Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 2887–2893 | Cite as

Antidiabetic potential and multi-biological activities of Trachystemon orientalis extracts

  • Burhanettin Sertaç Ayhan
  • Emine YalçınEmail author
  • Kültiğin Çavuşoğlu
  • Ali Acar
Original Paper


Due to the increase in exposure to chemical substances, the investigation of natural compounds with protective effects has become popular. So in this study the antimicrobial, antioxidant, antimutagenic activities and enzyme inhibitory effects of Trachystemon orientalis leaf and stem extracts were investigated. Antimicrobial effect was determined by disc diffusion method and the antimutagenic effect was investigated by Ames/Salmonella/microsomal test. Antioxidant properties of T. orientalis extracts were determined by investigating the phytochemical contents and 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) removal activity. The antidiabetic activity of the extracts was investigated by α-amylase and α-glucosidase enzyme inhibition. It has been determined that all extracts exhibit antimicrobial activity at different ratios and the highest antimicrobial activity was obtained with a 21 ± 0.4 mm inhibition zone against Escherichia coli. The highest DPPH removal activity of leaf and stem extracts was determined to be 65.1 ± 2.4% and 59.4 ± 2.7%, respectively. In enzyme inhibitory analysis, it was determined that the α-glucosidase inhibitory effect of extracts was higher than the α-amylase inhibition effect. In antimutagenity test, the highest antimutagenic effects of leaf and stem extract were determined as 78.2 ± 1.1% and 67.2 ± 1.5%, respectively. As a result, T. orientalis leaf and stem extracts were determined as a potential natural antimicrobial, antimutagenic and antioxidant source with a moderately high antidiabetic activity.


Antimutagenic activity Antioxidant activity Antidiabetic activity T. orientalis 



Acarbose equivalent


Butylated hydroxytoluene


Butylated hydroxyanisole




Gallic acide equivalent


Quillaja equivalent


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The present study does not constitute endorsement of the product by the authors or any conflict of interest.

Research involving human and animal participants

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects.


  1. 1.
    C.M. Stein, Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 71, 411–423 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    M.C. Navarro, M.P. Montilla, M.M. Cabo, M. Galisteo, A. Cáceres, C. Morales, I. Berger, Phytother. Res. 17, 325–329 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    O.E. Akcin, N. Kandemir, Y. Akcin, Turk. J. Bot. 28, 435–442 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Onaran, M. Yılar, J. Food Agric. Environ. 10, 287–291 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Yılar, A. Onaran, Y. Yanar, S. Belguzer, I. Kadıoglu, Iğdır Univ. J. Inst. Sci. Technol. 4, 19–27 (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Karolina, P. Beata, P. Elżbieta, M. Anna, A.M. Waszkielewicz, J. Appl. Genet. 55, 273–285 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Jung, M. Park, H.C. Lee, Y.H. Kang, E.S. Kang, S.K. Kim, Curr. Med. Chem. 13, 1203–1218 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    U. Etxeberria, A.L. Garza, J. Campión, J.A. Martinez, F.I. Milagro, Expert Opin. Ther. Targets 16, 269–297 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Bhat, S.S. Zinjarde, S.Y. Bhargava, A.R. Kumar, B.N. Joshi, J. Evid Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2011, 1–6 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    E. Yalçın, E. Azap, K. Çavuşoğlu, Duzce Univ. J. Sci. Technol. 5, 622–631 (2017)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    V.L. Singleton, J.A. Rossi, Am. J. Enol. Viticult. 16, 144–158 (1965)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. Zhishen, T. Mengcheng, W. Jianming, Food Chem. 64, 555–559 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    W. Vermerris, R. Nicholson, in Isolation and Identification of Phenolic Compounds. Phenolic Compound Biochemistry, (Springer, Dordrecht, 2008), pp 151–196.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Aktumsek, G. Zengin, G.O. Guler, Y.S. Cakmak, A. Duran, Food Chem. Toxicol. 55, 290–296 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    G.C. Yen, P.D. Duh, J. Agric. Food Chem. 42, 629–632 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    D.M. Maron, B.N. Ames, Mutat. Res. 113, 173–215 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Mocan, G. Zengin, A. Uysal, E. Gunes, A. Mollica, N.S. Degirmenci, L. Alpsoy, A. Aktumsek, J. Funct. Foods 25, 94–109 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    O. Sacan, Eur. J. Biol. 77, 70–75 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    M.C. Ayvaz, Turkey Herba Pol. 61, 40–51 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    S. Mamta, S. Jyoti, N. Rajeev, S. Dharmendra, G. Abhishek, J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 1, 168–182 (2013)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    A.B. Aliyu, A.M. Musa, M.S. Abdullahi, M.A. Ibrahim, M.B. Tijjani, M.S. Aliyu, A.O. Oyewale, J. Med. Plant Res. 5, 6709–6713 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Scalbert, Phytochemistry 30, 3875–3883 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    K. Asakura, S. Matsumura, S. Yoshikawa, K. Kawada, T. Uchibori, J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 66, 1450–1453 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    K.H. Kwon, A. Barve, S. Yu, M.T. Huang, A.N.T. Kong, Acta Pharmacol. Sin. 28, 1409–1421 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Y.J. Surh, Nat. Rev. Cancer 3, 768–780 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    A.R. Francis, T.K. Shetty, R.K. Bhattacharya, Mutat. Res. 222, 393–401 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    M. Masoumi, S. Mehrabian, M.K. Rahimi, F. Bagheri, H. Masoumi, Res. J. Pharm. Biol. Chem. Sci. 5, 1311–1319 (2014)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    R. Saad, M. Aqil, E. Yusuf, F. Asmani, IJPAR 3, 241–248 (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology, Faculty of Science and ArtUniversity of GiresunGiresunTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Medical Services and Techniques, Vocational School of Health ServicesUniversity of GiresunGiresunTurkey

Personalised recommendations