Characterization of Anti-Coxsackie Virus B3 Constituents ... 153and SI = 5.53). The subfractions SR 2 and SR 3 showed moderate antiviral
activity: IC 50 = 1750 ± 0.02 μg/mL; SI = 2.28 and IC 50 = 1876 ± 0.1 μg/mL;
SI = 2.13, respectively. Results revealed significant differences (P < 0.05). Our
work is the first study on the antiviral activity of a species belonging to the
Dipsacacae family. So we will compare our results with other works that have
treated anti-coxsackie B 3 activity of plants following our protocol. Guo et al.
[35] showed that the aqueous extracts of Chinese medicinal plants like
Sargentodox acuneata (Oliv.) Rehd. et Wils., Sophoraton kinensis Gapnep.,
Paeonia veitchii Lynch, Spatholobus suberectus Dunn. and Cyrtomium
fortunei J. sm. have activity against Coxsackie virus B 3 and the SI ranged from
3.9 to 9.8. Edziri et al. [36] showed that methanol, butanol and ethyl acetate
extracts of Marrubium deserti showed significant anti-coxsakie B 3 activity
with IC 50 values ranging from 100 to 135 μg/ml and with a selective index (SI)
above 3.
These results were more interesting than ours. Another recent study
showed that the ethyl acetate extract of Dodonaea viscosa leaves has moderate
anti-coxsackie B 3 activity (SI = 1.2) [37].
3.3. Phenolics Identification by RP-HPLC
Roots EtOAc fraction of S. arenaria exhibited an interesting anti-
coxsackie B 3 activity. This result is motivating to simplify this fraction by
chromatography process, further identify the most constituents in each
subfraction by RP-HPLC and try to localize the eventual researched activities.
The free forms of phenolic compounds are rarely present in plants. More often,
they occur as esters, glycosides or are bound to the cell wall. For this reason,
before HPLC analysis, hydrolysis of glycosides or esters was necessary, so
that phenolic compounds can be identified, since a considerable fraction is in
bounded form. Moreover, BHT, was added to prevent degradation of
phenolics during hydrolysis [38]. RP-HPLC coupled with UV–vis multiwave
length detector was employed to separate phenolic compounds. Compounds
have been identified according to their retention times and spectral
characteristics of their peaks against those of standards, as well as by spiking
the sample with standards. The compounds identified in the four subfractions
(SR 1 – SR 4 ) are reported in Table 2 and Figure 1 (A-D).