1. Introduction
Physiological phenomena, such as respiration, metabolism and immune system defense mechanisms, are important for the proper functioning of living organisms through which reactive oxygen species (ROS) are released. Their increased production could lead to disruption of redox signaling, molecular damage, mutations, cell death, and oxidative damage to macromolecules, such as DNA, proteins, and lipids. This damage could result in many diseases, including age-related disorders, cancer, atherosclerosis, and neurodegenerative diseases [1]. Moreover, ROS maintains inflammation by inducing the expression of genes that code for proteins involved in the production of inflammatory mediators [2,3]. Inflammation is a dynamic physiological process of defense, consisting of a set of vascular, cellular, and humoral reactions to eliminate the aggressor agent, cleanse cellular debris, repair damaged tissue, and restore homeostasis. This acute inflammation is manifested by redness, heat, pain, and swelling of the infected area. However, when it persists, it can lead to multiple general biological and clinical effects as altered general condition, combining asthenia, anorexia, fever, sleep disturbance, and cachexia with muscle wasting [4]. In addition, inflammation can be associated with changes in the three-dimensional structure of proteins following exposure to heat or chemicals. This leads to an activation of neutrophils and an overproduction of lysosomal constituents, such as bactericidal enzymes and proteases [5,6].
One of the most appropriate models for studying anti-inflammatory activities in vivo is that of oedema induction with carrageenan. Carrageenan induces acute and local inflammation characterized by an increase in the level of oxidative stress markers (neutrophil-derived free radicals and nitric oxide), proinflammatory mediators (histamine, prostaglandins etc., and proinflammatory cytokines/chemokines) in the body [7]. Overproduction of these mediators is strongly implicated in the pathogenesis of several chronic diseases, including diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, neurodegenerative diseases, alcoholic liver disease, chronic kidney disease, cancer, and aging [8]. Enzymatic and nonenzymatic antioxidant systems are part of the multiple mechanisms of the human body involved in protection from cellular damage due to reactive oxygen species (ROS) [9]. However, the innate defense may fail in the face of prolonged oxidative stress.
In addition, conventional therapies recommend the uses of analgesic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (SAIDs), and opioids. However, the side effects caused by long-term use of antioxidants [butylated hydroxyl anisole (BHA) and butylated hydroxyltoluene (BHT)] and synthetic anti-inflammatory drugs (Aspirin, sodium diclofenac, indomethacin, Paracetamol) motivate the scientific community to search for alternative therapeutic solutions [10]. Natural antioxidants are particularly important because they are harmless, low cost and abundant in many plant sources [11]. Thus, medicinal plants are increasingly exploited for this purpose because most of the pharmacological substances and active compounds used to combat the above-mentioned diseases and to produce medicines are of natural origin. They do so through their ability to inhibit the formation of free radicals. Equally, several scientific works have highlighted the anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activities of extracts and pure compounds (phenolics, flavonoids, such as cynaroside) isolated from medicinal plants, such as Libidibia ferrea, Curcuma longa; Spirulina plantensis, Camellia sinensis Elsholtiza bodinieri [12,13,14,15,16,17], and some Ficus species [18,19].
F. umbellata Vahl (Moraceae) is a plant used in Cameroonian pharmacopoeia in the management of certain physiological disorders related to menopause [20]. Previous studies have revealed that F. umbellata extracts possess antiestrogenic and estrogenic effects in vitro on estrogen receptor (ER) expressing cells and in vivo on estrogen primary targets organs, respectively [21]. In addition, methanolic extracts of F. umbellata showed cytotoxic potential on breast cancer cell lines and an in vivo antitumor activity in ovarian cancer model in Wistar rats [22]. Therefore, the present study was conducted to evaluate the antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activities of Ficus umbellatta aqueous and methanolic extracts.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Chemical Reagents and Drugs
Diclofenac sodium and ibuprofen were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich GmbH, Sternheim, Germany. The reagents used for antioxidant assays were purchased from GIBCO (Grand Island, NY, USA).
2.2. Plant Material Harvest and Pre-Treatment
The barks of F. umbellatta Vahl (Moraceae) were harvested at Yaoundé (Centre region, Cameroon). The geographical coordinates indicate 32 N0778863, E0428160_23 m (“GARMIN” GPS). The plant material was then authenticated at the National Herbarium of Cameroon in comparison to the voucher specimen N°99/HNC. The botanical sample was then cut into small pieces and after that air-dried at room temperature and ground.
2.3. Preparation of Extracts
2.3.1. Preparation of Aqueous Extract
One portion of Ficus umbellata powder (2.7 kg) was macerated in distilled water (10 L) for 24 h at room temperature and filtered using Whatman paper N°4. The aqueous filtrate of F. umbellata (FUAq) was lyophilized obtaining 229.8 g, corresponding to an 8.5% yield.
2.3.2. Preparation of Methanolic Extract
Ficus umbellata powder (2 kg) was macerated in methanol 99% in proportions 1:4 for 72 h and filtered using Whatman paper N°4. Then, the filtrate was concentrated using rotary evaporator (40 °C, 337 mbar) and dried at room temperature to obtain 162 g of the methanolic extract (FUMeoH) yielding 8.1%.
2.4. In vitro Antioxidant Assays
Antioxidant activity was determined based on the DPPH, ABTS, TAC (Total Antioxidant Capacity), and FRAP (Ferrous Reducing Antioxidant Power) assays.
2.4.1. DPPH Scavenging Activity
The DPPH scavenging activity of F. umbellata extracts was assessed as described by Alam et al. [23]. Briefly, in a 96-well microplate; 100 µL of sample was introduced and serially diluted from an initial concentration of 15 mg/mL. The 100 µL of freshly prepared DPPH solution was added in each well. The blank sample consisted of 100 µL of methanol and 100 µL of methanolic DPPH solution. The control consisted of the sample dilution solvent and the DPPH solution. All samples were performed three times in darkness at 25 °C, and the absorbance was read at 517 nm in a microplate reader (Tecan Pro 200, Tecan Trading AG, Männedorf, Switzerland) every 15 min for 1 h. Gallic acid was used as positive control and the percentage of the DPPH radical scavenging was determined using the equation given below: (%) = [(Ac − At)/Ac] × 100, where Ac is the absorbance of the control and At is the absorbance of the sample.
