Anti-allergic prenylated hydroquinones and alkaloids from the fruiting body of Ganoderma calidophilum

Sheng Zhuo Huang a, Bao Hui Chengb, Qing Yun Maa, Qi Wanga, Fan Dong Konga, Hao Fu Daia, Shu Qi Qiub, Peng Yuan Zhengc, Zhi Qiang Liu*b and You-Xing Zhao*a
aKey Laboratory of Biology and Genetic Resources of Tropical Crops, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Tropical Bioscience and Biotechnology, Chinese Academy of Tropical Agriculture Sciences, Haikou 571101, China. E-mail: zhaoyx1011@163.com; Fax: +86-898-66989095; Tel: +86-898-66989095
bShenzhen Key Laboratory of ENT, Institute of ENT & Longgang ENT Hospital, Shenzhen, 511172, China. E-mail: liuzhiqiang05312438@126.com; Tel: +86-755-28989999
cDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Fifth Hospital, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450052, China

Received 18th January 2016 , Accepted 15th February 2016

First published on 15th February 2016


Abstract

Six new prenylated hydroquinones named ganocalidin A–F (1–6) and two new compounds of ganocalicine A (7) and B (8), together with sixteen known compounds (9–24) were isolated from an EtOAc extract of the fruiting body of Ganoderma calidophilum. The new compound structures were elucidated on the basis of spectroscopic data analysis including 1D, 2D NMR and MS. Compounds 1 and 7 showed inhibitory activity effects on β-hexosaminidase activity (IC50 9.44 and 9.14 μM, respectively), and significantly reduced the production of IL-4 and LTB4 by RBL-2H3 cells in response to antigen stimulation, suggesting that 1 and 7 possess anti-allergic activity.


Introduction

Following changes to modern lifestyle and the ecological environment, the increasing prevalence of allergies has become a significant health problem worldwide, especially in westernized countries. Although a large number of allergy therapeutic agents have been introduced into clinical use, associated side effects are occasionally reported, such as dizziness, hypertrichosis, stomach upsets, and blurred vision.1 Chinese medicinal herbs, as alternative therapies, have become a promising source for potential new anti-allergic drugs, and natural products have been proposed as anti-allergic drug candidates due to their great immunomodulatory efficacy and established safety records.2 The Ganoderma species (Ganodermataceae), well known as a nostrum in Chinese myth, are widely used as functional foods and traditional medicine in Asian countries for a series of functions, such as nourishment, sedation, anti-inflammation, lowering blood pressure, and treating high blood fat and blood sugar (Z. B. Lin, 2007). Nowadays, there are a series of sterols, triterpenoids, and a few prenylated hydroquinones isolated from Ganoderma species with extensive biological and pharmacological activities, including cytotoxic (Huang, Liaw, Yang, Hseu, Kuo, Tsai, et al., 2012; Ma, Luo, Huang, Guo, Dai, & Zhao, 2013; X. Peng, Liu, Xia, Wang, Li, Deng, et al., 2015), hepatoprotective (L. Y. Liu, Chen, Liu, Wang, Kang, Li, et al., 2014; X. R. Peng, Liu, Han, Yuan, Luo, & Qiu, 2013), anti-inflammatory (Tung, Cuong, Hung, Lee, Woo, Choi, et al., 2013), and antioxidant (K. W. Lin, Chen, Yang, Wei, Hung, & Lin, 2013; Thang, Kuo, Hwang, Yang, Ngoc, Han, et al., 2013) properties. Ganoderma calidophilum is a rare wild fungi in the Ganodermataceae family, distributed in tropical areas of China, and its fruiting body of G. calidophilum is traditionally used in the treatment of allergic asthma, eczema, and allergic rhinitis, suggesting it may harbor anti-allergic natural components.3,4 A series of sterols, triterpenoids, and prenylated hydroquinones isolated from Ganoderma species have been reported, possessing extensive biological and pharmacological activities.5–7 However, the anti-allergic components of G. calidophilum are still unclear due to the lack of the natural resource. In order to investigate the anti-allergic components in G. calidophilum, the study of the chemical composition of G. calidophilum was carried out, and six new prenylated hydroquinones named ganocalidin A–F (1–6) and two alkaloids of ganocalicine A (7) and B (8) (Fig. 1) were obtained, along with twelve known compounds: (+)-fornicin C (9),8 jacareubin (10),9 ganodermadiol (11),10 ganoderone A (12),11 lucidadiol (13),12 ergosterol endoperoxide (14),13 5α,6α-epoxy-(22E,24R)-ergosta-8,22-diene-3β-7α-diol (15),14 stellasterin (16),15 5α,8α-dihydroxyl-(24R)-ergosta-6Z,22E-diene-3β-5α,8α-triol (17),16 6-methoxyl-cerevisterol (18),17 6-dehydrocerevisterol (19),18 3,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid (20),19 4-(2-hydroxy-4-methoxybutyl)-2-methoxyphenol (21),20 3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl) propanoic acid (22),21 1-(4-hydroxy-3,5-dimethoxyphenyl) ethanone (23),22 and 1-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl) ethanone (24)23 were isolated. All of the known compounds were identified on the basis of detailed spectroscopic analysis in the literature. This study focused on the isolation and structural elucidation of the new compounds from G. calidophilum, and their anti-allergic activities were also evaluated.
image file: c6ra01466f-f1.tif
Fig. 1 Structures of compounds 1–8.

