GET THE APP
Phytochemical Evaluation of Asparagus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilianum Leaves
Der Pharma Chemica- Journals on medicinal chemistry

Der Pharma Chemica
Journal for Medicinal Chemistry, Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Pharmaceutical Sciences and Computational Chemistry

ISSN: 0975-413X
All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission Systemof respective journal.

Research - Der Pharma Chemica ( 2022) Volume 14, Issue 1

View PDF Download PDF

Phytochemical Evaluation of Asparagus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilianum Leaves

Sumitra Nain*, Ruchi Singh, Samriti Faujdar and Sarvesh Paliwal
 
Department of Pharmacy, Banasthali Vidyapith, Banasthali, Rajasthan-304022, India
 
*Corresponding Author:
 Sumitra Nain, Department of Pharmacy, Banasthali Vidyapith, Banasthali, Rajasthan-304022, India, Email: nainsumitra@gmail.com

Received: 21-Dec-2021, Manuscript No. dpc-21-43612; Accepted Date: Dec 23, 2021 ; Editor assigned: 23-Dec-2021, Pre QC No. dpc-21-43612; Reviewed: 08-Jan-2022, QC No. dpc-21-43612; Revised: 14-Jan-2022, Manuscript No. dpc-21-43612; Published: 26-Jan-2022, DOI: 10.4172/0975-413X.14.1.10-21

Abstract

Background: This study had basically focused in revealing the existence of various active principles viz. steroids, triterpenoids, glycosides, alkaloids, etc. in the leaves of Asparagus racemosus by performing phytochemical evaluation of various types of extracts. Subsequently, explore the leaf extracts of Chlorophytum borivilianum for revealing the existence of several phytoconstituents. The extracts obtained by Soxhlet method were evaluated for pH, color, and percentage yield. Thus, in this research work, researchers evaluated the physicochemical, phytochemical evaluation and characterization by subjected to standard procedures.

Results: This study claimed that the ethanolic and Aqueous extract of Asparagus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilianum displayed overwhelming concentration of phytoconstituents viz., carbohydrates, terpenoid (saponins), steroids, flavonoids, proteins, free amino acids, glycosides, alkaloids, tannins, mucilages, etc.

Conclusions: Thus, the ethanolic and aqueous extract of both plants has shown positive and effective reports. Therefore, these both extracts were subjected to standard procedure for the characterization by HPTLC and TLC. The present study includes the detailed exploration of phytochemical constituents found in the leaves of Asparagus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilianum.

Keywords

Safed musli; Steroids; Triterpenoids; Saponins

Introduction

Currently in developing countries, medicinal plants are in high trend for different therapeutic application and for maintaining good health. Chlorophytum borivilianum is commonly known as safed musli or musli [1]. It is a herb belonging to a family “Asparagaceae” consist of lanceolate leaves. Its leaves are eaten as vegetable & roots are good health tonics. It is indigenous in thick forests of India. Since antiquity Chlorophytum borivilianum have a great economic potential due to high medicinal properties. It consists of saponins, alkaloids, terpenoids, carbohydrates, phenols, resins, mucilage sugars etc. Chlorophytum borivilianum have approx 55-60 cm length with short, white flowers, long slender leaves (20-70 cm long & 2-3 cm wide) and thick, fleshy rhizome [2, 3].

The Latin word “herba” and French word “herbe” gives an English word “herb” [1, 2]. In recent studies “herb” means any part of the plant like roots, stem, leaves, fruits, flowers etc. and also non-woody plants but in old age “herb” means only non- woody plants [2, 3]. The herbal plants have various medicinal properties and used as food, perfume, medicine, ornamental plants, spiritual faith, etc. Since old ages, when the mankind itself started, human beings started depending on nature for their basic needs like shelter, clothing, food, medicine, fragrance, transportation, etc [1-3]. In developing countries many researchers are working on herbal plants as these are showing dominant effect from continuous long use in the health care system. In developed as well as developing countries herbal plants have dynamic part in developing new drug discovery [3]. Herbal plants have sole role in treating deadly diseases like heart attacks, cancer, hepatitis, AIDS, etc [4]. Globally, India is the vast biodiversity- rich country having traditional and medicinal importance of herbal plants in the field of homeopathy, Ayurveda, unani and siddha since ancient times.

Various phytochemical constituents like steroidal saponins, beta sitosterol, stigmasterol are found in Chlorophytum borivilianum but the key pharmacologic phytoconstituent is saponin having various therapeutic applications. Saponins have unique physical property i.e., “soap like formation”. If it is dissolved in liquid, then it will give foam like formation while agitation. It is miscible in both aqueous as well as in oily solution [7, 8]. The chemical structure of saponin includes the attachment of glycosides and sugars to another organic moiety i.e., steroid or triterpenoid. Thus, saponin is also known as triterpenoid saponins or steroidal saponins. Many researchers have done pharmacological studies on tubers of Chlorophytum borivilianum showing many beneficial therapeutic effects viz., hypocholesterolemic, hypolipidemic, anti-oxidant and various other activities [9].

