Affiliations 

  • 1 Faculty of Pharmacy, International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM), Kuantan Campus, 25200, Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia
  • 2 Faculty of Pharmacy, International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM), Kuantan Campus, 25200, Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia. zaidul@iium.edu.my
  • 3 Department of Food Science and Nutrition, King Saud University, Riyadh, 11451, Saudi Arabia
  • 4 Faculty of Science, International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM), Kuantan Campus, 25200, Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia
  • 5 Institute of Tropical Agriculture, University Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM, Serdang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
  • 6 Faculty of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh, Bangladesh
  • 7 Department of Pharmaceutical Technology and Industry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Cyberjaya University College of Medical Science, No. 3410, Jalan Teknokrat 3, Cyber 4, 63000, Cyberjaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
BMC Complement Altern Med, 2017 Mar 31;17(1):181.
PMID: 28359331 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-017-1684-5

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study was aimed to evaluate antioxidant and α-glucosidase inhibitory activity, with a subsequent analysis of total phenolic and total flavonoid content of methanol extract and its derived fractions from Clinacanthus nutans accompanied by comprehensive phytochemical profiling.

METHODS: Liquid-liquid partition chromatography was used to separate methanolic extract to get hexane, ethyl acetate, butanol and residual aqueous fractions. The total antioxidant activity was determined by 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazy (DPPH) radical scavenging and ferric reducing antioxidant power assay (FRAP). The antidiabetic activity of methanol extract and its consequent fractions were examined by α-glucosidase inhibitory bioassay. The chemical profiling was carried out by gas chromatography coupled with quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GC Q-TOF MS).

RESULTS: The total yield for methanol extraction was (12.63 ± 0.98) % (w/w) and highest fractionated value found for residual aqueous (52.25 ± 1.01) % (w/w) as compared to the other fractions. Significant DPPH free radical scavenging activity was found for methanolic extract (63.07 ± 0.11) % and (79.98 ± 0.31) % for ethyl acetate fraction among all the fractions evaluated. Methanol extract was the most prominent in case of FRAP (141.89 ± 0.87 μg AAE/g) whereas most effective reducing power observed in ethyl acetate fraction (133.6 ± 0.2987 μg AAE/g). The results also indicated a substantial α-glucosidase inhibitory activity for butanol fraction (72.16 ± 1.0) % and ethyl acetate fraction (70.76 ± 0.49) %. The statistical analysis revealed that total phenolic and total flavonoid content of the samples had the significant (p 

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.