Polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols from Garcinia species and structural revision of seven analogues

  • Yong-Ge Fu 1 ,  
  • Yi-Qi Huang 1 ,  
  • Zhi-Hong Xu 1 ,  
  • Xia Liu 2 ,  
  • Xing-Wei Yang 1
  •     
Supplementary Information
The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s13659-025-00519-6.
Additional file1 Transformation between 7 and 7a detected by HPLC (Fig. S1), Original MS and NMR spectra of compounds 1–6 (Fig. S2–S29). (PDF 2862 KB)

Abstract

Our continuous study of the fruits of Garcinia xanthochymus and Garcinia subelliptica led to the isolation and structural characterization of six new polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols, xanthochymusones N and O (1 and 2), (–)-garciyunnanin L (3), and garsubelones C–E (46), together with two known analogues. Their structures were elucidated by interpretation of NMR and MS spectroscopic data. It was found that the Grossman-Jacobs rule is no longer applicable to determination of the C-7 configuration of compounds 13, as they possess a complex 6/6/6/6/6 fused ring system. The inhibitory activities of all the compounds against two human hepatocellular carcinoma cell lines Huh-7 and HepG2 were evaluated, and compound 1 exhibited moderate cytotoxic activities against HepG2 cells with IC50 value 7.3 μM. Furthermore, the previous assignments of some polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols have been proved to be incorrect in this study, and analysis of NMR data enabled the structural revision of seven analogues: hyperselancins A and B, garcinielliptones F and G, garxanthochins A and B, and 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin C. The revised structures of garcinielliptone F and garxanthochin A were shown to have the same structures of garsubelone B and xanthochymusone K, respectively, and the revised structures of other five compounds have not been reported.

Graphical Abstract

Keywords

Garcinia xanthochymus    Garcinia subelliptica    Polyprenylated acylphloroglucinol    Structural revision    Cytotoxicity    

1 Introduction

The genus Garcinia comprises more than 300 species and belongs to the family Clusiaceae [1]. This genus is a rich source of secondary metabolites including flavonoids, xanthones, and polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols with diverse bioactivities such as antioxidant, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, and anticancer activities [1, 2]. We have a long-standing interest in the investigation of structures and bioactivities of polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols (PPAPs) [314], a special kind of hybrid natural products that are found only in plants of families Clusiaceae and Hypericaceae [3, 15]. Our previous study on Garcinia xanthochymus involves the structural characterizations of a series of type B PPAPs sharing a lavandulyl-derived substituent as well as some simple polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols derivatives [14, 16]. In a continuous search for new and bioactive natural polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols, the phytochemical investigation of the fruits of G. xanthochymus and G. subelliptica were further carried out. As a result, three new type B PPAPs, xanthochymusones N and O (1 and 2), (–)-garciyunnanin L (3), were isolated from G. xanthochymus (Fig. 1). A new type A PPAP, garsubelone C (4), and two new simple polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols, garsubelones D and E (5 and 6), together with two known analogues (7 and 8), were isolated from G. subelliptica (Fig. 1). Herein are described the isolation and structural elucidation of the new prenylated acylphloroglucinols and the inhibitory activity of all compounds obtained against two human hepatocellular carcinoma cells Huh-7 and HepG2. Also, the previous assignments of some polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols have been proved to be incorrect. Detailed analysis of NMR and other spectroscopic data enabled the structural revision of hyperselancins A and B, garcinielliptones F and G, garxanthochins A and B, and 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin C.

Fig. 1

Structures of compounds 18

2 Results and discussion

2.1 Structural characterization of new polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols

The MeOH extracts of the fruits of G. xanthochymus and G. subelliptica were subjected to several purification steps. Six new polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols, xanthochymusones N and O (1 and 2), (–)-garciyunnanin L (3), garsubelones C–E (46), and two known analogues were obtained (Fig. 1). Known compounds were identified as garsubelone B (7) [17] and lupulone B (8) [18] by comparison of the physical and chemical data to the reported literature. Compound 3 were proven to be enantiomer of (+)-garciyunnanin L [19] via NMR, optical rotation, and ECD data.

