Next Article in Journal
Impact of Electrospinning Parameters and Post-Treatment Method on Antibacterial and Antibiofilm Activity of Chitosan Nanofibers
Next Article in Special Issue
A Comprehensive Review of Andrographis paniculata (Burm. f.) Nees and Its Constituents as Potential Lead Compounds for COVID-19 Drug Discovery
Previous Article in Journal
Iminosugar Amino Acid idoBR1 Reduces Inflammatory Responses in Microglia
Previous Article in Special Issue
Untargeted Metabolomic Approach to Determine the Regulatory Pathways on Salicylic Acid-Mediated Stress Response in Aphanamixis polystachya Seedlings
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Molecules
Volume 27
Issue 10
10.3390/molecules27103339
molecules-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Safety Assessment and Pain Relief Properties of Saffron from Taliouine Region (Morocco)

by
Maroua Ait Tastift
1,2,
Rachida Makbal
1,2,
Thouria Bourhim
1,2,
Zineb Omari
1,2,
Hiroko Isoda
3,4 and
Chemseddoha Gadhi
1,2,4,*
1
Laboratory of Agri-Food, Biotechnology, and Valorization of Plant Resources, Phytochemistry and Pharmacology of Medicinal Plants Unit, Faculty of Sciences Semlalia, Cadi Ayyad University, Avenue Prince Moulay Abdellah, BP 2390, Marrakesh 40000, Morocco
2
Agrobiotechnology and Bioengineering Center, CNRST-Labeled Research Unit (AgroBiotech-URL-CNRST-05 Center), Cadi Ayyad University, Marrakesh 40000, Morocco
3
Faculty of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Tennodai 1-1-1, Tsukuba City 305-8572, Ibaraki, Japan
4
Alliance for Research on the Mediterranean and North Africa (ARENA), University of Tsukuba, Tennodai 1-1-1, Tsukuba City 305-8572, Ibaraki, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Molecules 2022, 27(10), 3339; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27103339
Submission received: 5 March 2022 / Revised: 18 May 2022 / Accepted: 19 May 2022 / Published: 23 May 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Functional Applications of Medicinal Plants)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Saffron is the most expensive spice in the world. In addition to its culinary utilization, this spice is used for medicinal purposes such as in pain management. In this study, the analgesic activity of Crocus sativus stigma extract (CSSE) was evaluated in rodents and its possible physiological mechanism was elucidated. The anti-nociceptive effect of CSSE was evaluated using three animal models (hot plate, writhing, and formalin tests). The analgesic pathways involved were assessed using various analgesia-mediating receptors antagonists. The oral administration of CSSE, up to 2000 mg/kg, caused no death or changes in the behavior or in the hematological and biochemical blood parameters of treated animals nor in the histological architecture of the animals’ livers and kidneys. CSSE showed a central, dose-dependent, anti-nociceptive effect in response to thermal stimuli; and a peripheral analgesic effect in the test of contortions induced by acetic acid. The dual (central and peripheral) analgesic effect was confirmed by the formalin test. The anti-nociceptive activity of CSSE was totally or partially reversed by the co-administration of receptor antagonists, naloxone, atropine, haloperidol, yohimbine, and glibenclamide. CSSE influenced signal processing, by the modulation of the opioidergic, adrenergic, and muscarinic systems at the peripheral and central levels; and by regulation of the dopaminergic system and control of the opening of the ATP-sensitive K+ channels at the spinal level. The obtained data point to a multimodal mechanism of action for CSSE: An anti-inflammatory effect and a modulation, through different physiological pathways, of the electrical signal generated by the nociceptors. Further clinical trials are required to endorse the potential utilization of Moroccan saffron as a natural painkiller.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Pain is a physiological process whose purpose is to warn the person of a threat to his physical integrity, hence the term nociception [1]. However, to this simple transmission of the nociceptive message from the periphery to the somato-sensitive cortical centers is added an emotional and behavioral component, which explain the complex and multifactorial nature of pain.
Suffering from pain, especially chronic pain, has become a major medical and socio-economic burden worldwide. Pain reduces the quality of life and has physical, psychological, and environmental impacts not only on the individual but also on society as a whole [2].
The intervention of central and peripheral mechanisms in pain in the majority of cases makes the choice of an adequate pharmacological therapy very difficult. The analgesics that act at the central level, in spite of their great effectiveness, are not dissociated from side effects, namely addiction, constipation, and respiratory depression [3,4]. Furthermore, analgesics that proceed at the peripheral level have undesirable effects, such as gastrointestinal and renal lesions [5,6]. In this sense, several studieshave been devoted to discover new natural resources with analgesic potential and low secondary effects.
Saffron, also known as Crocus sativus L. stigmas (Iridaceae), is the most expensive spice in the world. At the retail price, it costs 4000 to 6000 US dollar per kg of dried stigmas and requires the collection of 200,000 to 300,000 flowers for one kg of saffron. The flowers are manually handled to gently remove the three precious stigmas that make up saffron. The major saffron-growing countries around the world are Iran, India, Morocco, Spain, Greece, Afghanistan, and Italy [7,8,9,10]. Iran produces 90% of the saffron that exists on the market, making it the leading producer and exporter in the world.
Morocco occupies an important place in the saffron market [11]. The country is the world’s fourth largest producer of this expensive spice, with an annual production of 6.5 tons in 2019, grown over an area of 1865 Ha, mainly in the region of Taliouine in the Anti-Atlas Mountains [12].
The chemical composition of saffron has been widely studied [8,10,13]. Stigmas mainly contain secondary metabolites belonging to the terpenoid family, in particular monoterpenes and apocarotenoids, and to the flavonoid family, all glycosidic derivatives of kaempferol [8,11,14,15,16].
Among the apocarotenoids, crocetin and its glycoside esters, crocins, are the most important [8] while safranal, a monoterpene aldehyde, and its glucoside derivative, picrocrocin, are the other two most important phytochemicals abundant in C. sativus stigmas.
The quality of saffron depends on its coloring potential, its taste, and its aroma, ascribable to crocin, picrocrocin, and safranal contents, respectively. Three categories of saffron are defined according to the saffron ISO-norm 3632-2: 2010 [17], namely category 1 (the highest quality category), category 2 (intermediate), and category 3 (lowest quality).
Although saffron samples from different locations or countries have similar overall chemical composition, it has been reported that there are qualitative and/or quantitative differences in chemical composition between samples; differences that are related to the geographical origin, drying process, and storage conditions [8,11,14,18,19,20,21]. Thus, it impacts the organoleptic properties and beneficial health effects of the saffron sample. The differences concern the structure of crocin (the glycoside ester of crocetin), the composition of the volatile fraction, and the structure of the kaempferol derivatives [8,14,20,21].
In saffron samples, different crocin derivatives exist depending on the isomer (cis/trans) of crocetin involved and on the number of glucose molecules attached to the molecule of crocetin [8,20,21]. Kaempferol derivatives also differ from one sample of saffron to another depending on the structure of sugars moiety [8]. Nevertheless, the key difference concerns the aromatic volatile fraction. Indeed, in addition to the drying process [11,18,20], the geographical location affects the chemical profile of the volatile fraction of saffron [14].
Karabagias et al. [14] compared saffron from Greece, Spain, Iran, and Morocco, on the basis of volatile compounds. They reported significant variations in the volatile compounds content, according to the geographical origin of the saffron, finding the following pattern: Morocco > Iran > Greece > Spain. The GC/MS analysis revealed that in all samples, safranal was the most abundant volatile compound but its relative content differs depending on saffron samples. Safranal represented 79.04, 71.35, 76.42, and 64.71% of saffron’s total volatile fraction, in Moroccan, Greek, Iranian, and Spanish samples, respectively [14]. Regarding other volatile safranal derivatives, a significant difference was recorded among samples in relation to the geographical origin [14].
Saffron has been used as a spice, dye, and for medicinal purposes for nearly four millennia [7]. It is considered safe in therapeutic doses [15,22]. Different studies reported the non-toxic effects of saffron after acute oral administration of a dose of 2 g/kg [15,22] and even at doses up to 5 g/kg [8,23]. No symptoms of toxicity were recorded after repeated administration of low doses of saffron (28 days of administration of a dose of 100 mg/kg in the rat) [22] while repeated oral administration of higher doses (>5 g/kg) was likely to cause vomiting, uterine contractions, dizziness, etc. [24].
Various health-promoting properties have been accredited to it and its main metabolites, crocin, crocetin, picrocrocin, and safranal, namely anticancer, anti-Alzheimer’s, anti-Parkinson’s, improved memory and learning abilities, treatment of anxiety disorders and schizophrenia, anti-nociceptive, anti-inflammatory, hepatoprotective, antidiabetic, macular degeneration protection, anticoagulant, skin anti-aging, skin lightening, antisolar, and moisturizing properties [9,13,15,16,19,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33].
In recent times, saffron has gained a special interest for its antidepressant properties based on in vivo testing and randomized controlled trials [34,35,36,37,38]. The inhibition of serotonin reuptake has been proposed as a possible mechanism of action of saffron and crocin [34]. It has also been acclaimed for its anti-cancer potential [39,40,41,42,43,44]. In a very recent report, El Midaoui et al. (2022) [45] highlighted the role of saffron in the treatment of neuropsychiatric and age-related diseases. Saffron and its major compounds have powerful antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties in vitro and in vivo [46,47]; properties that would be partly responsible for the effectiveness of saffron and its metabolites in the treatment of diseases [44,48,49,50].
Saffron is traditionally known to ease pain. Its analgesic activity was evaluated in vivo and in clinical trials [15,30,31,32,33]. The anti-nociceptive effect was found by Hosseinzadeh and Younesi [30] to not be significant in mice and to not involve the central nervous system, while other studies have confirmed saffron’s effectiveness [31,32,33], and the involvement of central mechanisms [15], without, however, specifying which ones are involved.
The majority of studies have used, in their investigation, saffron from Iran for its convenience, Iran being the first producer and exporter of this spice in the world [24] However, despite Morocco’s place on the podium of saffron production, and even with the strong aroma that characterizes it (high yield in volatile fraction [14]), Moroccan saffron has not been investigated for its functionality and, therefore, could hide unexpected assets.
Thus, the aim of the present work was primarily to assess, for the first time, the analgesic properties of saffron from Morocco. Furthermore, the elucidation of the physiological mechanism involved in the analgesic activity of C. sativus stigma extract (CSSE) using various antagonists of analgesia-mediating receptors was also recorded.

