4.7 Article

Antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effect of polysaccharides from Lobophora variegata on zymosan-induced arthritis in rats

期刊

INTERNATIONAL IMMUNOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 11, 期 9, 页码 1241-1250

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2011.04.003

关键词

Arthritis; Heterofucans; Cell influx; TNF-alpha; NMR; Antioxidant activity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzes the action of sulfated polysaccharides, fucans, from algae Lobophora variegata on zymosan-induced arthritis in rats. Groups of fucans, obtained after acetone fractionation (0.3-2.0 volumes), were denominated F0.3, F0.5, F0.8, F1, F1.5, and F2. The results that F1 contained a high yield in relation to other fractionated fucans. Chemical and structure analysis of F1 was performed by nuclear magneticresonance (NMR) and infrared (IR) spectroscopies. The in vitro antioxidant activities of the fraction F1 were also observed. Thus, 2 mg/mL of F1 inhibited the phosphomolybdate in the total antioxidant activity assay. The EC50 values were 0.3 mg/mL and 0.12 mg/mL for superoxide and hydroxyl radicals, respectively. Fucan F1 (25, 50, and 75 mg/kg by body weight), diclofenac sodium (10 mg/kg), and L-NAME (25 mg/kg) were administered intraperitoneally (i.p.) in rats, according to body weight of different groups of animals (n = 6). After 6 h, analyses of cell influx and nitrite levels were conducted. Then after 96 h, analysis of edema and concentration of serum TNF-alpha was carried out along with histopathological analysis. F1 at 25, 50, and 75 mg/kg i.p. by body weight reduced cell influx in 52.1-96.7% and nitric oxide level in 27.2-39% compared with the control group. The reduction of edema and serum TNF-alpha was observed at 50 mg/kg i.p. (p<0.001). These results suggest that this heterofucan from the brown algae L variegata has potential anti-inflammatory activity in acute zymosan-induced arthritis in rats and that antioxidant activity promotes modulation in the cellular redox state. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据