Xanthochymusone N (1) was isolated as a yellow gum. Its molecular formula, C38H52O8, was established by analysis of 13C NMR (Table 1) and HRESIMS data (m/z 635.3586, [M – H], cacld for 635.3584). The UV spectrum revealed the presence of conjugated groups with maximum absorptions at 232, 293, and 327 nm. The FTIR spectrum displayed absorption bands due to hydroxy (3400 cm−1), carbonyl (1724 cm−1), and olefinic (1621 and 1467 cm−1) functionalities. The 1H NMR spectrum (Table 1) exhibited signals of two singlet aromatic protons (δH 7.40 and 6.78, s), olefinic protons (δH 4.92 and 4.00), and nine singlet methyl groups (δH 0.52 ~ 1.65). The 13C and DEPT-NMR data revealed a total of 38 carbon resonances (Table 1), including a nonconjugated carbonyl (δC 209.2), a group of enol carbons at δC 122.4 and 164.7, six quaternary carbons (δC 75.8, 73.2, 72.8, 60.9, 54.1, and 49.5), two methines (δC 43.4 and 41.6). The above signals, in combination with a number of PPAPs that have been isolated from this plant, [13, 2026] indicated that compound 1 was a PPAP derivative. Comparison of its 1D NMR data with those of garcinialone [27], a type B PPAP with 6/6/6/6/6 fused ring system, indicated that they were structurally similar. The core carbon system of 1 was confirmed by the correlations from δH 0.99 and 0.92 (Me-37 and Me-38) to δC 60.9 (C-1), 43.4 (C-7), and 49.5 (C-8), from δH 2.82 and 2.37 (H2-10) to C-1 and δC 164.7 (C-2) and 209.2 (C-9), from a hydroxyl proton at δH 5.44 (4-OH) to δC 122.4 (C-3), 75.8 (C-4), and 54.1 (C-5), from δH 1.97 and 1.36 (H2-22) to C-5, C-9, and δC 38.5 (C-6), and from δH 1.59 (Me-26) to δC 41.6 (C-23), 73.8 (C-24), and 51.6 (C-25) in the HMBC spectrum, in combination with the correlations of δH 1.04 (H-7)/2.32 and 1.44 (H2-6), and δH 2.33 (H-23)/H2-22 in the 1H–1H COSY spectrum (Fig. 2). An oxidized isoprenyl group linked to C-23 was further determined via HBMC correlations of δH 1.37 and 1.39 (Me-30 and Me-31) with δC 72.8 (C-29) and 40.1 (C-28), coupled with the proton spin system of H-23/δH 1.83 and 1.34 (H2-27)/δH 2.07 and 1.73 (H2-28) in the 1H–1H COSY spectrum. Other parts of the planer structure of 1 were confirmed to be identical to those of garcinialone by detailed analysis of the 2D NMR spectroscopic data (Fig. 2). The relative configuration of 1 could be defined by using a combination of 1H–1H coupling constants, conformational analysis, NOE experiments, as well as biosynthetic consideration. As described in the literature, these rare PPAPs could be biosynthetically generated from type B PPAPs with a bicyclo[3.3.1]nonane-2,4,9-trione core carrying a lavandulyl substituent by Alder-ene reaction [19, 27]. As the cyclization took place from the less hindered α-phase, the resulting β-axial hydroxyl group (4-OH) was formed. In the 1H spectrum of 1 (measured in CDCl3), the 3 J coupling constants of both H-6a (δH 2.32, t, J = 13.6 Hz) and H-22b (δH 1.36, t, J = 13.6 Hz) were 13.6 Hz. So, H-6a, H-7, H-22b, and H-23 were axial while the C-7 prenyl group and C-23 substituent were equatorial. Then, the NOE contacts of 4-OH with H-6ax, H-22ax, and Me-26 indicated that the relative configuration of C-7 and C-23, and C-24 (Fig. 3). The NOE correlation of Me-26 (δH 1.33) with H-27a (δH 1.85) measured in CD3OD also confirmed the relative configuration of C-23 and C-24. The above deduction suggested that B ring adopted boat conformation while C ring adopted chair conformations.

