4.6 Article

Ameliorating effect of lyophilized extract of Butea frondosa leaves on scopolamine-induced amnesia in rats

Journal

PHARMACEUTICAL BIOLOGY
Volume 51, Issue 2, Pages 233-239

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/13880209.2012.717229

Keywords

Butea monosperma; dhak; cognitive functions; Morris water maze; object recognition

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Context: Butea frondosa (BF) Roxb. & Koen. (syn. B. monosperma Lam.) (Fabaceae) leaves have been used in folklore medicine for the treatment of diabetes, conjunctivitis, gastrointestinal tract, and central nervous system disorders such as anxiety, amnesia, etc. Objective: To evaluate the effect of lyophilized hydroalcoholic extract of BF leaves (BFLE) at 100, 200 and 400 mg/kg, p.o., for its memory enhancing activity against scopolamine-induced amnesia in rats. Materials and methods: Antiamnesic effect of the BFLE was evaluated using Morris water maze and object recognition test models. The effect of BFLE on acetylcholinesterase activity and malondialdehyde and glutathione levels were also evaluated in brain homogenate. Result: BFLE ameliorates scopolamine-induced amnesia in both the models with maximum effect at 400 mg/kg. BFLE (400 mg/kg) decreased escape latency and increased time spent in target quadrant (24.2 and 42.5 s, respectively) in comparison to scopolamine (82 and 18.2 s, respectively) in the Morris water maze task. In the object recognition test, BFLE produced significant increase in ability to discriminate between novel and familiar objects. The highest investigated dose of BFLE (400 mg/kg), produced a significant decrease in acetylcholinesterase activity and malondialdehyde levels, and improves glutathione levels in comparison to scopolamine. Moreover, this effect of BFLE at 400 mg/kg was comparable to that of standard, donepezil. Conclusion: BFLE exhibited significant antiamnesic activity in rats thereby validating its folklore use.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available