Evaluation of the in Vitro Biological Activities and Phytochemical Profiling of Eight Ficus Species Collected in Zambia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
t UCL SCHOOL OF PHARMACY EVALUATION OF THE IN VITRO BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITIES AND PHYTOCHEMICAL PROFILING OF EIGHT FICUS SPECIES COLLECTED IN ZAMBIA 2014 By: Mrs Angela Gono Bwalya 1st Supervisor: Dr Jose M Prieto-Garcia 2nd Supervisor: Dr Sudax Murdan Former 1st Supervisor: Dr Deniz Tasdemir 1 DECLARATION I, Angela Gono Bwalya declare that this dissertation is my own work. It is being submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph. D) in the School of Pharmacy, University College London, United Kingdom. It has not been submitted before for any degree or examination in any other University. Signed:..........................................this day................................................2014 2 To my sons Nkandu, Kudakwashe and Luse Bwalya 3 ABSTRACT Infectious diseases are responsible for an overwhelming number of deaths and morbidity worldwide. In tropical regions of the world, in particular, developing countries like Zambia, poor health is prevalent and diseases such as malaria, meningitis, pneumonia, tuberculosis and gastrointestinal infections strongly persist. Folkloric medicines are still actively used against some of these infections as primary care before seeking conventional treatment at hospitals. Members of the genus Ficus (Moraceae) are traditionally used in Zambia against many diseases caused by bacterial, fungal and protozoal infections. Thus according to the plant parts used traditionally for herbal preparations, aerial and root parts of eight Ficus species namely; F. ingens, F. lutea, F. natalensis, F. ovata, F. sansibarica subsp. macrosperma, F. sycomorus subsp. gnaphalocarpa, F. sycomorus subsp. sycomorus and F. wakefieldii were collected from different parts of Zambia. The main aim of this thesis was to evaluate the medicinal potential of members of the genus Ficus. This was achieved by three objectives, which involved the phytochemical profiling of the crude extracts and subextracts of the Ficus for their constituents using chromatographic methods such as thin layer chromatography (TLC), proton Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (1H NMR) and high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Secondly, the extracts were screened for various biological activities after which they were evaluated against recombinant FAS-II elongation enzymes, FabG, FabI and FabZ as potential targets in liver stage malaria parasites. In this case, finely ground dried plant material was extracted with methanol (MeOH) to yield the crude methanol extracts (CR-MeOH) which, were further partitioned to provide a coarse separation of the crude extracts according to polarity. The three subextracts obtained included n-hexane, chloroform (CHCl3) and aqueous methanol (aq-MeOH). The obtained extracts and subextracts were screened for biological activities such as: antifungal and antibacterial activities using the broth dilution and agar disc diffusion assays, antitubercular activity using the MTT assay, antischistosomal activity using the microscopic in vitro assay. In addition, antiprotozoal activitites which included antileshmanial activity using an assay against amastigotes of L. donovani strain 4 MHOM/ET/67/L82, trypanocidal activity against T. cruzi and T. brucei rhodesiense STIB 900 strain, and antiplasmodial activity by modified [3H]-hypoxanthine incorporation assay, using the chloroquine/pyrimethamine resistant K1 strain were performed. Cytotoxity activity was also performed using rat skeletal myoblasts L6-cells. The chemical profiling was done by TLC, NMR and RP-HPLC. Meanwhile the chemical compound isolation for F. sansibarica was attempted by different chromatographic techniques and characterization by spectroscopic methods. The phytochemical profiling revealed the presence of closely related polyphenolic compounds to which some of the biological activities were attributed to. For instance, the antibacterial and the FAS-II enzyme inhibition activities were mostly retained in the aq- MeOH subextracts, which were composed of very polar metabolites including flavonoids. Antiplasmodial activity was observed mostly in the less polar metabolites which were retained in the hexane and CHCl3 subextracts of the stem barks. This pattern was similar with antitrypanosomal and antileishmanial activities, though with lesser sensitivity. The same subextracts including those of the root barks showed the most activity against M. tuberculosis with MIC values of 256 and 128 μg/ml, and against Schistosoma, for both larval and adult worms. The extracts did not exert any antifungal activity by the agar disc diffusion method we used. Detailed phytochemical investigation of the leaves of F. sansibarica was performed, and led to the isolation of two compounds; epicatechin and apigenin-6-C-glucoside from the chloroform and aq. MeOH subextracts respectively. The predominant constituent of the CR-MeOH extract of F. sansibarica was identified as having a molecular weight of 432 g/mol by LC-MS analysis which could be set as an identification chemical marker for F. sansibarica. The results highlight the potential that Ficus species could have as a valuable source for potent compounds which can be identified as scaffolds for the development of novel liver stage antimalarial drugs. Our results support previous research on the antimicrobial activity of Ficus species and they also provide an in vitro scientific basis supporting the use of Ficus species in traditional herbal preparations against some bacterial and parasitic infections. 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Firstly, I would like to sincerely thank my supervisor Dr Jose Prieto-Garcia for his supervision, support and the time he devoted towards my progress and final completion of my PhD, having taken over from Professor Dr Deniz Tasdemir. His encouragement and patience was enormous. I also thank Professor Dr Deniz Tasdemir for her supervision and knowledge she has impacted on me. Her interest towards this research encouraged me so much, and the time she devoted towards my progress. Her expertise in the area of natural products is very invaluable and I thank her for letting me tap into her wealth of knowledge. I thank Professor Patrick Phiri, the taxonomist who greatly helped me with the collection and identification of the plant materials. To my family, words fail me as I sincerely thank my husband Gregory for supporting me to pursue this PhD, while he devoted himself to raising our sons. I thank him for his encouragement, prayers, moral and financial support. I thank my sons Nkandu, Kudakwashe and Luse for their support. They understood that I couldn’t always be available for them. I also thank my wonderful brother and sisters for the support, the list are endless. In this research work, there are a number of institutions we collaborated with, which I would like to appreciate for their facilities and expert staff who generously rendered support to my work. These include; 1.The Department of Medical Parasitology and Infection Biology, Basel, Switzerland for performing the in vitro antiplasmodial activity assay. 2. Tuberculosis Research Unit, Department of Respiratory Medicine, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London. 3. St. John's Institute of Dermatology, GSTS Pathology, London under Dr Susan Howel’s supervision, for the antifungal assays. 4. The Department of Infectious and Tropical Diseases of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. I say thank you in particular to, Dr Nuha Mansour, for helping with the antischistosomal assays. 6 Lastly, but not the least, I thank the support of the UK Commonwealth Scholarship Commission for financial support rendered to me to undertake this research. I also thank the Rick-Cannell Travel Fund of the School of Pharmacy, University of London, for funding my field work. 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION ............................................................................................................ 2 ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................ 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................ 8 TABLE OF FIGURES .................................................................................................. 14 CONTENT OF TABLES .............................................................................................. 17 ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................... 19 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 24 1.1 Fungal Infections .............................................................................................25 1.1.1 Dermatophytes ......................................................................................... 26 1.1.1.1 Treatment ......................................................................................... 26 1.1.2 Yeasts (Candidiasis) ................................................................................ 28 1.1.2.1 Treatment ......................................................................................... 28 1.1.3 Moulds (Aspergillosis)............................................................................. 29 1.1.3.1 Treatment ......................................................................................... 29 1.2 Bacterial infections ..........................................................................................30