2.4.2. ABTS Scavenging Activity
The scavenging activity of F. umbellata extracts on ABTS radical cation was carried out as described by Re et al. [24] with slight modifications. Briefly, in a 96-well microplate; 100 µL of ABTS solution was added to 100 µL of serial dilution samples from an initial concentration of 1 mg/mL. The samples was then stirred and incubated at room temperature in the dark and optical density was read at 734 nm in a microplate reader (Tecan Pro 200, Tecan Trading AG, Männedorf, Switzerland) every 15 min for 1 h against a blank consisting of 100 µL of ethanol solution and 100 µL of samples. The percentage of the ABTS radical scavenging was determined as above. (%) = [(Ac − At)/Ac] × 100, where Ac is the absorbance of the control reaction and At is the absorbance in the presence of the sample.
2.4.3. Total Antioxidant Capacity (TAC)
The Phosphomolybdenum method has been used to determine the total antioxidant capacity as reported by Prieto et al. [25]. Briefly, in eppendorf tubes, 100 µL of samples were mixed to 1 mL of a solution consisting of 0.6 M sulfuric acid, 28 mM phosphate sodium, and 4 mM molybdate ammonium. The mixture was incubated for 90 min at 95 °C in a water bath. The operation was done in triplicate and optical density was read at 695 nm in a microplate reader against a blank. The results are expressed as equivalence of ascorbic acid per milligrams of dry weight.
2.4.4. Ferrous Reducing Antioxidant Power (FRAP)
Ficus umbellata extracts reducing power of Fe3+ to Fe2+ was assessed as described by Benzie and Strain [26]. In microplates, 50 µL of extracts, (concentration of 1 mg/mL) was introduced and then 1950 µL of FRAP solution (40 mM of 2,4,6-tripyridyl-s-triazine in HCl, 20 Mm FeCl3, and 300 mM acetate buffer at pH 3.6) were added. Blank solutions were made of FRAP solution and solvent. Incubation was done in darkness for 30 min and absorbance was measured at 593 nm. All analyses were done in triplicate. The results were expressed in microgram of test extract as equivalent of ascorbic acid per milligram of dry mass (µg EAA/mg).
2.5. Anti-Inflammatory Assays
The in vitro anti-inflammatory activity of F. umbellata extracts was assessed by evaluating their capability to protect the murine erythrocyte cell membrane against heat [27] and inhibit the denaturation of proteins [28].
2.5.1. Preparation of Red Blood Cell Suspension
Ten milliliters of freshly collected rat blood were introduced in heparinized tubes. After centrifugation (2500× g; 30 min), the solution was washed three times with equal volumes of normal saline. The blood’s final volume was measured and reconstituted with normal saline to achieve a 10% v/v suspension.
2.5.2. Induction of Hemolysis by Heat
The test tubes containing 2 mL of reaction mixture consisted of 1 mL extracts of F. umbellatta at concentrations ranging between 0.125 to 2 mg/mL; 1 mL of phosphate buffer 0.15 M (pH 7.4) and 0.5 mL of 10% erythrocyte suspension were heated (56 °C; 30 min). The ibuprofen was used as a reference drug. The mixture was cooled, centrifuged (2500 g; 20 min), and the absorbance of the supernatants was read at 560 nm. The experiment was performed in triplicate. The percentages of the membrane stabilization activity were determined as below: Inhibition of hemolysis (%) = [(Acontrol − Atest)/Acontrol] × 100.
2.5.3. Protein Denaturation Assay
In test tubes were added successively, 1 mL of samples at different concentrations (0.125–2 mg/mL), 0.1 mL of albumin from fresh chicken eggs, and 1.9 mL of phosphate buffered saline (PBS, pH 6.4). Diclofenac sodium at the same concentrations was used as a reference drug. After incubation (37 °C; 20 min) and heating (70 °C; 5 min), the test tubes were cooled and the optical density was read against distilled water, at 660 nm, as blank. The inhibition percentages were calculated as below: % Inhibition = [(Atest − Acontrol)/Acontrol] × 100.
2.5.4. κ- Carrageenan Induced Acute Inflammation
The experimental design was composed of four (04) groups of five Wistar rats, each rat weighing between 150 and 200 g. A solution of 0.1 mL of 1% κ-carrageenan suspended in saline was injected in the left hind paw of each rat to induce acute inflammation. The rats were pre-treated with either sterile (0.9% NaCl w/v, s.c) FU50 and FU200 (50 and 200 mg/kg, p.o.) or diclofenac sodium (5 mg/kg, p.o.) as a reference 1 h prior to carrageenan injection. The handling of animals was in accordance with the guidelines and procedures of animal bioethics of the Cameroon Institutional National Ethic Committee (CEE Council 86/609), which adopted all procedures recommended by the European Union on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. The paw volume of rats was measured by a plethysmometer (Ugo Basile, Varese, Italy) at zero time and then 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 h after injection of carrageenan [29]. The variations of paw volume are expressed as percentages using the formula below: [(Vc − Vt)/Vc] × 100; where Vc and Vt represent the mean increase in paw volume of the control and treated groups, respectively.
2.6. Statistical Analysis
The data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation. The effects of FUAq and FUMeOH were assessed using One-way and Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The differences between group pairs were performed using the post hoc test of Tukey and Bonferroni. All analyses were performed with GraphPad Prism 5.0 (San Diego, CA, USA). p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
3. Results
3.1. Antioxidant Activities
3.1.1. DPPH Scavenging Activity
F. umbellata extracts exhibited a DPPH scavenging activity in a concentration-dependent manner.
Concerning FUaq, it appears that the percentages of inhibition increase significantly up to 7.5 mg/mL and then drop to 15 mg/mL. FUaq thus exerts a dose-dependent antiradical activity at a given time with a peak of activity at the concentration of 7.5 mg/mL, while FUMeOH exhibited a dose-dependent DPPH antiradical activity at a given time with a peak activity observed at 3.75 mg/mL (Table 1). These results are confirmed by the IC50 values, which vary from 0.60 to 0.76 mg/mL for FUMeOH and from 0.82 to 0.76 mg/mL for FUaq. However, these activities are significantly lower than that of the gallic acid standard, with IC50 values ranging from 1.67 to 1.74 µg/mL.
3.1.2. ABTS Scavenging Activity
Similarly, FUaq and FUMeOH exhibited dose and time-dependent ABTS antiradical activities at the tested concentrations (0.0019 to 0.125 mg/mL). The highest activities were observed at 0.125 mg/mL, regardless of incubation time, with approximately 100% of scavenging (Table 2). However, the results are not time-dependent at higher concentrations. These activities are also shown by the IC50 values, which vary from 1.40 to 0.62 mg/Trolox dry weight (Dw) but remain significantly lower than those of gallic acid whose IC50 = 32.33 µM/Trolox Dw.
