Issue

Vol. 32 No. 9 (2020): Vol 32 Issue 9, 2020

Copyright (c) 2020 AJC

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Variation in Phytochemical Constituents and Antioxidant Potential of Extracts Derived from Leaves of Sansevieria trifasciata var. Laurentii and Sansevieria trifasciata var. Zeylanica (Asparagaceae)

https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2020.22792
Nurul Huda Abdul Wahab
Faculty of Science and Marine Environment, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Terengganu 21030, Malaysia ; Advanced Nano Materials (ANoMa) Research Interest Group, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Terengganu 21030, Malaysia
Yvonne Samuel
Faculty of Science and Marine Environment, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Terengganu 21030, Malaysia
Norhayati Yusuf
Faculty of Science and Marine Environment, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Terengganu 21030, Malaysia ; Biological Security and Sustainability (Bioses) Research Interest Group, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Terengganu 21030, Malaysia
Hanis Mohd Yusoff
Faculty of Science and Marine Environment, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Terengganu 21030, Malaysia ; Advanced Nano Materials (ANoMa) Research Interest Group, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Terengganu 21030, Malaysia

Corresponding Author(s) : Nurul Huda Abdul Wahab

nhuda@umt.edu.my

Asian Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 32 No. 9 (2020): Vol 32 Issue 9, 2020

Abstract

Sansevieria is an ornamental plant that has many hybrids and varieties make them difficult to distinguish. The most common varieties used for medicinal purposes are Sansevieria trifasciatam which is known for cure of many diseases. However, little attention is given to this plant in proving it medicinal worth and capability as an antioxidant agent. This study was initiated to set up a metabolite classes profile and the potential enzymatic antioxidant of the variations of these plants. Crude extracts of S. trifasciata var. Laurentii and S. trifasciata var. Zeylanica were prepared from their leaves, and solvent used has different polarities. Qualitative phytochemical analysis was carried out using the extracts. Phytochemical screening suggested both of these samples contain carbohydrates in all extracts. It also show that flavonoid was found in hexane and ethyl acetate extracts while did not observed in the methanol extracts for both samples. However, alkaloid, phenol and tannin were positive in all of the methanol extracts except for hexane and ethyl acetate extracts. For the biological activity, all extracts were selected for the determination of enzymatic antioxidant activity test using catalase (CAT) assay and guaiacol peroxidase (gPOD) assay using UV-VIS spectrophotometer. Based on the results, CAT specific activity was the highest in methanol extract of S. trifasciata var. Laurentii (3.15 ± 0.50 units/mg protein) compared to S. trifasciata var. Zeylanica (2.20 ± 0.05 units/mg protein). For gPOD specific activity, ethyl acetate extract of S. trifasciata var. Laurentii shows the highest activity which is 1.46 × 10-2 ± 0.02 units/mg protein compared to the other crude extracts.

Keywords

Sansevieria trifasciata var. Laurentii Sansevieria trifasciata var. Zeylanica Phytochemistry Enzymatic antioxidant
Huda Abdul Wahab, N., Samuel, Y., Yusuf, N., & Mohd Yusoff, H. (2020). Variation in Phytochemical Constituents and Antioxidant Potential of Extracts Derived from Leaves of Sansevieria trifasciata var. Laurentii and Sansevieria trifasciata var. Zeylanica (Asparagaceae). Asian Journal of Chemistry, 32(9), 2303–2307. https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2020.22792
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. J.S. Anbu, P. Jayaraj, R. Varatharajan, J. Thomas, J. Jisha and M. Muthappan, Afr. J. Tradit. Complement. Altern. Med., 6, 529 (2009).
  2. B. Ncube and J. van Staden, Molecules, 20, 12698 (2015); https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules200712698
  3. C. Egbuna, M.E. Shahira, H. Tijjani and K.S. Vijay, Synthetic Analogs of Phytochemicals, In: Phytochemistry: An in-silico and in-vitro Update, Springer Nature: Singapore Pte Ltd. pp 23-55 (2019).
  4. R. Mittler, S. Vanderauwera, M. Gollery and F. Van Breusegem, Trends Plant Sci., 9, 490 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2004.08.009
  5. R. Ozgur, B. Uzilday, A.H. Sekmen and I. Turkan, Funct. Plant Biol., 40, 832 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1071/FP12389
  6. S.S. Gill and N. Tuteja, Plant Physiol. Biochem., 48, 909 (2010); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2010.08.016
  7. J.G. Scandalios, Braz. J. Med. Biol. Res., 38, 995 (2005); https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-879X2005000700003
  8. F. Mujeeb, A.F. Khan, P. Bajpai and N. Pathak, Res. J. Pharm. Biol. Chem. Sci., 9, 1484 (2018).
  9. S. Adesegun, G. Ayoola, H. Coker, A. Adepoju-Bello, K. Obaweya, E. Ezennia and T. Atangbayila, Trop. J. Pharm. Res., 7, (2008); https://doi.org/10.4314/tjpr.v7i3.14686
  10. R.S. Bhat and S. Al-Daihan, Asian Pac. J. Trop. Biomed., 4, 189 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1016/S2221-1691(14)60230-6
  11. A. Claiborne, Catalase Activity, CRC Handbook of Methods of Oxygen Radicals Research (1985).
  12. R. Agrawal and M.V. Patwardhan, Indian J. Plant Physiol., 37, 271 (1994).
  13. M.M. Bradford, Anal. Biochem., 72, 248 (1976); https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(76)90527-3
  14. Y. Ji, M. Yu, B. Wang and Y. Zhang, J. Chem. Pharm. Res., 6, 338 (2014).
  15. J.S. Berame, S.M. Cuenca, D.R. Cabilin and M.L. Manaban, J. Phylogenetics Evol. Biol., 05, (2017); https://doi.org/10.4172/2329-9002.1000187
  16. J. Sunilson, P. Jayaraj, R. Varatharajan, J. Thomas, J. James and M. Muthappan, Afr. J. Tradit. Complement. Altern. Med., 6, (2010); https://doi.org/10.4314/ajtcam.v6i4.57191
  17. C. Ikewuchi, C. Ikewuchi, O. Ayalogu and N. Onyeike, J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manag., 14, 103 (2010); https://doi.org/10.4314/jasem.v14i2.57874
  18. R.B. Teponno, C. Tanaka, B. Jie, L.A. Tapondjou and T. Miyamoto, Chem. Pharm. Bull. (Tokyo), 64, 1347 (2016); https://doi.org/10.1248/cpb.c16-00337
Read More
Author biographies is not available.
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 0