2. Results

2.1. CSSE Had No Toxic Effect

The acute toxicity was studied using the limit dose test reported in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and OECD guidelines [51,52]. The limit dose of 2000 mg/kg body weight is the recommended dose for acute toxicity studies to avoid the unnecessary use and killing of animals (one of the pillars of animals handling).
The oral administration of a single dose of CSSE (2000 mg/kg body weight) to mice did not cause any death within the fourteen days of the study. No toxicity symptoms or adverse behavioral changes were observed in CSSE treated mice (Table 1). In addition, the extract did not affect mice body weight (Figure 1a) nor the amount of food intake (Figure 1b) compared to the control. No macroscopic alterations were observed in the mice’s organs during the autopsy and the relative organ weights were unaffected (Table 2). Hematological parameters showed no significant difference between the treated mice and the control group (Table 3). Biochemical analysis of serum aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) showed that treatment with CSSE did not cause significant changes in serum transaminases (Table 3). In the same way, no changes in creatinine, urea, alkaline phosphatase, and total bilirubin levels were observed compared to the control group. The data show that the biochemical parameters remained within the physiological range, indicating that CSSE did not affect liver and kidney function. Histopathological analysis of the liver and kidneys was performed and confirmed the macroscopic examination (Figure 2). The oral median lethal dose (LD50) of CSSE was much higher than 2000 mg/kg body weight of mice. Therefore, CSSE was considered as safe according to the FDA [51] and the OECD [52] guidelines.

2.2. Analgesic Activity

2.2.1. CSSE Reduced the Abdominal Contractions Induced by Intraperitoneal Injection of Acetic Acid in Mice

Acetic acid is typically used as noxious stimuli in visceral pain studies [53]. When injected intraperitoneally to mice, it induces abdominal writhing (stretching, retracting, or pressing the belly against the floor). The writhing test is based on counting these events and is used to assess the pain threshold for inflammatory agents [53].
The pretreatment with CSSE significantly decreased the writhing response in a dose-dependent manner with a high inhibition rate of writhing (71.6%) observed at 200 mg/kg; while at 50 mg/kg and 100 mg/kg, the inhibition rates induced by acetic acid were of 48.3% and 60.5%, respectively. This pain-relieving effect of CSSE was very significant, as shown by its relative activity when compared to morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p). At 200 mg/kg, CSSE exhibited an 84.7 % morphine equivalent inhibitory effect (Table 4).

2.2.2. CSSE Increased Mice Latency Time to Respond to Heat-Induced Pain

Hot plate test is used to evaluate the pain threshold of mice towards heat [54]. CSSE showed a significant analgesic effect in the hot-plate test from 60 min after the start of treatment. Mice which received CSSE showed a significant, time-dependent increase in latency time to react to heat in comparison with the control group. The maximal analgesic effect in CSSE-treated group was observed at 120 min, as for morphine. After 4 h from the start of treatment, the pain threshold of mice towards heat decreased. (Figure 3).

2.2.3. CSSE Inhibited the Pain Induced by Formalin Injection in the Animal Paw

The formalin test is used to differentiate between acute and chronic pain [55]. The animal reacts to the pain triggered by the chemical stimuli by licking its paw. Paw licking time was recorded for the first five minutes after the formalin injection as an indicator of acute pain and between the 15th and 30th min of injection, indicating chronic pain [56].
The pain induced by the injection of the formalin solution in the mice paw was significantly inhibited by CSSE and morphine in both phases of the formalin test, the early phase and the late phase. CSSE (50, 100, or 200 mg/kg, p.o.) significantly reduced the time spent by mice licking their paws after formalin injection, during the early phase, by 13.4%, 35.9%, and 45%, respectively, and during the late phase by 38.8%, 53.6%, and 62.8%, respectively (Figure 4). The anti-nociceptive effect of CSSE was more noticeable in the late phase than in the early phase (Figure 4); while morphine was more effective in the early phase. Morphine significantly inhibited pain by 69.8%.

2.3. Mechanistic Studies of CSSE Anti-Nociceptive Effect

Nociceptive transmission involves several mediators acting through several pathways. The possible anti-nociceptive mechanisms of CSSE were investigated by pre-treatment of mice with different antagonists in the writhing test and the hot plate test.

2.3.1. Involvement of the Opioidergic Pathway in CSSE Analgesic Effect

To evaluate the involvement of opioid receptors, mice were pretreated with an opioid receptors’ antagonist, the naloxone (1 mg/kg, i.p.) [57].
In the writhing test, naloxone significantly (p < 0.001) reversed the effect of both CSSE and morphine by increasing the mean number of abdominal contractions (Figure 5a). The analgesic effect of CSSE and morphine decreased in the presence of naloxone by 42% and 33.6%, respectively.
In the hot plate model, naloxone lowered the pain threshold of CSSE-treated mice to equal that of the control group as for morphine (Figure 6a).

2.3.2. Involvement of the Cholinergic Pathway

To evaluate the involvement of the cholinergic receptors, mice were pretreated with a muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs) antagonist, the atropine (1 mg/kg, i.p.) [58].
In the writhing test, atropine significantly (p < 0.001) increased the number of abdominal writhes of mice pretreated with morphine or CSSE (Figure 5b). Atropine reduced CSSE’s anti-nociceptive effect by 42%.
In the hot plate test, atropine significantly (p < 0.05) reversed the analgesic effect of CSSE back to baseline; while the analgesic effect of morphine was partially reversed (Figure 6b).

2.3.3. Involvement of ATP Channel Blocker Pathway in CSSE Analgesic Effect

Another pathway potentially involved in pain generation is the depolarization of the cells. Glibenclamide is an inhibitor of ATP-sensitive K+ channels [59,60,61].
In the writhing test, the administration of glibenclamide (10 mg/kg, p.o.) to CSSE-pretreated mice totally abolished CSSE’s analgesic effect. The mean number of abdominal writhes produced by acetic acid increased by 100% in this group to be similar to the control (Figure 5c). Meanwhile, glibenclamide did not significantly change the mean number of abdominal writhes of mice treated with morphine. Morphine’s analgesic effect reduced only by 14.5% in the presence of glibenclamide (Figure 5c). In the hot plate test, glibenclamide partially reversed the analgesic effect of morphine and CSSE (Figure 6c).

2.3.4. Involvement of Dopaminergic Pathway in CSSE Analgesic Effect

The active mechanism of haloperidol is to block the postsynaptic dopamine (D2) receptors [62]. It was therefore used to assess if CSSE acts through this pathway.
In the writhing test, the analgesic effect of morphine and CSSE decreased in the presence of haloperidol by only 14% and 24.4%, respectively (Figure 5d). In the hot plate test, haloperidol did not reverse the analgesic effect of CSSE and only slightly reversed that of morphine (Figure 6d). In contrast, haloperidol alone exerted a significant analgesic effect compared to the control with a pain inhibitory activity of 43.9% (Figure 6d).

2.3.5. Involvement of the Adrenergic Pathway in the Mode of Action of CSSE

Yohimbine blocks presynaptic alpha-2 adrenergic receptors [63].
Yohimbine significantly (p < 0.001) increased the mean number of acetic acid-induced writhing in groups pretreated with CSSE or morphine. The analgesic effect of CSSE was greatly reduced (77%) in the presence of yohimbine as well as for morphine (47.5%) (Figure 5e). In the hot plate test, yohimbine very slightly lowered the pain threshold of mice treated with CSSE or morphine (Figure 6e).

2.4. Chemical Characterization of Moroccan Saffron According to ISO 3632 Guidelines

The quality of saffron is standardized by the norm for saffron ISO 3632 2:2010 [17]. The characterization of saffron samples was assessed by measuring the amount of picrocrocin (flavor strength), safranal (aroma strength), and crocin (coloring strength), and by the moisture content (expressed as percentage). The results (Table 5) showed a high content of crocin (5.6 times the required minimal limit for the first quality category), a high content of picrocrocin (7.5 times the minimal limit for the first quality category), and a high content of safranal, which ranges into the limits established by the norms for the first quality category (min. 20; max. 50). The moisture content (10.3 ± 0.24%) was lower than the maximum limit required for all categories (12%). Therefore, and according to the limits established by the ISO 3632 2:2010 [17], this saffron is classified in the first category, which refers to saffron of a high quality.

