This study evaluated the in vitro anthelmintic activity of a liquorice (Glycyrrhiza glabra) root aqueous extract and of glycyrrhetinic acid at 30, 10, 5, 1, and 0.5 mg/mL against sheep gastrointestinal nematodes (GINs), using the egg hatch test (EHT), the larval development test (LDT), and the larval migration inhibition test (LMIT). The compounds were applied on a mixture of GIN eggs and larvae, mainly Trichostrongylus spp. and Teladorsagia/Ostertagia spp. Cytotoxicity assays were also performed. In the EHT, both candidates showed significant concentration-dependent efficacy and were significantly more effective (p < 0.001) at the highest concentrations (30 and 10 mg/mL) than the lowest ones. In the LDT, only G. glabra showed a concentration-dependent effect (R2 = 0.924), but glycyrrhetinic acid (R2 = 0.910) had significantly higher efficacy than G. glabra root extract. Moreover, the efficacy of glycyrrhetinic acid at 30, 10, and 5 mg/mL was significantly higher (p < 0.001) than at lower concentrations. In the LMIT, G. glabra showed concentration-dependent efficacy (R2 = 0.971), while considerably reduced efficacy was observed for glycyrrhetinic acid (R2 = 0.855) at the lowest concentrations. These data suggest that the two compounds may have different mechanisms of action. In the LMIT, the 50% lethal concentration (LC50) of glycyrrhetinic acid (~5.12 mg/mL) was > 2.0-fold lower when compared to G. glabra (12.25 mg/mL). Analysis and previous findings indicated low toxicity for both compounds. The results obtained encourage in vivo studies aimed at evaluating the potential use of the tested compounds as natural de-wormers in ruminants.

In vitro anthelmintic activity of an aqueous extract of Glycyrrhiza glabra and of glycyrrhetinic acid against gastrointestinal nematodes of small ruminants

Maestrini M.;Forzan M.;Perrucci S.
2021-01-01

Abstract

This study evaluated the in vitro anthelmintic activity of a liquorice (Glycyrrhiza glabra) root aqueous extract and of glycyrrhetinic acid at 30, 10, 5, 1, and 0.5 mg/mL against sheep gastrointestinal nematodes (GINs), using the egg hatch test (EHT), the larval development test (LDT), and the larval migration inhibition test (LMIT). The compounds were applied on a mixture of GIN eggs and larvae, mainly Trichostrongylus spp. and Teladorsagia/Ostertagia spp. Cytotoxicity assays were also performed. In the EHT, both candidates showed significant concentration-dependent efficacy and were significantly more effective (p < 0.001) at the highest concentrations (30 and 10 mg/mL) than the lowest ones. In the LDT, only G. glabra showed a concentration-dependent effect (R2 = 0.924), but glycyrrhetinic acid (R2 = 0.910) had significantly higher efficacy than G. glabra root extract. Moreover, the efficacy of glycyrrhetinic acid at 30, 10, and 5 mg/mL was significantly higher (p < 0.001) than at lower concentrations. In the LMIT, G. glabra showed concentration-dependent efficacy (R2 = 0.971), while considerably reduced efficacy was observed for glycyrrhetinic acid (R2 = 0.855) at the lowest concentrations. These data suggest that the two compounds may have different mechanisms of action. In the LMIT, the 50% lethal concentration (LC50) of glycyrrhetinic acid (~5.12 mg/mL) was > 2.0-fold lower when compared to G. glabra (12.25 mg/mL). Analysis and previous findings indicated low toxicity for both compounds. The results obtained encourage in vivo studies aimed at evaluating the potential use of the tested compounds as natural de-wormers in ruminants.
2021
Maestrini, M.; Molento, M. B.; Forzan, M.; Perrucci, S.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
parasite-articolo liquirizia pecore 2021.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: articolo finale pubblicato sulla rivista
Tipologia: Versione finale editoriale
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 696.34 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
696.34 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11568/1110496
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 2
  • Scopus 9
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 8
social impact