Anti-obesity and antioxidant activities of selected medicinal plants and phytochemical profiling of bioactive compounds

Figures & data

Table 1. Inhibitory effects (%) of different plant extracts on pancreatic lipase at different concentrations.

Samples	Inhibition (%)
	1000 ppm	500 ppm	250 ppm	125 ppm	62.5 ppm
C. caudatus	21.7 ± 1.3^aB	20.6 ± 0.7^aB	19.5 ± 0.2^abB	17.3 ± 1.5^bcB	15.4 ± 1.8^Cb
P. bleo	15.7 ± 1.1^aDE	16.4 ± 0.7^aC	15.2 ± 1.4^aCD	12.2 ± 0.9^bC	11.3 ± 1.1^Bc
P. indica	18.4 ± 1.2^aCD	17.8 ± 1.8^aC	17.0 ± 2.3^abBC	14.3 ± 1.2^bcC	11.7 ± 1.4^cC
P. betle	15.9 ± 1.9^aDE	10.2 ± 0.2^bD	6.7 ± 1.6^cE	5.2 ± 2.1^cdE	3.6 ± 0.8^Dde
L. inermis	20.6 ± 2.0^aBC	16.4 ± 1.4^bC	14.7 ± 1.3^bCD	6.1 ± 1.4^cDE	5.0 ± 1.2^Cd
A. paniculata	13.0 ± 1.7^aEF	10.5 ± 1.3^bD	8.2 ± 0.3^cE	5.2 ± 0.7^dE	2.7 ± 0.8^eDE
M. lunu	10.4 ± 1.0^aF	9.4 ± 1.1^aD	8.6 ± 1.7^aE	6.4 ± 1.0^bDE	1.8 ± 0.6^Ce
C. papaya	14.0 ± 1.5^bE	17.4 ± 0.3^aC	12.9 ± 2.0^bD	8.4 ± 1.0^cD	4.9 ± 0.5^dD
Orlistat*	36.6 ± 1.8^aA	35.4 ± 1.5^aA	33.3 ± 1.6^abA	30.2 ± 2.2^bA	26.0 ± 3.2^cA
Epicatechin*	18.6 ± 2.4^aCD	17.8 ± 2.7^aC	17.0 ± 2.5^aBC	14.4 ± 1.9^abC	10.7 ± 2.7^bC

* = Positive control. Values with small letters indicate significant (p<0.05) difference between concentrations, while capital letters indicate significant difference between different extracts, Duncan test, and SPSS version 20 (n=3±SD)

Table 2. DPPH, β-Carotene-linoleic scavenging activity and TPC in different plant extracts.

Samples	DPPH IC50 (μg/mL)	β-Carotene Bleaching Assay (% AA)	TPC (mg GAE/g extract)
C. caudatus	31.98 ± 1.22^a	42.2 ±2.9^e	708.45 ± 49.63^a
P. indica	42.24 ± 1.13^a	59.8 ± 2.3^c	715.11 ± 14.69^a
L. inermis	53.88 ± 4.06^ab	82.0 ± 1.4^b	417.33 ±41.07^b
P. betle	98.95 ± 26.89^b	36.0 ± 1.7^f	464.89 ±56.60^b
M. lunu	179.75 ± 12.36^c	52.9 ± 2.4^d	241.11 ±22.33^c
C. papaya	643.82 ± 14.16^d	61.5 ± 2.7^c	152 ±5.46^d
P. bleo	1080.31 ± 65.66^e	42.0 ± 3.3^e	76.56 ± 8.06^e
A. paniculata	1304.95 ± 54.82^f	15.1 ± 2.7^g	50 ±2.35^e
Ascorbic acid*	13.89 ± 0.09^a	NA	NA
BHA*	33.69 ± 0.79^a	93.5 ± 1.8^a	NA
α-tocopherol*	35.57 ± 0.79^a	NA	NA

Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation, measured by one-way ANOVA, SPSS 20. All experiments were repeated three times with triplicate readings. Value marked by different lower case letters indicates significant difference (p < 0.05) between samples. * = Positive control.