3.1.3. Total Antioxidant Capacity (TAC)
In this study, the aqueous and methanolic extracts of F. umbellatta showed total antioxidant activity with 389.50 ± 2.66 and 734.98 ± 4.51 µg EAA/mg DW, respectively (Table 3).
3.1.4. Ferrous Reducing Antioxidant Power (FRAP)
Regarding the ferrous reducing antioxidant power, both extracts of F. umbellata, exhibited the ability to reduce ferric ions with 166.99 ± 14.50 and 223.72 ± 8.63 µg EAA/mg DW for FUaq and FUMeOH, respectively (Table 4).
3.2. In Vitro Anti-Inflammatory Activities
3.2.1. Erythrocyte Membrane Stabilization
The effects of F. umbellatta extracts on the hemolysis of murine red blood cells are shown in Table 5. At the tested concentrations (0.125–2 mg/mL), Ficus umbellatta extracts have stabilized the murine red blood cell membranes within the range of 33.04 ± 3.92% to 23.69 ± 0.13% and 30.91 ± 2.39% to 34.17 ± 2.17% for FUaq and FUMeOH, respectively. These activities were less important compared to ibuprofen used as standard with percentages of 47.83 ± 2.46% to 93.52 ± 0.84 for concentrations ranging from 0.125 to 2 mg/mL.
3.2.2. Inhibition of Albumin Denaturation
Table 6/Figure 1 revealed the effects of F. umbellatta extracts on albumin-induced denaturation. At the tested concentrations, FUaq and FUMeOH exhibited an inhibitory capacity of protein denaturation ranging from 59.85 ± 2.25% to 62.27 ± 1.68% and from 60.18 ± 1.54% to 64.39 ± 2.86%, respectively. However, no significance was observed between both extracts, and their effects were significantly lower compared to sodium diclofenac (72.14 ± 1.37% at 0.125 mg/mL) used as a reference drug.
3.3. In Vivo Anti-Inflammatory Activities
In this study, the injection of carrageenan solution induced edema in hind paw leading to the vascular phase of inflammation. The pre-treatment of rats with diclofenac sodium (5 mg/kg) and methanolic extract of F. umbellatta at doses 50 and 200 mg/kg significantly prevented the development of paw oedema over time, respectively, at 2, 3, 4, and 3 h after carrageenan administration (Table 7). No significant differences have been observed between Ficus umbellata extract’s activities and Diclo 5 during experimentation at t = 5 h. These results suggested antiedematous effects of methanolic extracts of F. umbellatta at different stages of acute inflammation.
4. Discussion
The current article focused on the antiradical, antioxidative and anti-inflammatory activities of F. umbellata. DPPH (2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl) is a stable free radical whose electrons can delocalize and form free radicals that do not dimerize from one another; leading to its visible discoloration from purple to yellow and absorption at 517 nm. So, DPPH assay is one of the most adequate methods to assess antioxidant activities of various natural substances in vitro because of its fastness, reliability, and reproducibility [30,31,32]. The DPPH reactivity in the presence of F. umbellata extracts carried out in this study consisted of tracking the inactivation of the DPPH radical by the different extracts over time by recording the absorbance every 15 min for 60 min. The DPPH and ABTS radical scavenging abilities are mainly based on the electron transfer ability of Ficus umbellata’s antioxidant components. Several works have highlighted the DPPH and ABTS antiradical activities of ethanolic and methanolic aqueous extracts of leaves, fruits, barks, and roots of medicinal plants, such as Cassia species, Olive tree, Citrus species, Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntz, Ficus bengalensis L., Ficus racemosa L. and Ficus carica [18,19,33,34,35]. Methanolic extract have exhibited stronger scavenging activities than aqueous extract at the tested concentrations. This could be due to its richness in phenol compounds more specifically flavonoids and flavonols, as shown by [22]. This variability in phenol compound content and antiradical activities in both extracts is due to the polarity of the different compounds toward water and methanol [36]. In addition, it is well known that phenol compound content is closely related to free radical scavenging activities [33,37,38].
The total antioxidant capacity assay of Ficus umbellatta extracts revealed that FUMeOH exhibited higher capacity than FUaq, confirming that aqueous and alcoholic extracts of some Ficus varieties have been shown to possess high total antioxidant activity [37,39,40]. The high total antioxidant capacity of FUMeOH is correlated to its high content in secondary metabolites, such as flavonoids, flavonols, and alkaloids [20]. These are able to donate electrons to transform reactive species into non-reactive and more stable compounds [41].
Ferrous ions are involved in many physiological processes leading to the production and accumulation of free radicals in the body causing much damage. Therefore, the ferrous reducing antioxidant power of an extract or a pure compound could be of a great importance to alleviate neurodegenerative disorders, metabolic diseases, anemias, cardiovascular diseases, and cancers [42]. Nowadays, it has been clearly shown that extracts from Ficus species are also endowed with ferrous reducing antioxidant power [19,39]. Murugan et al. [43] revealed the strong ferrous reducing antioxidant power of extracts from Osbeckia parvifolia. These results suggest that some bioactive compounds from F. umbellata extracts as phenol compounds are able to reduce ferrous metal ions, which could be connected to the type of functional groups from their structure. Polyphenolic compounds, such as flavanols and flavonoids, have been recognized as strong ferrous reducing antioxidant power [35,38]. Previous studies which aimed at evaluating the antioxidant potential of species from Ficus genus have demonstrated strong antioxidant power comparable to controls with either scavenging activities or reducing potential [39,44]. EC50 values of 9.06 ± 2.21 μg/mL and 369.19 ± 12.04 μg/mL were obtained from Ficus sur fruits and leaves, respectively [44]. With the DPPH assay, EC50 ranging between 210.3 ± 3.22 and 358.3 ± 2.05 µg/mL were obtained from six Ficus species [45]. This difference in activity with regard to the present study could be due to the difference in the part/organs of the plant been used and the geographical region where the plants were collected; both factors influence the type and relative abundance of secondary metabolites present.
