 ± 0.21a3 | 0.56 ± 0.09a2 | 56.59% | 0.14 ± 0.03a1 | 79.71% |
| CAW60 | 151.67 ± 19.23a2 | 3.17 ± 0.75a3 | 0.82 ± 0.21 | 36.43% | 0.38 ± 0.18 | 44.93% |
| CAW120 | 156.00 ± 22.27a2 | 2.17 ± 0.54a3 | 0.65 ± 0.17a1 | 49.61% | 0.24 ± 0.11 | 65.23% |
| CAW240 | 177.83 ± 7.67a3 | 1.83 ± 0.31a3 | 0.48 ± 0.07a2 | 62.80% | 0.11 ± 0.03a2 | 84.06 |
| CAM60 | 103.17 ± 10.08 | 2.5 ± 0.34a3 | 0.81 ± 0.15a1 | 37.21% | 0.32 ± 0.13a1 | 53.62% |
| CAM120 | 126.33 ± 20.73 | 1.67 ± 0.21a3 | 0.54 ± 0.11a3 | 58.14% | 0.18 ± 0.05a2 | 73.91% |
| CAM240 | 203.67 ± 20.77a3 | 1.17 ± 0.17a3 | 0.38 ± 0.05a3 | 70.54% | 0.11 ± 0.01a3 | 84.06% |
Values are expressed as mean ± S.E.M (n = 6), analysis was performed using one way ANOVA followed by Tuckey post hoc test. Comparison was made among different groups: acompared to control; 1p < 0.05, 2p < 0.01, 3p < 0.001. DW = distilled water, L = loperamide, CAW = C. aurea water extract, and CAM = C. aurea 80% methanol extract.
Figure 1Effects of the aqueous and 80% methanol seed extracts of C. aurea on prostaglandin-induced enteropooling (weight of intestinal content) in mice. Values are expressed as mean ± S.E.M (n = 6). Comparison was made among different groups: acompared to control; e to 240 mg/kg aqueous 1p < 0.05, 2p < 0.01, 3p < 0.001. DW = distilled water, L = loperamide, CAW = C. aurea water extract, and CAM = C. aurea 80% methanol extract.
Figure 2Effects of the aqueous and 80% methanol seed extracts of C. aurea on prostaglandin-induced enteropooling (volume of intestinal content) in mice. Values are expressed as mean ± S.E.M (n = 6). Comparison was made among different groups: acompared to control; e to 240 mg/kg aqueous 1p < 0.05, 2p < 0.01, 3p < 0.001. DW = distilled water, L = loperamide, CAW = C. aurea water extract, and CAM = C. aurea 80% methanol extract.
Effects of the aqueous and 80% methanol seed extracts of C. aurea on castor oil-induced gastrointestinal transit in mice.
| Group | Total length of small intestine (cm) | Distance moved by the charcoal meal (cm) | Peristalsis index (%) | %Inhibition |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DW | 56.00 ± 1.13 | 44.17 ± 1.33 | 79.00 ± 2.63 | — |
| L3 | 53.83 ± 1.28 | 16.67 ± 1.33a3c3 | 30.81 ± 1.96a3c3 | 62.26% |
| CAW60 | 52.67 ± 0.88 | 30.67 ± 1.98a3b3d3e3 | 58.29 ± 3.74a3b3d3e3 | 30.22% |
| CAW120 | 51.50 ± 1.45 | 18.83 ± 2.34a3c3 | 36.63 ± 4.52a3c3 | 57.37% |
| CAW240 | 54.00 ± 1.32 | 16.17 ± 1.05a3c3 | 29.82 ± 1.31a3c3 | 63.39% |
| CAM60 | 52.00 ± 1.81 | 22.17 ± 2.73a3 | 42.23 ± 3.93a3e1 | 49.81% |
| CAM120 | 55.67 ± 1.17 | 18.83 ± 2.47a3 | 34.03 ± 4.69a3 | 57.37% |
| CAM240 | 59.83 ± 1.05 | 17.17 ± 1.45a3 | 28.55 ± 2.08a3c1 | 61.13% |
Values are expressed as mean ± S.E.M (n = 6), analysis was performed using one way ANOVA followed by Tuckey post hoc test, comparison was made among different groups: acompared to control, b to standard drug, c to 60 mg/kg aqueous, d to 120 mg/kg aqueous, e to 240 mg/kg aqueous; 1p < 0.05, 2p < 0.01, 3p < 0.001. DW = distilled water, L = loperamide, CAW = C. aurea water extract, and CAM = C. aurea 80% methanol extract.
