| In vitro: |
| Molecules. 2013 Dec 13;18(12):15624-35. | | Modulation of lipogenesis and glucose consumption in HepG2 cells and C2C12 myotubes by sophoricoside.[Pubmed: 24352018] | Sophoricoside, an isoflavone glycoside isolated from Sophora japonica (Leguminosae), has been widely reported as an immunomodulator. In this study, the effects of sophoricoside on lipogenesis and glucose consumption in HepG2 cells and C2C12 myotubes were investigated.
METHODS AND RESULTS:
Treatment with sophoricoside at concentrations of 1-10 μM inhibited lipid accumulation in HepG2 cells in a dose-dependent manner. At the same concentration range, no effect on cell viability was observed in the MTT assay. Inhibition of lipogenesis was associated with the downregulation of SREBP-1a, SREBP-1c, SREBP-2 and their downstream target genes (FAS, ACC, HMGR) as revealed by realtime quantitative PCR. The lipid-lowering effect was mediated via the phosphorylation of AMPK. Further investigation of the activities of this isoflavone showed that sophoricoside has the capability to increase glucose uptake by C2C12 myotubes. It also effectively inhibited the activities of α-glucosidase and α-amylase in vitro and remarkably lowered postprandial hyperglycaemia in starch-loaded C57BL6/J mice.
CONCLUSIONS:
These results suggest that sophoricoside is an effective regulator of lipogenesis and glucose consumption and may find utility in the treatment of obesity and type 2 diabetes. | | World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2015 Jan;31(1):187-97. | | Effective bioconversion of sophoricoside to genistein from Fructus sophorae using immobilized Aspergillus niger and Yeast.[Pubmed: 25392205] | In this study, sophoricoside from Fructus sophorae was highly bioconversed to genistein by co-immobilized Aspergillus niger and Yeast.
METHODS AND RESULTS:
Bioconversion conditions for genistein were optimized with single-factor experiments. The optimal conditions were as follows: microbial concentration 1.5 × 10(7) cells/mL, wet weight of microorganisms beads 10.0 g/g material, pH 5, ratio of liquid to solid 25:1 (mL/g), temperature 32 °C and time 24 h. Under these conditions, a 34.45-fold increase in production of genistein was observed with a bioreactor. Moreover, the antioxidant activities of the extracts from the fermented and untreated F. sophorae were 0.287 ± 0.11, 0.384 ± 0.08 mg/mL (IC50) and 1.84 ± 0.13, 1.28 ± 0.25 mmol Fe(II)/g, according to the DPPH test and FRAP assay, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS:
The results indicated that the method described in the current work were valuable procedure for the production of genistein, which is of most importance for industrial scale applications as well as food industry. |
|
| In vivo: |
| Chem Biol Interact. 2014 Aug 5;219:57-63. | | Sophoricoside fails the embryo implantation by compromising the uterine endometrial receptivity at implantation [Pubmed: 24877640 ] | Sophoricoside (SOPH) is an isoflavone glycoside isolated from the fruits of Sophora japonica. Since its first isolation in 1961, there are rare findings about the effects of SOPH on reproductive system.
METHODS AND RESULTS:
In the present study, the pregnant mice administrated by different doses of SOPH were used to explore the effect of SOPH on embryo implantation, especially on the endometrial receptivity. The statistical results showed that the number of implanted embryos was gradually declining along the increasing dose of SOPH. When the administrated dose of SOPH was 600 mg/kg per day, great changes were observed in the exposed uterine morphology and up-regulated progesterone receptor (PR) and down-regulated estrogen receptor α (ERα), E-cadherin, matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2) and integrin β3 were also found in SOPH-exposed uterine.
CONCLUSIONS:
These findings demonstrated that SOPH exposure reduced the number of implanted embryos in a dose-dependent manner and failed the embryo implantation through altering the morphology of uterine and compromising the endometrial receptivity. |
|
Cell. 2018 Jan 11;172(1-2):249-261.e12. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.12.019.IF=36.216(2019)
Cell Metab. 2020 Mar 3;31(3):534-548.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2020.01.002.IF=22.415(2019)
Mol Cell. 2017 Nov 16;68(4):673-685.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.10.022.IF=14.548(2019)
ACS Nano. 2018 Apr 24;12(4): 3385-3396. doi: 10.1021/acsnano.7b08969.IF=13.903(2019)
Nature Plants. 2016 Dec 22;3: 16206. doi: 10.1038/nplants.2016.205.IF=13.297(2019)
Sci Adv. 2018 Oct 24;4(10): eaat6994. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aat6994.IF=12.804(2019)