Generally, during biological phenomena in human beings, such as metabolism and respiration, free radicals and reactive oxygen species are yielded. However, their excessive production causes oxidation of macromolecules (proteins, lipids, proteins), and DNA damage, which are strongly involved in the pathogenesis of most chronic diseases, such as atherosclerosis, neurodegenerative diseases, angiocardiopathy, and cancers [46,47]. Natural antioxidants can help to fight against these deleterious effects by preventing and avoiding oxidation of biomolecules and regulating the immune system. The increased production of ROS triggers a cascade of reactions leading to the onset of an inflammatory response that can be chronic and lead to pathologies mentioned above, hence it is necessary to assess the anti-inflammatory activities of aqueous and methanolic extracts of F. umbellata.
The exposure of cells to such chemicals as methyl salicylate, phenyl hydrazine, hypotonic solutions, or heat, provokes hemoglobin oxidation and hemolysis [48]. On the other hand, free radicals, such as lipid peroxides and superoxides are responsible for cell membrane destabilization. Flavonoids are polyphenolic compounds that are effective scavengers of these free radicals. Thus, we can postulate that these polyphenolic compounds found in Ficus umbellata extracts could be responsible for the membrane stabilizing effect observed in this study. This protective effect against heat-induced hemolysis of F. umbellatta extracts noticed in this study suggests their ability to protect the plasma membrane against lysis and then of lysosomal membranes because of their structural similitudes. The mechanism involved for the maintenance of cell life is the inhibition of releasing serum proteins because they can activate neutrophils and extend the inflammatory response for a long time [49].
F. umbellatta extracts have shown the antidenaturing activity of egg albumin at concentrations ranging from 0.125 to 2 mg/mL. These results corroborate those of Dharmadeva et al. [50] who extracted Ficus racemosa L. from bark at concentrations ranging from 0.01 μg/mL to 0.1 μg/mL. Murugan et al. [43] have shown that the methanol extracts of O. parvifolia at 1 mg/mL concentration significantly protected the albumin denaturation and lysis of erythrocyte membrane induced by hypotonic solution, which is comparable to the standard Diclofenac sodium. In fact, protein denaturation occurred very often in an uncontrolled or prolonged activation of inflammation leading to dangerous alterations, such as production of autoantigens associated with type III hypersensitivity reactions and autoimmune diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis. The denaturation results from the disruption of electrostatic, hydrogen, hydrophobic, and disulfide bonds that maintain the three-dimensional structure of proteins [51]. The inhibitory activity of F. umbellatta extracts are probably due to their chemical composition because phenol compounds could interact with two sites present in some proteins, such as ovalbumin of tyrosine-, threonine- and lysine-rich bonds. Therefore, F. umbellatta extracts could protect protein denaturation by inhibiting the release of autoantigens in living organisms.
Chemical external stimuli, such as carrageenan, leads to a two-phase inflammatory reaction, since carrageenan is a phlogogenic substance. The initial or early phase lasting 90 min after injection of carrageenan is characterized by the release of serotonin, histamine, and bradykinin. After injection of carrageenan, the late phase can last up to 5 h and it is characterized by infiltration of neutrophil and prostaglandin release, mediated by cyclooxygenases. These mediators increase capillary permeability and thus forms an exudate responsible for the oedema that also compresses the nerves and causes the sensation of pain [52]. In this case, FU200 exhibited the strongest antiedematous activity 5 h after injection of carrageenan. Similar observations were made by Mehta et al., 2013 after administration of ethanolic extracts form aerial parts of Cassia species in carrageenan induced paw oedema in Wistar albino rats. Different extracts of Ficus species have also demonstrated high antiedematous activity in rodents [40]. In addition, Almeida et al. [12] have reported the in vivo anti-inflammatory activities of several extracts related to Libidibia ferrea organs’ medicinal plant. Thus, the antiedematous effects of methanolic extracts from F. umbellata could be helpful to attenuate the delirious effects of an acute inflammation.
5. Conclusions
In summary, this study provides experimental evidence that aqueous and methanolic extracts of F. umbellata endow free radical scavenging, total antioxidant capacity, and ferrous reducing power, in a dose-dependent manner. They also exhibit protective effects against hemolysis of murine erythrocyte membranes induced by heat and denaturation of proteins at concentrations ranging from 0.125 to 2 mg/mL. Moreover, methanolic extract of F. umbellata at 200 mg/kg has presented a strong in vivo anti-inflammatory response in a carrageenan induced paw oedema model. Further studies on other models are necessary to validate methanolic extracts of F. umbellata as a potential antioxidative and anti-inflammatory agent.
Conceptualization, K.K.S., S.Z. and D.N.; methodology, K.K.S., M.T.K.S., A.V.D.B. and A.B.C.; resources, R.M.D. and D.N.; investigation, K.K.S., M.T.K.S., A.V.D.B. and A.B.C.; writing—original draft preparation, K.K.S. and M.T.K.S.; review and editing, R.M.D. and S.Z.; supervision, R.M.D. and D.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
The study was conducted in accordance with the principles and procedures of the European Union Animal Care (CEE Council 86/609) guidelines adopted by the Cameroon Institutional National Ethics Committee (Reg. number FWA-IRD 0001954).
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Authors thank “Dunarea de Jos” University, Romania and the Eugen-Ionescu fellowship (2020) for the material and technical support through which part of this work was achieved.
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Enlarge this image.Figure 1. Inhibitory effects of sodium diclofenac and F. umbellatta extracts on albumin denaturation. FUMeoH: Ficus umbellata methanolic extract; FUAq: Ficus umbellata aqueous extract. Data are presented as the means ± SD of denaturation inhibition percentage of three independent experiments. Values with different letters are significantly different from each other at a given concentration. Significance at p < 0.05.
DPPH scavenging activity of F. umbellatta extracts.