Table 3. Inhibitory effects (%) of different extracts of Cosmos caudatus on pancreatic lipase at different concentrations.

Sample (EtOH:H2O)	Inhibition (%)
	1000 ppm	500 ppm	250 ppm	125 ppm	62.5 ppm
100:0	21.8 ± 1.5^aB	19.9 ± 1.4^abB	17.5 ± 2.1^bcB	15.8 ± 2.2^cdB	13.1 ± 0.9^dB
80:20	16.7 ± 1.0^aC	15.1 ± 0.6^bC	14.3 ± 0.8^bC	14.2 ± 0.6^bBC	10.5 ± 0.9^cBC
60:40	14.1 ± 0.7^abD	12.9 ± 1.0^abCD	14.5 ± 2.2^aC	11.7 ± 0.8^bcCD	10.3 ± 1.8^cBC
50:50	12.3 ± 1.2^aD	11.6 ± 1.3^abD	10.9 ±1.6^abcD	9.1 ± 0.9^cDE	9.5 ± 0.9^bcC
40:60	9.9 ± 1.8^aE	8.0 ± 1.0^abE	8.0 ± 0.1^abE	7.4 ± 1.1^bE	6.2 ± 0.4^bD
Orlistat*	36.23 ± 0.2^aA	34.7 ± 2.0^aA	33.9 ± 0.9^abA	30.8 ± 2.8^bcA	28.6 ± 2.7^cA
Epicatechin*	13.2 ± 1.2^aD	12.4 ± 2.1^aD	12.0 ± 2.1^aCD	10.9 ± 2.0^abD	7.7 ± 2.1^bCD

Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation, measured by one-way ANOVA, SPSS 20. All experiments were repeated three times with triplicate readings. Value marked by different lower case letters indicates significant difference (p < 0.05) between concentrations, while value marked with capital letters indicates significant difference (p < 0.05) among samples. * = Positive control.

Figure 1. Inhibitory effects (%) of different extracts of Cosmos caudatus and Epicatechin on lipoprotein lipase (0.1 mg/mL). Values with different letters indicate significance difference (p < 0.05) measured by one-way ANOVA, SPSS 20. All experiments were repeated three times with triplicate readings. Error bars represent the standard deviation.

Table 4. DPPH, TPC and TFC of different extracts of Cosmos caudatus.

Samples (EtOH:H2O)	DPPH IC50 (μg/mL)	TPC (mg GAE/g extract)	TFC (mg RE/g extract)
100:0	24.88 ± 1.06^b	865.8 ± 5.04^a	398.8 ± 34.78^a
80:20	61.71 ± 4.68^c	473.8 ± 43.40^b	234.0 ± 8.43^b
60:40	75.62 ± 4.10^d	377.1 ± 36.36^c	207.2 ± 33.76^b
50:50	94.71 ± 5.03^e	311.8 ± 13.34^d	152.6 ± 23.76^c
40:60	126.02 ± 6.00^f	266.3 ± 53.72^d	125.2 ± 15.48^c
Quercetin*	10.95 ± 0.55^a	NA	NA
BHA*	19.83 ± 1.55^b	NA	NA
Ascorbic acid*	20.77 ± 0.22^b	NA	NA

Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation, measured by one-way ANOVA, SPSS 20. All experiments were repeated three times with triplicate readings. Value marked by different letters indicates significant difference (p < 0.05) between samples. * = Positive control. NA = Not available or not determined, EtOH = Ethanol, H₂O = Water.

Table 5. Identified metabolites of Cosmos caudatus extract with their mass spectral characteristics.

