4.1 Article

Effect of dietary supplementation of ginger and turmeric rhizomes on ectonucleotidases, adenosine deaminase and acetylcholinesterase activities in synaptosomes from the cerebral cortex of hypertensive rats

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED BIOMEDICINE
卷 14, 期 1, 页码 59-70

出版社

UNIV SOUTH BOHEMIA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jab.2015.06.001

关键词

Ginger; Hypertension; L-NAME; Ectonucleotidase; ADA; Acetylcholinesterase

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ginger and turmeric rhizomes are used in folk medicine for the treatment of several cerebrovascular diseases with limited scientific basis for their action. Hence, in this study, we investigate the effects of two Zingiberaceae varieties (ginger and turmeric) on ectonucleotidases (NTPDase and 50-nucleotidase), adenosine deaminase (ADA) and acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activities in synaptosomes of cerebral cortex from L-NAME induced hypertensive rats. The animals were divided into seven groups (n = 10): normotensive control rats; hypertensive rats; hypertensive rats treated with atenolol; normotensive and hypertensive rats treated with 4% supplementation of turmeric and ginger rhizomes, respectively. After 14 days of pre-treatment with both rhizomes the animals were induced with hypertension by oral administration of L-NAME. The results revealed an increase of ATP and AMP hydrolysis as well as ADA and AChE activities of cerebral cortex synaptosomes in induced rats when compared with the control. The supplementation of both rhizomes prevented these alterations by decreasing ATP and AMP hydrolysis and ADA and AChE activities in cerebral cortex. In conclusion, this study demonstrated that both rhizomes interfere with the purinergic and cholinergic neurotransmission in cerebral cortex of hypertensive rats. Therefore, we can suggest that both rhizomes exert neuroprotective potential under hypertensive state. (C) 2015 Faculty of Health and Social Studies, University of South Bohemia in Ceske Budejovice. Published by Elsevier Sp. z o.o. 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

4.1
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