Table 1

1H (600 MHz) and 13C (150 MHz) NMR data of compounds 1 and 2

No. 1a 1b 2a
δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz) δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz) δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz)
1 60.9, C 62.2, C 61.5, C
2 164.7, C 165.1, C 165.6, C
3 122.4, C 123.4, C 122.7, C
4 75.8, C 77.7, C 77.4, C
4-OH 5.44, s
5 54.1, C 55.4, C 54.9, C
6 38.5, CH2 2.32, t (13.6) 39.9, CH2 2.39, t (13.8) 39.3, CH2 2.41, t (14.0)
1.44, dd (13.6, 2.9) 1.43, dd (13.8, 3.1) 1.48, m
7 43.4, CH 1.04, m 45.1, CH 1.06, m 43.8, CH 1.11, m
8 49.5, C 50.3, C 49.6, C
9 209.2, C 211.3, C 210.3, C
10 27.0, CH2 2.82, dd (13.4, 7.5) 28.2, CH2 2.77, brd (13.6) 27.4, CH2 2.85, dd (13.5, 4.2)
2.37, dd (13.4, 7.5) 2.71, dd (13.6, 9.6) 2.61, m
11 118.5, CH 4.00, t (7.5) 120.4, CH 4.54, m 118.8, CH 4.47, t (6.3)
12 16 135.2, C 135.4, C 135.0, C
13 24.2, CH3 0.52, s 25.9, CH3 1.36, s 26.0, CH3 1.37, s
14 17.9, CH3 1.46, s 18.4, CH3 1.62, s 18.3, CH3 1.60, s
15 178.4, C 179.6, C 178.6, C
16 115.6, C 116.8, C 116.4, C
17 152.8, C 155.0, C 152.4, C
18 101.8 CH 6.78, s 103.4, CH 6.86, s 102.8, CH 6.94, s
19 151.3, C 152.5, C 151.7, C
20 143.5, C 146.5, C 143.3, C
21 107.9, CH 7.40, s 108.1, CH 7.36, s 108.2, CH 7.72, s
22 34.4, CH2 1.97, dd (13.6, 3.1) 34.1, CH2 2.09, dd (13.6, 3.5) 37.0, CH2 2.25, m
1.36, t (13.6) 1.19, t (13.6) 1.26, overlap
23 41.6, CH 2.33, overlap 44.9, CH 2.02, m 38.3, CH 2.61, overlap
24 73.8, C 73.7, C 147.1, C
25 51.6, CH2 2.43, d (13.8) 52.2, CH2 2.47, d (14.0) 47.4, CH2 2.97, d (13.7)
0.92, d (13.8) 1.20, d (14.0) 1.83, d (13.7)
26 24.0, CH3 1.59, s 23.4, CH3 1.33, s 109.2, CH2 4.88, s
4.84, s
27 26.0, CH2 1.83, m 25.3, CH2 1.85, m 30.6, CH3 1.87, m
1.34, m 0.99, m 1.46, overlap
28 40.1, CH2 2.07, m 43.1, CH2 1.76, m 35.6, CH2 2.21, m
1.73, m 1.53, m 2.17, m
29 72.8, C 71.8, C 146.7, C
30 30.6, CH3 1.37, s 29.5, CH3 1.23, s 109.6, CH2 4.75, s
4.74, s
31 29.2, CH3 1.39, s 28.9, CH3 1.22, s 22.9, CH3 1.78, s
32 28.6, CH2 1.90, brd (13.4) 29.9, CH2 1.96, brd (14.0) 28.8, CH2 1.94, brd (13.4)
1.55, m 1.64, m 1.57, m
33 122.9, CH 4.92, t (6.4) 124.4, CH 4.96, t (6.8) 122.9, CH 4.93, t (6.5)
34 133.1, C 134.1, C 133.5, C
35 25.8, CH3 1.65, s 26.0, CH3 1.67, s 26.0, CH3 1.66, s
36 17.9, CH3 1.49, s 18.0, CH3 1.52, s 18.0, CH3 1.49, s
37 25.0, CH3 0.99, s 25.5, CH3 1.03, s 25.2, CH3 1.04, s
38 20.1, CH3 0.92, s 20.5, CH3 1.03, s 20.2, CH3 1.00, s
aRecorded in CDCl3
bRecorded in methanol-d4