Metabolite	Retention Time (min)	Molecular ion (M–H)^−	MS/MS fragmentations	References
Quinic acid	2.23	191.1	173.1, 111.0, 93.0, 85.0	^[Citation41]
Monogalloyl glucose	2.63	331.1	271.0, 211.0	^[Citation42]
1-caffeyolquinic acid	3.41	353.1	191.0, 179.0, 135.0, 93.0	^[Citation43]
Procyanidin B1	3.69	577.2	451.1, 425.1, 407.1, 289.1, 161.1. 137.0, 125.0	^[Citation44]
Catechin	4.22	289.1	271.2, 245.2, 151.0, 137.1	^[Citation41,Citation45]
Quercetin-rhamnosyl-galactoside	4.88	609.2	463.1, 300.5, 179.0, 151.1	^[Citation46,Citation47]
Quercetin-3-glucoside	5.15	463.1	300.2, 179.1, 151.3	^[Citation35,Citation41]
Quercetin-O-pentoside	5.28	433.1	300.5, 255.5, 151.1	^[Citation48,Citation49]
Kaempferol glucoside	5.54	447.1	284.3, 256.3, 151.2	^[Citation45,Citation50]
Quercetin	6.87	301.1	273.1, 179.0, 151.0	^[Citation50]
Kaempferol	7.67	285.0	255.0, 229.1, 151.1	^[Citation50]

Mediani, A.; Abas, F.; Khatib, A.; Tan, C.P.; Ismail, I.S.; Shaari, K.; Ismail, A; Lajis, N.H. Phytochemical and Biological Features of Phyllanthus Niruri and Phyllanthus Urinaria Harvested at Different Growth Stages Revealed by 1H NMR-based Metabolomics. Industrial Crops and Products 2015, 77, 602–613.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Nuengchamnong, N.; Boonpathanasak, S.; Tepwitukkij, P. Rapid Screening of Antioxidant Compounds in Homemade Fruit Fermented Juice Using an On Line LC-ESI-MS/MS and DPPH Assay. Chiang Mai Journal of Science 2011, 38, 430–438.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Clifford, M.N.; Knight, S.; Kuhnert, N. Discriminating Between the Six Isomers of Dicaffeoylquinic Acid by LC-MS(n). Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 2005, 53, 3821–32.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kardel, M.; Taube, F.; Schulz, H.; Schütze, W.; Gierus, M. Different Approaches to Evaluate Tannin Content and Structure of Selected Plant Extracts–Review and New Aspects. Journal of Applied Botany and Food Quality 2013, 86, 154–166.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lee, S.Y.; Abasa, F.; Khatib, A.; Ismail, I.S.; Shaari, K.; Zawawi, N. Metabolite Profiling of Neptunia Oleracea and Correlation with Antioxidant and A-Glucosidase Inhibitory Activities Using 1H NMR- Based Metabolomics. Phytochemistry Letters 2016, 16, 23–33.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ogita, T.; Vallejo Manaois, R.; Wakagi, M.; Oki, T.; Takano Ishikawa, Y.; Watanabe, J. Identification and Evaluation of Antioxidants in Japanese Parsley. International Journal of Food Science and Nutrition 2016, 67, 431–40.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Del Rio, D.; Stewart, A.J.; Mullen, W.; Burns, J.; Lean, M.E.; Brighenti, F.; Crozier, A. HPLC-MSn Analysis of Phenolic Compounds and Purine Alkaloids in Green and Black Tea. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 2004, 52, 2807–2815.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mediani, A.; Abas, F.; Ping, T.C.; Khatib, A.; Lajis, N.H. Influence of Growth Stage and Season on the Antioxidant Constituents of Cosmos caudatus. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 2012, 67, 344–350.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jaiswal, R.; Jayasinghe, L.; Kuhnert, N. Identification and Characterization of Proanthocyanidins of 16 Members of the Rhododendron Genus (Ericaceae) by tandem LC-MS. Journal of Mass Spectrometry 2012, 47, 502–15.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ado, M.A.; Abas, F.; Ismail, I.S.; Ghazali, H.M.; Shaari, K. Chemical Profile and Antiacetylcholinesterase, Antityrosinase, Antioxidant and α-glucosidase Inhibitory Activity of Cynometra Cauliflora L. Leaves. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 2015, 95, 635–42.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Maulidiani, A.; Abasa, F.; Khatiba, A.; Shaaria, K.; Lajis, N.H. Chemical Characterization and Antioxidant Activity of Three Medicinalapiaceae Species. Industrial Crops and Products 2014, 55, 238–247.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar