4.5 Article

In vivo antidiabetic effects of phenolic compounds of spinach, mustard, and cabbage leaves in mice

Journal

HELIYON
Volume 9, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16616

Keywords

Diabetes; Spinach; Mustard; Cabbage; Phenolic compounds; Antidiabetic potential

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The antidiabetic effects of spinach, mustard, and cabbage were studied by feeding their phenolic-rich aqueous extracts to diabetic mice. Results showed significant improvements in various biochemical and hematological indices as well as tissue histology in the treated mice. Cabbage extract was found to be the most effective in ameliorating diabetic stress among the studied vegetables.
Leafy vegetables are considered to have health-promoting potentials, mainly attributed to bioactive phenolic compounds. The antidiabetic effects of spinach, mustard, and cabbage were studied by feeding their phenolic-rich aqueous extracts to alloxan-induced diabetic mice. The antioxidant, biochemical, histopathological, and hematological indices of the control, diabetic, and treated mice were studied. Phenolic compounds present in the extracts were identified and quantified using HPLC-DAD. Results showed ten, nineteen, and eleven phenolic compounds in spinach, mustard, and cabbage leave aqueous extracts, respectively. The body weight, tissue total glutathione (GSH) contents, fasting blood sugar, liver function tests, renal function tests, and lipid profile of the mice were affected by diabetes and were significantly improved by the extract treatments. Likewise, hematological indices and tissues histological studies also showed recovery from diabetic stress in treated mice. The study's findings highlight that the selected leafy vege-tables potentially mitigate diabetic complications. Among the studied vegetables, cabbage extract was comparatively more active in ameliorating diabetic stress.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available