3. Discussion

Saffron is a spice traditionally known for its health benefits [16]. It is considered safe in therapeutic doses [15,22] but becomes toxic in high doses [24]. In the present study, the safety of Moroccan saffron was evaluated in order to further assess its analgesic activity at doses without toxic symptoms. CSSE has been shown to be safe up to a dose of 2 g/kg. No death or signs of toxicity were recorded in the treated group, which is consistent with the literature reports on saffron [15,22]. Therefore, it was possible to perform pharmacological tests in the range of safe doses and to assess the pain-relieving potential of CSSE.
The anti-nociceptive activity of CSSE was evaluated in this study using three tests: the hot plate test, writhing test, and formalin test.
The writhing test corresponds to the counting of abdominal stretching induced by the injection of acetic acid into the peritoneal cavity of mice [53]. Acetic acid, a chemical irritant, induces inflammation and is responsible for the release of chemical mediators such as serotonin, histamine, bradykinin, substance P, and prostaglandins (PGE2α) [64,65,66]. These chemical mediators stimulate peripheral chemo-sensitive nociceptors, induce an increase in vascular permeability [65], and result in abdominal writhing [66]. Therefore, because the pretreatment with CSSE significantly decreased the writhing response in a dose-dependent manner, CSSE most likely has an anti-inflammatory effect whereby it modulates nociception. This suggestion was backed up by the results of the formalin test. CSSE significantly reduced, in a dose-dependent manner, the time mice spent licking their paws after formalin injection.
The injection of the formalin solution into the mouse’ paw causes a biphasic response [55,67]. The early neurogenic pain phase is initiated immediately after formalin injection and is characterized by stimulation of the C fibers and release of the substance P and bradykinin. The second phase is due to the local inflammatory pain caused by the production of serotonin, histamine, and prostaglandins [68,69]. The results revealed that CSSE has acted effectively in both phases of the formalin test with a more noticeable effect in the late inflammatory phase than in the early neurogenic pain phase (Figure 4). Thus, CSSE acts largely in the management of pain through the control of inflammation.
Several studies have indeed confirmed the anti-inflammatory activity of saffron [15,28,45,46] and ascribed it to the activity of its metabolites, in particular crocetin, the active form of crocin. Crocetin acted through its modulatory effect on redox balance [46], regulatory activity on inducible nitric synthase (iNOS) expression, and through the inhibition of cyclooxygenase-1 and cyclooxygenase-2, and prostaglandins production [45].
CSSE also controls pain through central neurogenic pain management, as confirmed, in addition to the formalin test, by the hot plate test. The hot plate test is a central model that has a selectivity for opioid-derived analgesics [70].
CSSE showed a time-dependent anti-nociceptive effect by increasing the pain threshold of mice towards heat. This result was similar to that reported by Khan et al. [15] but does not corroborate the conclusions of Hosseinzadeh and Younesi [30], who reported that the aqueous-ethanolic and aqueous extracts of a saffron from Iran have no significant effects on latency time, hence no central analgesic effect. This discrepancy may be related to the difference in the chemical composition, which in turn is related to the geographical and environmental conditions [14].
To understand how CSSE modulates the electric signal triggered by the nociceptors, it is essential to specify which endogenous pathways have been involved and at which level (spinal and/or supraspinal). To answer the question of the level of signal integration and control, the acetic acid-induced writhing test was used to confirm the spinal control level and the hot plate test for the supraspinal one [54,71]. As the signal integration mechanism involves the release of various neurotransmitters, receptor antagonists of these neurotransmitters were used to verify their involvement in CSSE-induced analgesia.
Naloxone (non-selective opioid receptors antagonist [57]), atropine (non-selective muscarinic receptor antagonist [58]), glibenclamide (ATP-sensitive K+ channels blocker [59,60,61]), haloperidol (dopamine receptors antagonist [62]), and yohimbine (a selective α2-adrenoceptor antagonist [63]) were used to substantiate the involvement of the opioidergic, cholinergic, ATP-sensitive K+ channels, and dopaminergic and adrenergic systems, respectively.
Naloxone totally reversed the analgesic effect of CSSE in the hot plate test and partially reversed it in the writhing test. This presumes the involvement of opioid receptors [72] in the analgesic effects of CSSE, mainly at the supraspinal level, but also at spinal level, even in the peripheral endings of the primary afferent fibers, because opioids µ-receptors are also located in the periphery [72]. A similar scheme was found with atropine, a muscarinic receptor antagonist. This suggests that CSSE may also involve the cholinergic pathway in its analgesic activity at the supraspinal and spinal levels. In particular, this is because the activation of the muscarinic receptors in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord has been reported to contribute to the analgesic effect by releasing inhibitory interneurons, reducing nociceptive transmission [73].
The implication of the adrenergic system in the analgesic activity of CSSE was confirmed as well. Yohimbine, a selective α2-adrenoceptor antagonist, helped to reduce the analgesic activity of CSSE, mainly at the spinal level, with a 77% decrease in analgesia in the acetic acid-induced writhing test. The supraspinal level of action of CSSE on the adrenergic system was moderate, as confirmed by the slight decrease in CSSE activity in the hot plate test in the presence of yohimbine. These findings corroborate what was reported concerning the involvement of the adrenergic system in nociception at the spinal and supraspinal levels, mediated through activation of α- adrenoceptors and descending inhibitory pathways [74,75]. They also corroborate what was reported concerning the stimulatory effect of saffron’s metabolite crocetin on ß2-adrenoceptors [76], which contribute to crocetin antinociception activity.
Among the neurotransmitters, the dopaminergic system also plays a role in pain control [77]. Dopamine receptors are expressed in primary nociceptors as well as in the spinal neurons located in different laminae of the dorsal horn of the spinal cord, suggesting that dopamine may modulate pain signals by acting on both presynaptic and postsynaptic targets [78]. Decreased levels of dopamine have been associated with painful symptoms [77]. At the physiological level, haloperidol reduces dopamine availability by blocking the dopamine D2 receptors [79]. Haloperidol reduced CSSE-induced antinociception in the writhing test, which suggests that CSSE modulated the dopamine system at the spinal level through activation of the D2 receptors.
At the supraspinal level, haloperidol did not modify the central anti-nociceptive effect of CSSE (Figure 6d), which implies that CSSE analgesic activity in the brain certainly did not involve D2 receptors, although it may still act on the dopamine system but through other mechanisms. This assumption was supported by previous reports on saffron’s effect on the brain [80,81]. It has been reported that brain dopamine concentration is increased by saffron [80]. In line with this report, Monchaux De Oliveira et al. [81] recently established that the saffron-induced improvement of depressive-like behavior was associated with the modulation of monoaminergic neurotransmission, in particular changes in serotonergic and dopaminergic neurotransmission. Saffron modulated the dopamine neurotransmission in the frontal cortex by reducing its catabolism and in the striatum by significantly increasing local dopamine levels [81].
The generation of many pain signals in the human nervous system is mediated by ion channels [79]. Open ATP-sensitive potassium channels produce analgesia by reducing neuronal excitability and by inhibiting the release of various neurotransmitters in the spinal cord [79]. Glibenclamide, a sulfonylurea, is an oral hypoglycemic drug that acts through the inhibition of the ATP-sensitive K+ channels in the pancreatic cells, which leads to the depolarization of the cells and insulin secretion [82].
At the spinal level, in the writhing test, the analgesic effect of CSSE was fully reversed by glibenclamide, suggesting that the pain-relieving activity of CSSE was certainly due to the opening of the ATP-sensitive K+ channels. At the supraspinal level, CSSE increased the pain threshold, but to a lesser extent, through the opening of the K+ channels, because the glibenclamide only partially reversed the analgesic effect of CSSE in the hot plate test.
Over all, the mechanism behind the analgesic effect of CSSE is multimodal. CSSE reduced nociception, through its anti-inflammatory action, demonstrated by the formalin test and by the modulation of the electrical signal generated by the nociceptors. CSSE influenced signal processing, both peripherally and centrally, by the modulation of the opioidergic, adrenergic, and muscarinic systems; and at the spinal level, by the modulation of the dopaminergic system and the opening of the ATP-sensitive K+ channels.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Plant Material

The stigmas of C. sativus were purchased in November 2018 from local producers in Sktana, Taliouine region (South of Morocco). The stigmas were authenticated by Prof. A. Ouhammou, a taxonomist at Cadi Ayyad University. A voucher specimen (MARK11120) has been deposited in the regional herbarium MARK, Faculty of Sciences Semlalia, University Cadi Ayyad, Marrakech, Morocco.

4.2. Standards and Reagents

Acetic acid and ethanol were purchased from VWR International (Rosny-sous-Bois, France). Formalin, atropine, naloxone, and urethane were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA). Glibenclamide was bought from Promopharma (Had Soualem, Morocco). Haloperidol was procured from Pharma5 (Casablanca, Morocco). Yohimbine was purchased from Micro Ingredients (Montclair, CA, USA). Morphine was provided by Sothema (Casablanca, Morocco). Hematoxylin and eosin were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany).

4.3. Animals

The in vivo study was carried out using adult Swiss albino mice (12 weeks) housed in cages under standard conditions (25 ± 2 °C, 12/12 h light/dark cycle) with free access to water and food. The animals were divided into groups with 6 mice per group. They were acclimatized for one week prior to the experiment and fasted overnight before each test. All studies were authorized by the Ethical Committee for Animal Care of the Faculty of Sciences Semlalia, University Cadi Ayyad, Marrakech, Morocco, in accordance with the European decree, related to the ethical evaluation and authorization of projects using animals for experimental procedures, 1 February 2013, NOR: AGRG1238767A. All mice were handled by the 3R principles of laboratory animal care and use.

4.4. Preparation of CSSE Extract

Saffron stigmas were grounded to powder just prior to extract preparation. Stigmas powder (0.5 g) was extracted by 5 mL of 70% ethanol, with mechanical stirring (150 Hz/min) for 48 h at room temperature and in the dark. The extract was then centrifuged for 10 min at 3000 rpm/min. A second extraction was carried out on the marc by macerating them for 48 h in 5 mL of 70% ethanol. After centrifugation, the same operation was repeated with maceration times of an additional 48 h in order to exhaust the plant material. The supernatants from the various extractions were combined and then evaporated to dryness under reduced pressure at 45 °C.

4.5. Acute Toxicity Test

The acute toxicity was studied by limit dose test [51,52]. Albino mice were divided into two groups (n = 6 per group). Control group received distilled water and test group was treated orally with CSSE (2000 mg/kg in H2O). Observation of the behavior of the animals was carried out every 30 min for 4 h on the first day and once a day for 14 days in order to record any signs or symptoms of intoxication, namely the modifications of the autonomous activity, piloerection, respiratory rhythm, presence of hemorrhage, diarrhea, and death. Food intake and body weight were also recorded daily. At the end of the observation period, animals were anesthetized with urethane (1 g/kg, i.p.). Blood was collected in a tube and centrifuged at 3000 rpm at 4 °C for 10 min to obtain the serum for biochemical analysis. Animals were then sacrificed, and the organs were removed, weighed, and stored in the formaldehyde solution for histopathological analysis [51,52]. Biochemical analysis of serum samples was performed using an automatic chemistry analyzer (Cobas Integra 400 plus analyzer, Roche). The biochemical parameters measured were alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), creatinine, urea, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and total bilirubin. Hematological analysis was performed using an automatic hematological analyzer (ABX MICROS 60-OT). The hematological parameters analyzed were white blood cell count (WBC), red blood cell count (RBC), platelets (PLT), red cell distribution width (RDW), hemoglobin (HGB), hematocrit (Hct), mean corpuscular volume (MCV), mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH), mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC), red cell distribution width (RDW), mean platelet volume (MPV), neutrophile, lymphocyte, and monocyte.
Finally, the acute toxicity of CSSE was evaluated by the determination of the median lethal dose (LD50), the evaluation of signs of intoxication at behavioral and biological levels, and the target organs.
The relative organ weight of each animal was calculated as follows:
relative organ weight = absolute organ weight (g) × (body weight of mice on sacrifice day (g))−1 × 100.
Liver and kidney samples from each treatment group were subjected to histopathologic examination. Organs were fixed in 10% formalin, then tissues were dehydrated and embedded in paraffin blocks. Sections of 4 µm thickness were stained with hematoxylin-eosin (H&E). Then, the slides were examined under a light microscope at 200× magnification.

4.6. Analgesic Activity

4.6.1. Acetic Acid-Induced Writhing Test

The analgesic activity of CSSE was deduced by the decrease in the frequency of writhing induced by acetic acid injection [53]. Mice (n = 6/group) were treated with 10 mL/kg, b.w, (p.o.) of distillated water (control), 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg (p.o.) of CSSE, or 1 mg/mL (i.p.) of morphine. The choice of these doses was based on the literature review. After 30 min of administration of the extracts, the animals were intraperitoneally injected with 0.6% of acetic acid. Then, the number of writhes produced in the mice within 15 min was counted for 20 min [56]. The analgesic effect was measured by calculating the reduction in the mean number of abdominal writhing for each group as compared to the control. The inhibition rate was calculated by applying the following formula:
Inhibition rate = 100 × (mean number of writhes of control group—mean number of writhes of drug treatment group) × (mean number of writhes of control group)−1.

4.6.2. Hot Plate Test

The analgesic activity of CSSE was tested by hot plate test, as described by Laughlin et al. [83]. Swiss albino mice were divided into 5 groups (n = 6 per group). Group (I) was assigned as a control and received 10 mL/kg, b.w of distillated water. Groups (II, III, and IV) were administered CSSE orally at doses 50, 100, and 200 mg/kg, respectively. Group (V) was given i.p. 1 mg/mL of morphine. The hot plate was maintained at 55 ± 1 °C for a maximum time of 15 s to prevent the animals from being burnt. The latency time (time for which mouse remains on the hot plate (55 ± 0.1 °C) without licking or flicking of hind limb or jumping) in seconds was determined before and after the administration of the extract every 30 min for 4 h.

4.6.3. Formalin-Induced Paw-Licking Test

The formalin-induced nociceptive behavior was performed as described by Kim et al. [84]. Mice were divided into 5 groups (n = 6 per group). Three groups orally received CSSE at different doses (50, 100, or 200 mg/kg); one group assigned as positive group received morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p.), and the control group was administered distilled water (10 mL/kg, p.o.). After 30 min of oral administration of the test substances, 20 μL of 1% formalin in saline solution was injected subcutaneously into the hind paw of the mouse. The animal was immediately placed in an observation cage for 30 min. The nociceptive response was assessed by quantifying the licking time of the paw during the early phase (0–5 min) and the late phase (20–30 min) after injection.

4.7. Mechanistic Studies

Nociceptive transmission involves several mediators acting through several pathways. The possible anti-nociceptive mechanisms of C. sativus stigma were investigated by pre-treatment of mice with different antagonists in the writhing test and the hot plate test [85]. The doses of antagonists were chosen based on the previous literature data. The dose (200 mg/kg) for CSSE was chosen on the basis of its high analgesic efficacy.

4.7.1. The Examination of the Effect of CSSE on Opioidergic System

The possible involvement of CSSE analgesic action on opioidergic pathway was investigated using the hot plate test and the writhing test. Seventy-two mice were divided into groups with six animals each. The first 6 groups were separated as follow; groups 1 and 2 received an oral administration of distilled water (10 mL/kg, b.w) and CSSE (200 mg/kg b.w), respectively. In parallel, groups 3 and 4 were injected by morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p) and naloxone (1 mg/kg, i.p, a non-selective opioid receptor antagonist [57]). Meanwhile, groups 5 and 6, for which naloxone was administrated 15 min earlier, were treated with morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p) and CSSE (200 mg/kg, p.o.), respectively. After 30 min, the hot plate test was performed. The same treatment groups were used with the remaining six groups for the torsion test.

4.7.2. The Inspection of CSSE Nociceptive Activity on Cholinergic System

To inspect the possible analgesic action of CSSE on the cholinergic system, 12 groups of mice were divided so that they had 6 mice per group, and then the mice were used for the hot plate and writhing test. The first 6 groups were divided as follow: the groups 1, 2, and 3 received distilled water (10 mL/kg, p.o.), CSSE (200 mg/kg, p.o.), and morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p), respectively. The atropine (5 mg/kg, ip, a muscarinic receptor antagonist [58]) was pre-injected to groups 4, 5, and 6. After 15 min, groups 4, 5, and 6 received distilled water (10 mL/kg, p.o.), morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p), and CSSE (200 mg/kg, p.o.), respectively. After 30 min of treatment, the hot plate test was carried out for all mice. The same treatment groups were used with the remaining six groups for writhing test.

4.7.3. The Investigation of the CSSE Effect on K+-ATP Channel Blocker Pathway

The mechanism action of CSSE on the ATP-sensitive potassium channel blockers system was examined by acetic acid-induced writhing test. In this study, the glibenclamide was used as a K+ ATP channel blocker [59,60,61]. Twelve groups with six mice each were treated. The groups 1, 2, and 3 received distilled water (10 mL/kg, p.o.), CSSE (200 mg/kg, p.o.), and morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p), respectively. The groups 4, 5, and 6 were injected with glibenclamide (10 mg/kg, p.o.) 15 min prior to the administration of distilled water (10 mL/kg, p.o.), morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p), and CSSE (200 mg/kg, p.o.), respectively. After 1 h from the previous treatments, acetic acid-induced writhing test was proceeded for all groups. For another 6 groups of 6 mice each, the same treatments were applied and the hot plate test carried out.

4.7.4. The Study of CSSE Analgesic Effect on Dopaminergic Pathway

To elucidate the possible contribution of CSSE on dopaminergic pathway, haloperidol was used as a dopamine receptor antagonist [62]. For this purpose, 12 groups were used. The groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 were given distilled water (10 mL/kg, p.o.), CSSE (200 mg/kg, p.o.), morphine (1 mg/kg, p.i), and haloperidol (1 mg/kg, p.o.), respectively. The groups 5 and 6 were pre-treated with haloperidol (1 mg/kg, p.o.) 15 min prior to the administration of CSSE (200 mg/kg, p.o.) and morphine (1mg/kg, i.p), respectively. The acetic acid-induced writhing test was realized for the first six groups of animals after 1 h of mentioned treatments and the others were used for the hot plate test with the same treatments

4.7.5. The Evaluation of CSSE Analgesic Effect on Adrenergic System

To assess the potential involvement of CSSE on the adrenergic system, yohimbine was used as an α2 adrenergic antagonist [63]. A total of 12 groups of animals (6 mice each) were used for the writhing and hot plate test. The groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 were administrated with distilled water (10 mL/kg, p.o.), CSSE (200 mg/kg, p.o.), morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p), and yohimbine (1 mg/kg, i.p), respectively. The groups 5 and 6 were pre-injected 15 min earlier with yohimbine (1 mg/kg, ip), then they received CSSE (200 mg/kg, p.o.) and morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p), respectively. After 1 h, all animals were subjected to acetic acid-induced writhing test. The other groups were treated with the same treatments in the hot plate test.

