| Literature DB >> 36119801 |
Olubayode Bamidele1, Nkiruka Chisom Okeke1, Temitope Gabriel Adedeji1,2, Lawrence Dayo Adedayo1, Akinjide Moses Akinnuga3.
Abstract
Objective: Stress is becoming an unavoidable threat in recent times, there has been increasing interest by researchers in the use of naturally occurring biologically active compounds with medicinal value to cure body ailments. The present work was carried out to investigate the effect of methanol extract of Basella alba leaves on stress in Wistar rats (Rattus norvegicus).Entities:
Keywords: Basella alba L.; antioxidant enzymes; fasting blood glucose; haematological parameters; stress
Year: 2020 PMID: 36119801 PMCID: PMC9476701 DOI: 10.1016/j.chmed.2019.11.004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chin Herb Med ISSN: 1674-6384
Fasting blood glucose in different experimental groups of forced swim stress and restraint stress rats (mean ± SEM, n = 5).
| Groups | Week 2 | Week 4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1 (normal control) | 54.4 ± 1.86 | 62.6 ± 1.21 |
| 2 (restraint control) | 106.2 ± 4.55 | 136.8 ± 5.29 |
| 3 (forced swim test control) | 114.8 ± 6.12 | 120.8 ± 4.51 |
| 4 (restraint test + | 85.2 ± 1.49 | 85.8 ± 4.90 |
| 5 (forced swim test + | 72.8 ± 1.36 | 67.6 ± 1.36 |
| 6 (restraint test + | 80 ± 3.37 | 91.4 ± 2.46 |
| 7 (forced swim test + | 82 ± 2.04 | 101.6 ± 1.72 |
P < 0.05 vs Group 1 (normal control).
P < 0.05 vs appropriate stress control.
Haematological parameters in different experimental groups of restraint stress rats (mean ± SEM, n = 5).
| Blood parameters | Week | Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 4 | Group 6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RBC (× 109L) | 2 | 6.94 ± 0.41 | 7.16 ± 0.46 | 8.14 ± 0.23 | 7.38 ± 0.19 |
| 4 | 8.14 ± 0.21 | 7.62 ± 0.33 | 7.58 ± 0.20 | 7.66 ± 0.22 | |
| PCV (%) | 2 | 42.6 ± 2.38 | 47.2 ± 2.71 | 52.2 ± 1.69 | 47.2 ± 1.49 |
| 4 | 47.2 ± 1.49 | 47.6 ± 2.25 | 45.8 ± 1.01 | 42 ± 2.02 | |
| HbC (g/100 mL) | 2 | 12.6 ± 0.42 | 12.74 ± 0.39 | 14.24 ± 0.13 | 13.12 ± 0.45 |
| 4 | 14.02 ± 0.32 | 13.48 ± 0.47 | 14.08 ± 0.29 | 13.18 ± 0.43 | |
| WBC (× 109L) | 2 | 7.8 ± 0.79 | 11.80 ± 0.36 | 10.06 ± 0.20 | 7.98 ± 0.57 |
| 4 | 11.38 ± 0.79 | 13.34 ± 0.49 | 15.60 ± 0.84 | 10.80 ± 0.75 | |
| PLATELET (× 109L) | 2 | 639.6 ± 33.07 | 1052.4 ± 47.82 | 624.6 ± 22.32 | 483.4 ± 12.57 |
| 4 | 730.4 ± 10.25 | 711.2 ± 24.11 | 690.6 ± 45.38 | 619.6 ± 8.59 |
P < 0.05 vs Group 1 (normal control).
P < 0.05 vs appropriate stress control.
Haematological parameters in different experimental group of forced swim stress rats (Mean ± SEM, n = 5).
| Blood parameters | Week | Group 1 | Group 3 | Group 5 | Group 7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RBC × 109L | 2 | 6.94 ± 0.41 | 6.42 ± 0.27 | 6.88 ± 0.23 | 7.10 ± 0.41 |
| 4 | 8.14 ± 0.21 | 7.8 ± 0.17 | 7.98 ± 0.23 | 6.84 ± 0.24 | |
| PCV (%) | 2 | 42.6 ± 2.38 | 43 ± 1.52 | 45.2 ± 1.02 | 46.6 ± 1.63 |
| 4 | 47.2 ± 1.49 | 44.2 ± 0.37 | 47.8 ± 0.86 | 45.6 ± 3.14 | |
| HbC (g/100 mL) | 2 | 12.6 ± 0.42 | 11.84 ± 0.28 | 12.62 ± 0.25 | 12.06 ± 0.25 |
| 4 | 14.02 ± 0.32 | 13.7 ± 0.24 | 14.54 ± 0.26 | 14.56 ± 1.53 | |
| WBC (× 109L) | 2 | 7.8 ± 0.79 | 10.64 ± 0.12 | 8.36 ± 0.24α | 9.24 ± 1.19 |
| 4 | 11.38 ± 0.79 | 18.82 ± 1.32 | 17.68 ± 1.49 | 17.16 ± 1.54 | |
| PLT (× 109L) | 2 | 639.6 ± 33.07 | 800.8 ± 29.58 | 694.6 ± 50.10 | 397 ± 20.12 |
| 4 | 730.4 ± 10.25 | 579 ± 28.69 | 676.4 ± 39.35 | 605.6 ± 13.63 |
P < 0.05 vs Group 1 (normal control).
P < 0.05 vs appropriate stress control.
Fig. 1Superoxide dismutase enzyme concentration in different groups of restraint stress model in rats.
*P < 0.05 vs normal control group; ΔP < 0.05 vs appropriate stress control group.
Fig. 2Superoxide dismutase enzyme concentration in the different groups of forced swim stress model in rats.
*P < 0.05 vs normal control group; ΔP < 0.05 vs appropriate stress control group.
Fig. 3Glutathione concentrations in the different groups of restraint stress model in rats.
*P < 0.05 vs normal control group; ΔP < 0.05 vs appropriate stress control group.
Fig. 4Glutathione concentration in the different groups of forced swim stress model in rats.
*P < 0.05 vs normal control group; ΔP < 0.05 vs appropriate stress control group.
Results of open field test in different experimental groups (Mean ± SEM, n = 5).
| Groups | Rearing | Line crossing | Quadrant entry | Duration in quadrant | Defecation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0 ± 1.87 | 34.6 ± 1.03 | 143 ± 0.24 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.0 ± 0.00 |
| 2 | 7.8 ± 2.35 | 28.6 ± 6.52 | 1.0 ± 0.00 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 2.4 ± 0.75 |
| 3 | 7.0 ± 1.30 | 28.6 ± 7.17 | 1.20 ± 0.20 | 1.6 ± 0.4 | 1.0 ± 0.00 |
| 4 | 7.0 ± 2.30 | 26.2 ± 5.41 | 1.2 ± 0.20 | 1.2 ± 0.2 | 1.0 ± 0.00 |
| 5 | 9.0 ± 3.83 | 36.2 ± 4.96 | 1.2 ± 0.20 | 1.2 ± 0.2 | 1.2 ± 0.20 |
| 6 | 12 ± 2.43 | 68.8 ± 5.19 | 1.4 ± 0.25 | 1.6 ± 0.60 | 1.8 ± 0.49 |
| 7 | 5.4 ± 1.96 | 35.40 ± 7.16 | 1.0 ± 0.00 | 2.0 ± 0.45 | 1.0 ± 0.00 |
P < 0.05 vs Group 1 (normal control).
P < 0.05 vs appropriate stress control.
Fig. 5A stressed rat with poor body grooming (A) and normal control rat with neat body grooming (B).