Asparagus racemosus is commonly known as Satavar, Shatavari, etc. It is indigenous to the Himalayan region of north India. Its height is 2-3m with short, spiky stems having white flowers and blackish-purple, globular berries. Its roots are adventitious and tuberous going deep in gravelly, rocky soil. It belongs to a family “Asparagaceae”. Carbohydrates, glycosides, steroidal saponins, flavonoids, alkaloids and mucilage are the main active principles of Asparagus racemosus [10].

Chlorophytum borivilianum

Traditionally, Chlorophytum borivilianum plant is a rare ayurvedic herb having lanceolate leaves found in thick forest regions of India [11]. Now it is being cultivated because of strong economic potential and several usage properties viz. adaptogenic compounds, aphrodisiac, anti-inflammatory and used in arthritis, cancer, and diabetes. Chlorophytum borivilianum is commonly known as safed musli but due to the coloration of its root, referred as White gold [12]. The roots are rich in several active constituents like saponins and polysaccharides. There is various pharmacological activity of Chlorophytum borivilianum viz. anxiolytic, aphrodisiac, immunomodulatory activity, anthelmintic, antiulcer, antistress, anti-tumor, antioxidant, antidiabetic, antimicrobial, etc. Chlorophytum borivilianum is a peculiar gift of nature to mankind. Traditionally the leaves of Chlorophytum borivilianum are used for different activities like – aphrodisiac activity, culinary as well as vegetables [10-13].

Classification

Kingdom: Plantae

Order: Asparagales

Family: Asparagaceae

Sub family: Agavoideae

Genus: Chlorophytum

Species: borivilianum

Asparagus racemosus

Asparagus racemosus is a traditional plant found in India and regions of Himalayas used for treating dyspepsia, constipation, diarrhea, bronchitis, dementia, diabetes, etc. Asparagus racemosus is a species of Asparagus, commonly known as satavar, shatavari, etc and indigenous to tropical and subtropical region of India [14]. It is a woody climber grows 2-3m tall but roots go deep in soil. The demand of Asparagus racemosus is constantly high due to its various medicinal uses [15]. The whole plant of Asparagus racemosus including leaves and roots are especially useful in traditional Ayurvedic medicine [16]. Generally, Asparagus racemosus plants are found in India, some regions of Himalayas and all over the region of Sri Lanka, Asia, Australia, etc. It has many pharmacological effects namely: antitussive, antisecretory, gastrointestinal effects, antibacterial, antiprotozoal activity, apoptogenic activity, molluscicidal effect, antihepatotoxic activity, effect on uterus, etc. Generally, all the therapeutic uses of Asparagus racemosus are described in I.P. and B.P. and in Ayurveda, Siddha and Unani. Asparagus racemosus crop are generally resistant to pest and insects [17-21]. These are properly grown in hot climate and well- drained black soil [22].

Classification

Kingdom: Plantae

Order: Asparagales

Family: Asparagaceae

Subfamily: Asparagoideae

Genus: Asparagus

Species: racemosus

Materials and Methods

Selection of the plants on the basis of medicinal use and ethnobotanical survey

The leaves of Chlorophytum borivilianum and Asparagus racemosus are abundant in saponins, sterols, β-sitosterols, flavonoids, etc., according to different reports [23]. The test components would be the leaves of Chlorophytum borivilianum and Asparagus racemosus.

Collection, storage and authenticity of identification

Asparagus racemosus leaves have been collected from the campus of the University of Gopal Narayan Singh, Jamuhar, Sasaram (Bihar), and Chlorophytum borivilianum leaves was collected from the Indrapuri-Rohtas Sasaram district (Bihar). Plant authentication was performed by the Botanist, Department of Botany, National College of Bihar, University of Patna (Bihar). The leaves of these two plants were desiccated without drying.

Physicochemical Evaluation

The dried parts were subjected to the normal process of determining the different physicochemical parameters.

Successive Extraction of Plant material

Samples were broken and tested with 40 meshes. Dried shade into coarse powdered plant material (250 gms) i.e., dried leaves of Asparagus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilianum were loaded into Soxhlet machines and extracted with petroleum ether (60-62ºC), Chloroform, ethanol and water until complete extraction. After completing the extraction, the solvent was extracted by distillation. Dried the extracts using a rotator evaporator. The rest was then stored in a dessicator and a percentage yield was determined [12-14].

Phytochemical investigation

According to the standard procedures, the various leaves extracts of Asparagus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilianum i.e., Pet. Ether extract, Chloroform extract, Ethanolic extract and Aqueous extract were obtained and after extraction they were subjected for phytochemical screening to determine the presence of various phytochemicals present in the extracts [11-13].