4.8. Chemical Characterization of Moroccan Saffron According to ISO 3632 Guidelines

The norm ISO 3632-2 for saffron [17] describes methods suitable for testing the spice saffron, which is obtained from the flowers of the saffron crocus (C. sativus L.). It refers to the method for the determination of the main characteristics of saffron (picocrocine, safranal, and crocine) by spectrometric method.
Three repetitions of 0.1 g of stigma powder were macerated in 200 mL of distilled water with mechanical stirring (150 Hz/min) for 1 h in the dark at room temperature. A total of 10 mL of the solution was poured into a 100 mL flask, adding distilled water until sorted. After dilution, the solution was filtered. The absorbance of the various components of saffron was measured by a spectrophotometer UV-VIS at the following wavelengths; 257 nm (picrocrocin), 330 nm (safranal), and 440 nm (crocin). The results were expressed according to the following formula:
A1% 1 cm (λmax) = (D × 10,000)/(m × (100 − wMV)
with:
D: the specific absorbance;
m: the mass in g of the test part;
WMV: moisture content of the sample in %.

4.9. Statistical Analyses

The data were accessed as mean ± SEM. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way and two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) using SigmaPlot 11.0 software (WPCubed GmbH, Munich, Germany). Post hoc tests were carried out using Tukey test for one-way or Duncan test for two-way ANOVA. The results were considered to be significant at p ≤ 0.05.

5. Conclusions

The present study proved that CSSE was safe up to 2000 mg/kg. It highlighted for the first time the analgesic potential of Moroccan saffron and displayed its dual effect (central and peripheral), unlike Iranian saffron. For the first time, this study sheds light on the possible physiological mechanism involved in the analgesic activity of saffron in general. This study implicated the activation of the opioidergic, cholinergic, dopaminergic, and adrenergic receptors, as well as the opening of ATP-sensitive K+-channels. The obtained data point to a multimodal mechanism of action: (i) an anti-inflammatory action and (ii) a modulation, through different physiological pathways, of the electric signal triggered by the nociceptors. Thus, the present study scientifically validates the traditional use of C. sativus stigma in the treatment of pain. However, further experimental studies focusing on the elucidation of the molecular mechanism behind the analgesic effect of CSSE are required; as well as clinical trials to obtain reliable data.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.G. and H.I.; methodology, C.G. and M.A.T.; funding acquisition, C.G. and H.I.; investigation, M.A.T., R.M. and Z.O.; supervision, C.G.; writing—original draft, M.A.T.; writing—review and editing, M.A.T., T.B. and C.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)—Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)’s Science and Technology Research Partnership for Sustainable Development (SATREPS) project entitled, “Valorization of Bioresources Based on Scientific Evidence in Semi- and Arid Land for Creation of New Industry”; and by Ministry of Higher Education, Scientific Research and Executive Training (MHESRET) of the Kingdom of Morocco.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

Authors are grateful and wish to acknowledge the support of Dar Azaafarane Taliouine, Morocco.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

Sample Availability

Samples are available from the first author (M.A.T.).

