↓ Skip to main content

Phytochemical profiling and in vitro screening for anticholinesterase, antioxidant, antiglucosidase and neuroprotective effect of three traditional medicinal plants for Alzheimer’s Disease and…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Phytochemical profiling and in vitro screening for anticholinesterase, antioxidant, antiglucosidase and neuroprotective effect of three traditional medicinal plants for Alzheimer’s Disease and Diabetes Mellitus dual therapy
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12906-018-2140-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohan Penumala, Raveendra Babu Zinka, Jeelan Basha Shaik, Suresh Kumar Reddy Mallepalli, Ramakrishna Vadde, Damu Gangaiah Amooru

Abstract

Extensive epidemiological and clinical studies revealed that Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2D) are most likely to appear simultaneously in aged people as T2D is a major risk factor for AD. Therefore, development of potential multifunctional agents for dual therapy of AD and T2D has received much attention. Buchanania axillaris, Hemidesmus indicus and Rhus mysorensis have been used extensively in popular medicine. The present study was aimed at phytochemical profiling and evaluating multifunctional ability of titled plants in the AD and T2D dual therapy. Methanolic extracts and their derived fractions were evaluated for their inhibitory capacities against acetylcholinesterase (AChE) & butyrylcholinesterase (BuChE), and α- & β-glucosidase besides kinetic analysis of inhibition using methods of Elmann and Shibano, respectively. Antioxidant potency of active fractions was assessed by their DPPH and ABTS radical scavenging activities. Active fractions were tested by the MTT assay to verify cytotoxicity and neuroprotective ability in human nueroblastoma cell lines. Phytochemical screening was done with the aid of spectrophotometric methods. All the methanolic extracts of test plants (BAM, HIM, RMM) showed concentration dependent inhibitory activities against AChE, BuChE, α- and β-glucosidase enzymes. Subsequent fractionation and evaluation revealed that chloroform fractions BAC, HIC and RMC with IC50values of 12.29±2.14, 9.94±2.14, 16.65±1.99 and 27.38±1.24; 28.14±0.9, 5.16±0.22, 11.03±0.5 and 87.64±15.41; 41.35±1.6, 15.86±7.3, 26.04±0.37 and 25.33±0.3 were most prominent with regard to inhibition potential against AChE, BuChE, α- and β-glucosidase, respectively. Kinetic analysis of these active fractions proved that they disclosed mixed-type inhibition against AChE, BuChE, α- and β-glucosidase enzymes. In the MTT assay, active fractions BAC, HIC, RMC showed significant cell viability at high concentrations (400 μg). Moreover, in MTT assay, the active fractions displayed excellent neuroprotective effects against oxidative stress induced cell death and significant cell viability in SK N SH cells at all concentrations. The strong anticholinesterase, antiglucosidase, antioxidant and neuroprotective activities of methanolic extracts and their derived chloroform fractions indicate the potential of Buchanania axillaris, Hemidesmus indicus and Rhus mysorensis as multifunctional therapeutic remedies for the dual therapy of T2D and AD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Student > Master 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 35 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 8%
Chemistry 3 4%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 35 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 March 2018.
All research outputs
#17,932,482
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#2,362
of 3,644 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,104
of 331,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#58
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,644 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,404 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.