Anti-emetic Principles of Water Extract of Brazilian Propolis

Figures & data

Table 1.. Anti-emetic effects of metoclopramide on copper sulfate–induced emesis in young chicks.

Drug	Dose (mg/kg)	No. of young chicks	No. of retches (mean ± SEM)	Inhibition (%)
Control		5	45.8 ± 3.01
Metoclopramide	50	6	12.7 ± 1.50	72.3

*p < 0.001, significantly different from the control value.

Table 2.. Anti-emetic effects of each extract on copper sulfate–induced emesis in young chicks.

Drug	Dose (mg/kg)	No. of young chicks	No. of retches (mean ± SEM)	Inhibition (%)
Control		5	45.8 ± 3.01
H2O extract	300	6	22.5 ± 1.77	50.9
Control		5	53.2 ± 2.48
MeOH sol.	100	6	29.3 ± 1.61	44.9
MeOH insol.	200	6	45.3 ± 2.65	14.9

*p < 0.001, significantly different from the control value.

Table 3.. Anti-emetic effects of chromatographic fractions on copper sulfate–induced emesis in young chicks.

Drug	Dose (mg/kg)	No. of young chicks	No. of retches (mean ± SEM)	Inhibition (%)
Control		6	59.3 ± 3.27
fr. 1	200	6	41.3 ± 3.02**	30.5
Control		6	66.2 ± 3.23
fr. 2	50	6	47.7 ± 5.71	28.0
fr. 3	50	6	57.0 ± 5.87	13.9
fr. 4	50	6	43.5 ± 3.78	34.3
Control		5	55.0 ± 3.45
fr. 5	10	6	25.0 ± 2.37***	54.5
Control		5	56.2 ± 2.60
fr. 6	70	5	30.6 ± 2.06**	45.6
Control		5	53.2 ± 1.83
fr. 7	50	6	35.2 ± 6.47	33.9

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, significantly different from the control value.

Table 4.. Anti-emetic effects of chromatographic fractions on copper sulfate–induced emesis in young chicks.

Drug	Dose (mg/kg)	No. of young chicks	No. of retches (mean ± SEM)	Inhibition (%)
Control		6	56.7 ± 1.43
fr. I	40	5	47.8 ± 2.76	15.6
fr. II	30	6	37.5 ± 2.71**	33.8
fr. III	10	5	26.4 ± 2.29**	53.4
Control		6	57.0 ± 2.00
fr. IV	35	6	55.7 ± 1.74	2.3
fr. V	35	6	47.8 ± 2.73	16.1
fr. VI	50	6	47.7 ± 1.86	16.4
Control		6	54.2 ± 1.45
fr. A	1	6	49.5 ± 1.75	8.6
fr. B	3	6	27.7 ± 1.33**	48.9
fr. C	3	6	40.2 ± 1.22**	25.8
Control		6	54.2 ± 2.06
fr. D	10	6	44.7 ± 3.07	17.5
fr. E	5	6	21.2 ± 1.72**	60.9
fr. F	10	6	41.2 ± 2.68	24.0

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.001, significantly different from the control value.

Table 5.. Anti-emetic effects of chromatographic fractions on copper sulfate–induced emesis in young chicks.

Drug	Dose (mg/kg)	No. of young chicks	No. of retches (mean ± SEM)	Inhibition (%)
Control		6	59.0 ± 1.00
fr. a	10	6	32.7 ± 1.33**	44.6
fr. b	50	6	38.3 ± 0.71**	35.0
fr. c	10	6	44.7 ± 1.50**	24.3
Control		6	55.0 ± 1.93
fr. d	10	6	32.0 ± 1.97**	41.8
fr. e	30	6	46.1 ± 3.99	16.1
fr. f	80	6	40.5 ± 2.93	26.4

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.001, significantly different from the control value.

Table 6.. Anti-emetic effects of compounds 1–6 on copper sulfate–induced emesis in young chicks.

Drug	Dose (mg/kg)	No. of young chicks	No. of retches (mean ± SEM)	Inhibition (%)
Control		6	55.8 ± 1.49
Compound 1	1	6	39.2 ± 1.78**	29.8
	2	6	30.8 ± 1.14**	44.8
	4	6	22.2 ± 1.25**	60.3
Control		6	58.0 ± 1.51
Compound 2	2	6	49.7 ± 1.99	14.4
Control		6	55.8 ± 1.35
Compound 2	10	6	41.8 ± 1.40**	25.0
	20	6	31.8 ± 1.19**	43.0
Control		6	58.2 ± 0.95
Compound 3	25	6	37.5 ± 1.15**	35.5
	50	4	31.3 ± 0.95**	46.3
	100	6	23.7 ± 0.80**	59.3
Control		6	49.2 ± 1.51
Compound 4	1	6	34.8 ± 1.25**	29.2
	2	6	26.8 ± 1.83**	45.4
	4	6	21.2 ± 2.15**	56.9
Control		5	47.2 ± 0.86
Compound 5	2.5	6	34.7 ± 1.02**	26.6
	5	6	31.2 ± 1.14**	34.0
	10	6	27.0 ± 0.86**	42.8
Control		6	47.5 ± 1.73
Compound 6	2.5	6	31.2 ± 1.25**	34.3
	5	6	26.7 ± 1.41**	43.8
	10	6	23.8 ± 0.91**	49.9

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.001, significantly different from the control value.