| % Scavenging | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time | 15 min | 30 min | 45 min | 60 min | |||||
| Conc (mg/mL) | FUMeoH | FUAq | FUMeoH | FUAq | FUMeoH | FUAq | FUMeoH | FUAq | |
| 15 | 96.20 ± 0.84 | 92.96 ± 2.52 | 96.16 ± 0.88 | 90.83 ± 2.96 | 95.91 ± 0.88 | 91.67 ± 2.51 | 95.62 ± 0.92 | 91.33 ± 3.01 | |
| 7.5 | 95.89 ± 0.37 a | 140.21 ± 4.61 b | 95.87 ± 0.402 a | 141.72 ± 7.04 b | 95.65 ± 0.36 a | 143.33 ± 7.17 b | 95.40 ± 0.38 a | 146.65 ± 7.24 b | |
| 3.75 | 94.66 ± 0.42 c | 117.49 ± 2.59 d | 95.61 ± 0.29 c | 119.46 ± 2.55 d | 95.57 ± 0.21 c | 121.14 ± 2.53 d | 95.40 ± 0.27 c | 124.22 ± 2.41 d | |
| 1.87 | 73.10 ± 1.09 e | 101.98 ± 3.15 f | 76.79 ± 1.14 e | 110.18 ± 4.91 f | 78.30 ± 1.28 e | 111.35 ± 6.03 f | 78.88 ± 1.3 e | 114.80 ± 6.25 f | |
| 0.937 | 57.46 ± 2.85 g | 68.12 ± 1.04 h | 59.43 ± 3.08 g | 72.22 ± 1.88 h | 59.27 ± 3.29 g | 77.74 ± 1.79 h | 55.35 ± 3.5 g | 79.87 ± 3.15 h | |
| 0.468 | 49.67 ± 0.82 | 41. 30 ±1.19 | 50.51± 0.88 | 44.34 ± 0.99 | 49.13 ± 0.96 | 44.48 ± 0.31 | 47.17 ± 1.61 | 46.25 ± 1.08 | |
| 0.234 | 44.64 ± 1.8 i | 23.52 ± 0.09 j | 44.45 ± 1.93 i | 22.64 ± 0.23 j | 42.40 ± 2.06 i | 21.22 ± 0.17 j | 39.49 ± 2.16 i | 18.35 ± 0.19 j | |
| 0.117 | 37.13 ± 0.48 k | 15.77 ± 1.22 l | 36.16 ± 0.43 k | 14.26 ± 1.28 l | 33.12 ± 0.45 k | 10.53 ± 1.25 l | 29.3 ± 0.51 k | 5.74 ± 1.35 l | |
FUMeoH: Ficus umbellata methanolic extract; FUAq: Ficus umbellata aqueous extract. Values are average of three independent experiments and represent mean ± standard deviation. Values with different letters for a given time and concentration of extracts are significantly different from each other. Significance at p < 0.05.
ABTS scavenging activity of Ficus umbellata extracts.
| % Scavenging | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conc (mg/mL) | 15 min | 30 min | 45 min | 60 min | ||||
| FUMeoh | FUAq | FUMeoH | FUAq | FUMeoH | FUAq | FUMeoH | FUAq | |
| 0.125 | 101.98 ± 0.177 | 101.63± 2.30 | 102.04 ± 0.19 | 105.28 ± 28 | 102.11 ± 0.18 | 105.69 ± 0.55 | 103.5 ± 0.29 | 105.22 ± 5.38 |
| 0.062 | 95.27 ± 0.64 | 97.07 ± 1.12 | 96.98 ± 0.68 | 98.24 ± 1.06 | 98.18 ± 0.77 | 99.37 ± 1.08 | 98.28 ± 1.26 | 99.98 ± 1.53 |
| 0.0312 | 81.95± 1.91 | 84.068 ± 0.92 | 82.69 ± 2.23 | 84.19 ± 1.05 | 83.43 ± 2.71 | 84.26 ± 1.23 | 73.22 ± 5.41 | 73.83 ± 1.85 |
| 0.0156 | 72.84 ± 0.95 a | 78.73 ± 0.155 b | 71.67 ± 0.96 a | 78.20 ± 0.2 b | 71.25 ± 1.2 a | 77.21 ± 0.39 b | 50.95 ± 2.27 | 59.33 ± 0.52 |
| 0.0078 | 68.36 ± 0.48 c | 73.48 ± 0.90 d | 67.22 ± 1.12 c | 73.23 ± 0.68 d | 66.71 ± 1.43 c | 72.58 ± 0.48 d | 43.41 ± 2.92 | 53.05 ± 0.93 |
| 0.0039 | 65.02 ± 0.36 e | 71.64 ± 0.08 f | 62.75 ± 0.43 e | 70.66 ± 0.07 f | 61.56 ± 0.39 e | 69.65 ± 0.06 f | 33.55 ± 0.76 a | 46.94 ± 0.15 b |
| 0.0019 | 65.48 ± 1.66 | 66.83 ± 0.51 | 63.60 ± 2.27 | 65.69 ± 0.57 | 62.69 ± 2.72 | 64.73 ± 0.74 | 35.86 ± 5.32 | 38.78 ± 1.35 |
FUMeoH: Ficus umbellata methanolic extract; FUAq: Ficus umbellata aqueous extract. Values are average of three independent experiments and represent mean ± standard deviation. Values with different letters for a given time and concentration of extracts are significantly different from each other. Significance at p < 0.05.
Total antioxidant capacity of F. umbellata extracts.
| Extracts | µg Eq AA/mg DW |
|---|---|
| FUMeOH | 734.98 ± 4.51 a |
| FUAq | 389.50 ± 2.66 b |
FUMeoH: Ficus umbellata methanolic extract; FUAq: Ficus umbellata aqueous extract; µg Eq AA/mg DW: microgram equivalent of ascorbic acid per milligram of dry weight. Values are average of three independent experiments and represent mean ± standard deviation. The superscript letter indicates significance at p < 0.05.
Ferrous Reducing Antioxidant Power of F. umbellata extracts.
| Extracts | µg Eq AA/mg DW |
|---|---|
| FUMeOH | 223.72 ± 8.63 a |
| FUAq | 166.99± 14.5 b |
FUMeoH: Ficus umbellata methanolic extract; FUAq: Ficus umbellata aqueous extract; µg Eq AA/mg DW: microgram equivalent of ascorbic acid per milligram of dry weight. Values are average of three independent experiments and represent mean ± standard deviation. The superscript letter indicates significance at p < 0.05.
Inhibitory effects of ibuprofen and F. umbellatta extracts on hemolysis of erythrocytes membrane.
| % Inhibition of Hemolysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration (µg/mL) | Ibuprofene | FUMeoH | FUAq |
| 0.125 | 47.83 ± 2.46 a | 34.17 ± 2.17 b | 33.04 ± 3.92 b |
| 0.25 | 59.27 ± 1.39 c | 33.008 ± 1.57 d | 38.31 ± 1.48 d |
| 0.5 | 75.13 ± 0.314 e | 30.026 ± 2.06 f | 37.08 ± 2.31 g |
| 1 | 92.048 ± 0.71 h | 37.85 ± 1.7 i | 31.44 ± 0.71 j |
| 2 | 93.52 ± 0.84 k | 30.91 ± 2.39 l | 23.69 ± 0.13 m |
FUMeoH: Ficus umbellata methanolic extract; FUAq: Ficus umbellata aqueous extract; data are presented as the means of three independent experiments and represent mean ± SD of hemolysis inhibition percentage. Values with different letters for a given concentration are significantly different from each other. significance at p < 0.05.
