Research Article
Phytochemical Analysis, In Vitro Free Radical Scavenging, and LDL Protective Effects of Different Solvent Fractions of Calotropis procera (R.) Br. Root Bark Extract
Table 2
IC50 values of CMRME and its solvent fractions on different in vitro radical systems tested.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IC50 values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 3). IC50 of CPRME (crude extract) is compared with that of different solvent fractions. a, a, a, a# when compared with CPRME and b, b, b# when compared with HF (hexane fraction). ns: not significant. n: indicates a higher IC50 than CPRME and therefore, lower radical scavenging activity. NA: no standard was used. The results of LDL oxidation assay of crude extract and solvent fractions were compared with positive control (native LDL with CuSO4 only) CPRME: Calotropis procera root bark methanol extract; HF: hexane fraction; DMF: dichloromethane fraction; EAF: ethyl acetate fraction; MF: methanol fraction; AF: aqueous fraction. |