556
KRAVCHENKO et al.
Neuroprotective properties of the compounds experimental precision. A sample in which malonic
(III)–(VI) and (XI) were assessed in white randomꢀ dialdehyde formation was induced was used as a posiꢀ
bred male mice with a body mass of 22–24 g. The mice tive control. The experiment was performed in sextuꢀ
were divided into isolated groups of ten animals. All plicate.
groups were housed similarly and belonged to progeny
of close siblings obtained at the same time. The behavꢀ
ioral reactions were assessed in “openꢀfield” [20] and
“elevated plus maze” [21] tests. Motor activity assessꢀ
ment was based on the number of squares crossed in
the open field and on the total number of entries to the
open and closed arms of the maze. Exploratory activꢀ
ity assessment was based on the number of holes
explored in the open field and on the number of rearꢀ
ings and head dippings in the plus maze.
Statistical analysis of all data was performed using
the Student’s tꢀtest. The difference was considered
significant at
р
< 0.05.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Financial support for the present work was proꢀ
vided by the “Biomolecular and Medicinal Chemisꢀ
try” program of the Chemistry and Material Science
Division of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Assessment of the anxiety level of the mice was
based on the number of entries to the open arms of the
maze and time spent there. The control animals were
given an intraperitoneal injection of physiological
saline, the experimental animals received injections of
the drugs tested (100 mg/kg in physiological saline),
and mebicar (100 mg/kg) was used as the reference
drug. In order to maintain the drug treatment duration
exactly the same for all drugs, the time delay between
the injection of physiological saline mebicar solution
and the drugs tested to mice of each group equaled
6 min. Exactly 1 h after the injection each mouse was
placed into the “open field” apparatus for 3 min and then
into the “elevated plus maze” apparatus immediately for
3 min. All the experiments were performed between
14.00 and 16.00; ten animals were tested every day.
REFERENCES
1. Blaschke, G., Kraft, H.P., Fichentscher, K., and
Kohler, F., Arzneim.ꢀForch., 1979, vol. 29, p. 1640.
2. Laurence, D.R. and Bennett, P.N., Clinical Pharmacoꢀ
logy, 6th ed., Curchill Livingstone, Edinburg, 1987.
3. Mashkovskii, M.D., in Lekarstvennye sredstva (Drugs),
Moscow: Novaya volna, 2010, p. 89.
4. Bakibayev, A.A., Akmedzhanov, R.R., Yagovkin, A.Yu.,
Novozheyeva, T.P., Filimonov, V.D., and Saratnikov, A.S.,
Pharm. Chem. J., 1993, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 29–31.
5. Herbert, H., Hase, C., and Budnowski, M., Ger. Offen.
no. 3003356, 1981; Chem. Abstrs., 1981, vol. 95,
pp. 187–252.
6. Vikharev, Yu.B., Anikina, L.V., Chikunov, I.E.,
Sigachev, A.S., Kravchenko, A.N., Shklyaev, Yu.V., and
Makhova, N.N., Vopr. Biol. Med. Farmats. Khim., 2006,
no. 2, pp. 12–16.
7. Kravchenko, A.N., Sigachev, A.S., Maksareva, E.Yu.,
Gazieva, G.A., Trunova, N.S., Lozhkin, B.V., Pivina, T.S.,
Il’in, M.M., Lyssenko, K.A., Nelyubina, Yu.V.,
Davankov, V.A., Lebedev, O.V., Makhova, N.N., and
Tartakovsky, V.A., Russ. Chem. Bull, Int. Ed., 2005,
vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 691–704.
8. Pletnev, V.Z., Mikhailova, I.Yu., Sobolev, A.N., Gaꢀ
litsky, N.M., Verenich, A.I., Khmel’nitskii, L.I., Lebeꢀ
dev, O.V., Kravchenko, A.N., and Suvorova, L.I., Russ.
J. Bioorg. Chem., 1993, vol. 19, pp. 672–680.
9. Kravchenko, A.N., Maksareva, E.Yu., Belyakov, P.A.,
Sigachev, A.S., Chegaev, K.Yu., Lyssenko, K.A., Lebeꢀ
dev, O.V., and Makhova, N.N., Russ. Chem. Bull. Int.
Ed., 2003, vol. 52, pp. 192–197.
10. Lyssenko, K.A., Golovanov, D.G., Kravchenko, A.N.,
Chikunov, I.E., Lebedev, O.V., and Makhova, N.N.,
Mendeleev Commun., 2004, pp. 105–107.
11. Kravchenko, A.N., Sigachev, A.S., Gazieva, G.A.,
Maksareva, E.Yu., Trunova, N.S., Chegaev, K.Yu., Lysꢀ
senko, K.A., Lyubetsky, D.V., Struchkova, M.I.,
Il’in, M.M., Davankov, V.A., Lebedev, O.V.,
Makhova, N.N., and Tartakovsky, V.A., Chem. Heteroꢀ
cycl. Compd., 2006, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 365–376.
Two weeks after the experiments the behavior tests
were repeated with the same groups of mice, but this
time each mouse was placed in a 250ꢀmL hermetic
chamber for 20 min 1 h after the injection. The time of
confinement to the hermetic chamber was chosen
according to the results of the previous experiments:
mice of the same body weight started dying 22 min
after the start of the hypoxic hypoxiaꢀhypercapnia test.
After 20 min the mouse was removed from the chamꢀ
ber and placed into a cage for 30 min, and then into
the “open field” apparatus for 3 min and into the “eleꢀ
vated plus maze” apparatus for 3 min. The parameters
recorded were the same as in the previous series of
experiments. All the experiments were performed
between 14.00 and 16.00; five animals were tested
every day.
Assessment of antioxidant properties was perꢀ
formed on mouse brain homogenates. Lipid peroxidaꢀ
tion (LP) was initiated by ironꢀascorbate treatment
[22]. The compounds tested were added to the reacꢀ
tion mixture to a concentration of 1
µ
M and incubated
at 37 for 1 h. Rutin (1 M) was used as the reference
°
С
µ
drug. The quantity of malonic dialdehyde formed was
measured photometrically after the reaction with
thiobarbituric acid and expressed in nmol/mg brain
homogenate. The initial malonic dialdehyde level and
the rate of spontaneous formation of malonic dialdeꢀ
hyde during incubation were monitored to ensure
12. Kravchenko, A.N., Lyssenko, K.A., Chikunov, I.E.,
Belyakov, P.A., Il’in, M.M., Baranov, V.V.,
Nelyubina, Yu.V., Davankov, V.A., Pivina, T.S.,
Makhova, N.N., and Antipin, M.Yu., Russ. Chem. Bull.
Int. Ed., 2009, vol. 58, pp. 395–405.
RUSSIAN JOURNAL OF BIOORGANIC CHEMISTRY Vol. 38
No. 5
2012