Effects of the aqueous and 80% methanol seed extracts of C. aurea on normal gastrointestinal transit in mice.
| Group | Total length of small intestine (cm) | Distance moved by the charcoal meal (cm) | Percent of transit inhibition | %Inhibition |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DW | 52.83 ± 1.76 | 35.50 ± 0.99 | 32.38 ± 3.31 | — |
| L3 | 54.00 ± 0.97 | 25.00 ± 2.88a1 | 53.70 ± 5.14a1c1 | 29.58% |
| CAW60 | 51.67 ± 1.52 | 31.83 ± 3.74 | 32.58 ± 7.93b1 | 10.34% |
| CAW120 | 51.00 ± 2.45 | 26.67 ± 1.45 | 47.65 ± 2.01 | 24.87% |
| CAW240 | 53.33 ± 0.95 | 26.50 ± 1.38 | 50.17 ± 2.90 | 25.35% |
| CAM60 | 50.83 ± 1.40 | 31.00 ± 3.48 | 38.68 ± 7.01 | 12.68% |
| CAM120 | 52.17 ± 0.70 | 26.83 ± 2.96 | 48.36 ± 5.94 | 24.42% |
| CAM240 | 53.83 ± 2.51 | 25.33 ± 2.64 | 51.70 ± 6.32 | 28.65% |
Values are expressed as Mean ± S.E.M (n = 6), analysis was performed using one way ANOVA followed by Tuckey post-hoc test, Comparison was made among different groups: a compared to control, b to standard drug, c to 60 mg/kg aqueous, 1p < 0.05, 2p < 0.01, 3p < 0.001. DW = distilled water, L = loperamide, CAW = C. aurea water extract and CAM = C. aurea 80% methanol extract.
In Vivo antidiarrhea index of aqueous and 80% methanol seed extracts of C. aurea.
| Extracts | Dose administered | Delay in defecation (time of onset in minute, dfreq (%)) | Gut meal travel distance, (Gmeq (%)) | Reduction in intestinal fluid accumulation (%) | Antidiarrheal index (ADI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aqueous extract | 60 mg/kg | 47.37 | 30.22 | 33.96 | 36.50 |
| 120 mg/kg | 48.83 | 57.37 | 50.94 | 52.26 | |
| 240 mg/kg | 55.11 | 63.39 | 67.92 | 61.91 | |
|
| |||||
| 80% methanol extract | 60 mg/kg | 22.62 | 49.81 | 39.62 | 35.47 |
| 120 mg/kg | 36.81 | 57.37 | 52.83 | 48.14 | |
| 240 mg/kg | 60.80 | 61.13 | 62.26 | 61.39 | |
|
| |||||
| Loperamide | 3 mg/kg | 45.69 | 62.26 | 49.06 | 51.87 |
Values are expressed as % inhibition of different parameters of different models and the combined effect is calculated as ADI.
Antibacterial effects of aqueous and 80% methanol seed extracts of C. aurea using disk diffusion techniques.
| Zone of inhibition | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name of bacterial strain | |||||
| Category of test | Concentration |
|
|
|
|
| Methanol extract | 1000 mg/ml | 12.7 ± 0.17 | 11.57 ± 0.09 | 9.50 ± 0.18 | 9.20 ± 0.06 |
| 500 mg/ml | 11.54 ± 0.34 | 10.00 ± 0.06 | — | 8.70 ± 0.1 | |
| 250 mg/ml | 9.9 ± 0.06 | 7.5 ± 0.01 | — | 8.00 ± 0.15 | |
| 125 mg/ml | 9.51 ± 0.11 | 7.25 ± 0.13 | — | 7.34 ± 0.09 | |
| Cipro5 | 28 ± 0.15 | 26.00 ± 0.15 | 28.00 ± 0.17 | 27.00 ± 0.1 | |
|
| |||||
| Aqueous extract | 1000 mg/ml | — | 8.73 ± 0.09 | — | 8.70 ± 0.15 |
| 500 mg/ml | — | 7.7 ± 0.02 | — | 7.30 ± 0.15 | |
| 250 mg/ml | — | 6.48 ± 0.14 | — | — | |
| 125 mg/ml | — | — | — | — | |
Values are expressed as Mean ± S.E.M (n = 3). The negative control showed no antibacterial activity = positive control, cipro = ciprofloxacin, — = no activity, The values are the average of triplicate tests. ATCC—American type culture collection, E. coli = Escherichia coli, S. aureus = Staphylococcus aureus, S. soni = Shigella soni, S. typhimurium = Salmonella typhimurium.
Antibacterial effects of both aqueous and 80% methanol seed extracts of C. aurea using microdilution techniques.
| Minimum inhibitory concentration and minimum bactericidal concentration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Organism | Methanol extract | Aqueous extract | ||
| MIC | MBC | MIC | MBC | |
|
| 500 mg/ml | 1000 mg/ml | — | — |
|
| 500 mg/ml | 1000 mg/ml | 1000 mg/ml | — |
|
| 250 mg/ml | 500 mg/ml | 500 mg/ml | 1000 mg/ml |
|
| 1000 mg/ml | — | — | — |
MIC—minimum inhibitory concentration, MBC—minimum bactericidal concentration, the values are the average of triplicate tests. ATCC—American type culture collection. — = no activity.