Inhibitory effects of sodium diclofenac and F. umbellatta extracts on albumin denaturation.
| % Inhibition of Denaturation | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration | Sodium Diclofenac | FUMeOH | FUAq |
| 0.125 | 72.14 ± 1.37 a | 60.18 ± 1.54 b | 59.85 ± 2.25 b |
| 0.25 | 70.52 ± 1.48 c | 60.79 ± 0.93 d | 60.57 ± 1.93 d |
| 0.5 | 74.11 ± 1.73 e | 60.99 ± 1.95 f | 62.81 ± 2.35 f |
| 1 | 73.73 ± 1.35 g | 61.09 ± 0.52 h | 59.99 ± 2.52 h |
| 2 | 74.17 ± 1.32 i | 64.39 ± 2.86 j | 62.27 ± 1.68 j |
FUMeoH: Ficus umbellata methanolic extract; FUAq: Ficus umbellata aqueous extract. Data are presented as the means ± SD of denaturation inhibition percentage. Values with different letters are significantly different from each other at a given concentration. Significance at p < 0.05. Values are average of three independent experiments and represent mean ± SD. The different superscript letters mean significance at p < 0.05.
Effects of sodium diclofenac and F. umbellatta extracts on carrageenan induced acute inflammation.
| % Inhibition of Paw Edema | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Time (h) | Diclo5 | FU 50 | FU 200 |
| 0.5 | 28.68 ± 2.31 | 27.56 ± 2.16 | 33.75 ± 1.74 |
| 1 | 46.41 ± 2.85 | 47.88 ± 2.69 | 51.88 ± 0.94 |
| 2 | 56.93 ± 2.98 | 48.75 ± 2.52 * | 56.13 ±1.09 |
| 3 | 66.31 ± 2.29 | 51.51 ± 2.92 *** | 55.06 ± 1.51 ** |
| 4 | 70.77 ± 1.00 | 58.81 ± 2.51 ** | 68.02 ± 1.64 |
| 5 | 72.98 ± 7.51 | 66.24 ± 1.28 | 71.16 ± 1.72 |
Data are presented as the means ± SD of edema inhibition percentage. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001 compared to the positive control. Diclo5: positive control (animals treated with diclofenac sodium at 5 mg/kg + 0.9% NaCl p.o.); FU50: animals treated with the methanolic extract of F. umbellatta at 50 mg/kg + 0.9% NaCl p.o.; FU200: animals treated with the methanolic extract of F. umbellatta at 200 mg/kg + 0.9% NaCl p.o.
References
1. Diaz, P.; Jeong, S.C.; Lee, S.; Khoo, C.; Koyyalamudi, S.R. Antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activities of selected medicinal plants and fungi containing phenolic and flavonoid compounds. Chin. Med.; 2012; 7, 26. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-8546-7-26] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23176585]
2. Halliwell, B.; Whiteman, M. Measuring reactive species and oxidative damage in vivo and in cell culture: How should you do it and what do the results mean?. Br. J. Pharmacol.; 2004; 142, pp. 231-255. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjp.0705776] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15155533]
3. Jones, D.P. Redefining oxidative stress. Antioxid. Redox Signal.; 2006; 8, pp. 1865-1879. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1089/ars.2006.8.1865]
4. Chen, L.; Deng, H.; Cui, H.; Fang, J.; Zuo, Z.; Deng, J.; Li, Y.; Wang, X.; Zhao, L. Inflammatory responses and inflammation-associated diseases in organs. Oncotarget; 2018; 9, pp. 7204-7218. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.23208] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29467962]
5. Leelaprakash, G.; Dass, S.M. In vitro anti-inflammatory activity of methanol extract of Enicostemma axillare. Int. J. Drug Dev. Res.; 2011; 3, pp. 189-196.
6. Rajendran, V.; Lakshmi, K.S. In vitro and in vivo anti-inflammatory activity of leaves of Symplocosco chinchinensis (Lour) Moore. Bangladesh J. Pharmacol.; 2008; 3, pp. 121-124.
7. Mansouri, M.T.; Hemmati, A.A.; Naghizadeh, B.; Mard, S.A.; Rezaie, A.; Ghorbanzadeh, B. A study of the mechanisms underlying the anti-inflammatory effect of ellagic acid in carrageenan-induced paw edema in rats. Indian J. Pharmacol.; 2015; 47, pp. 292-298.
8. Nediani, C.; Dinu, M. Oxidative Stress and Inflammation as Targets for Novel Preventive and Therapeutic Approaches in Non-Communicable Diseases II. Antioxidants; 2022; 11, 824. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/antiox11050824]
9. Anderson, D. Antioxidant defences against reactive oxygen species causing genetic and other damage. Mutat. Res.; 1999; 350, pp. 103-108. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0027-5107(95)00096-8]
10. Anagnostopoulou, M.A.; Kefalas, P.; Papageorgiou, V.P.; Assimepoulou, A.N.; Boskou, D. Radical scavenging activity of various extracts and fractions of sweet orange peel (Citrus sinensis). Food Chem.; 2006; 94, pp. 19-25. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2004.09.047]
11. Cai, Y.; Luo, Q.; Sun, M.; Corke, H. Antioxidant activity and phenolic compounds of 112 traditional Chinese medicinal plants associated with anticancer. Life Sci.; 2004; 74, pp. 2157-2184. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2003.09.047] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14969719]
12. Almeida, N.C.O.S.; Silva, F.R.P.; Carneiro, A.L.B.; Lima, E.S.; Barcellos, J.F.M.; Furtado, S.C. Libidibia ferrea (juca) anti-inflammatory action: A systematic review of in vivo and in vitro studies. PLoS ONE; 2021; 16, e0259545. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259545]
13. Meng, B.; Li, J.; Cao, H. Antioxidant and Antiinflammatory Activities of Curcumin on Diabetes Mellitus and its Complications. Curr. Pharm. Des.; 2013; 19, pp. 2101-2113. [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23116316]
14. Deng, R.; Chow, T.-J. Hypolipidemic, Antioxidant, and Antiinflammatory Activities of Microalgae Spirulina. Cardiovasc. Ther.; 2010; 28, pp. e33-e45. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-5922.2010.00200.x] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20633020]
15. Zou, Y.; Zhang, M.; Zhang, T.; Wu, J.; Wang, J.; Liu, K.; Zhan, N. Antioxidant and Anti-inflammatory Activities of Cynaroside from Elsholtiza bodinieri. Nat. Prod. Commun.; 2018; 13, pp. 1501-1504. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1934578X1801301122]
16. Tošović, J.; Bren, U. Antioxidative Action of Ellagic Acid-A Kinetic DFT Study. Antioxidants; 2020; 9, 587. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/antiox9070587]
17. Brglez Mojzer, E.; Knez Hrnčič, M.; Škerget, M.; Knez, Ž.; Bren, U. Polyphenols: Extraction Methods, Antioxidative action, Bioavailability and Anticarcinogenic Effects. Molecules; 2016; 21, 901. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules21070901]
18. Shahinuzzaman, M.; Yaakob, Z.; Anuar, F.H.; Akhtar, P.; Kadir, N.H.A.; Hasan, A.K.M.; Sobayel, K.; Nour, M.; Sindi, H.; Amin, N. et al. In vitro antioxidant activity of Ficus carica L. latex from 18 different cultivars. Sci. Rep.; 2018; 10, 10852.