Fig. 2

Key 1H–1H COSY and HMBC correlations of compounds 1 and 46

Fig. 3

Simplified and configuration optimized molecular model of 1. Black arrows, coupling constants; blue arrows, NOE correlations

It is worth noting that the chemical shift of C-7 (δC 43.4) and the difference in chemical shifts of the two H-6 protons (0.88 ppm) and the configurational assignment of C-7 substituent (endo) is against the Grossman-Jacobs rule of determination of the C-7 configuration [3, 15]. The fact may be ascribable to the conformational change of B ring (from chair to boat) after the Alder-ene reaction (Fig. 3). So, the Grossman-Jacobs rule is no longer applicable to determination of the C-7 configuration of this kind of PPAPs.

Xanthochymusone O (2) was assigned the molecular formula C38H48O6 by analysis of its 13C NMR and HREIMS data. The 1H and 13C NMR data of 2 (Table 1) resembled those of garciyunnanin L [19]. The structure of 2 was shown to be a double-bond regioisomer of garciyunnanin L (Δ29,30 in 2 and Δ28,29 in garciyunnanin L). The 2D NMR data showed that the other structural features of 2 were identical to those of garciyunnanin L (Fig. 2).

The 1H and 13C NMR spectra of 3 are identical to those of (+)-garciyunnanin L [19]. Nevertheless, the opposite optical rotations of 3 and (+)-garciyunnanin L ([α]D = –21 and + 28.5, respectively) and opposite experimental CD curves indicate that these compounds are enantiomeric. Considering that compounds 13 are co-isolates of G. xanthochymus and their absolute configurations should be consistent with those of xanthochymusones reported previously [14].

Garsubelone C (4) has NMR spectra nearly identical to garsubelone B (7) [17], except the isopropyl group in garsubelone B was replaced by a sec-butyl group (δC 49.5, C-11; 17.8, C-12; 26.7, C-13; and 11.7, C-13a) (Table 2), so we assign to garsubelone C the structure 4. The HMBC correlation of Me-12 (δH 1.02, d, J = 6.5 Hz) with C-10 (δC 208.6) and the correlations of Me-12/δH 1.78 (H-11)/1.95 and 1.32 (H2-13)/δH 0.81 (Me-13a) in the 1H–1H COSY spectrum confirmed the assignment (Fig. 2). Since the absolute configuration of garsubelone B was undoubtfully determined as 1R,5S,7R on the basis of X-ray crystallographic data and garsubelones B and C are isolated from the same plant (G. subelliptica) [17], the absolute configurations of C-1, C-5, and C-7 for compound 4 should be the same as those of garsubelone B.

