화학공학소재연구정보센터
홈 로그인 로그아웃 연락처 사이트맵
Applied Chemistry for Engineering, Vol.30, No.1, 114-121, February, 2019
DOI10.14478/ace.2018.1123  Export Citation
택란 추출물 및 분획물의 항산화, 항균 및 세포 보호 효과
Antioxidant, Antimicrobial and Cellular Protective Effects of Lycopus lucidus Extract and Fraction
이진경, 박영민, 이상래, 송바름, 이윤주, 박수남†
  • 서울과학기술대학교 정밀화학과, 화장품종합기술연구소, 코스메틱 융⋅복합산업 지원센터
Jin Kyoung Lee, Young Min Park, Sang Lae Lee, Ba Reum Song, Yun Ju Lee, and Soo Nam Park†
  • Department of Fine Chemistry, Cosmetic R&D Center, Cosmetic Industry Coupled Collaboration Center, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, 232 Gongneung-ro, Nowon-gu, Seoul 01811, Korea
E-mail:
초록
본 연구에서는 택란(Lycopus lucidus)의 에탄올 추출물 및 에틸아세테이트 분획물에 대하여 항산화, 항균 및 세포 보호 효과를 비교 분석하였다. 택란 추출물 및 분획물의 자유 라디칼 소거 활성을 측정한 결과(FSC50), 추출물은 65.1 μg/mL, 분획물은 64.9 μg/mL로 나타냈다. Fe3+-EDTA/H2O2계에서 활성산소 소거 활성은(OSC50) 각각, 6.6, 6.3 μg/mL로 모두 총 항산화능이 뛰어났다. 항균 활성에서, 추출물은 S. aureus에서, 분획물은 A. niger를 제외한 모든 균에서 활성을 나타냈다. 택란 추출물 및 분획물의 세포 보호 효과 비교 결과, 1O2로 유도된 적혈구 세포손상에 대한 보호 효과(τ50) 는 50 μg/mL에서 각각 51.3, 73.7 min로 나타냈다. 과산화수소와 UVB로 손상된 각질형성세포에 대한 세포 보호 효과에서 추출물은 각각 효능을 나타내지 않고, 1-2 μg/mL에서 효능을 나타냈다. 분획물은 각각 세포 생존율을 최대 85.8, 81.9%까지 증가시켰다. 세포 내 ROS 소거 활성 결과, 분획물 1-2 μg/mL에서 소거 활성을 나타내었다. 종합적으로 택란 에탄올 추출물 및 에틸아세테이트 분획물의 생리활성을 비교한 결과, 택란 에틸아세테이트 분획물은 추출물과 비슷한 항산화 효능을 가지며, 항균 및 세포 보호 효과에서 추출물보다 뛰어난 효과를 나타냄으로써 외부 스트레스로부터 세포를 보호할 수 있는 화장품 소재로 응용가능성이 있음을 시사한다.
In this study, antioxidative, antibacterial and cytoprotective effects of the ethanol extract and ethylacetate fraction of Lycopus lucidus (L. lucidus) were compared and analyzed. Free radical scavenging activities (FSC50) of the L. lucidus extract and fraction were found to be 65.1 and 64.9 μg/mL respectively. In the Fe3+-EDTA/H2O2 system, the reactive oxygen species (ROS) scavenging activities (OSC50) for the extract and fraction were 6.6 and 6.3 μg/mL, respectively which showed excellent total antioxidant abilities. The extract showed antibacterial activity against S. aureus, while the fraction showed in all the bacteria except for A. niger. The cytoprotective effect of L. lucidus extract was compared to that of the fraction and the effect against 1O2-induced cellular damage of human erythrocytes (τ50) was 51.3 and 73.7 min at 50 μg/mL, respectively. For the cytoprotective effect of keratinocytes damaged by H2O2 and UVB, the extracts did not show any efficacy but showed efficacy at 1-2 μg/mL, respectively. The fraction increased the cell viability up to 85.8 and 81.9%, respectively. As a result of intracellular ROS scavenging activity, the scavenging activity was observed at 1-2 μg/mL of the fraction. From the results comparing the physiological activities of L. lucidus extract and the fraction, the ethylacetate fraction of L. lucidus has antioxidative effect similar to that of the extract whereas superior antimicrobial and cytoprotective effects than that of the extract. Overall, the ethylacetate fraction of L. lucidus protects cells from an external stress which can be used as a potential cosmetic material.
Keywords:L. lucidus;ROS;Antimicrobial;Antioxidative;Cytoprotective effect
  1. Park JA, Choi MO, Korean J. Aesthet. Cosmetol., 9(2), 1 (2011)
  2. Park TS, Lee JY, Hyun SJ, Park GH, Cho YJ, Kim SG, An BJ, J. Korean Soc. Appl. Biol. Chem., 50(3), 210 (2007)
  3. Yeo YH, Park CH, Korean Soc. Biotechnol. Bioeng. J., 29(5), 372 (2014)
  4. Smith CN, Alexander BR, Toxicol. In Vitro, 19, 963 (2005)
  5. Choi EY, Korean J. Aesthet. Cosmetol., 13(2), 213 (2015)
  6. Lee DS, Lim MS, Kwan SS, Kim SY, Park SN, Appl. Chem. Eng., 23(1), 93 (2012)
  7. Zaid MA, Afaq F, Syed DN, Dreher M, Mukhtar H, Photochem. Photobiol., 83, 882 (2007)
  8. Slater TF, Biochem. J., 222, 209 (1984)
  9. Park SH, Shin HS, Lee NH, Hong IK, Park SN, Appl. Chem. Eng., 29(1), 49 (2017)
  10. Valko M, Rhodes CJ, Moncol J, Izakovic M, Mazur M, Chem. Biol. Interact., 160, 1 (2006)
  11. Kim DY, Ghil SH, J. Exp. Biomed. Sci., 15, 147 (2009)
  12. Lee YJ, Kang DG, Kim JS, Lee HS, Vascul. Pharmacol., 48, 38 (2008)
  13. Shin TY, Kim SH, Suk KH, Ha JH, Kim IK, Lee MG, Jun CD, Kim SY, Lim JP, Eun JS, Shin HY, Kim HM, Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol., 209, 255 (2005)
  14. Woo ER, Piao MS, Lycopus lucidus, Arch. Pharm. Res., 27, 173-176 (2004).
  15. Yu JQ, Lei JC, Zhang XQ, Yu HD, Tian DZ, Liao ZX, Zou GL, Food Chem., 126(4), 1593 (2011)
  16. Ha JH, Jeong YJ, Seong JS, Kim KM, Kim AY, Fu MM, Suh JY, Lee NH, Park J, Park SN, J. Soc. Cosmet. Sci. Korea, 41(4), 361 (2015)
  17. Park SN, Won DH, Hwang JP, Han SB, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 20(5), 3046 (2014)
  18. Rodriguez-Tudela JL, Barchiesi F, Bille J, Chryssanthou E, et al., Clin. Microbiol. Infect., 9(8), 1 (2003)
  19. Park SN, J. Soc. Cosmet. Sci. Korea, 23, 75 (1997)
  20. Xuan SH, Park YM, Ha JH, Jeong YJ, Park SN, Pharmacol. Rep., 69(6), 1224 (2017)
  21. Kim KM, Kim AR, Kim AY, Ha JH, Xuan SH, Jeong YJ, Park YM, Jeong HJ, Hong IG, Park SN, Korean J. Pharmacogn., 48(2), 1 (2017)
  22. Yoshihisa Y, Rehman MU, Shimizu T, Exp. Dermatol., 23(3), 178 (2014)