References

  1. Le Bars, D.; Gozariu, M.; Cadden, S.W. Animal models of nociception. Pharmacol. Rev. 2001, 53, 597–652. [Google Scholar]
  2. Sessle, B. Unrelieved pain: A crisis. Pain Res. Manag. 2011, 16, 416–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Droney, J.M.; Gretton, S.K.; Sato, H.; Ross, J.R.; Branford, R.; Welsh, K.I.; Cookson, W.; Riley, J. Analgesia central side-effects: Two separate dimensions of morphine response. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2013, 75, 1340–1350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Vella-Brincat, J.; Macleod, A.D. Adverse effects of opioids on the central nervous systems of palliative care patients. J. Pain Palliat. Care Pharmacother. 2007, 21, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Carter, G.T.; Duong, V.; Ho, S.; Ngo, K.C.; Greer, C.L.; Weeks, D.L. Side effects of commonly prescribed analgesic medications. Phys. Med. Rehabil. Clin. 2014, 25, 457–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sostres, C.; Gargallo, C.J.; Arroyo, M.T.; Lanas, A. Adverse effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs, aspirin and coxibs) on upper gastrointestinal tract. Bailliere’s Best Pract. Res. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2010, 24, 121–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Mousavi, S.Z.; Bathaie, S.Z. Historical uses of saffron: Identifying potential new avenues for modern research. Avicenna J. Phytomed. 2011, 1, 57–66. [Google Scholar]
  8. Mykhailenko, O.; Kovalyov, V.; Goryacha, O.; Ivanauskas, L.; Georgiyants, V. Biologically active compounds and pharmacological activities of species of the genus Crocus: A review. Phytochemistry 2019, 162, 56–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Cardone, L.; Castronuovo, D.; Perniola, M.; Cicco, N.; Candido, V. Saffron (Crocus sativus L.), the king of spices: An overview. Sci. Hortic. 2020, 272, 109560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kothari, D.; Thakur, R.; Kumar, R. Saffron (Crocus sativus L.): Gold of the spices—A comprehensive review. Hortic. Environ. Biotechnol. 2021, 62, 661–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lage, M.; Melai, B.; Cioni, P.L.; Flamini, G.; Gaboun, F.; Bakhy, K.; Zouahri, A.; Pistelli, L. Phytochemical composition of Moroccan saffron accessions by headspace solid phase microextraction. Am. J. Essent. Oil. 2015, 2, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  12. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, Rural Development, Water and Forests, Kingdom of Morocco: Saffron Sector. Available online: https://www.agriculture.gov.ma/fr/filiere/safran (accessed on 28 January 2022).
  13. Bagur, M.J.; Salinas, G.L.A.; Jiménez-Monreal, A.M.; Chaouqi, S.; Llorens, S.; Martínez-Tomé, M.; Alonso, G.L. Saffron: An old medicinal plant and a potential novel functional food. Molecules 2018, 23, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Karabagias, I.K.; Koutsoumpou, M.; Liakou, V.; Kontakos, S.; Kontominas, M.G. Characterization and geographical discrimination of saffron from Greece, Spain, Iran, and Morocco based on volatile and bioactivity markers, using chemometrics. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2017, 243, 1577–1591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Khan, A.; Muhamad, N.A.; Ismail, H.; Nasir, A.; Khalil, A.A.K.; Anwar, Y.; Khan, Z.; Ali, A.; Taha, R.M.; Al-Shara, B.; et al. Potential nutraceutical benefits of in vivo grown saffron (Crocus sativus L.) as analgesic, anti-inflammatory, anticoagulant, and antidepressant in mice. Plants 2020, 9, 1414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Maggi, M.A.; Bisti, S.; Picco, C. Saffron: Chemical composition and neuroprotective activity. Molecules 2020, 25, 5618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. International Organization for Standardization ISO 3632-2. Épices—Safran (Crocus sativus L.).—Partie 2: Méthodes D’essai; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2010; Available online: https://www.iso.org/fr/standard/44526.html (accessed on 20 December 2019).
  18. Chaouqi, S.; Moratalla-López, N.; Lage, M.; Lorenzo, C.; Alonso, G.L.; Guedira, T. Effect of drying and storage process on Moroccan saffron quality. Food Biosci. 2018, 22, 146–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Mzabri, I.; Addi, M.; Berrichi, A. Traditional and modern uses of saffron (Crocus sativus). Cosmetics 2019, 6, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Cid-Pérez, T.S.; Nevárez-Moorillón, G.V.; Ochoa-Velasco, C.E.; Navarro-Cruz, A.R.; Hernández-Carranza, P.; Avila-Sosa, R. The relation between drying conditions and the development of volatile compounds in saffron (Crocus sativus). Molecules 2021, 26, 6954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Tabtabaei, S.; D’Archivio, A.A.; Maggi, M.A.; Brutus, M.; Bajracharya, D.H.; Konakbayeva, D.; Soleimani, A.; Brim, H.; Ashktorab, H. Geographical classification of Iranian and Italian saffron sources based on HPLC analysis and UV–Vis spectra of aqueous extracts. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2019, 245, 2435–2446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Bharate, S.S.; Kumar, V.; Singh, G.; Singh, A.; Gupta, M.; Singh, D.; Kumar, A.; Vishwakarma, R.A.; Bharate, S.B. Preclinical development of Crocus sativus-based botanical lead IIIM-141 for Alzheimer’s disease: Chemical standardization, efficacy, formulation development, pharmacokinetics, and safety pharmacology. ACS Omega 2018, 3, 9572–9585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Ramadan, A.; Soliman, G.; Mahmoud, S.S.; Nofal, S.M.; Abdel-Rahman, R.F. Evaluation of the safety and antioxidant activities of Crocus sativus and Propolis ethanolic extracts. J. Saudi Chem. Soc. 2012, 16, 13–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Schmidt, M.; Betti, G.; Hensel, A. Saffron in phytotherapy: Pharmacology and clinical uses. Wien. Med. Wochenschr. 2007, 157, 315–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Giannoulaki, P.; Kotzakioulafi, E.; Chourdakis, M.; Hatzitolios, A.; Didangelos, T. Impact of Crocus sativus L. on metabolic profile in patients with diabetes mellitus or metabolic syndrome: A systematic review. Nutrients 2020, 12, 1424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Rahim, V.B.; Khammar, M.T.; Rakhshandeh, H.; Samzadeh-Kermani, A.; Hosseini, A.; Askari, V.R. Crocin protects cardiomyocytes against LPS-Induced inflammation. Pharmacol. Rep. 2019, 71, 1228–1234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Pitsikas, N. Constituents of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) as potential candidates for the treatment of anxiety disorders and schizophrenia. Molecules 2016, 21, 303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Zandi, N.; Pazoki, B.; Roudsari, N.M.; Lashgari, N.; Jamshidi, V.; Momtaz, S.; Abdolghaffari, A.H.; Akhondzadeh, S. Prospects of saffron and its derivatives in Alzheimer’s disease. Arch. Iran Med. 2021, 24, 233–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ahmad, A.S.; Ansari, M.A.; Ahmad, M.; Saleem, S.; Yousuf, S.; Hoda, M.N.; Islam, F. Neuroprotection by crocetin in a hemi-parkinsonian rat model. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 2005, 81, 805–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Hosseinzadeh, H.; Younesi, H.M. Antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory effects of Crocus sativus L. stigma and petal extracts in mice. BMC Pharmacol. Toxicol. 2002, 2, 7. [Google Scholar]
  31. Azhari, S.; Ahmadi, S.; Rakhshandeh, H.; Jafarzadeh, H.; Mazlom, S.R. Evaluation of the effect of oral saffron capsules on pain intensity during the active phase of labor. Iran. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Infertil. 2014, 17, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  32. Safakhah, H.A.; Taghavi, T.; Rashidy-Pour, A.; Vafaei, A.A.; Sokhanvar, M.; Mohebbi, N.; Rezaei-Tavirani, M. Effects of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) stigma extract and its active constituent crocin on neuropathic pain responses in a rat model of chronic constriction injury. Iran. J. Pharm. Sci. 2016, 15, 253. [Google Scholar]
  33. Mohammadierad, R.; Mohammad-Alizadeh-Charandabi, S.; Mirghafourvand, M.; Fazil, F. Effect of saffron with or without date sugar on intensity of pain and anxiety during labor in primiparous females: A randomized, controlled trial. Iran. Red Crescent Med. J. 2018, 20, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hausenblas, H.A.; Saha, D.; Dubyak, P.J.; Anton, S.D. Saffron (Crocus sativus L.) and major depressive disorder: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J. Integr. Med. 2013, 11, 377–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Shafiee, M.; Arekhi, S.; Omranzadeh, A.; Sahebkar, A. Saffron in the treatment of depression, anxiety and other mental disorders: Current evidence and potential mechanisms of action. J. Affect. Disord. 2018, 227, 330–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Tóth, B.; Hegyi, P.; Lantos, T.; Szakács, Z.; Kerémi, B.; Varga, G.; Tenk, J.; Pétervári, E.; Balaskó, M.; Rumbus, Z.; et al. The efficacy of saffron in the treatment of mild to moderate depression: A meta-analysis. Planta Med. 2018, 85, 24–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Jelodar, G.; Javid, Z.; Sahraian, A.; Jelodar, S. Saffron improved depression and reduced homocysteine level in patients with major depression: A randomized, double-blind study. Avicenna J. Phytomed. 2018, 8, 43–50. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  38. Kashani, L.; Esalatmanesh, S.; Eftekhari, F.; Salimi, S.; Foroughifar, T.; Etesam, F.; Safiaghdam, H.; Moazen-Zadeh, E.; Akhondzadeh, S. Efficacy of Crocus sativus (saffron) in treatment of major depressive disorder associated with post-menopausal hot flashes: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2018, 297, 717–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lambrianidou, A.; Koutsougianni, F.; Papapostolou, I.; Dimas, K. Recent advances on the anticancer properties of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) and its major constituents. Molecules 2021, 26, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Gezici, S. Comparative anticancer activity analysis of saffron extracts and a principle component, crocetin for prevention and treatment of human malignancies. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 56, 5435–5443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Khorasanchia, Z.; Shafiee, M.; Kermanshahi, F.; Khazaei, M.; Ryzhikov, M.; Parizadeh, M.R.; Kermanshahi, B.; Ferns, G.A.; Avan, A.; Hassanian, S.M. Crocus sativus a natural food coloring and flavoring has potent anti-tumor properties. Phytomedicine 2018, 43, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Naeimi, M.; Shafiee, M.; Kermanshahi, F.; Khorasanchi, Z.; Khazaei, M.; Ryzhikov, M.; Avan, A.; Gorji, N.; Hassanian, S.M. Saffron (Crocus sativus) in the treatment of gastrointestinal cancers: Current findings and potential mechanisms of action. J. Cell Biochem. 2019, 120, 16330–16339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Shakeri, M.; Tayer, A.H.; Shakeri, H.; Jahromi, A.S.; Moradzadeh, M.; Hojjat-Farsangi, M. Toxicity of saffron extracts on cancer and normal cells: A review article. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2020, 21, 1867–1875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Sharma, D.; Gupta, S. Anticancer activity of Crocus sativus: A review. IJRAR 2018, 5, 851–854. [Google Scholar]
