Paper · 2019 · Revista de Biología Tropical

Antimutagenic activity and identification of antioxidant compounds in the plant Poincianella bracteosa (Fabaceae)

Anna Couto; Irlana Araújo; Alyne Lopes; et al.

4
claims
5
verbatim quotes
14
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Poincianella bracteosa (Tul.) L.P. Queiroz. (Fabaceae), known as catingueira, is traditionally used in medicine to treat catarrhal infections, diarrhea, hepatitis and anemia. However, there are no studies on toxicogenetics effects of P. bracteosa. The present study aimed to investigate the phytochemical profile as well as the mutagenic and antimutagenic potential of P. bracteosa aqueous barks extract in Allium cepa and Mus musculus. Barks from P. bracteosa were collected in Teresina (PI, Brazil) and male Swiss mice (Mus musculus) were provided by the vivarium from the Faculty of Medical Sciences (FACIME) (PI, Brazil). All procedures using animals were approved by the Ethics Committee on the Use of Animals (Protocol No. 07557/15) with five groups (five animals per group). The extract from barks was diluted in distilled water to yield the four concentrations (2, 4, 8 and 16 mg/mL) used in the A. cepa bioassay and the three doses (10, 20 and 40 mg/Kg) administered to the mice. The phytochemical profile was performed by the colorimetric test to identify the main secondary metabolites in the barks extract. After treatment, the roots of A. cepa were washed in distilled water and hydrolyzed (60°C) for 10 min. After hydrolysis, the roots were washed in distilled water and stained with Schiff's reagent (2 h) in the dark. Five thousand meristematic cells (ten slides) were analyzed to determine the mitotic index, the mean number of chromosome alterations and the percentage of damage reduction. For mice, after 24, 48 and 72 h, the blood of tail of each animal was collected for the preparation of two slides per animal. Slides were dried (24 h), fixed in methanol (5 min.), stained with Giemsa (15 min.) and washed with distilled water. For each animal assay, 2,000 normochromatic erythrocytes per mice were evaluated to establish the number of micronuclei and the protective effect. The data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis test (p < 0.05). Phytochemical study of the extract detected reducing sugars and tannins. Probably, the phytochemicals in the extract did not interfere with the cell cycle (A. cepa) nor caused damage to the DNA (A. cepa and mice), and exhibited protective effect in both studied species. The observed data indicate the importance of P. bracteosa bark extract for the inhibition of damage and chemoprevention. However, more studies should be carried out to ensure its protective effect on the genetic material.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 4

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Poincianella bark extract contained reducing sugars and tannins.

Taxon
Poincianella bracteosaCenostigma bracteosumt0
Outcome
reducing sugars and tanninse0

Verbatim

e0

“Phytochemical study of the extract detected reducing sugars and tannins.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1956–2028 · show in text ↑
t0

“Poincianella bracteosa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–102 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The extract probably did not interfere with the Allium cepa cell cycle.

Taxon
A. cepaAllium cepae0
Treatment
phytochemicals in the extracte0
Outcome
cell cyclee0
Direction
did not interferee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Probably, the phytochemicals in the extract did not interfere with the cell cycle (A. cepa) nor caused damage to the DNA (A. cepa and mice), and exhibited protective effect in both studied species.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2029–2226 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The extract probably did not damage Allium cepa DNA.

Taxon
A. cepaAllium cepae0
Treatment
phytochemicals in the extracte0
Outcome
DNA (A. cepa and mice)e0
Direction
nor caused damagee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Probably, the phytochemicals in the extract did not interfere with the cell cycle (A. cepa) nor caused damage to the DNA (A. cepa and mice), and exhibited protective effect in both studied species.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2029–2226 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The extract showed a protective effect in Allium cepa.

Taxon
A. cepaAllium cepae0
Treatment
phytochemicals in the extracte0
Outcome
protective effecte0
Direction
protectivee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Probably, the phytochemicals in the extract did not interfere with the cell cycle (A. cepa) nor caused damage to the DNA (A. cepa and mice), and exhibited protective effect in both studied species.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2029–2226 · show in text ↑

botanical · organism · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 5 positive, 10 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 papers →

botanical · control · Allium cepa (onion)Results agree

11 papers: 11 positive, 0 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.