Abstract
Background and Objective: Chronic diseases are associated with low-grade inflammation and oxidative damage. Traditional medicines have been used to manage these disorders due to their high polyphenol content and potent antioxidant activity. We evaluated the in-vitro anti-diabetic and antioxidant potential of extracts of several medicinal plants namely, Mangifera indica, Terminalia arjuna, Moringa oleifera, Albizia lebbeck, Terminalia chebula and Hippophae rhamnoides.
Methods: Total polyphenol, flavonoid, and saponin contents were estimated by standard methods. Antioxidant activity was measured using 2, 2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) free radical scavenging assay. The anti-diabetic potential was evaluated using in-vitro α-glucosidase inhibition assay.
Results: Terminalia chebula was found to be the richest in both polyphenols (566.5 ± 21.9 μg Gallic acid equivalents/mg of dry weight) and flavonoids (190.67 ± 10.78 quercetin equivalents/mg of dry weight). Extract of Terminalia arjuna was the richest source of saponins (171.92 ± 12.48 μg saponin equivalents/mg of dry weight). All plant extracts showed potent anti-oxidant activity as reflected by their IC50 values in DPPH assay, with Albizia lebbeck (IC50 = 1.35 μg/ml) being the most potent. All plant extracts also showed potent anti-diabetic activity as inferred from their ability to inhibit α- glucosidase, the principal enzyme involved in the metabolism of dietary carbohydrates in the intestine. It was observed that all tested extracts were more potent (IC50 2.53 to 227 μg/ml) in comparison to the standard α-glucosidase inhibitor Acarbose (IC50=2.7 mg/ml).
Conclusion: The plant extracts of Mangifera indica, Terminalia arjuna, Moringa oleifera, Albizia lebbeck, Terminalia chebula, and Hippophae rhamnoides possess potent antioxidant and α- glucosidase inhibitory potential and can aid in the management of postprandial hyperglycemia and oxidative damage.
Keywords: Antidiabetic, antioxidants, hyperglycemia, insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome, oxidative stress.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2018.02.023] [PMID: 29496507]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dci18-0033] [PMID: 30291106]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2230-8210.183480] [PMID: 27366724]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/9092759] [PMID: 28326333]
[PMID: 31333808]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/8962763] [PMID: 27340510]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/527570] [PMID: 24455701]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0973-7847.79096] [PMID: 22096315]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2015-000327] [PMID: 26512331]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/2068370] [PMID: 30622663]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6882-12-173] [PMID: 23038995]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2013.02.003] [PMID: 23961240]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2008-2231-20-37] [PMID: 23351720]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/pop.2015.0181] [PMID: 27124621]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2230-8210.129102] [PMID: 24741507]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/9589472.]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S158513] [PMID: 29731617]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjbas.2016.12.003]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.advms.2017.05.005] [PMID: 28822266]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/5276130] [PMID: 27803762]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5530/pj.2018.6.209]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.05.088] [PMID: 26212963]
[PMID: 23251942]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0973-7847.65325] [PMID: 22228940]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2018.02.001]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fshw.2016.04.001]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2012/436857] [PMID: 22530142]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcme.2016.02.003] [PMID: 28053890]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2221-1691(13)60059-3] [PMID: 23620847]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12906-019-2482-z] [PMID: 30909900]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jfbc.12627]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-695X.2007.00331.x] [PMID: 17888010]