Various extracts obtained after extraction were subjected to phytochemical experiments to determine the existence of several phytochemicals present in extracts. Standard procedures were adopted to conduct the research [14, 15].

Characterization of extracts by TLC and HPTLC

The HPTLC instrument was used for the identification of respective chemical constituents present in the leaves of Chlorophytum borivilianum and Asparagus racemosus.

Development of thin layer chromatography

The TLC profile was determined for ethanolic and aqueous extract of ARL: Asparagus racemosus (Leaves) and CBL: Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves) using following technique.

Experimental technique [12]

Preparation and activation of plate

Liquid mud (1 part silica G gel and 3 parts pure water) was filtered out of the pestle glass and spread over glass plates (10cm by 20cm) by pouring and allowed to dry in air. The plates work an hour at 110-120 degrees and are placed on desiccators to cool.

Preparation of sample solution

About 1% solution of methanolic extract was prepared and suspended impurities were filtered off.

Saturation of chamber

The solvent system was repaired and poured into the TLC chamber. A sheet of filter paper was inserted into it to provide quick filling and to prevent the bending effect. The room was closed by placing a glass plate at the mouth of the room with paraffin wax.

Application of spots

Spots of sample solutions are applied with the help of small capillaries on a plate, at a distance of about 1.5 cm from the ground and allowed to dry in the air. The distance between the two spots is kept at least 10 mm.

Development of chromatograms

After filling, the plates are placed in a chamber and the solvent is allowed to work until the solvent height of about 15 cm is reached at the point of view, removed and marked. It is then allowed to dry in air and sprayed with detecting reagent and stored in the oven for 5 minutes. Then the Rf values are calculated.

Development of HPTLC

Fingerprint of ethanolic and aqueous extracts of ARL: Asparagus racemosus (Leaves) and CBL: Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves) is made using the CAMAG HPTLC (Switzerland) system with the automatic Linomat IV additive. . The analysis was performed in an air-conditioned room maintained at 220ºC. HPTLC is made of pre-assembled silica gel HPTLC aluminum plates 60 F254 (20cm 10cm / 10cm 10cm, 0.2mm thick, 5-6μm particle size, E. Merck, Germany). 5-10μl sample solution (1μg / ml) was identified as a 4mm or 5mm diameter band using automatic samples fitted with a 100 μl Hamilton syringe. Plates are developed using a solvent system prepared i.e. EA: M: H2O; 7.5: 2: 4 for ethanolic and methanolic extraction respectively in the CAMAG double plate development room which was lined with filter paper and filled in front with a 30ml cell section. Enhanced plates are dried in the air and photographed. A spectrodensitometer (Scan 3, CAMAG) equipped with WINCATS software for planar chromatography controller was used for densitometry measurement and data processing. Absorbance / emission was a measurement mode with a scan speed of 20 mm / sec. Fragment dots are scanned from 200 to 800 nm to record their UV-VIS spectrum and detect high wavelength wavelengths. Densitogram was recorded at wavelength of high absorption of a different sample observed [13-14].

Result

In this research work different solvents were used to prepare various extracts and researchers evaluated the percentage yield of different extracts of both the plants i.e. Asparagus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilianum, shown below in Table 1 and Table-2.

Table 1: The percentage Yield of Various Extract of Asparagus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilianum leaves
S/No. Extract Parameters
Nature of Extract Color pH % Yield
1. PEEARL Semi Solid Dark Brown 5.89 0.67
2. CEARL Semi solid Creamish Brown 6.03 3.09
3. EEARL Semi Solid Blackish Brown 6.09 8.11
4. AEARL Solid Powder Light brown 6.05 15.09
5. PEECBL Semi Solid Dark Green 6.09 0.86
6. CECBL Semi Solid        Green 6.09 2.98
7. EECBL Semi solid Light Brown 7.87 7.77
8. AECBL Semi Solid Dark brown 6.08 11.99
Abbreviations
PEEARL=Petroleum Ether extract of Asparagus racemosus (Leaves)
CEARL=Chloroform extract of Asparagus racemosus (Leaves)
EEARL=Ethanolic extract of Asparagus racemosus (Leaves)
AEARL=Aqueous extract of Asparagus racemosus (Leaves)
PEECBL=Petroleum Ether extract of Chlorophytum borivilianum(Leaves)
CECBL=Chloroform extract of Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves)
EECBL=Ethanolic extract of Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves)
AECBL=Aqueous extract of Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves)

Table 2: Preliminary Phytochemical Screening of Asparagus racemosus leaves
S/No. Constituents ARL
PEEARL CEARL EEARL AEARL
1 Carbohydrates √ √ X √
2 Glycosides X X √ √
3 Alkaloids X X √ √
4 Protein & Amino acid X X √ √
5 Tannins & Phenolic compounds X X √ X
6 Flavonoids X √ √ X
7 Fixed oil and Fats X X X X
8 Steriods & Triterpenoids √ √ √ √
9 Waxes X X X X
10 Mucilage & Gums √ X X X
√ = Present
X =Absent

Physicochemical Evaluation

According to the standard procedures the dried plant parts of ARL: Asparagus racemosus (Leaves) and CBL: Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves) were used for the determination of various physicochemical parameters (Table 3-5). The results were presented in table 5.1 and Graph 1.

Table 3: Preliminary Phytochemical Screening of Chlorophytum borivilianum leaves
S/No. Constituents CBL
PEECBL CEPCBL EECBL AECBL
1 Carbohydrates X √ √ √
2 Glycosides X √ √ √
3 Alkaloids √ √ √ √
4 Protein & Amino acid X X √ √
5 Tannins & Phenolic compounds √ √ √ √
6 Flavonoids X X X X
7 Fixed oil and Fats X X X X
8 Steriods & Triterpenoids √ √ √ √
9 Waxes X X X X
10 Mucilage & Gums X X X X
√ = Present; X = Absent

Table 4: Development of TLC plates
S. No. Solvent System Inference
1.        Chloroform Overlapping
2.        Ethyl acetate Overlapping
3.        Methanol Overlapping
4.        Ethyl acetate: hexane: methanol (9:90:1) Overlapping
5.        Chloroform:  benzene: methanol (20:2:1) Tailing
6.        Ethyl acetate: hexane: chloroform (50:50:5) Tailing
7.        Ethyl acetate: hexane: chloroform (50:60:3) Poor
8.        Chloroform: Ethyl acetate: formic acid (2.5: 2: 0.5v/v) Satisfactory
9.        Toluene: ethyl acetate (50:50) Overlapping
10.    Toluene: ethyl acetate: Glacial acetic acid: formic acid (20: 45: 20:5) Overlapping
11.    Toluene: ethyl acetate: formic acid (3: 2: 0.4v/v) Satisfactory
12.    Ethyl Acetate:methanol:water (7.5: 2: 4) Best
Adsorbent: Silica gel, Detecting reagent: Ferric chloride solution and in UV at 254 nm

Table 5: TLC profile of ethanolic and aqueous extract of ARL: Asparagus racemosus (Leaves) and CBL: Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves)
S./No. Name No. of spots (Visible) No. of spots Rf values
(At 254nm) ( in visible)
1 EEAARL 2 2 0.51, 0.68
2 AEARL 2 2 0.49, 0.70
3 EECBL 2 2 0.47, 0.72
4 AECBL 2 2 0.48. 0.71
Adsorbent: Silica gel G, Detecting reagent: Ferric chloride solution and in UV at 254 nm, Solvent System: Ethyl Acetate: methanol: water (7.5: 2: 4 v/v)

Table 5.1: Physicochemical Evaluation of Asparagus racemosus leaves and Chlorophytum borivilianum leaves
S/No. Parameters ARL CBL
1. FOM 1.19±0.02 2.07±0.28
2. LOD 4.32±0.15 3.09±0.12
3. TA 8.29±0.08 6.09±0.12
4. AIS 1.01±0.01 1.03±0.02
5. WSA 2.19±0.12 2.02±0.03
6. SI 6.07±0.13 4.12±0.11
7. WSEV 17.23±1.08 16.15±1.12
8 ESEV 8.08±1.11 10.05±1.03
derpharmachemica-Physicochemical

Graph 1: Physicochemical Evaluation of Asparagus racemosus leaves and Chlorophytum borivilianum leaves

Successive extraction of selected herbs

The shade dried coarsely powdered plant material of ARL: Asparagus racemosus leaves) and CBL: Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves) was extracted with petroleum ether, Chloroform, ethanol and water. The extraction was done by soxhlet method for dried plant material of ARL and CBL.

The extracts obtained were evaluated for pH, color and % yield. The results were presented in table 5.2, 5.3 and graph 2 & 3.

Table 5.2: Estimation of % Yield of Various Extract of Asparagus racemosus leaves
S/No. Extract Parameters
Nature of Extract Color pH % Yield
1 PEEARL Semi Solid Creamish brown 6.98 0.78
2 CEARL Semi solid Brown 7.02 2.11
3 EEARL Semi Solid Light brown 7.1 9.21
4 AEARL Solid Powder Dark brown 7.03 16.02

Table 5.3: Estimation of % Yield of Various Extract of Chlorophytum borivilianum leaves
S/No. Extract Parameters
Nature of Extract Color pH % Yield
1 PEECBL Semi Solid Green 7.01 0.68
2 CECBL Semi Solid Light green 7 1.89
3 EECBL Semi solid Brown 6.99 8.88
4 AECBL Semi Solid Blackish brown 7.02 12.45

Preliminary phytochemical investigation of extracts

The various extract of ARL: Asparagus racemosus (Leaves) and CBL: Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves) obtained post-extraction were subjected to phytochemical experiments to determine the presence of existing phytochemical extracts. A standard procedure was adopted to conduct research.

