覆盆子抗耐药真菌活性成分提取方法比较及活性部位初步筛选  

Preliminary screening active constituent against Candida albicans resistant to fluconazole from Rubus chingii Hu fruits

作　　者：韩冰 林辉[2] 陈佳 喻轶群 曹永兵[2,3] 姜远英[2,3] 

机构地区：[1]上海市闵行区中心医院药剂科,上海201199 [2]福建中医药大学药学院中药学教研室,福州350000 [3]上海第二军医大学药学院新药研究中心,上海200433

出　　处：《中国真菌学杂志》2012年第6期326-329,共4页Chinese Journal of Mycology

摘　　要：目的考察热回流法、超声法及冷浸法提取覆盆子抗菌活性成分的优劣,初步筛选覆盆子提取物中具有体外抗真菌活性的部位。方法以覆盆子提取物联合氟康唑体外抗耐药真菌活性为主要指标,结合提取率评价三种提取覆盆子抗菌活性成分方法的优劣;依次用石油醚、氯仿、乙酸乙酯及正丁醇萃取覆盆子提取物,以所得部位联合氟康唑体外抗耐药真菌的活性为评价指标,初步筛选覆盆子提取物的抗菌活性部位。结果热回流法、超声法及冷浸法三种提取方法的提取率分别为21.0%、16.8%及12.8%,所得提取物联合氟康唑对耐药菌株100的FICI值分别为0.035 2、0.032 2及0.046 9,所得提取物联合氟康唑对耐药菌株103的FICI值分别为0.033 2、0.031 7及0.039 1;覆盆子提取物的石油醚、氯仿、乙酸乙酯、正丁醇及水部位对耐药菌株100的FICI值分别为>1、0.502 0、0.507 8、0.033 2及>1,对耐药菌株103的FICI值分别为>1、0.531 3、0.507 8、0.033 2及>1。结论与热回流法及冷浸法相比,超声法提取覆盆子抗菌活性成分简便、稳定、高效,是一种较优的提取方法;覆盆子提取物的活性部位为其正丁醇部位。Objecive To compare three methods （cold-soak method, ultrasonic wave method and hot reflux method） of extrac-ting antifungal constituents from Rubus chingii Hu fruits and preliminary screen active part of the extracts. Methods The three ex-tractive methods were evaluated through antifungal activity in vitro of extracts from Rubus chingii Hu fruits combining with flueonazole against durg-resistant Candida albicans and extraction rate. The compositions of these extracts were separated with petroleum ether, chloroform, ethyl acetate, n-butyl alcohol and water. Screening out the active part were performed through evaluating antifungal ac- tivity in vitro of parts from the extracts ofRubus chingii Hu fruits combining with fluconazole against durg-resistant Candida albicans ~ Results The extraction rate of the Cold-soak method, ultrasonic wave method and hot reflux method was 21.0%, 16.8% and 12. 8%. The FICIs of the extracts using three methods combining with fluconazole against Candida albicans 100 were 0.035 2, 0. 032 2 and 0. 046 9, and 0. 033 2, 0. 031 7 and 0. 039 1 against Candida albicans 103. The FICIs of petroleum ether, chloroform, ethyl acetate, n-butyl alcohol and water part combining with fluconazole against Candida albicans 100 were 〉 1,0. 502 0, 0. 507 8, 0. 033 2 and 〉 1, and 〉 1, 0.531 3,0.507 8, 0.033 2 and 〉 1 against Candida albicans 103. Conclusions Ultrasonic wave meth- od is simple, reliable and efficient. Compared with the other methods, it is the best method of extracting antifungal constituents from Rubus chingii Hu fruits. The active part of the extracts from Rubus chingii Hu fruits is the n-butyl alcohol part.

关 键 词：覆盆子 抗菌活性成分 提取方法 活性部位 

分 类 号：R978.5[医药卫生—药品]