4.7 Article

Identification of the protein components displaying immunomodulatory activity in aged garlic extract

期刊

JOURNAL OF ETHNOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 124, 期 3, 页码 384-390

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2009.05.030

关键词

Aged garlic extract; ASA I; ASA II; Garlic agglutinins; Immunomodulatory proteins; Mitogenic activity

资金

  1. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), New Delhi [MLP-040]
  2. IRIS ID [2006-04440]
  3. Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), New Delhi

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ethnopharmacological relevance: Traditionally, garlic (Allium sativum L; Alliaceae) has been known to boost the immune system. Aged garlic has more potent immunomodulatory effects than raw garlic. These effects have been attributed to the transformed organosulfur compounds; the identity of the immunomodulatory, proteins in aged garlic extract (AGE) is not known. Aim of the study: The major aims are to examine the changes occurring in the protein fraction during ageing of garlic and to identify the immunomodulatory proteins. Materials and methods: Changes occurring in garlic during ageing have been examined by protein quantitation and gel electrophoresis. Purification and identification of the immunomodulatory proteins have been achieved by Q-Sepharose chromatography and mitogenic activity. Results: Only two major proteins (12-14 kDa range by SDS-PAGE) are observed in AGE. The purified protein components QA-1, QA-2, and QA-3 display immunomodulatory and mannose-binding activity; QA-2 shows the highest mitogenic activity. The identity of QA-2 and QA-1 proteins with the garlic lectins ASA I and ASA II, respectively, has been confirmed by hemagglutination analysis. QA-3 exhibits mitogenic activity, but no hemagglutination activity. Conclusions: The immunomodulatory, activity of AGE is also contributed by immunomodulatory proteins. The major immunomodulatory proteins have been identified as the well-known garlic lectins. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. 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