3.8 Article

Screening for antioxidant and antimutagenic properties of extracts from Centaurea pterocaula as well as their enzyme inhibitory potentials

Journal

MARMARA PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL
Volume 20, Issue 3, Pages 232-242

Publisher

MARMARA UNIV, FAC PHARMACY
DOI: 10.12991/mpj.20162094922

Keywords

Centaurea pterocaula; antioxidant; enzyme inhibition; antimutagenic; natural agents

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the antioxidant capacities, mutagenic/antimutagenic propeties and enzyme inhibitory effects of three extracts (ethyl acetate, methanol and water) of Centaurea pterocaula. The antioxidant properties were investigated using in vitro antioxidant methods such as radical scavenging (DPPH assay), reducing power (FRAP and CUPRAC assays), phosphomolybdenum and metal chelating activity. Enzyme inhibitory effects were tested aganist cholinesterase, tyrosinase, amylase and glucosidase. Ames test was used to show mutagenic/antimutagenic properties of these extracts. Methanol extract had the strongest free radical scavenging (31.06 mgTE/g extract) and reducing power abilities (66.95 mgTE/g extract for CUPRAC and 51.03 mgTE/g extract for FRAP). Also, ethyl acetate extract exhibited the strongest effect on the tested enzymes (except for glucosidase). Total phenolic and flavonoid contents were found to be 15.77-25.22 mg GAE/g extract and 0.67-31.44 mg RE/g extract, respectively. The mutagenicity was not seen for all extracts tested, while it was determined that some samples had significant antimutagenicity. In the condition of presence of S9 mix, ethyl acetate and methanol extracts revealed excellent antimutagenic activity (92% and 92%) at a dose of 5000 mu g/plate against 2-aminoflourene (2-AF) for TA98 strain. According to the results of the present study, C. pterocaula can be considered as a potential source for developing new nutraceuticals or pharmaceuticals.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available