Results and discussion

Structural elucidation of 1–8

Compound 1 was obtained as a colorless oil, and its molecular formula was assigned to be C21H24O6 from its HREIMS (m/z 372.1570 [M]+, calcd for C21H24O6, 372.1573) and NMR data (Table 1). The IR spectrum displayed the presence of hydroxyl (3408 cm−1) and double bond (1595, 1419 cm−1) absorptions. Analysis of its 13C NMR and DEPT spectra (Table 1) showed 21 carbon resonances, including one methyl, six methylenes (two oxygenated), six methines (six olefinic), and eight quaternary carbons (one carbonyls, six olefinic, and one ketal). The 13C NMR data of 1 were similar to those of fornicin B,8 a rare prenylated hydroquinone, except for additional shifts at δC 70.4 (d, C-12), 60.0 (d, C-13) and the absence of δC 25.8 (t, C-12), 17.7 (t, C-13), and 56.9 (q, –OMe) in fornicin B, indicating that C-12 and C-13 were oxygenated to be hydroxyls, and one of the hydroxyl substituted –OMe formed a C-1 ketal in compound 1. The HMBC (Fig. 2) correlations of 1 from H-12 [δH 4.29 (1H, d, J = 13.1 Hz) and 3.90 (1H, d, J = 13.1 Hz)], H-21 [δH 6.95 (1H, s)], and H-2 [δH 7.17 (1H, s)] to C-1 (δC 107.4 s) and from H-12 to C-10 (δC 137.1 d), and from H-13 [δH 4.49 (1H, d, J = 11.9 Hz) and 4.15 (1H, d, J = 11.9 Hz)] and H-9 [δH 2.46 (1H, m) and 2.14 (1H, m)] to C-11 (δC 133.4 s) confirmed this hypothesis. The other correlations in the 1H–1H COSY and HMBC spectrum further confirmed the atom connectivity in compound 1. The geometry of the double bonds as 2Z, 6E, and 10E, were proposed by NOE (Fig. 2) H-2 [δH 7.17 (1H, s)]/H-4 [δH 2.35 (2H, s)], H-6 [δH 4.94 (1H, dd, J = 9.0, 8.8 Hz)]/H-8 [δH 2.26 (1H, m) and 2.14 (1H, m)], and H-10 [δH 5.20 (1H, dd, J = 11.0, 10.4 Hz)]/H-12, respectively. Thus, the structure of compound 1 was assigned as shown, and named ganocalidin A.
Table 1 1H NMR and 13C NMR Data of 1–8a
No 1a 2b 3b 4b 5a 6a No 7a 8a
δH multi, J (Hz) δC δH multi, J (Hz) δC δH multi, J (Hz) δC δH multi, J (Hz) δC δH multi, J (Hz) δC δH multi, J (Hz) δC δH multi, J (Hz) δC δH multi, J (Hz) δC
a 1H, 13C NMR data measured at 500 and 125 MHz, respectively. a in CDCl3. b in CDCl3 + CD3OD.
1   107.4 s   204.6 s 5.07 d, 1H, 6.4 78.6 d   197.1 s   108.6 s   204.2 s 2   147.8 s   145.6 s
2 7.17 s, 1H 146.6 d 3.40 dd, 1H, 17.9, 9.1 40.5 t 7.26 d, 1H, 6.4 149.5 d 7.67 s, 1H 131.4 d 7.40 s, 1H 148.3 d 4.02 s, 2H 37.5 t 3   123.2 s   123.4 s
3.05 dd, 1H, 17.9, 4.5
3   134.3 s 2.95 m, 1H 40.2 d   131.6 s   144.6 s   135.7 s   129.0 s 4 2.99 ddd, 1H, 16.8, 8.6, 3.7 28.1 t 2.99 t, 1H 7.4 30.3 t
2.75 ddd, 1H, 16.8, 7.7, 6.4
4 2.35 m, 2H 25.2 t 1.72 m, 1H 32.4 t 2.05 m, 2H 26.8 t 2.64 t, 2H, 7.5 27.8 t 2.32 m, 2H 25.9 t 6.97 t, 1H, 7.2 z 145.5 d 5 2.34 m, 1H 32.2 t 2.20 tt, 2H, 7.5, 7.4 25.0 t
1.58 m, 1H 2.24 m, 1H
5 2.34 m, 1H 23.4 t 2.08 m, 1H 25.9 t 2.42 m, 1H 25.4 t 2.18 dt, 2H, 7.5, 7.4 26.8 t 2.26 m, 2H 40.6 t 2.18 dd, 2H, 7.3, 7.2 28.8 t 6 4.86 dd, 1H, 6.3, 2.8 82.8 d 2.88 t, 1H, 7.5 30.2 t
2.27 m, 1H 1.72 m, 1H 2.24 m, 1H
6 4.94 dd, 1H, 9.0, 8.8 126.1 d 4.94 dd, 1H, 9.0, 8.8 126.1 d 4.94 dd, 1H, 9.0, 8.8 126.1 d 5.09 t, 1H, 7.4 123.2 d 5.09 t, 1H, 7.2 124.1 d 5.13 t, 1H, 7.3 121.7 d 7 8.56 s, 1H 145.5 d 8.39 s, 1H 143.7 d
7   135.0 s   135.0 s   135.6 s   135.2 s   137.6 s   137.8 s 8   150.0 s   149.7 s
8 2.26 m, 1H 39.1 t 2.06 m, 2H 38.5 t 2.02 m, 2H 37.7 t 1.93 t, 2H, = 7.9 37.6 t 1.94 m, 2H 40.6 t 2.05 t, 2H, 7.6 39.1 t 9   138.3 s   140.2 s
2.14 m, 1H
9 2.46 m, 1H 23.6 t 2.25 m, 1H 27.6 t 2.31 m, 1H 24.8 t 2.15 dt, 2H, 7.9, 7.3 27.2 t 2.11 m, 2H 26.9 t 2.22 dt, 2H, 7.6, 7.4 28.1 t 10 5.11 d, 1H, 13.7 65.4 t 5.16 s, 1H 65.6 t
2.02 m, 1H 2.07 m, 1H 2.22 m, 1H 5.02 d, 1H, 13.7
10 5.20 dd, 1H, 11.0, 10.4 137.1 d 6.77 dd, 1H, 8.9, 2.4 143.2 d 6.71 m, 1H 143.2 d 6.77 t, 1H, 7.3 142.9 d 5.50 t, 1H, 7.3 130.2 d 6.68 t, 1H, 7.4 143.4 d 1′   123.6 s   123.7 s
11   133.4 s   128.0 s   127.1 s   127.1 s   139.2 s   127.5 s 2′   151.6 s   151.4 s
12 4.29 d, 1H, 13.1 70.4 t   171.3 s   171.0 s   170.7 s 4.07 s, 2H 65.6 t   170.7 s 3′ 6.78 d, 1H, 8.7 119.0 d 6.87 d, 1H 8.6 118.4 d
3.90 d, 1H, 13.1
13 4.49 d, 1H, 11.9 60.0 t 1.77 s, 3H 12.4 q 1.73 s, 3H 11.8 q 1.75 s, 3H 11.6 q 4.13 s, 2H 58.3 t 1.73 s, 3H 12.5 q 4′ 6.74 dd, 1H, 8.7, 2.9 118.1 d 6.85 dd, 1H, 8.6, 2.3 118.2 d
4.15 d, 1H, 11.9
14 1.61 s, 3H 15.0 q 1.59 s, 3H 16.1 q 1.55 s, 3H 15.5 q 1.55 s, 3H 15.3 q 1.48 s, 3H 16.1 q 1.59 s, 3H 16.3 q 5′   149.9 s   150.1 s
15   172.2 s   178.5 s   175.6 s   168.9 s   173.4 s   170.6 s 6′ 7.58 d, 1H, 2.9 110.8 d 7.69 d, 1H 2.3 110.5 d
16   124.4 s   119.4 s   121.9 s   119.6 s   123.6 s   120.5 s 6-OMe 3.42 s, 3H 56.5 q    
17   147.1 s   155.6 s   147.0 s   155.7 s   149.3 s   156.5 s          
18 6.70 m, 1H 118.3 d 6.77 d, 1H, 8.9 119.1 d 6.64 d, 1H, 8.7 116.2 d 6.83 d, 1H, 8.9 118.6 d 6.67 m, 1H 118.4 d 6.74 d, 1H, 8.9 119.7 d          
19 6.69 m, 1H 117.9 d 6.99 dd, 1H, 8.9, 2.9 125.4 d 6.59 d, 1H, 8.7 116.1 d 7.04 dd, 1H, 8.9, 2.9 125.4 d 6.66 m, 1H 118.2 d 6.95 dd, 1H, 8.9, 2.9 125.8 d          
20   149.8 s   149.3 s   148.6 s   148.8 s   151.2 s   150.7 s          
21 6.95 s, 1H 112.5 d 7.20 d, 1H, 2.9 114.8 d 6.49 s, 1H 112.0 d 7.14 d, 1H, 2.9 114.7 d 6.96 s, 1H 114.6 d 7.29 d, 1H, 2.9 115.6 d          
OMe               3.26 s, 3H 52.2 q                



image file: c6ra01466f-f2.tif
Fig. 2 Key HMBC and 1H–1H COSY correlations of 1–8 (HMBC →, 1H–1H COSY [thick line, graph caption]).

Compound 2 was assigned the molecular formula C21H26O7 according to HRESIMS analysis (m/z 389.1597 [M − H], calcd for C21H25O7, 389.1600). The 13C NMR (DEPT) spectroscopic data (Table 1) showed two methyls, five methylenes, six methines (five olefinic), and eight quaternary carbons (five olefinic, one ketone carbonyl, and two carboxyls). The 1H and 13C NMR data of 2 were similar to those of 9, except for the shifts at δC 171.3 (s, C-12) in compound 2, and the substituent of δC 25.7 (q, C-12) in 9, revealed that the methyl group in C-12 was oxygenated to a carboxyl group in compound 2. The HMBC (Fig. 2) correlations of 2 from H-13 [δH 1.77 (3H, s)] to C-12 and C-11 (δC 128.0 s) further confirmed this hypothesis. The configuration of compound 2 was elucidated by ROESY experiments (Fig. 3) and was determined to be the same as that of compound 1 with E configurations for Δ6,7 and Δ10,11. The orientation of C-3 was difficult to determine. Therefore, the structure of compound 2 was elucidated as shown and named ganocalidin B.


image file: c6ra01466f-f3.tif
Fig. 3 Key ROESY correlations of 1–7.

Compound 3 was defined with the molecular formula C21H24O6 from HREIMS (m/z 372.1757 [M]+, calcd for C21H24O6, 372.1572). The 13C NMR data (Table 1) of 3 were similar to those of fornicin B,4 except for the shifts at δC 78.6 (d, C-1) and 146.3 (s, C-12) in compound 3 instead of the responding carbons at δC 107.6 (s, C-1) and 25.8 (q, C-12) in fornicin B, and a methoxy carbon δC 56.9 (q, 1-OMe) was lost, indicating that the methoxy group at the ketal carbon C-1 was removed and the methyl group of C-12 was oxygenated to a carboxyl group in compound 3. The HMBC (Fig. 2) correlations of 3 from H-1 [δH 5.07 (1H, d, J = 6.4 Hz)] to C-3 (δC 131.6 s) and C-17 (δC 147.0 s), and from H-13 [δH 1.73 (3H, s)] to C-11 (δC 127.1 s) and C-12, together with the key 1H–1H COSY correlations H-1/H-2 [δH 7.26 (1H, d, J = 6.4 Hz)], confirmed this hypothesis. The other correlations in the HMBC and 1H–1H COSY spectrum further confirmed the atom connectivity in compound 3 (Fig. 2). The configuration of the skeleton in compound 3 was elucidated by ROESY experiments (Fig. 3) and was determined to be the same as that of compound 2, with a Z configuration for Δ2,3 and E configurations for Δ6,7 and Δ10,11. The orientation of C-2 was difficult to determine. Thus, the structure of compound 3 was assigned as shown and named ganocalidin C.