The preliminary phytochemical screening revealed the presence of Carbohydrates, Alkaloids, Glycosides, Flavonoids, Tannins, Phenolic compounds, and Amino acid, Saponins, Steroids, Gums and Proteins.

The results for ARL are presented in table 5.4 and for CBL are presented in table 5.5.

Table 5.4: Preliminary Phytochemical Screening of Asparagus racemosus leaves
S/No. Constituents ARL
PEEARL CEARL EEARL AEARL
1 Carbohydrates + + - +
2 Glycosides - - + +
3 Alkaloids - - + +
4 Protein & Amino acid - - + +
5 Tannins & Phenolic compounds - - + -
6 Flavonoids - + + +
7 Fixed oil and Fats - - - -
8 Steriods & Triterpenoids + + + +
9 Waxes - - - -
10 Mucilage & Gums - - - -
+ = Present; - = Absent

Table 5.5: Preliminary Phytochemical Screening of Chlorophytum borivilianum leaves
S/No. Constituents CBL
PEECBL CEPCBL EECBL AECBL
1 Carbohydrates - + + +
2 Glycosides - + + +
3 Alkaloids + + + +
4 Protein & Amino acid - - + +
5 Tannins & Phenolic compounds + + + +
6 Flavonoids - - + +
7 Fixed oil and Fats - - - -
8 Steriods & Triterpenoids + + + +
9 Waxes - - - -
10 Mucilage & Gums - - - -
+ = Present; - = Absent

Characterization of extracts by TLC and HPTLC

derpharmachemica-extract

Graph 2: pH of various extract of Asparagus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilianum leaves

derpharmachemica-Percentage

Graph 3: Percentage Yield of various extract of Asparagus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilianum leaves

The various extract of ARL: Asparagus racemosus (Leaves) and CBL: Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves) post-extraction were subjected to phytochemical experiments to determine the presence of various phytochemicals present in extracts. In ethanolic extract and aqueous extract the maximum phyto-constitunets were present in ARL and CBL. Therefore these two extracts of ARL: Asparagus racemosus (Leaves) and CBL: Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves) were subject to standard procedure for the characterization by TLC and HPTLC.

The TLC was performed for EEARL, AEARL, EECBL and AECBL. The findings were recorded in table 5.6 and table 5.7

Table 5.6: Development of TLC plates
S. No. Solvent System Inference
1 Chloroform Overlapping
2 Ethyl acetate Overlapping
3 Methanol Overlapping
4 Ethyl acetate: hexane: methanol (9:90:1) Overlapping
5 Chloroform:  benzene: methanol (20:2:1) Tailing
6 Ethyl acetate: hexane: chloroform (50:50:5) Tailing
7 Ethyl acetate: hexane: chloroform (50:60:3) Poor
8 Chloroform: Ethyl acetate: formic acid (2.5: 2: 0.5v/v) Satisfactory
9 Toluene: ethyl acetate (50:50) Overlapping
10 Toluene: ethyl acetate: Glacial acetic acid: formic acid (20: 45: 20:5) Overlapping
11 Toluene: ethyl acetate: formic acid (3: 2: 0.4v/v) Satisfactory
12 Ethyl Acetate:methanol:water (7.5: 2: 4) Best
Adsorbent: Silica gel, Detecting reagent: Ferric chloride solution and in UV at 254 nm

Table 5.7: TLC profile of ethanolic and aqueous extract of ARL: Asparagus racemosus (Leaves) and CBL: Chlorophytum borivilianum (Leaves)
S./No. Name No. of spots (Visible) No. of spots(At 254nm) Rf values ( in visible)
1 EEAARL 2 2 0.51, 0.68
2 AEARL 2 2 0.49, 0.70
3 EECBL 2 2 0.47, 0.72
4 AECBL 2 2 0.48. 0.71
Adsorbent: Silica gel G, Detecting reagent: Ferric chloride solution and in UV at 254 nm, Solvent System: Ethyl Acetate: methanol: water (7.5: 2: 4 v/v)

EEARL, AEARL, EECBL and AECBL were subjected to HPTLC analysis by specific solvent systems i.e., EA: M: H2O; 7.5: 2: 4 for respective extracts and detected under UV at 25 4nm to identify the active phyto-constituents present in these extract. The results were presented in table 5.8. Figure 1 shows the number of reported peaks. HPTLC chromatograms were presented in Figure 2.