19. Manian, R.; Anusuya, N.; Siddhuraju, P.; Manian, S. The antioxidant activity and free radical scavenging potential of two different solvent extracts of Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntz, Ficus bengalensis L. and Ficus racemosa L. Food Chem.; 2008; 107, pp. 1000-1007. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.09.008]
20. Arbonnier, M. Arbres, Arbustes et Lianes des Zones Sèches d’Afrique de l’Ouest; 10th ed. Service des Publications Scientifiques: Paris, France, 2009; pp. 396-416.
21. Zingue, S.; Michel, T.; Tchatchou, J.; Magne Nde, C.B.; Winter, E.; Monchot, A.; Awounfack, C.F.; Djiogue, S.; Clyne, C.; Fernandez, X. et al. Estrogenic effects of Ficus umbellate Vahl. (Moraceae) extracts and their abilityto alleviate some menopausal symptoms induced by ovariectomy in Wistar rats. J. Ethnopharmacol.; 2016; 179, pp. 332-344. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2016.01.004]
22. Silihe, K.; Zingue, S.; Winter, E.; Awounfack, C.; Bishayee, A.; Desai, N.; João Mello, L.; Michel, T.; Tankeu, F.; Ndinteh, D. et al. Ficus umbellata Vahl. (Moraceae) Stem Bark Extracts Exert Antitumor Activities In Vitro and In Vivo. Int. J. Mol. Sci.; 2017; 18, 1073. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms18061073] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28545243]
23. Alam, N.; Bristi, N.J. Rafiquzzaman, M. Review on in vivo and in vitro methods evaluation of antioxidant activity. Saudi Pharm. J.; 2013; 21, pp. 143-152. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsps.2012.05.002] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24936134]
24. Re, R.; Pellegrini, A.A.; Yang, M.; Rice-Evans, C. Antioxidant activity applying an improved ABTS radical cation decolorization assay. Free Radic. Biol. Med.; 1999; 26, pp. 1231-1237. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0891-5849(98)00315-3]
25. Prieto, P.; Pineda, M.; Aguilar, M. Spectrophotometric quantity of antioxidant capacity through the formation of a phosphomolybdenum complex: Specific application to the determination of vitamin E. Anal. Biochem.; 1999; 269, pp. 337-341. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1006/abio.1999.4019] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10222007]
26. Benzie, I.F.F.; Strain, J.J. The ferric reducing ability of plasma (FRAP) as a measure of antioxidant power: The FRAP assay. Anal. Biochem.; 1996; 239, pp. 70-76. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1006/abio.1996.0292] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8660627]
27. Azeem, A.K.; Dillip, C.; Prasanth, S.S.; Junice, V.; Shahima, H. Anti-inflammatory activities of Gladular extract of Thunnus alalunga. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Med.; 2010; 3, pp. 794-796. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1995-7645(10)60190-3]
28. Sakat, S.; Juvekar, A.R.; Gambhire, M.N. In vitro antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activity of methanol extract of Oxalis corniculata Linn. Int. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. Sci.; 2010; 2, pp. 146-155.
29. Winter, C.A.; Risley, E.A.; Nuss, G.W. Carrageenin-Induced Edema in Hind Paw of the Rat as an Assay for Antiinflammatory Drugs. Exp. Biol. Med.; 1962; 111, pp. 544-547. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3181/00379727-111-27849]
30. Koleva, I.I.; van Beek, T.A.; Linssen, J.P.H.; Groot, D.A.; Evstatieva, L.N. Screening of Plant Extracts for Antioxidant Activity: A Comparative Study on Three Testing Methods. Phytochem. Anal.; 2002; 13, pp. 8-17. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pca.611]
31. Cudalbeanu, M.; Ghinea, I.O.; Furdui, B.; Dah-nouvlessounon, D.; Raclea, R.; Id, T.C.; Cucolea, I.E.; Urlan, F.; Dinica, R.M. Exploring New Antioxidant and Mineral Compounds from Nymphaea alba Wild-Grown in Danube Delta Biosphere. Molecules; 2018; 23, 1247. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules23061247] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29882880]
32. Cudalbeanu, M.; Furdui, B.; Cârâc, G.; Barbu, V.; Iancu, A.V.; Marques, F.; Leitão, J.H.; Sousa, S.A.; Dinica, R.M. Antifungal, antitumoral and antioxidant potential of the danube delta Nymphaea alba extracts. Antibiotics; 2020; 9, 7. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9010007] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31877815]
33. Mehta, J.P.; Parmar, P.H.; Vadia, S.H.; Patel, M.K.; Tripathi, C.B. In vitro antioxidant and in vivo anti-inflammatory activities of aerial parts of Cassia species. Arab. J. Chem.; 2017; 10, pp. S1654-S1662. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2013.06.010]
34. Şahin, S.; Samli, R.; Tan, A.S.B.; Barba, F.J.; Chemat, F.; Cravotto, G.; Lorenzo, J.M. Solvent-Free Microwave-Assisted Extraction of Polyphenols from Olive Tree Leaves: Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Properties. Molecules; 2017; 22, 1056. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules22071056] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28672807]
35. Wang, Y.; Qian, J.; Cao, J.; Wang, D.; Liu, C.; Yang, R.; Li, X.; Sun, C. Antioxidant Capacity, Anticancer Ability and Flavonoids Composition of 35 Citrus (Citrus reticulata Blanco) Varieties. Molecules; 2017; 22, 1114. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules22071114]
36. Duh, P.D.; Tu, Y.Y.; Yen, G.C. Antioxidant activity of water extract of harn jyur (Chrysanthemum morifolium Ramat). Leben-Wissen Technol.; 1990; 32, pp. 269-277. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1006/fstl.1999.0548]
37. Çalişkan, O.; Polat, A.A. Phytochemical and antioxidant properties of selected fig (Ficus carica L.) accessions from the eastern Mediterranean region of Turkey. Sci. Hortic.; 2011; 128, pp. 473-478. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2011.02.023]
38. Dong, L.-M.; Jia, X.-C.; Luo, Q.-W.; Zhang, Q.; Luo, B.; Liu, W.-B.; Zhang, X.; Xu, Q.-L.; Tan, J.-W. Phenolics from Mikania micrantha and Their Antioxidant Activity. Molecules; 2017; 22, 1140. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules22071140] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28698451]
39. Sirisha, N.; Sreenivasulu, M.; Sangeeta, K.; Chetty, C.M. Antioxidant Properties of Ficus Species—A Review. Int. J. PharmTech Res.; 2010; 2, pp. 2174-2182.