Compound 4 was shown to have the molecular formula C21H24O7 from HRESIMS (m/z 411.1413 [M + Na]+, calcd for C21H24O7Na, 411.1420). Comparison of its 1D NMR data (Table 1) with 2 suggested that compound 4 had a similar structure to 2. The differences were additional shifts at δC 131.4 (d, C-2) and 144.6 (s, C-3) in 4 instead of shifts at δC 40.5 (t, C-2) and 40.2 (d, C-3) in compound 2, suggesting that a double bond was generated between C-2 and C-3 in 4. The key HMBC (Fig. 2) correlations of 4 from H-2 [δH 7.67 (1H, s)] to C-1 (δC 197.1 s), C-15 (δC 168.9 s) and C-17 (δC 155.7 s), and from H-5 [δH 2.18 (2H, dt, J = 7.5, 7.4 Hz)] to C-3 (δC 144.6 s) further supported the hypothesis. The other correlations in the HMBC and 1H–1H COSY spectrum (Fig. 2) further confirmed the atom connectivity in compound 4. The configurations of 2Z, 6E, and 10E in compound 4 were elucidated by NOE H-2/H-4 [δH 2.64 (2H, t, J = 7.5 Hz)], H-5/H-14 [δH 1.55 (3H, s)], H-6 [δH 5.09 (1H, t, J = 7.4 Hz)]/H-8 [δH 1.93 (2H, t, J = 7.9 Hz)], and H-9 [δH 2.15 (2H, dt, J = 7.9, 7.3 Hz)]/H-13 [δH 1.75 (3H, s)]. Thus, the structure of compound 7 was assigned as shown and named ganocalidin D.

Compound 5 was defined with the molecular formula C22H28O7 from HRESIMS (m/z 403.1752 [M − H], calcd for C22H27O7, 403.1757). The 1H and 13C NMR data (Table 1) of 5 were similar to those of fornicin B,8 except for the signals at δC 65.6 (t, C-12) and 58.3 (t, C-13) in compound 5 replacing signals at δC 25.8 (s, C-12) and 17.7 (d, C-13) in fornicin B, meaning that the C-12 and C-13 were oxygenated to be methylol groups in compound 5. The HMBC (Fig. 2) correlations of 5 from H-12 [δH 4.07 (2H, s)] and H-13 [4.13 (2H, s)] to C-10 (δC 130.2 d) and C-11 (δC 139.2 d) confirmed this structural change. The other correlations in the HMBC and 1H–1H COSY spectrum (Fig. 2) further determined the atom connectivity in compound 5. The configurations of 2Z and 6E in compound 4 were elucidated by the ROESY experiments (Fig. 3). The orientation of C-2 was difficult to determine. Thus, the structure of compound 5 was assigned as shown and named ganocalidin E.

Compound 6 was formulated as C21H24O3 from HRESIMS (m/z 387.1444 [M + Na]+, calcd for C21H23O7, 387.1450). Compound 6 had similar 13C NMR data (Table 1) to those of 4, and the differences were shifts of δC 37.5 (t, C-2), 129.0 (s, C-3), and 145.5 (d, C-4) in 6, replacing shifts of δC 131.4 (d, C-2), 144.6 (s, C-3), and 27.8 (d, C-4) in 4, indicating that in compound 6, the double bond moved from C-2-C-3 to C-3-C-4. The HMBC correlations from H-2 [δH 4.02 (2H, s)] to C-15 (δC 170.6 s), C-16 (δC 120.5 s), and C-3 (δC 129.0 s), and from H-4 [δH 6.97 (H, t, J = 7.2 Hz)] to C-15, and the 1H–1H COSY correlations (Fig. 2) of H-4 with H-5 [δH 2.18 (2H, dd, J = 7.3, 7.2 Hz)] confirmed the hypothesis and the atom connectivity in compound 6. The configuration of compound 6 was determined to possess three trans-vinyl groups as shown in the structure by ROESY experiments (Fig. 3). Thus, the structure of compound 6 was assigned as shown and named ganocalidin F.

Compound 7 was assigned to be C16H15NO3 by HREIMS (m/z 269.1051 [M]+, calcd for C16H15NO3, 269.1051). Analysis of its 13C NMR and DEPT spectra (Table 1) showed 16 carbon resonances, including one methoxyl, three methylenes (one oxygenated), five methines (six olefinic and one oxygenated), and seven olefinic quaternary carbons. The 13C NMR data (Table 1) of 7 were similar to those of sinesine E, a rare ganoderma alkaloid, except for one additional shift at δC 56.5 (6-OMe) and the shift at δC 73.9 (d, C-6) replacing δC 82.8 (t, C-6) in sinesine E,24 indicating that the hydroxyl group at C-6 was substituted by a methoxyl group in compound 7. The HMBC (Fig. 1) correlations of 7 from 6-OMe [δH 3.42 (3H, s)] to C-6 (δC 82.8 s) and 1H–1H COSY correlations from H-5 [δH 2.34 (1H, m) and 2.24 (1H, m)] to H-4 [δH 2.99 (1H, ddd, J = 16.8, 8.6, 3.7 Hz) and 2.75 (1H, ddd, J = 16.8, 7.7, 6.4 Hz)] and H-6 [δH 4.86 (1H, dd, J = 6.3, 2.8 Hz)] confirmed this hypothesis. The configuration of C-6 (R) was confirmed by comparing the NMR spectroscopy, specific rotation,24 and the NOE correlation H-6/H-4β [δH 2.99 (1H, ddd, J = 16.8, 8.6, 3.7 Hz)]. Finally, compound 7 was determined and named ganocalicine A.

