4.7 Article

Guaiane-type sesquiterpenoids from the roots of Stellera chamaejasme L. and their neuroprotective activities

期刊

PHYTOCHEMISTRY
卷 183, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2020.112628

关键词

Stellera chamaejasme L. (Thymelaeaceae); Guaiane-type sesquiterpenoids; Calculated NMR and ECD; Neuroprotective effects; Apoptosis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81872766, 81973528]
  2. Key R&D Projects of Liaoning Province [2020JH2/10300058]
  3. Science Research Project of Liaoning [2020-MS-193]
  4. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2019M661135]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nine undescribed guaiane-type sesquiterpenoids, known as stelleraterpenoids A-I, were isolated from the roots of Stellera chamaejasme L. along with seven reported congeners. The compounds showed neuroprotective effects on H2O2-induced damage in human neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells. Stelleraguaianone B exhibited the best activity in inhibiting cell apoptosis compared to the positive control Trolox.
Nine undescribed guaiane-type sesquiterpenoids stelleraterpenoids A-I, along with seven reported congeners, were isolated and identified from the 70% EtOH extract of the roots of Stellera chamaejasme L. Their chemical structures were elucidated on the basis of various spectral data. The relative configurations were determined by their NOESY spectra and comparison between their experimental and calculated NMR data. The absolute configurations were established by the comparison between the experimental and calculated ECD spectra and further by X-ray single-crystal diffraction analysis. The neuroprotective effects of these compounds on the H2O2-induced damage in human neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells were evaluated. Stelleraguaianone B exhibited the better activity with 71.62% cell viability compared to the positive control Trolox (65.05%) at 12.5 mu M, which might be achieved by inhibiting the apoptosis of SH-SY5Y cells based on an annexin V-FITC/PI staining experiment.

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