40. Ali, B.; Mujeeb, M.; Aeri, V.; Mir, S.R.; Faiyazuddin, M.; Shakeel, F. Anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activity of Ficus carica Linn. leaves. Nat. Prod. Res. Former. Nat. Prod. Lett.; 2012; 26, pp. 460-465.
41. Busuioc, A.C.; Botezatu, A.-V.D.; Furdui, B.; Vinatoru, C.; Maggi, F.; Caprioli, G.; Dinica, R.-M. Comparative Study of the Chemical Compositions and Antioxidant Activities of Fresh Juices from Romanian Cucurbitaceae Varieties. Molecules; 2020; 25, 5468. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules25225468]
42. Sudan, R.; Bhagat, M.; Gupta, S.; Singh, J.; Koul, A. Iron (FeII) Chelation, Ferric Reducing Antioxidant Power, and Immune Modulating Potential of Arisaema jacquemontii (Himalayan Cobra Lily). BioMed Res. Int.; 2014; 2014, 179865. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/179865] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24895548]
43. Murugan, R.; Parimelazhagan, T. Comparative evaluation of different extraction methods for antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties from Osbeckia parvifolia Arn.–An in vitro approach. J. King Saud Univ.-Sci.; 2014; 26, pp. 267-275. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jksus.2013.09.006]
44. Ogunlaja, O.O.; Moodley, R.; Baijnath, H.; Jonnalagadda, S.B. Antioxidant activity of the bioactive compounds from the edible fruits and leaves of Ficus sur Forssk. (Moraceae). S. Afr. J. Sci.; 2022; 118, pp. 1-5. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2022/9514]
45. Chandan, T.; Rubul, B.; Moushumi, H.; Jayanta, B.; Gajurel, P. Assessment of Antioxidant Activity of Six Ficus Species—Underutilized Fruits from Arunachal Pradesh in North East India. Int. J. Fruit Sci.; 2015; 15, pp. 85-99.
46. Willcox, J.K.; Ash, S.L.; Catignani, G.L. Antioxidants and Prevention of Chronic Disease. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr.; 2004; 44, pp. 275-295. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408690490468489] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15462130]
47. Rai, S.; Wahile, A.; Mukherjee, K.; Saha, B.P.; Mukherjee, P.K. Antioxidant activity of Nelumbo nucifera (sacred lotus) seeds, J. Ethnopharmacol.; 2006; 104, pp. 322-327. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2005.09.025]
48. Varghese, C.P.; Ambrose, C.; Jin, S.C.; Lim, Y.J.; Keisaban, T. Antioxidant and Anti-inflammatory Activity of Eurycoma longifolia Jack: A Traditional Medicinal Plant in Malaysia. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. Nanotechnol.; 2013; 5, pp. 1875-1878. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.37285/ijpsn.2012.5.4.7]
49. Anosike, C.A.; Obidoa, O.; Ezeanyika, L.U. Membrane stabilization as a mechanism of the anti-inflammatory activity of methanol extract of garden egg (Solanum aethiopicum). Daru; 2012; 20, 76. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2008-2231-20-76]
50. Dharmadeva, S.; Galgamuwa, L.S.; Prasadinie, C.; Kumarasinghe, N. In vitro anti-inflammatory activity of Ficus racemosa L. bark using albumin denaturation method. Ayu; 2018; 39, pp. 239-242.
51. Arya, D.; Patni, V. Comparative analysis of in vitro anti-inflammatory and anti-arthritic activity in methanolic extract of Pluchea lanceolata Oliver & Hiern. In vivo and in vitro. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. Rev. Res.; 2013; 4, pp. 676-680.
52. Florentino, I.F.; Silva, D.P.B.; Silva, D.M.; Cardoso, C.S.; Moreira, A.L.E.; Borges, C.L.; de A. Soares, C.M.; Galdino, P.M.; Liao, L.M.; Ghedini, P.C. et al. Potential anti-inflammatory effect of LQFM-021 in carrageenan induced inflammation: The role of nitric oxide. Nitric Oxide; 2017; 69, pp. 35-44. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.niox.2017.04.006] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28412475]
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Zingue, Stephane 2
; Marius Trésor Kemegne Sipping 3
; Anna Busuioc Cazanevscaia 4 ; Andreea Veronica Dediu Botezatu 4
; Njamen, Dieudonne 5 ; Dinica, Rodica Mihaela 4
1 Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Science, University of Yaoundé 1, Yaoundé P.O. Box 812, Cameroon; Department of Chemistry, Physics and Environment, University Dunarea de Jos of Galati, 800008 Galați, Romania
2 Department of Medical and Biomedical Engineering, University of Yaoundé 1, Ebolowa P.O. Box 55, Cameroon
3 Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Science, University of Yaoundé 1, Yaoundé P.O. Box 812, Cameroon; Laboratory of Phytoprotection and Valorization of Genetic Resources, Biotechnology Centre-Nkolbisson, University of Yaoundé 1, Yaoundé P.O. Box 812, Cameroon
4 Department of Chemistry, Physics and Environment, University Dunarea de Jos of Galati, 800008 Galați, Romania
5 Department of Animal Physiology, University of Yaoundé 1, Yaoundé P.O. Box 812, Cameroon