4.7 Article

Antidepressant-like and toxicological effects of a standardized aqueous extract of Chrysactinia mexicana A. Gray (Asteraceae) in mice

期刊

JOURNAL OF ETHNOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 171, 期 -, 页码 295-306

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2015.05.055

关键词

Chlysactinia Mexicana; Depression; Toxicity; Damianita; Damiana false

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ethnopharmacological relevance: C. mexicana A. Gray (Asteraceae) is a native of North America plant. In Mexico's folk medicine it is used for the fever, rheumatism and as a diuretic, antispasmodic, general tonic or adaptogenic herb, and as a stimulant agent. The aim of the study was to examine the antidepressant-like properties of an aqueous extract of C mexicana (Cm), in order to scientifically describe its potential value in the management of depressive disorders. To evaluate the acute and subacute toxic effects of Cm and effects on hepatic and biochemical functions in mice. Materials and methods: Antidepressant-like effects of Cm were evaluated in the Forced swimming and suspension tail tests (FST and TST), the ambulatory activity was measure in the Open Field Test (OFT), motor coordination was evaluated in the inverted screen and gyratory roller (IST and Rota-rod), the biochemical and histopathological analysis were carried out. Phytochemical studies of organic and aqueous extracts of Cm were thoroughly conducted. \\ Results: Cm produced a significant reduction of the immobility time both FST and in TST, without affect the ambulatory activity of experimental mice. Cm did not produce any damage in the hepatic functions, nor produce any significant change in the morphological tissue of organs examined. Conclusions: Onysactinia mexicana induces a clear antidepressant-like effect in mice, without affect any basic functions. The consumption of this medicinal plant does not represent risk for health. The chemical analysis showed the flavonoids free and glycosides mainly. (C) 2015 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