Compound 8 was defined with the molecular formula C15H13NO2 from HREIMS (m/z 239.0940 [M]+, calcd for C15H13NO2, 239.0946). Comparison of the similar 13C NMR data (Table 1) of 8 with those of 7 showed that the carbon signals at δC 30.2 (t, C-6) in 8 replaced those of δC 82.8 (d, C-6) and 56.6 (q, 6-OMe) in 7, indicating that the methoxy group at C-6 in 7 was removed in 8. This deduction was proved by the HMBC and 1H–1H COSY (Fig. 2) correlations in compound 8. Thus, the structure of compound 8 was assigned as shown and named ganocalicine B.

Bioactivity evaluation

In immediate-type hypersensitivity reactions, antigen-specific IgE binds to mast cells and basophils and is cross-linked by an allergen, which phosphorylates intracellular tyrosine kinase cascades and then triggers the release of preformed chemical mediators, and then results in the multiorgan symptoms of an allergy.25 Antigen-stimulated RBL-2H3 cells have been used as principal models for the activation of mast cells and basophils in immediate allergic reactions to test the efficacy of new anti-allergy therapies by measuring the release of β-hexosaminidase, a well-established granule marker, as well as by analyzing the production of degranulation-independent mediators, such as leukotrienes and interleukin-4.26 As shown in Fig. 4, RBL-2H3 cells sensitized with dinitrophenyl specific immunoglobulin E (DNP-IgE) and challenged with dinitrophenyl-bovine serum albumin (DNP-BSA) produced a significant release of β-hexosaminidase, and increased concentrations of IL-4 and LTB4 (Fig. 4).
image file: c6ra01466f-f4.tif
Fig. 4 Effect of compounds from G. calidophilum on the cell viability (a) and the release of β-hexosaminidase or IL-4 or LTB4 (b–d) in DNP-BSA-activated RBL-2H3 cells. (a) Cytotoxic effects of compounds 1–8 on RBL-2H3 cells. The percentage survival of RBL-2H3 cells is shown following 24 h of incubation with 1–8 (10 μM). (b) The effects of compounds 1 and 7 on the release of β-hexosaminidase in DNP-BSA-activated RBL-2H3 cells. RBL-2H3 cells were seeded on a 24-well plate (1 × 105 cells per well) in DMEM with 5% FBS at 37 °C, and incubated with DNP-IgE for 24 h. DNP-IgE-sensitized cells were exposed to 1 and 7 (5–10 μM) for 1 h, and then stimulated with DNP-BSA (1 μg ml−1) for 1 h. The β-hexosaminidase activity was determined as described in the Experimental section. (c) Inhibition of IL-4 production by 1 and 7 in RBL-2H3 cells. (d) 1 and 7 decrease the secretion of LTB4 in RBL-2H3 cells. Data are presented as the mean ± SD values of triplicate determinations. *P < 0.01, **P < 0.05, ***P < 0.001 versus DNP-BSA-treated group (n = 3).

Among the isolated compounds from G. calidophilum, the impact of the new compounds 1–8 on cell viability was firstly evaluated (each compound was evaluated between 1–10 μM), and no significant cytotoxicity was observed in the RBL-2H3 cells (Fig. 4a). Compounds 1–8 were further tested for their effects on the release of β-hexosaminidase in DNP-IgE-sensitized RBL-2H3 cells, and two compounds (1 and 7) showed higher inhibitory activities (IC50 = 9.44 ± 1.95 and 9.14 ± 2.12 μM) than ketotifen fumarate, a positive control (IC50 = 203.27 ± 10.81 μM) (Fig. 4b). However, no significant difference was observed for the inhibition of β-hexosaminidase by the other isolated compounds (2–6, 8) compared to the DNP-BSA-treated group. To investigate the effect of the compounds on the production of IL-4 and LTB4 from activated mast cells, RBL-2H3 cells were sensitized with 1 μg ml−1 DNP-IgE overnight and treated with 1–8 for 1 h, followed by treatment with DNP-BSA for 1.5 h. The result showed that treatment of sensitized RBL-2H3 with 1 and 7 (5–10 μM) significantly suppressed the production of the allergic cytokine IL-4 (Fig. 4). In addition, 1 and 7 (5–10 μM) also reduced the release of the lipid mediator LTB4 in activated RBL-2H3, compared to untreated sensitized RBL-2H3 (Fig. 4).

These results implied that 1 and 7 might inhibit the activation of the FcεRI receptor-mediated intracellular signaling cascade molecules, which are responsible for allergic responses in antigen-stimulated RBL-2H3 cells. After the cross-linking of the IgE-bound FcεRI by an allergen, the intracellular spleen tyrosine kinase (Syk) becomes phosphorylated (p-Syk) to propagate downstream signaling. Activated Syk dependent signaling events increase the intracellular calcium level, which leads to mast cell degranulation, releasing a range of preformed and newly synthesized mediators that evoke a potent immune allergic response. While preformed mediators such as histamine, chemotactic factors, tryptases and chymases are stored in granules and released upon exocytosis, newly synthesized mediators such as prostaglandin, the leukotrienes and platelet activating factor are produced and secreted to the mucosal tissue, which provoke a variety of allergic symptoms. Therefore, by measuring the release of β-hexosaminidase, allergic cytokine and lipid mediator, it is revealed that compounds 1 and 7 from G. calidophilum are capable of inhibiting mast cell degranulation and the release of allergic mediators. This finding indicates that 1 and 7 are potential drugs to prevent or relieve allergic symptoms.