  45. El Midaoui, A.; Ghzaiel, I.; Vervandier-Fasseur, D.; Ksila, M.; Zarrouk, A.; Nury, T.; Khallouki, F.; El Hessni, A.; Ibrahimi, S.O.; Latruffe, N.; et al. Saffron (Crocus sativus L.): A source of nutrients for health and for the treatment of neuropsychiatric and age-related diseases. Nutrients 2022, 14, 597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wen, Y.-L.; He, Z.; Hou, D.-X.; Qin, S. Crocetin exerts its anti-inflammatory property in LPS-induced RAW264.7 cells potentially via modulation on the crosstalk between MEK1/JNK/NF-κB/iNOS pathway and Nrf2/HO-1 pathway. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2021, 2021, 6631929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Akbari-Fakhrabadi, M.; Najafi, M.; Mortazavian, S.; Rasouli, M.; Memari, A.H.; Shidfar, F. Effect of saffron. (Crocus sativus L.) and endurance training on mitochondrial biogenesis, endurance capacity, inflammation, antioxidant, and metabolic biomarkers in Wistar rats. J. Food Biochem. 2019, 43, e12946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Akowuah, G.A.; Htar, T.T. Therapeutic properties of saffron and its chemical constituents. J. Nat. Prod. 2014, 7, 5–13. [Google Scholar]
  49. Siddiqui, M.J.; Saleh, M.S.M.; Basharuddin, S.N.B.; Zamri, S.H.; Mohd Najib, M.H.; Che Ibrahim, M.Z.; Mohd Noor, N.A.; Binti Mazha, H.N.; Hassan, N.M.; Khatib, A. Saffron (Crocus sativus L.): As an antidepressant. J. Pharm. Bioallied Sci. 2018, 10, 173–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. D’Onofrio, G.; Nabavi, S.M.; Sancarlo, D.; Greco, A.; Pieretti, S. Crocus sativus L. (Saffron) in Alzheimer’s disease treatment: Bioactive effects on cognitive impairment. Curr. Neuropharm. 2021, 19, 1606–1616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). LD50 Test Policy. Fed. Regist. 1988, 53, 39650–39651. [Google Scholar]
  52. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4/Test No. 423: Acute Oral Toxicity—Acute Toxic Class Method; Editions OCDE: Paris, France, 2002; pp. 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ribeiro, R.A.; Vale, M.L.; Thomazzi, S.M.; Paschoalato, A.B.; Poole, S.; Ferreira, S.H.; Cunha, F.Q. Involvement of resident macrophages and mast cells in the writhing nociceptive response induced by zymosan and acetic acid in mice. Eur. J. Pharm. 2000, 387, 111–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Deuis, J.R.; Dvorakova, L.S.; Vetter, I. Methods used to evaluate pain behaviors in rodents. Front. Mol. Neurosci 2017, 10, 284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  55. Hunskaar, S.; Hole, K. The formalin test in mice: Dissociation between inflammatory and non-inflammatory pain. Pain 1987, 30, 103–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Deng, J.; Han, J.; Chen, J.; Zhang, Y.; Huang, Q.; Wang, Y.; Xiaoxiao, Q.; Zhongqiu, L.; Elaine Lai-Han, L.; Dawei, W.; et al. Comparison of analgesic activities of aconitine in different mice pain models. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0249276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Costa, F.V.; Canzian, J.; Stefanello, F.V.; Kalueff, A.V.; Rosemberg, D.B. Naloxone prolongs abdominal constriction writhing-like behavior in a zebrafish-based pain model. Neurosci. Lett. 2019, 708, 134336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Giorno, T.B.S.; Santos, C.H.C.D.; Carvalho, M.G.D.; Silva, V.C.D.; Sousa, P.T.D.; Fernandes, P.D.; Boylan, F. Study on the antinociceptive activity and mechanism of action of isolated saponins from siolmatra brasiliensis (Cogn.) Baill. Molecules 2019, 24, 4584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. León-Reyes, M.R.; Castañeda-Hernández, G.; Ortiz, M.I. Pharmacokinetic of diclofenac in the presence and absence of glibenclamide in the rat. J. Pharm. Pharm. Sci. 2009, 12, 280–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Foster, M.N.; Coetzee, W.A. KATP Channels in the Cardiovascular System. Physiol. Rev. 2016, 96, 177–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Xia, P.; Liu, L.; Hu, X.; Yu, D.; Dong, S.; Du, J.; Xu, Y.; Liu, B.; Yang, Y.; Gao, F.; et al. KATP Channel Blocker Glibenclamide Prevents Radiation-Induced Lung Injury and Inhibits Radiation-Induced Apoptosis of Vascular Endothelial Cells by Increased Ca2+ Influx and Subsequent PKC Activation. Radiat. Res. 2020, 193, 171–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Becker, A.; Grecksch, G.; Zernig, G.; Ladstaetter, E.; Hiemke, C.; Schmitt, U. Haloperidol and risperidone have specific effects on altered pain sensitivity in the ketamine model of schizophrenia. Psychopharmacology 2009, 202, 579–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Vo, L.; Hood, S.; Drummond, P.D. Involvement of opioid receptors and α2-adrenoceptors in inhibitory pain modulation processes: A double-blind placebo-controlled crossover study. J. Pain 2016, 17, 1164–1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Garcia, M.D.; Fernandez, M.A.; Alvarez, A.; Saenz, M.T. Antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory effect of the aqueous extract from leaves of Pimenta racemosa varozua (Mirtaceae). J. Ethnopharmacol. 2004, 91, 69–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Raj, P.P. Pain Medicine: A Comprehensive Review, 2nd ed.; Mosby Publications: St. Louis, MI, USA; Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2003; p. 448. [Google Scholar]
  66. Bley, K.R.; Hunter, J.C.; Eglen, R.M.; Smith, J.A. The role of IP prostanoid receptors in inflammatory pain. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 1998, 19, 141–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Chau, T.T. Analgesic testing in animal’s models. In Pharmacological Methods in the Control of Inflammation; Alan R. Liss, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1989; pp. 195–212. [Google Scholar]
  68. Tsai, H.Y.; Lin, Y.T.; Tsai, C.H.; Chen, Y.F. Effects of paeoniflorin on the formalin-induced nociceptive behavior in mice. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2001, 75, 267–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Santa-Cecília, F.V.; Vilela, F.C.; da Rocha, C.Q.; Dias, D.F.; Cavalcante, G.P.; Freitas, L.A.; Giusti-Paiva, A. Anti-inflammatory and antinociceptive effects of Garcinia brasiliensis. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2011, 133, 467–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Hajhashemi, V.; Ghannadi, A.; Sedighifar, S. Analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties of the hydroalcoholic, polyphenolic and boiled extracts of Stachys lavandulifolia. Res. Pharm. Sci. 2007, 1, 92–98. [Google Scholar]
  71. Muhammad, N. In-Vivo Models for Management of Pain. Pharmacol. Pharm. 2014, 5, 42226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Kieffer, B.L. Opioid receptors: From genes to mice. J. Pain 2000, 1, 45–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Wess, J.; Duttaroy, A.; Gomeza, J.; Zhang, W.; Yamada, M.; Felder, C.C.; Bernardini, N.; Reeh, P.W. Muscarinic receptor subtypes mediating central and peripheral antinociception studied with muscarinic receptor knockout mice: A review. Life Sci. 2003, 72, 2047–2954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Millan, M.J. Descending control of pain. Prog. Neurobiol. 2002, 66, 355–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Roczniak, W.; Wrobel, J.; Dolczak, L.; Nowak, P. Influence of central noradrenergic system lesion on the serotoninergic 5-HT3 receptor mediated analgesia in rats. Adv. Clin. Exp. Med. 2013, 22, 629–638. [Google Scholar]
  76. Erfanparast, A.; Tamaddonfard, E.; Henareh-Chareh, F. Central H2 histaminergic and alpha-2 adrenergic receptors involvement in crocetin-induced antinociception in orofacial formalin pain in rat. Vet. Res. Forum 2020, 11, 229–234. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  77. Wood, P.B. Role of central dopamine in pain and analgesia. Expert Rev. Neurotherap. 2008, 8, 781–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Reinig, S.; Driever, W.; Arrenberg, A.B. The descending diencephalic dopamine system is tuned to sensory stimuli. Curr. Biol. 2017, 27, 318–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  79. Zakaria, Z.A.; Abdul Rahim, M.H.; Roosli, R.A.; Mohd Sani, M.H.; Omar, M.H.; Tohid, S.F.M.; Othman, F.; Ching, S.M.; Abdul Kadir, A. Antinociceptive activity of methanolic extract of Clinacanthus nutans leaves: Possible mechanisms of action involved. Pain Res. Manag. 2018, 2018, 9536406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Ettehadi, H.; Mojabi, S.N.; Ranjbaran, M.; Shams, J.; Sahraei, H.; Hedayati, M.; Asefi, F. Aqueous extract of saffron (Crocus sativus) increases brain dopamine and glutamate concentrations in rats. J. Behav. Brain Sci. 2013, 3, 315–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Monchaux De Oliveira, C.; Pourtau, L.; Vancassel, S.; Pouchieu, C.; Capuron, L.; Gaudout, D.; Castanon, N. Saffron extract-induced improvement of depressive-like behavior in mice is associated with modulation of monoaminergic neurotransmission. Nutrients 2021, 13, 904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Fuhlendorff, J.; Rorsman, P.; Kofod, H.; Brand, C.L.; Rolin, B.; MacKay, P.; Shymko, R.; Carr, R.D. Stimulation of insulin release by repaglinide and glibenclamide involves both common and distinct processes. Diabetes 1998, 47, 345–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Laughlin, T.M.; Tram, K.V.; Wilcox, G.L.; Birnbaum, A.K. Comparison of antiepileptic drugs tiagabine, lamotrigine, and gabapentin in mouse models of acute, prolonged, and chronic nociception. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2002, 302, 1168–1175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Kim, H.W.; Kwon, Y.B.; Roh, D.H.; Yoon, S.Y.; Han, H.J.; Kim, K.W.; Lee, J.H. Intrathecal treatment with σ1 receptor antagonists reduces formalin-induced phosphorylation of NMDA receptor subunit 1 and the second phase of formalin test in mice. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2006, 148, 490–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Rangel, R.A.; Marinho, B.G.; Fernandes, P.D.; De Moura, R.S.; Lessa, M.A. Pharmacological mechanisms involved in the antinociceptive effects of dexmedetomidine in mice. Fundam. Clin. Pharmacol. 2012, 28, 104–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Molecules 27 03339 g001 550
Figure 1. Evolution of the body weight (a) and the food intake (b) of mice treated with a single dose of CSSE (2000 mg/kg, p.o.). CSSE: C. sativus stigma extract. The values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). No significant difference was recorded between CSSE-treated group and non-treated control (p < 0.05, ANOVA I Tukey’s test).