Table 5.8: HPTLC profile of the ethanolic and aqueous extracts of ARL and CBL at EA: M: H2O (7.5: 2: 4) solvent system
Samples Rf Max Height Max % Area Area %
EEARL 0.43 50.4 5.23 592.7 1.99
0.11 102.6 10.65 1994.4 6.71
0.68 28.8 2.99 389.4 1.31
AEARL 0.49 47.2 4.90 1625.4 5.47
0.56 93.2 9.68 3170.0 10.66
0.70 140.8 14.61 4151.7 13.97
0.78 235.6 24.45 8067.7 27.1
0.81 48.7 5.06 1454.7 4.89
0.95 216.1 22.43 8278.3 27.85
EECBL 0.13 135.0 7.94 890.7 1.26
0.21 183.9 10.82 6129.5 8.69
0.29 37.6 2.21 382.6 0.54
0.30 147.6 8.70 11804.5 16.73
0.47 564.6 33.23 34856.8 49.41
0.58 373.2 20.97 10930.1 15.40
0.72 67.1 4.31 680.4 0.96
0.84 104.17 6.20 2593.7 3.67
0.91 83.7 4.93 2279.9 3.23
AECBL 0.19 618.4 50.21 48110.3 74.67
0.41 78.8 6.53 1809.5 2.82
0.48 68.9 5.71 2579.9 4.01
0.69 66.1 5.48 2045.4 3.18
0.71 67.8 5.61 1754.6 2.73
0.75 61.1 5.06 2296.7 3.57
0.84 62.9 5.21 2059.9 3.21
derpharmachemica-fingerprint

Figure 1: HPTLC fingerprint profile of ethanolic and aqueous extracts of ARL and CBL (EA: M: H2O; 7.5: 2: 4) visualized under 254 nm UV M, 366 nm and after derivatization in iodine vapour

derpharmachemica-chromatogram

Figure 2: HPTLC chromatogram of ethanolic and aqueous extracts of ARL and CBL (EA: M: H2O; 7.5: 2: 4) peak densitogram display

Discussion

There are various chemical constituents in medicinal plants which enhances the properties of prevention and treatment from various diseases [76, 77]. These chemical constituents are secondary metabolites, present in one or many parts of the plants. These chemical constituents are secondary metabolites, present in one or many parts of the plants. These secondary metabolites may be categorized as glycosides, alkaloids, flavonoids, saponins, steroids etc. The knowledge is still incomplete and it should go more and more especially regarding biosynthetic pathway due to which these medicinal plants are highly valuable in today’s life [78, 79]. The developing countries, forest areas, rural places have traditional uses of these medicinal plants. Since, last few decades, there is a drastic elevation in exportation of medicinal plants, due to which all over the world, traditional health system is in high demand [80, 81, 82].

There are various medicinal plants are now in extinction due to over-exploitation. Since last few decades, medicinal plants are in high demand for its properties. The tribal communities use different types of plants for their treatments [82, 83, 84].

Conclusion

This study revealed the presence of various phytochemical constituents, recorded above in which Steriods & Triterpenoids were in excessive amount in both Asparagaus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilianum leaves and Tannins & Phenolic compounds in Chlorophytum borivilianum leaves and this study also proved that the percentage (%) yield of Aqueous extract of both the plants i.e. Asparagus racemosus and Chlorophytum borivilanum leaves was greater in comparison to other prepared extracts.

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to the Honorable Vice-Chancellor Banasthali Vidyapith, Rajasthan, for providing essential facilities.

References

  1. Cheung MC. Thromb and Vasc Biol. 2001. 21: p. 1320-1326.
  2. Doughari JH. J Med Plants Res. 2009, 3: p. 839-848.

    3.       Google Scholar    

  3. Arnoldus M Mangao.  J Sci Food Agric. 2020, 100(3): p. 1185-1194.

    4.       Indexed at    Google Scholar      Crossref

  4. Salhi S. Lazaroa. 2010, 31: p. 133.
  5. Benkhnigue O. et.al. Acta Botanica Barc. 2019, 53: p. 191-216.

    6.       Google Scholar      Crossref

  6. Majambu Mbiky. Front Pharmacol. 2012, 20: p. 969-973.

    7.      Indexed at     Google Scholar      Crossref

  7. Lin X. et.al. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2010, 64: p. 1481-1487.

    8.        Google Scholar     

  8. Kamada C. Free Radi Res. 2005, 39: p. 185-194.

    9.      Indexed at     Google Scholar      Crossref

  9. Carroll KK. J Nutr. 1995, 125: p. 598S-605S.

    10.        Google Scholar      Crossref

  10. Radi R. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1991, 286: p. 117-125.

    11.         Google Scholar      Crossref

  11. Gylling H. Atheroscler. 2014, 232(2): p. 346-360.

    12.         Google Scholar      Crossref

  12. Parraga I. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2011, 11: p. 73.

    13.         Google Scholar      Crossref

  13. Carlos Eduardo Cabral. Arq Bras Cardiol. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2017, 109(5): p. 475-482.