Conclusion

Mast cells play a critical role in immediate-type hypersensitivity reactions, and mast cell mediators are implicated in many different conditions including allergic rhinitis, conjunctivitis, asthma, and psoriasis.27,28 Thus, there is intense interest in the development of agents which prevent mast cell mediator release or inhibit the actions of such mediators once released into the environment of the cell. As a complementary and alternative medicine for allergic asthma and rhinitis, the Ganoderma species (Ganodermataceae) is popularly prescribed in anti-allergic herbal formulae.2 The pursuit of the compounds responsible for anti-allergic agents in G. calidophilum led to the isolation of six new prenylated hydroquinones and two new alkaloids, and anti-allergy assay results indicated that two compounds (1 and 7) are capable of inhibiting mast cell degranulation and the release of allergic cytokines, suggesting that they have potent anti-allergy abilities, which may aid drug development for anti-allergic treatment. The study of the bioactive components firstly clarified the structures of the prenylated hydroquinones and alkaloids in G. calidophilum, and revealed the chemical basis for the usage of G. calidophilum in anti-allergy applications.

Experimental section

General

Optical rotations were measured on a Cataceo Co. LTD Polar-L polarimeter. UV spectra were obtained on a Shimadzu UV-250 spectrometer. IR spectra were obtained on a Thermo Nicolet 380 spectrometer with KBr pellets. NMR spectra were recorded on a Bruker AV-500 spectrometer with TMS as an internal standard. ESIMS, HRESIMS, and HREIMS were recorded with a Micromass Autospec-Uitima-TOF, API QSTAR Pulsar 1, or a Waters Autospec Premier spectrometer. Silica gel (200–300 mesh, Qingdao Marine Chemical Inc., China), RP-18 (40–70 μm, Fuji Silysia Chemical Ltd., Japan) and Sephadex LH-20 (Amersham Biosciences, Sweden) were used for column chromatography. Semipreparative HPLC was performed on an Agilent 1100 liquid chromatograph with a Zorbax SB-C18, ϕ 5 μm, 9.4 mm × 25 cm, column. Fractions were detected by TLC and spots were visualized by heating after spraying with 7% H2SO4 in ethanol.

Plant material

Fruiting bodies of Ganoderma calidophilum were collected in Qiongzhong country, Hainan Province, People’s Republic of China, and identified by Prof. X. L. Wu (Hainan University). A voucher specimen (HUANG0007) was deposited at the Key Laboratory of Biology and Genetic Resources of Tropical Crops, Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Tropical Bioscience and Biotechnology, Chinese Academy of Tropical Agriculture Sciences, Haikou, People’s Republic of China.

Extraction and isolation

The dried and powdered fruiting bodies of Daphne acutiloba (2.5 kg) were extracted with 95% EtOH under reflux four times (4 × 20 L). The extract was concentrated and suspended in water followed by extraction with EtOAc (3 × 4 L). The EtOAc extract (246 g) was separated by a silica gel column using a gradient solvent CHCl3/MeOH (9[thin space (1/6-em)]:[thin space (1/6-em)]1–3[thin space (1/6-em)]:[thin space (1/6-em)]1 10 L) to afford fractions A–C. Fraction A was surrendered for a large quantity of oil with a TLC test. Fraction B (97 g) was separated by a silica gel column using a gradient solvent CHCl3/MeOH (15[thin space (1/6-em)]:[thin space (1/6-em)]1–5[thin space (1/6-em)]:[thin space (1/6-em)]1) to afford fractions B1–B5. Fractions B1–B5 (1–5 g) were subjected to repeated RP-18 (MeOH/H2O, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, and 100%), Saphadex LH-20 (MeOH) and semi-preparative HPLC (MeOH/H2O, 37[thin space (1/6-em)]:[thin space (1/6-em)]63) to yield 9 (8.6 mg), 10 (72.3 mg) and 11 (2.1 g) from B1; 12 (7.6 mg), 14 (42.1 mg), 17 (8.9 mg), and 18 (20.2 mg) from B2; 13 (11.3 mg), 15 (24.6 mg), and 16 (24.0 mg) from B3; 17 (54.9 mg), 18 (34.6 mg), 19 (27.1 mg), and 20 (8.2 mg) from B4; and 1 (7.6 mg), 7 (15.2 mg), and 8 (16.2 mg) from B5, respectively; fraction C (36 g) was subjected to repeated RP-18 (MeOH/H2O, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, and 100%), Saphadex LH-20 (MeOH) and semi-preparative HPLC (MeOH/H2O, 37[thin space (1/6-em)]:[thin space (1/6-em)]63) to yield 2 (5.9 mg), 3 (5.1 mg), 4 (7.6 mg), 5 (9.8 mg), 6 (25.2 mg), 21 (68.4 mg), 22 (5.9 mg), 23 (3.8 mg), 24 (6.7 mg).
Ganocalidin A (1). Orange oil; [α]30.1D −7.70 (c 0.10, MeOH); UV (MeOH) λmax (log[thin space (1/6-em)]ε) 191 (5.16), 192 (5.16), 197 (5.16), 272 (4.39) nm; IR (KBr) νmax 3408, 2922, 1595, 1419, 1118, 1040 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data see Table 1; ESIMS negative m/z [M − H] 371 (100); HREIMS m/z [M]+ 372.1570 (calcd for C21H24O6, 372.1573).
Ganocalidin B (2). Orange oil; [α]18.3D −5.60 (c 0.30, MeOH); UV (MeOH) λmax (log[thin space (1/6-em)]ε) 191 (5.21), 203 (5.01), 269 (4.67), 357 (3.86), 360 (3.86) nm; IR (KBr) νmax 3346, 2920, 1651, 1645, 1634, 1372, 1159, 1110, 1060, 1005, 559 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data see Table 1; ESIMS positive m/z [M + Na]+ 413 (100); HREIMS negative m/z [M − H] 389.1597 (calcd for C21H25O7, 389.1600).
Ganocalidin C (3). Orange oil; [α]30.1D −0.24 (c 0.17, MeOH); UV (MeOH) λmax (log[thin space (1/6-em)]ε) 194 (4.76), 196 (4.76), 203 (4.48), 205 (4.47), 210 (4.45), 291 (3.70), 372 (3.43) nm; IR (KBr) νmax 3422, 2924, 2360, 1639, 1027, 410 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data see Table 1; EIMS m/z [M] 372 (20), 204 (20), 137 (100); HREIMS m/z [M]+ 372.1574 (calcd for C21H24O6, 372.1573).
Ganocalidin D (4). Orange oil; UV (MeOH) λmax (log[thin space (1/6-em)]ε) 197 (5.38), 272 (4.54), 387 (3.84) nm; IR (KBr) νmax 3386, 2923, 1677, 1413, 1373, 1162, 1112, 1059, 1025, 560 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data see Table 1; ESIMS positive m/z [M + Na]+ 411 (100); HRESIMS positive m/z [M + Na]+ 411.1413 (calcd for C21H24O7Na, 411.1420).
Ganocalidin E (5). Orange oil; [α]30.1D −13.03 (c 0.40, MeOH); UV (MeOH) λmax (log[thin space (1/6-em)]ε) 193 (5.40), 200 (4.52), 291 (3.84), 306 (3.86), 309 (3.86), 354 (3.73), 356 (3.73), 366 (3.71) nm; IR (KBr) νmax 3384, 3926, 1598, 1417, 1116, 1030, 551, 408 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data see Table 1; ESIMS positive m/z [M + Na]+ 427 (100); HRESIMS negative m/z [M − H] 403.1752 (calcd for C22H27O7, 403.1757).
Ganocalidin F (6). Orange oil; [α]30.1D −9.50 (c 0.60, MeOH); UV (MeOH) λmax (log[thin space (1/6-em)]ε) 194 (5.21), 197 (5.21), 216 (4.67), 297 (3.45), 362 (3.87) nm; IR (KBr) νmax 3351, 2922, 1637, 1424, 1372, 1160, 1110, 1057, 557, 428 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data see Table 1; ESIMS positive m/z [M + Na]+ 411 (100); HRESIMS negative m/z [M − H] 387.1444 (calcd for C21H23O7, 387.1450).
Ganocalicine A (7). Colorless powder; [α]30.1D −12.20 (c 0.45, MeOH); UV (MeOH) λmax (log[thin space (1/6-em)]ε) 195 (5.13), 201 (4.86), 212 (4.63), 236 (4.37), 274 (4.28), 307 (3.77), 343 (4.05) nm; IR (KBr) νmax 3415, 2924, 1641, 1600, 1124, 1034, 442 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data see Table 1; ESIMS positive m/z [M + H]+ 270 (100); HREIMS m/z [M]+ 269.1051 (calcd for C16H15NO3, 269.1052).
Ganocalicine B (8). Colorless powder; UV (MeOH) λmax (log[thin space (1/6-em)]ε) 194 (5.04), 200 (4.62), 202 (4.61), 208 (4.58), 213 (4.58), 274 (4.26), 343 (4.20) nm; IR (KBr) νmax 3415, 2922, 1636, 1110, 1026, 410 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data see Table 1; ESIMS positive m/z [M + H]+ 240 (100); HREIMS m/z [M]+ 239.0940 (calcd for C15H13NO2, 239.0946).

