Protective role of Spondias mombin leaf and Cola acuminata seed extracts against scopolamine-induced cognitive dysfunction

Peer review under responsibility of Alexandria University Faculty of Medicine.

Available online 6 April 2017

Figures & data

Table 1 Table of total antioxidant capacity, total phenolic and flavonoid content.

Extract	TPC (mg GAE/g DE)	TAC (mg AE/g DE	TFC (mg RE/g DE)
SM	29.28 ± 0.11	41.06 ± 0.17	12.84 ± 0.16
CA	35.48 ± 0.28	60.13 ± 0.11	16.44 ± 0.12

Values are expressed as mean ± S.D (n = 3), TPC (total phenolic content), TAC (total antioxidant capacity), TFC (total flavonoid content), GAE (gallic acid equivalent), AE (ascorbic acid equivalent), RE (rutin equivalent), DE (dry extract).

Table 2 Free radical scavenging, nitric oxide inhibition and ferric ion reducing power activity of SM and CA.

Extract	DPPH (IC50) μg/ml	NO (IC50) μg/ml	FRAP (EC50) μg/ml
SM	46.78 ± 1.89	37.94 ± 1.09	96.13 ± 4.32
CA	56.50 ± 2.75	47.07 ± 3.11	106.50 ± 3.74
Ascorbic acid	41.41 ± 3.56	40.74 ± 1.28	64.11 ± 4.75

Values are expressed as mean ± S.D (n = 3).

Table 3 Effect of SM and CA on spontaneous locomotor activity.

Treatment (mg/kg)	Line crosses	Rearing	Grooming
Vehicle 10 ml/kg	67.40 ± 13.77	19.80 ± 4.59	7.80 ± 2.48
SM 5000	65.20 ± 4.31	7.20 ± 1.80^⁎⁎	4.60 ± 1.97^⁎
CA 5000	75.20 ± 13.75	18.80 ± 4.86	10.80 ± 5.14

Values are expressed in mean ± SEM (n = 5).

⁎ P < 0.05.

⁎⁎ P < 0.01 versus vehicle treated control (one way ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc multiple comparison test).

Figure 1 Effect of (A) SM or (B) CA on spontaneous alternation behaviour in scopolamine-treated mice in the Y-maze test. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6), ^∗∗P < 0.01; ^∗∗∗P < 0.001 versus vehicle-treated; ^aP < 0.05; ^bP < 0.01; ^cP < 0.05 versus scopolamine-treated group (one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc multiple comparison test).

Figure 2 Effect of (A) SM and (B) CA on total number of arm entries in scopolamine-treated mice in the Y-maze. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6).

Figure 3 Effect of (A) SM and (B) CA on spatial learning following scopolamine-induced memory impairment in the Morris water maze test in rats. Values are expressed as mean ELT (s) ± S.E.M (n = 6). ^aP < 0.05, ^bP < 0.01, ^cP < 0.001 versus session 1 (two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc multiple comparison test).

Figure 4 Effect of SM and CA on MDA levels in the (A) prefrontal cortex, (B) hippocampus and (C) striatum of scopolamine-treated rats after the MWM task. Values are expressed as Mean ± SEM (n = 6). ^∗∗P < 0.01, ^∗∗∗P < 0.001 versus vehicle-treated control, ^aP < 0.05, ^bP < 0.01, ^cP < 0.001 versus vehicle + scopolamine treated (one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc multiple comparison test).

Figure 5 Effect of SM and CA on GSH level in the (A) prefrontal cortex, (B) hippocampus and (C) striatum of scopolamine-treated rats after the MWM task. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). ^∗P < 0.05, ^∗∗P < 0.01 versus vehicle-treated control, ^aP < 0.05, ^bP < 0.01, ^cP < 0.001 versus vehicle + scopolamine treated (one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc multiple comparison test).

Figure 6 Effect of SM and CA on catalase level in the (A) prefrontal cortex, (B) hippocampus and (C) striatum of scopolamine-treated rats after the MWM task. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). ^∗∗P < 0.01, ^∗∗∗P < 0.001 versus vehicle-treated control, ^aP < 0.05, ^bP < 0.01, ^cP < 0.001 versus vehicle + scopolamine treated (one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc multiple comparison test).

Figure 7 Effect of SM and CA on SOD activity in the (A) prefrontal cortex, (B) hippocampus and (C) striatum of scopolamine-treated rats after the MWM task. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). ^∗∗P < 0.01 versus vehicle-treated control, ^aP < 0.05, ^bP < 0.01, ^cP < 0.001 versus vehicle + scopolamine treated (one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc multiple comparison test).

Figure 8 Effect of SM and CA on nitrite level in the (A) prefrontal cortex, (B) hippocampus and (C) striatum of scopolamine-treated rats after the MWM task. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). ^∗∗P < 0.01; ^∗∗∗P < 0.01 versus vehicle-treated control, ^aP < 0.05; ^bP < 0.01; ^cP < 0.001 versus vehicle + scopolamine treated (one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc multiple comparison test).