    14.        Indexed at    Google Scholar      Crossref

  14. Mensink RP. Atheroscler. 2002, 160(1): p. 205-213.

    15.        Indexed at    Google Scholar      Crossref

  15. Plat J. et.al. J Nutr. 2009, 139(6): p. 1143-1149.

    16.         Indexed at   Google Scholar      Crossref

  16. Shattat F. ghassan. Biomed Pharmacol J. 2014, 7(2).

    17.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  17. Rita Kiss. Int J Mol Sci. 2018, 19(3): p. 771.

    18.          Indexed at   Google Scholar      Crossref

  18. Mang B. Eur J Clin Invest. 2006, 36(5): p. 340-344.

    19.         Indexed at   Google Scholar      Crossref

  19. Neelakantan Nithya.  Nutr J. 2014, 13: p. 7.

    20.         Indexed at    Crossref

  20. Subbarao D. J Nutr. 1997, 100: p. 1307-1309.

    21.        Indexed at     Google Scholar      Crossref

  21. Kitchen BJ. Biochem J. 1973, 135(1): p. 93-99.

    22.          Indexed at   Google Scholar      Crossref

  22. Pawar H. Med & Aromat Plants. 2018, 7: p. 1-7.

    23.          Google Scholar

  23. Nitesh Visavadiya P. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2009, 6(2): p. 219-26.

    24.        Indexed at    Google Scholar      Crossref

  24. Abu Saleh M. Bangladesh J Pharmacol. 2006, 1: p. 64-67.

    25.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  25. Gylling Heleng. J ISCP. 2010, 6(3): p. 18-21.

    26.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  26. Das Gitishree. Front Pharmacol. 2020, 11: p. 561248.

    27.          Indexed at   Google Scholar      Crossref

  27. Zahmatkesh M. Chron Dis J. 2013, 1(2): p. 74-82.

    28.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  28. Das Sayan. IJPCB. 2019, 8(6).

    29.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  29. Samani KG. Int J Health Sci. 2014, 8(1): p. 39-43.

    30.         Indexed at   Google Scholar      Crossref

  30. Gupta R. Int J of Biomed Adv Res. 2015, 6(01): p. 57-59.

    31.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  31. Willirson james T.  Circulation. 2002, 106: p. 3143.

    32.        Crossref

  32. Sambaiah K. Nahrung.  1991, 35(1): p. 47-51.

    33.        Indexed at      Google Scholar      Crossref

  33. Karen E. Friday. Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2003, 228(7): p.769-778.

    34.        Indexed at     Google Scholar      Crossref

  34. Karkhaneh Azam. Lipids Health Dis. 2019.

    35.          Google Scholar

  35. Muruganandan S. J Biol Chem. 2011, 286: p. 23982–23995.

    36.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  36. Islam D. J Diabet Mellit. 2017, 7: p. 55-70.

    37.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  37. Thamolwan, Suanarunsawat. Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2011, p. 962025.

    38.        Indexed at     Google Scholar      Crossref

  38. Vadiya DB Ashok. J Clin Biochem Nutr. 2007, 41(1): p. 1-11.

    39.         Indexed at   Google Scholar      Crossref

  39. Jihua zhang. AIJBM. 2019, 9(2):
    p. 306-314.

    40.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  40. Lemon Mark. J biomed life science. 2017, 4(3): 1-9.

    41.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  41. Ram Lokhande. Natural Science. 2010, 2: p. 26-32.

    42.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  42. MI Alam. J Pharmacology & Pharmacy. 2014, 5: p. 828-837.

    43.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  43. Hipólito Aguiar Hernández. J biomed & life science. 2016, 3: p. 1-15.

    44.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  44. Jamuna Senguttuvan. Asian Pac J Trop Biomed. 2014, 4(Suppl 1): p. S359-S367.

    45.        Indexed at      Google Scholar      Crossref

  45. Sunil Singh KR.  Pharm Biol. 2009, 48(2): p.134-141.

    46.        Indexed at       Google Scholar      Cross ref

  46. Upton Roy. Phytochemistry Reviews. 2020, 19: p. 1157–1177.

    47.          Google Scholar

  47. Katiyar Chandrakant. NCBI. 2012, 33(1): p. 10-19.

    48.        Indexed at      Google Scholar      Crossref

  48. Lidia Szwajkowska-Michałek. MDPI. 2020, 10(19): p. 6907.

    49.          Crossref

  49. Millett  MA. ACS publications. 1964.
  50. Negi JS. Pharmacogn Rev. 2011, 5(10): p. 155-158.

    51.       Indexed at       Google Scholar      Crossref

  51. Kopila A. Pharmacogn J. 2018, 10(5): p. 963-968.

    52.         Indexed at     Google Scholar      Crossref

  52. Botham PA. Toxicol In Vitro. 2004, 18(2): p. 227-230.

    53.       Indexed at     Google Scholar      Crossref

  53. Gautam vinod Kr. J Adv Pharm Technol Res. 2013, 4(2): p. 108-117.

    54.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  54. Alam Sajid. CELLMED. 2019, 9(3): p. 5.1-5.2.