Figure 1. Evolution of the body weight (a) and the food intake (b) of mice treated with a single dose of CSSE (2000 mg/kg, p.o.). CSSE: C. sativus stigma extract. The values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). No significant difference was recorded between CSSE-treated group and non-treated control (p < 0.05, ANOVA I Tukey’s test).
Molecules 27 03339 g001
Molecules 27 03339 g002 550
Figure 2. Photomicrograph (hematoxylin-eosin staining; ×200 magnification) of liver and kidney sections of mice after administration or not of a single oral dose of CSSE (2000 mg/kg). (A1): liver section of control mice. (B1): liver section of mice treated with CSSE. (A2): kidney section of control mice, (B2): kidney section of mice treated with CSSE. CV: Central vein, HC: Hepatocytes, S: Sinusoids. G: Glomerulus, BC: Bowman’s capsule, RT: Renal tubule. Analyses of liver and kidney sections showed no significant histopathological changes after a single oral administration of CSSE (2000 mg/kg) compared to the control group (n = 6 per group).
Figure 2. Photomicrograph (hematoxylin-eosin staining; ×200 magnification) of liver and kidney sections of mice after administration or not of a single oral dose of CSSE (2000 mg/kg). (A1): liver section of control mice. (B1): liver section of mice treated with CSSE. (A2): kidney section of control mice, (B2): kidney section of mice treated with CSSE. CV: Central vein, HC: Hepatocytes, S: Sinusoids. G: Glomerulus, BC: Bowman’s capsule, RT: Renal tubule. Analyses of liver and kidney sections showed no significant histopathological changes after a single oral administration of CSSE (2000 mg/kg) compared to the control group (n = 6 per group).
Molecules 27 03339 g002
Molecules 27 03339 g003 550
Figure 3. Effect of a single administration of CSSE (50, 100, or 200 mg/kg) on the latency time of mice to react to heat in the hot plate test. Morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p) is used as positive control. Each value represents the mean ± SEM (n = 6); different letters indicate a significant difference during the duration of the experiment or between treatments (p < 0.05) (ANOVA II Duncan’s test).
Figure 3. Effect of a single administration of CSSE (50, 100, or 200 mg/kg) on the latency time of mice to react to heat in the hot plate test. Morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p) is used as positive control. Each value represents the mean ± SEM (n = 6); different letters indicate a significant difference during the duration of the experiment or between treatments (p < 0.05) (ANOVA II Duncan’s test).
Molecules 27 03339 g003
Molecules 27 03339 g004 550
Figure 4. Effect of a single administration of CSSE (50, 100, or 200 mg/kg, p.o.) on paw licking time of mice treated with formalin. Morphine (1 mg/ kg, i.p) is used as positive control. Each value represents the mean ± SEM (n = 6); different letters (a–e,a′–e′) indicate a significant difference between treatments (p < 0.05) (ANOVA I Duncan’s test).
Figure 4. Effect of a single administration of CSSE (50, 100, or 200 mg/kg, p.o.) on paw licking time of mice treated with formalin. Morphine (1 mg/ kg, i.p) is used as positive control. Each value represents the mean ± SEM (n = 6); different letters (a–e,a′–e′) indicate a significant difference between treatments (p < 0.05) (ANOVA I Duncan’s test).
Molecules 27 03339 g004
Molecules 27 03339 g005 550
Figure 5. Effect of CSSE on the nociceptive response to abdominal contractions induced by injection of acetic acid in mice pretreated with or without naloxone (a), atropine (b), glibenclamide (c), haloperidol (d), and yohimbine (e); 15 min before administration of CSSE or morphine. Each value represents the mean ± SEM (n = 6); Statistical significance was calculated by ANOVA I followed by Tukey’s test. *** p < 0.001 when comparing all groups to the control group; ### p < 0.001 when comparing all groups to the control group pretreated with naloxone (a), atropine (b), glibenclamide (c), haloperidol (d), and yohimbine (e); + p < 0.05, +++ p < 0.001 when comparing CSSE-treated group or morphine-treated group with the corresponding group pretreated with naloxone (a), atropine (b), glibenclamide (c), haloperidol (d), and yohimbine (e).
Figure 5. Effect of CSSE on the nociceptive response to abdominal contractions induced by injection of acetic acid in mice pretreated with or without naloxone (a), atropine (b), glibenclamide (c), haloperidol (d), and yohimbine (e); 15 min before administration of CSSE or morphine. Each value represents the mean ± SEM (n = 6); Statistical significance was calculated by ANOVA I followed by Tukey’s test. *** p < 0.001 when comparing all groups to the control group; ### p < 0.001 when comparing all groups to the control group pretreated with naloxone (a), atropine (b), glibenclamide (c), haloperidol (d), and yohimbine (e); + p < 0.05, +++ p < 0.001 when comparing CSSE-treated group or morphine-treated group with the corresponding group pretreated with naloxone (a), atropine (b), glibenclamide (c), haloperidol (d), and yohimbine (e).
Molecules 27 03339 g005
Molecules 27 03339 g006 550
Figure 6. Effect of CSSE on the latency time of mice to react to heat in the hot plate. Mice were pretreated with or without naloxone (a), atropine (b), glibenclamide (c), haloperidol (d), and yohimbine I 15 min before administration of CSSE or morphine (e). BL: Base Line. Each value represents the mean ± SEM (n = 6); different letters (a–g) indicate a significant difference during the duration of the experiment or between treatments (p < 0.05) (ANOVA II Duncan’s test).
Figure 6. Effect of CSSE on the latency time of mice to react to heat in the hot plate. Mice were pretreated with or without naloxone (a), atropine (b), glibenclamide (c), haloperidol (d), and yohimbine I 15 min before administration of CSSE or morphine (e). BL: Base Line. Each value represents the mean ± SEM (n = 6); different letters (a–g) indicate a significant difference during the duration of the experiment or between treatments (p < 0.05) (ANOVA II Duncan’s test).
Molecules 27 03339 g006
Table
Table 1. Effect of oral administration of a single dose of CSSE (2000 mg/kg, b.w) on the behavior and mortality of mice.
Table 1. Effect of oral administration of a single dose of CSSE (2000 mg/kg, b.w) on the behavior and mortality of mice.
GroupDose
(mg/kg b.w p.o.)		Sex D/TSymptoms
Vehicle0Female 0/6 None
CSSE2000Female 0/6 None
CSSE: Hydro-Ethanolic Extract of Stigma of C. sativus; D/T: Number of deaths versus total number of mice.
Table
Table 2. The relative organ weight of mice treated with a single oral dose of CSSE.
Table 2. The relative organ weight of mice treated with a single oral dose of CSSE.
OrganRelative Organ Weight (g/100 g b.w)
ControlCSSE (2000 mg/kg)
Heart0.52 ± 0.040.59 ± 0.04
Lungs0.93 ± 0.050.87 ± 0.08
Liver0.06 ± 0.010.06 ± 0.01
Spleen0.43 ± 0.060.51 ± 0.05
Right kidney0.49 ± 0.010.54 ± 0.05
Left kidney 0.57 ± 0.010.56 ± 0.05
Stomach0.77 ± 0.051.08 ± 0.16
CSSE: C. sativus stigma extract. The values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). No significant difference was recorded between CSSE-treated group and non-treated control (p < 0.05, ANOVA I Tukey’s test).
Table
Table 3. Effect of a single oral dose of CSSE on blood hematological and biochemical parameters of mice.
Table 3. Effect of a single oral dose of CSSE on blood hematological and biochemical parameters of mice.
ParametersUnitControlCSSE
(2000 mg/kg)
Hematological
White blood cell count (WBC)103/µL6.8 ± 0.46.2 ± 0.8
Red blood cell count (RBC)106/µL8.8 ± 0.38.6 ± 0.4
Hemoglobin (HGB) g/dL 13.5 ± 0.813.2 ± 1.2
Hematocrit (HCT)%44.4 ± 2.342.3 ± 3.6
Platelets (PLT)103/µL732 ± 40.3694 ± 73.1
Mean corpuscular volume (MCV)fL49.7 ± 1.347.4 ± 2.0
Mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH) pg 15.1 ± 0.716.0 ± 1.3
Mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC) g/dL 30.4 ± 2.131.7 ± 1.9
Red cell distribution width (RDW) % 22.0 ± 0.322.9 ± 0.7
Mean platelet volume (MPV) fL 8.0 ± 0.59.2 ± 0.8
Neutrophil % 10.6 ± 1.212.2 ± 2.2
Lymphocyte % 84.3 ± 5.976.9 ± 6.2
Monocyte % 4.7 ± 0.24.1 ± 0.5
Biochemical
Alanine aminotransferase (ALT)UI/L17 ± 2.0016.25 ± 2.19
Aspartate aminotransferase (AST)UI/L792 ± 60.50838 ± 75.00
Creatinine mg/dL 3 ± 0.143 ± 0.09
Ureag/L0.45 ± 0.040.50 ± 0.03
Alkaline phosphatase (ALP)UI/L95.5 ± 7.589.75 ± 5.38
Total bilirubin mg/dL 0.30 ± 0.050.33 ± 0.09
CSSE: C. sativus stigma extract. The values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). No significant difference was recorded between CSSE-treated group and non-treated control (p < 0.05, ANOVA I Tukey’s test).
Table
Table 4. Effect of CSSE on abdominal contractions induced by intraperitoneal injection of acetic acid in mice.
Table 4. Effect of CSSE on abdominal contractions induced by intraperitoneal injection of acetic acid in mice.
GroupDose
(mg/kg, b.w)		Number of
Contortions		Inhibition of Pain (%)Relative Activity
Compared to
Morphine (%)
Control-34.2 ± 1.5--
Morphine15.3 ± 0.7 ***84.5 ± 0.5 100
CSSE5017.7 ± 0.3 ***48.3 ± 0.8 +++57.2
10013.5 ± 0.4 ***60.5 ± 1.0 +++71.6
2009.7 ± 0.4 ***71.6 ± 0.9 ++84.7
CSSE: Hydro-ethanolic extract of stigma of C. sativus; Morphine (1 mg/kg, i.p) is used as positive control. Each value represents the mean ± SEM (n = 6); *** Statistically significant (p ≤ 0.001) versus the non-treated control (ANOVA, Tukey’s test). ++ and +++ Statistically significant (p ≤ 0.01) and (p ≤ 0.001), respectively versus morphine-treated group (ANOVA, Tukey’s test).
Table
Table 5. Chemical characterization of Moroccan saffron according to saffron norm ISO 3632 2:2010 [17].
Table 5. Chemical characterization of Moroccan saffron according to saffron norm ISO 3632 2:2010 [17].
Strength
Indicator In:		A1%1cm
Measure		Saffron
Samples		ISO 3632
Category 1		Quality
Conformity
Pigments PicrocrocinFlavorλ 257525.5 ± 0.4min. 70First Quality Category
CrocinColoringλ 4401126.3 ± 0.5min. 200First Quality Category
Safranal Aromaλ 33032.4 ± 0.2min. 20; max. 50First Quality Category
Moisture content--10.3 ± 0.24%max 12%Conform
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ait Tastift, M.; Makbal, R.; Bourhim, T.; Omari, Z.; Isoda, H.; Gadhi, C. Safety Assessment and Pain Relief Properties of Saffron from Taliouine Region (Morocco). Molecules 2022, 27, 3339. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27103339

AMA Style

Ait Tastift M, Makbal R, Bourhim T, Omari Z, Isoda H, Gadhi C. Safety Assessment and Pain Relief Properties of Saffron from Taliouine Region (Morocco). Molecules. 2022; 27(10):3339. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27103339

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ait Tastift, Maroua, Rachida Makbal, Thouria Bourhim, Zineb Omari, Hiroko Isoda, and Chemseddoha Gadhi. 2022. "Safety Assessment and Pain Relief Properties of Saffron from Taliouine Region (Morocco)" Molecules 27, no. 10: 3339. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27103339

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop