Meena Ajay Kumar, Ilavarasan R, Perumal Ayyam, Singh Ravindra, Ojha Vikas, Srikanth N, Dhiman K S
Regional Ayurveda Research Institute, Aamkho, Gwalior, 474009, India.
Captain Srinivasa Murthy Central Ayurveda Research Institute, Chennai, 600106, India.
Heliyon. 2022 Aug 14;8(8):e10251. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10251. eCollection 2022 Aug.
The Aim of the present research article is to proposing a conservative approach for the by using of small branches instead of stem bark because of plant has many important chemical constituents which show different medicinal activity so consumption of plant is high. We studied here Comparative preliminary phytochemical screening test of the ethanol extract and aqueous extract of the stem bark and small branches of obtained by cold maceration process. Physicochemical analysis of was done to ascertain the quality of the raw material used in the study. Successive soxhlet extraction method used for the successive extraction of stem bark and small branches with different solvents for comparative chemical profile study by HPLC, LCMS, and GCMS. Molecular Docking Interaction of Abundant Medicinal Phytochemicals in the Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS) Analysis Data of with the Drug Target Proteins and Pancreatic lipase colipase target protein.
The pH of the small branches was found slightly higher as compared to stem bark and the percentage of other parameters like total ash content, acid insoluble ash, loss on drying at 105 °C, water soluble extractive and alcohol soluble extractive values were found fewer in the small branches as compare to stem bark of the plant. It was observed that the number of peaks in stem bark and small branches of the plant sample were almost similar and the retention time of each peak in stem bark was coincide with the retention of small branches of the sample. Therefore, similarity was observed in stem bark and small branches of the plant in HPLC, LC-MS and GC-MS. The results obtained from HPLC analysis shows that stem bark contains 0.0084% and small branches having 0.0257% of rhein in Compounds 3, 9 and 12 are present in Stem bark as well as small branches of and Compounds 22, 32 and 37 are present in small branches only. All the compounds have very good binding energy (Kcal/mol) with the respective target proteins.
The small branches have more active chemical constituents than stem bark against particular target proteins.
本研究文章的目的是提出一种保守方法,由于该植物有许多显示不同药用活性的重要化学成分,导致其消耗量很大,因此使用小枝而非茎皮。我们在此研究了通过冷浸法获得的该植物茎皮和小枝的乙醇提取物和水提取物的比较初步植物化学筛选试验。对该植物进行了物理化学分析,以确定研究中使用的原材料的质量。采用连续索氏提取法,用不同溶剂对茎皮和小枝进行连续提取,以通过高效液相色谱法(HPLC)、液相色谱 - 质谱联用仪(LCMS)和气相色谱 - 质谱联用仪(GCMS)进行比较化学图谱研究。该植物液相色谱 - 质谱分析数据中丰富的药用植物化学成分与该植物药物靶蛋白和胰脂肪酶辅脂肪酶靶蛋白的分子对接相互作用。
发现小枝的pH值比茎皮略高,与该植物的茎皮相比,小枝中总灰分、酸不溶性灰分、105℃干燥失重、水溶性提取物和醇溶性提取物值等其他参数的百分比更少。观察到该植物样品茎皮和小枝中的峰数几乎相似,茎皮中每个峰的保留时间与样品小枝的保留时间一致。因此,在该植物的茎皮和小枝的HPLC、LC - MS和GC - MS中观察到相似性。HPLC分析获得的结果表明,在该植物中,茎皮含0.0084%的大黄酸,小枝含0.0257%的大黄酸。化合物3、9和12存在于该植物的茎皮以及小枝中,化合物22、32和37仅存在于小枝中。所有化合物与各自的靶蛋白都有非常好的结合能(千卡/摩尔)。
与特定靶蛋白相比,小枝比茎皮含有更多活性化学成分。