Cell culture

Rat basophilic leukemia (RBL-2H3) cells from the cell bank of Shanghai Science Academy were cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM) containing 10% (v/v) FBS, 100 U per mL penicillin, and 100 μg mL−1 streptomycin at 37 °C in a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2.

Cell viability test

An MTT (3-(4,5-dimethyl-2-thiazolyl)-2,5-diphenyl-2-H-tetrazolium bromide) assay was conducted to examine cell viability. RBL-2H3 cells (5 × 105 cells per well, 100 μL per well) were plated into a 96-well plate. After 24 h of incubation, cells were incubated with 1–8 (1–10 μM) for 3 hours, and the medium was replaced with MTT solution (250 μg mL−1) and incubated at 37 °C for 4 h. The medium was carefully discarded and formazan was resuspended in 200 μL of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO). The absorbance was measured at 490 nm using a microplate reader. Values measured from untreated cells were considered to represent 100% viability. The assay was repeated three times, and each concentration was set in triplicate.

β-Hexosaminidase release activity

RBL-2H3 cells were seeded in a 24-well plate (5 × 105 cells per well), and sensitized with dinitrophenol (DNP)-specific IgE (1 μg mL−1) at 37 °C overnight. The IgE-sensitized cells were preincubated with compounds 1–8 for 30 min, and then stimulated with DNP-BSA for 2 h. To measure the activity of β-hexosaminidase released from the cells, the cultured media were centrifuged (17[thin space (1/6-em)]000 g, 10 min) at 4 °C. The supernatant (50 μL) was mixed with 50 μL of 0.1 M sodium citrate buffer (pH 4.5) containing 10 mM 4-nitrophenyl N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminide in a 96-well plate, and then incubated for 90 min at 37 °C. The absorbance was measured at 405 nm after terminating the reaction by addition of 0.2 M glycine (pH 10.0). The inhibition percentage of β-hexosaminidase released from RBL-2H3 cells was calculated using the following equation, and the IC50 values were determined by GraphPad prism 5.01 software graphically: anti-degranulation activity (%) = [1 − (T − N)/(C − N)] × 100%. The control (C) was DNP-BSA (+), test sample (−); test (T) was DNP-BSA (+), test sample (+); and the normal (N) was DNP-BSA (−), test sample (−). Ketotifen fumarate was used as a reference compound. The inhibition assay was repeated three times, and each concentration was set in triplicate.

