Which Extraction Solvents and Methods Are More Effective in Terms of Chemical Composition and Biological Activity of Alcea fasciculiflora from Turkey?

Abstract

The bioactive content, antioxidant properties, and enzyme inhibition properties of extracts of Alcea fasciculiflora from Turkey prepared with different solvents (water, methanol, ethyl acetate) and extraction methods (maceration, soxhlet, homogenizer assisted extraction, and ultrasound assisted extraction) were examined in this study. UHPLC-HRMS analysis detected or annotated a total of 50 compounds in A. fasciculiflora extracts, including 18 hydroxybenzoic and hydroxycinnamic acids, 7 Hexaric acids, 7 Coumarins, 15 Flavonoids, and 3 hydroxycinnamic acid amides. The extracts had phenolic and flavonoid levels ranging from 14.25 to 24.87 mg GAE/g and 1.68 to 25.26 mg RE/g, respectively, in the analysis. Both DPPH and ABTS tests revealed radical scavenging capabilities (between 2.63 and 35.33 mg TE/g and between 13.46 and 76.27 mg TE/g, respectively). The extracts had reducing properties (CUPRAC: 40.38–78 TE/g and FRAP: 17.51–42.58 TE/g). The extracts showed metal chelating activity (18.28–46.71 mg EDTAE/g) as well as total antioxidant capacity (phosphomolybdenum test) (0.90–2.12 mmol TE/g). DPPH, ABTS, FRAP, and metal chelating tests indicated the water extracts to be the best antioxidants, while the ethyl acetate extracts had the highest overall antioxidant capacity regardless of the extraction technique. Furthermore, anti-acetylcholinesterase activity was identified in all extracts (0.17–2.80 mg GALAE/g). The water extracts and the ultrasound-assisted ethyl acetate extract were inert against butyrylcholinesterase, but the other extracts showed anti-butyrylcholinesterase activity (1.17–5.80 mg GALAE/g). Tyrosine inhibitory action was identified in all extracts (1.79–58.93 mg KAE/g), with the most effective methanolic extracts. Only the ethyl acetate and methanolic extracts produced by maceration and homogenizer aided extraction showed glucosidase inhibition (0.11–1.11 mmol ACAE/g). These findings showed the overall bioactivity of the different extracts of A. fasciculiflora and provided an overview of the combination of solvent type and extraction method that could yield bioactive profile and pharmacological properties of interest and hence, could be a useful reference for future studies on this species.

Essential Oils Composition and Biological Activity of Chamaecyparis obtusa, Chrysopogon nigritanus and Lavandula coronopifolia Grown Wild in Sudan

“…All protein structures were prepared according to the protocol described in the Ref. [ 57 ]. The 3D structures of selected ligands were downloaded from the PubChem database ( ) (accessed on 23 December 2022) and geometry optimization was done using Biovia Discovery Studio Visualizer v4.5 (Dassault Systèmes Biovia Software Inc., San Diego, CA, USA, 2012).…”

Unraveling the chemical profile, antioxidant, enzyme inhibitory, cytotoxic potential of different extracts from Astragalus caraganae

“…The detailed procedure of homology modeling has been described previously. [ 104 ] All protein structures were prepared according to the protocol described in Ozturk et al [ 105 ] The 3D structures of selected ligands were retrieved from the PubChem database (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) and geometry optimization was done using Frog2 webserver (https://mobyle.rpbs.univ-paris-diderot.fr/cgi-bin/portal.py#forms::Frog2). [ 106 ] The cocrystal ligand in each complex was used to define the docking grid box dimension and coordinates using AutoDock Tools 1.5.6, and each ligand was docked into the binding pocket of each protein using AutoDock 4.2.6 (https://autodock.scripts.edu).…”

Chemical Characterization of Different Extracts from Artemisia annua and Their Antioxidant, Enzyme Inhibitory and Anti‐Inflammatory Properties

“…The 3D structures of human α‐tyrosinase and α‐glucosidase were modeled from those of Priestia megaterium (6QXD) [82] and Mus musculus (7KBJ), [83] respectively as described previously [84,85] . Protein preparation at a pH of 7.4 was performed using the protocol available in ref [86] . All ligand 3D structures were obtained from the PubChem compound repository (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/).…”

“…[84,85] Protein preparation at a pH of 7.4 was performed using the protocol available in ref. [86] All ligand 3D structures were obtained from the PubChem compound repository (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/). We prepared docking grid files using AutoDockTools 1.5.6, and conducted the docking study with AutoDock 4.2.6 (https://autodock.scripts.edu) [87] following the protocol outlined in ref.…”