Assessment of Anti-Inflammatory and Antimicrobial Potential of Ethanolic Extract of Woodfordia fruticosa Flowers: GC-MS Analysis

Abstract

Currently, the potential utilization of natural plant-derived extracts for medicinal and therapeutic purposes has increased remarkably. The current study, therefore, aimed to assess the antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory activity of modified solvent evaporation-assisted ethanolic extract of Woodfordia fruticosa flowers. For viable use of the extract, qualitative analysis of phytochemicals and their identification was carried out by gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy. Analysis revealed that phenolic (65.62 ± 0.05 mg/g), flavonoid (62.82 ± 0.07 mg/g), and ascorbic acid (52.46 ± 0.1 mg/g) components were present in high amounts, while β-carotene (62.92 ± 0.02 µg/mg) and lycopene (60.42 ± 0.8 µg/mg) were present in lower amounts. The antimicrobial proficiency of modified solvent-assisted extract was evaluated against four pathogenic bacterial and one fungal strain, namely Staphylococcusaureus (MTCC 3160), Klebsiellapneumoniae (MTCC 3384), Pseudomonasaeruginosa (MTCC 2295), and Salmonellatyphimurium (MTCC 1254), and Candidaalbicans (MTCC 183), respectively. The zone of inhibition was comparable to antibiotics streptomycin and amphotericin were used as a positive control for pathogenic bacterial and fungal strains. The extract showed significantly higher (p < 0.05) anti-inflammatory activity during the albumin denaturation assay (43.56-86.59%) and HRBC membrane stabilization assay (43.62-87.69%). The extract showed significantly (p < 0.05) higher DPPH (2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl) scavenging assay and the obtained results are comparable with BHA (butylated hydroxyanisole) and BHT (butylated hydroxytoluene) with percentage inhibitions of 82.46%, 83.34%, and 84.23%, respectively. Therefore, the obtained results concluded that ethanolic extract of Woodfordia fruticosa flowers could be utilized as a magnificent source of phenols used for the manufacturing of value-added food products.

Keywords: antimicrobial activity; antioxidant activity; chromatography; flower extract.

Figure 1

GC-MS chromatogram of Woodfordia fruticosa flower extract showing vital bioactive components.

Figure 2

Chemical structure of bioactive components isolated from Woodfordia fruticosa flower extract (a) γ–Terpinene, (b) Dihydrocarvyl acetate, (c) 1-Decalone (cis-trans), (d) cis-7-Decen-1-al, (e) 2,6-Octadien-1-ol, 3,7-dimethyl-acetate, (E)-(Geranyl acetate), (f) Caryophyllene Epoxide, (g) Tetradecanoic acid, (h) Palmitic anhydride, (i) Cyclopropaneoctanoic acid, (j) Pentadecanoic acid, (k) Pentadecanoic acid, (l) Octadecanoic acid, (m) n- Hexadecanoic acid (n) 3-Decyn-1-ol, (o) 2H-1-Benzopyran-2-one, and (p) gamma-elemene.

Figure 3

Antibacterial activity (zone of inhibition) of Woodfordia fruticosa flower’s dry extract and antibiotic streptomycin against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Data are presented as means ± SEM (n = 3); a, b: Means within the column with different lowercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).

Figure 4

Antifungal activity (zone of inhibition) of Woodfordia fruticosa flower’s dry extract against Candida albicans. Data are presented as means ± SEM (n = 3); a, b: Means within the column with different lowercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).

Figure 5

Time–kill kinetics of Woodfordia fruticosa flower’s dry extract against the growth of food pathogenic bacteria during different time intervals. Data are presented as means ± SEM (n = 3); a–c: Means within the column with different lowercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05); A, B: Means within the row with different uppercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05) from each other.

Figure 6

Time–kill kinetics of Woodfordia fruticosa flower’s dry extract against the growth of pathogenic Candida albicans during different time intervals. Data are presented as means ± SEM (n = 3); a–d: Means within the column with different lowercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).

Figure 7

Total phenol, flavonoid, ascorbic acid content, total β-carotene, and lycopene content of modified solvent evaporated Woodfordia fruticosa flower extract. Data are presented as means ± SEM (n = 3).

Figure 8

Antioxidant activity of Woodfordia fruticosa flower’s dry extract in comparison with natural and synthetic commercially available antioxidant components. Data are presented as means ± SEM (n = 3); a–c: Means within the column with different lowercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).

Figure 9

Anti-inflammatory activity of Woodfordia fruticosa flower dry extract in comparison with standard diclofenac sodium during the HRBC membrane stabilization assay. Data are presented as means ± SEM (n = 3); a, b: Means within the column with different lowercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).

Figure 10

Anti-inflammatory activity of Woodfordia fruticosa flower dry extract in comparison with standard diclofenac sodium during the albumin denaturation assay. Data are presented as means ± SEM (n = 3); a, b: Means within the column with different lowercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).