Determination of IL-4 and LTB4

To measure the levels of interleukin-4 (IL-4) and leukotriene B4 (LTB4) in the cultured media, all cultured media were centrifuged at 4 °C, and the samples were stored at −80 °C until assay. IL-4 and LTB4 were quantified using an ELISA kit according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

Statistical analyses

The data were analyzed using a one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s multiple comparison test with GraphPad Prism software (GraphPad Prism version 5.01 for Windows, San Diego, CA, USA). The values are expressed as mean ± SD. Differences with p < 0.05 were considered significant.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by grants from the Natural Science Foundation of China (31300294, 81370494, 81403160), Special Fund for Agro-Scientific Research in the Public Interest (201303117), National Support Science and Technology Subject (2013BAI11B04), Fundamental Scientific Research Funds for CATAS (ITBB2015ZD02), Natural Science Foundation of Hainan Province (214039), and the Shenzhen Innovation of Science and Technology Commission (No. ZDSYS201506050935272, JCYJ20150403091931191, YLWS20140609102809065, 201401099).

Notes and references

  1. M. Furue, H. Terao, W. Rikihisa, K. Urabe, N. Kinukawa, Y. Nose and T. Koga, Br. J. Dermatol., 2003, 148, 128–133 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  2. X. M. Li and L. Brown, J. Allergy Clin. Immunol., 2009, 123, 297–306 CrossRef PubMed.
  3. Coloured Illustrations of Ganodermataceae of China, ed. X. L. Wu and Y. C. Dai, Science Press, Beijing, 2005, pp. 19–22 Search PubMed.
  4. X. L. Wu, X. L. Mao, G. E. Tuli, B. Song, T. H. Li, Y. X. Zhao, S. L. Chen, L. K. Zeng, S. Z. Huang, T. C. Wen and C. Y. Deng, Medicinal Fungi of China, Science Press, Beijing, 2013, pp. 330–331 Search PubMed.
  5. Q. Y. Ma, Y. Luo, S. Z. Huang, Z. K. Guo, H. F. Dai and Y. X. Zhao, J. Asian Nat. Prod. Res., 2013, 15, 1214–1219 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  6. X. R. Peng, J. Q. Liu, Z. H. Han, X. X. Yuan, H. R. Luo and M. H. Qiu, Food Chem., 2013, 141, 920–926 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  7. H. C. Huang, C. C. Liaw, H. L. Yang, Y. C. Hseu, H. T. Kuo, Y. C. Tsai, S. C. Chien, S. Amagaya, Y. C. Chen and Y. H. Kuo, Phytochemistry, 2012, 84, 177–183 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  8. X. M. Niu, S. H. Li, H. D. Sun and C. T. Che, J. Nat. Prod., 2006, 69, 1364–1365 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  9. F. F. Zhong, Y. Chen, P. Wang, H. J. Feng and G. Z. Yang, Chin. J. Chem., 2009, 27, 74–80 CrossRef CAS.
  10. M. Arisawa, A. Fujita, M. Saga, H. Fukumura, T. Hayashi, M. Shimizu and N. Morita, J. Nat. Prod., 1986, 49, 621–625 CrossRef CAS.
  11. T. H. J. Niedermeyer, U. Lindequist, R. Mentel, D. Goerdes, E. Schmidt, K. Thurow and M. Lalk, J. Nat. Prod., 2005, 68, 1728–1731 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  12. A. G. Gonzalez, F. Leon, A. Rivera, C. M. Munoz and J. Bermejo, J. Nat. Prod., 1999, 62, 1700–1701 CrossRef CAS.
  13. G. Y. Li, B. G. Li, G. Y. Liu and G. L. Zhang, Chin. J. Appl. Environ. Biol., 2005, 11, 67–70 CAS.
  14. H. C. Kwon, S. D. Zee, S. Y. Cho, S. U. Choi and K. R. Lee, Arch. Pharmacal Res., 2002, 25, 851–855 CrossRef CAS.
  15. M. P. Zimmerman and C. Djerassi, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1991, 113, 3530–3533 CrossRef CAS.
  16. J. T. Feng and Y. P. Shi, Pharmazie, 2005, 60, 464–467 CAS.
  17. X. Luo, F. Li, P. B. Shinde, J. Hong, C. O. Lee, K. S. Im and J. H. Jung, J. Nat. Prod., 2006, 69, 1760–1768 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  18. S. P. Yang, J. Xu and J. M. Yue, Chin. J. Chem., 2003, 21, 1390–1394 CrossRef CAS.
  19. F. Yin, L. Cheng and F. C. Lou, Chin. J. Nat. Med., 2004, 2, 149–151 CAS.
  20. M. Mutz, K. J. Barr and J. Gestwicki, Application: WO Pat., 2009-US6600, 2010077317, 2010.
  21. N. Wang, J. H. Wang, J. Cheng and X. Li, J. Shenyang Pharm. Univ., 2003, 20, 425–427 CAS.
  22. X. Zhang, H. Gao, N. L. Wang and X. S. Yao, J. Chin. Med. Mater., 2006, 37, 652–655 CAS.
  23. M. T. Alonso, E. Brunet, O. Juanes and J. C. Rodriguez-Ubis, J. Photochem. Photobiol., A, 2002, 147, 113–125 CrossRef CAS.
  24. J. Q. Liu, C. F. Wang, X. R. Peng and M. H. Qiu, Nat. Prod. Bioprospect., 2011, 1, 93–96 CrossRef CAS.
  25. S. H. He, H. Y. Zhang, X. N. Zeng, D. Chen and P. C. Yang, Acta Pharmacol. Sin., 2013, 34, 1270–1283 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  26. E. Passante and N. Frankish, J. Photochem. Photobiol., A, 2009, 58, 737–745 CAS.
  27. J. Kalesnikoff and S. J. Galli, Nat. Immunol., 2008, 9, 1215–1223 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  28. S. N. Abraham and A. L. St John, Nat. Rev. Immunol., 2010, 10, 440–452 CrossRef CAS PubMed.

Footnotes

Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available: The HPLC fingerprint of the ethanol extract, spectra of 1H and 13C NMR, MS, HSQC, and HMBC of 1–8. See DOI: 10.1039/c6ra01466f
These authors contributed equally to this work.

This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2016
Click here to see how this site uses Cookies. View our privacy policy here.