    55.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  55. Narayana DBA. Pharmacogn Mag. 2010, 6(23): p. 145-146.

    56.        Indexed at     Crossref

  56. Hyder S. J Ethnopharmacol. 2011, 138(3): p. 741-747.

    57.       Indexed at       Google Scholar      Crossref

  57. Venu Pamidiboina. Int J  Pharm and Pharm Sci. 2010,  2: p. 86 -91.

    58.          Google Scholar    

  58. Babu S. RJPP. 2018, 10(3): 241-245.   
  59. Venu Pamidiboina. Int J Pharm and Pharm Sci.  2010, 2: p. 86 -91.

    60.          Google Scholar

  60. Carroll KK.  J Nutr. 1995, 125: p. 598S-605S.

    61.          Indexed at    Google Scholar      Crossref

  61. Bruno Chukwuemeka Chinko. JAMPS. 2020.

    62.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  62. Zulet M. J Am Coll Nutr. 1999, 18(1): p. 36-42.

    63.          Indexed at   Google Scholar      Crossref

  63. Scot M. AHA journal. 2018, 139: p. e1082–e1143.

    64.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  64. Alan R Needle. Sports Med. 2017, 47(7): p. 1271-1288.

    65.       Indexed at      Google Scholar      Crossref

  65. Asita Wongprikorn.  PLoS One. 2016, 11(6): p. e0157531.

    66.         Indexed at   Google Scholar      Crossref

  66. Chem Clinton D.  NIH. 2011, 21(5): p. 365-371.

    67.          Crossref

  67. Jacek Rysz. Int J Mol Sci. 2020, 21(2): p. 601.

    68.         Indexed at    Google Scholar      Crossref

  68. Bergheanu SC. Neth Heart J. 2017, 25(4): p. 231-242.

    69.        Indexed at      Google Scholar      Crossref

  69. Harada-Shiba. J Atheroscler Thromb. 2018, 25(9): p. 846-984.

    70.          Indexed at    Google Scholar      Crossref

  70. Barbara Fletcher. AHA journal. 2015, 112: p. 3184-3209.

    71.          Crossref

  71. Engelmann B. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1992, 1165: p. 32-37.

    72.         Indexed at    Google Scholar      Crossref

  72. Fenton WS. Biol Psychiatry. 2000, 47(1): p. 8-21.

    73.         Indexed at   Google Scholar      Crossref

  73. Michos ED. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2019, 16: p. 1557-1567.

    74.         Indexed at     Google Scholar      Crossref

  74. Condell RA. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1983, 223: p. 407-416.

    75.         Indexed at   Google Scholar      Crossref

  75. Shin-ichiro Kagami. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2008, 1: p. 61-66.

    76.          Indexed at    Google Scholar      Crossref

  76. Tamas Csont . Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2002, 290: p. 1535-1538.

    77.         Indexed at    Google Scholar      Crossref

  77. Engelmann B. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1992, 1165: p. 32-37. \

    78.       Indexed at       Google Scholar      Crossref

  78. Verma Nihirika. Int J Curr Pharm Res. 2017, 9(1).

    79.          Google Scholar      Crossref 

  79. Ghassan F Shattat. Biomed Pharmacol J. 2014, 7(2).

    80.          Google Scholar      Crossref

  80. Eric D Shirley. Sports Health. 2012, 4(5): p. 394-403.

    81.                 Indexed at      Google Scholar      Crossref

  81. Sudipta Kumar Rath.  Ayu. 2013, 34(3): p. 273-275.

    82.        Indexed at      Google Scholar      Crossref

  82. Thakur M. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2007, 4 (4): p. 419-423.

    83.         Indexed at      Google Scholar      Crossref

  83. Shashi Alok. Asian Pac J Trop Dis. 2013, 3(3): p. 242-251.

    84.       Indexed at   Crossref

  84. Fabio Firenzuoli. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2007, 4: p. 37- 40.

    85.        Indexed at     Google Scholar      Crossref

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language

30+ Million Readerbase
SCImago Journal & Country Rank
Google Scholar citation report
Citations : 15261

Der Pharma Chemica received 15261 citations as per Google Scholar report

Flyer image
Der Pharma Chemica peer review process verified at publons
Flyer image
DOWNLOADS
Der Pharma Chemica- Journals on pharmaceutical chemistry