| Letters |
|
|
|
|
| Phenolic contents and antioxidant capacities of Thai-Makham Pom (Phyllanthus emblica L.) aqueous extracts |
| Sitthichai Iamsaard, Supatcharee Arun, Jaturon Burawat, Wannisa Sukhorum, Jintanaporn Wattanathorn, Somsak Nualkaew, Bungorn Sripanidkulchai |
| Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand; Center for Research and Development of Herbal Health Products, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand; Integrative Complementary Alternative Medicine Research and Development Group, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand; Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy, Mahasarakham University, Mahasarakham 44150, Thailand |
|
|
|
Abstract This study was aimed at determining the amount of the total phenolic contents (TPCs) and to evaluate the antioxidant activities of different extracts (leaves, branches, and barks) of Phyllanthus emblica (PE) L., a traditional medicinal plant that has been recently used as an anti-inflammatory, wound healing, and anti-aging agent. PE leaves, branches, or barks were aqueous-extracted and the amount of the TPC was determined using a Folin-Ciocalteu reagent method. The antioxidant activity of each PE extract was as-sessed using 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl radical scavenging and ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) methods. Among plant extracts, the PE bark extract possessed the highest TPC. The TPCs of the PE leaves, branches, and barks were (513.83±20.52), (650.50±9.76), and (2196.33±11.02) mg gallic acid equivalent/g dried material, respectively. Interest-ingly, the IC50, which was calculated from 50% inhibition against concentration (µg/ml) plot, of the PE leaf ((7.72±0.25) µg/ml), branch ((6.92±0.22) µg/ml), or bark ((6.54±0.27) µg/ml) extract was lower than that of the ascorbic acid ((8.06±0.01) µg/ml). As calibrated to the standard, the potent reducing power abilities of the PE leaf, branch, and bark extracts were (696.73±78.48), (729.33±36.9), and (966±64.73) mg/g ascorbic acid equivalent, respectively.
|
|
Received: 10 November 2013
Published: 06 April 2014
|
|
|
|
Viewed |
|
|
|
Full text
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
Cited |
|
|
|
|
| |
Shared |
|
|
|
|
| |
Discussed |
|
|
|
|