Table 2

1H and 13C NMR data for 4 and hyperselancins A and B in CDCl3

No. 4 Hyperselancin Aa Hyperselancin Ba
δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz) δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz) δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz)
1 83.6, C 81.2, C 81.1, C
2 188.3, C 188.8, C 187.6, C
3 114.5, C 114.1, C 114.2, C
4 170.7, C 171.7, C 171.8, C
5 56.8, C 55.1, C 55.0, C
6 39.4, CH2 1.90, dd (13.2, 3.8) 38.4, CH2 2.11, m 38.1, CH2 2.11, m
1.39, t (13.2) 2.06, m 2.06, m
7 43.5, CH 1.47, m 47.7, CH 1.36, m 47.7, CH 1.36, m
8 47.0, C 48.2, C 48.0, C
9 206.4, C 206.8, C 206.7, C
10 208.6, C 208.6, C 208.9, C
11 49.5, CH 1.78, m 48.9, CH 1.84, m 41.9, CH 2.15, m
12 16 17.8, CH3 1.02, d (6.5) 18.0, CH3 1.02, d (6.1) 21.7, CH3 1.03, d (6.6)
13 26.7, CH2 1.95, m 26.7, CH2 1.94, m 20.6, CH3 1.14, d (6.6)
1.32, m 1.32, m
13a 11.7, CH3 0.81, t (7.5) 11.7, CH3 0.83, t (7.5)
14 115.5, CH 6.48, d (10.0) 115.5, CH 6.49, d (10.1) 115.4, CH 6.49, d (10.1)
15 123.7, CH 5.35, d (10.0) 124.0, CH 5.38, d (10.1) 124.0, CH 5.38, d (10.1)
16 81.9, C 82.5, C 82.5, C
17 28.6, CH3 1.39, s 29.3, CH3 1.51, s 29.3, CH3 1.51, s
18 28.4, CH3 1.46, s 28.2, CH3 1.37, s 28.1, CH3 1.36, s
19 29.0, CH2 2.50, dd (14.6, 6.1) 30.5, CH2 2.45, d (6.6) 30.5, CH2 2.45, d (6.6)
2.41, dd (14.6, 7.6)
20 119.3, CH 4.98, m 119.7, CH 4.99, t (6.6) 119.7, CH 5.02, t (6.6)
21 133.9, C 133.6, C 133.5, C
22 26.0, CH3 1.64, s 26.0, CH3 1.65, s 25.9, CH3 1.67, s
23 18.2, CH3 1.68, s 18.1, CH3 1.69, s 18.1, CH3 1.53, s
24 26.6, CH2 2.10, m 29.5, CH2 2.10, m 29.4, CH2 2.10, m
1.64, m 1.87, m 1.87, m
25 122.7, CH 4.96, m 125.0, CH 4.92, t (7.0) 125.0, CH 4.92, t (7.5)
26 133.3, C 132.1, C 132.1, C
27 25.7, CH3 1.64, s 25.8, CH3 1.65, s 25.8, CH3 1.65, s
28 17.8, CH3 1.54, s 18.1, CH3 1.53, s 18.1, CH3 1.68, s
29 23.0, CH3 1.23, s 26.5, CH3 1.19, s 26.5, CH3 1.20, s
30 15.6, CH3 0.99, s 22.1, CH3 1.32, s 22.1, CH3 1.32, s
aData from the literature

The molecular formula of garsubelone D (5) was determined as C30H42O4 by analysis of its 13C NMR (Table 3) and HRESIMS data (m/z 489.2978, [M + Na]+), 68 mass units more than that of lupulone B (8) [18]. On the basis of analysis of its 1D (Table 3) and 2D NMR data, compound 5 was assigned to possess the same backbone as lupulone B. The structural novelty of 5 involved the presence of a geranyl side chain rather than a prenyl group. The geranyl group linked to C-5 was confirmed by the 1H–1H COSY correlations of H2-21/H-22 and H2-25/H2-26/H-27, in combination with the HMBC correlations of Me-24 (δH 1.75) with C-22 (δC 123.0) and C-25 (δC 40.9) and of both Me-29 (δH 1.66) and Me-30 (δH 1.56) with C-27 (δC 125.3) (Fig. 2). The NOE contact of Me-24/H2-21 in the NOESY spectrum defined the E configuration of the corresponding ene.

Table 3

1H and 13C NMR data for compounds 5 and 6 in methanol-d4

No. 5 6
δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz) δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz)
1 108.3, C 108.1, C
2 195.0, C 197.1, C
3 54.2, C 58.5, C
4 169.4, C 173.5, C
5 116.5, C 107.5, C
6 191.4, C 187.5, C
7 208.4, C 208.6, C
8 36.7, CH 3.88, sept (6.8) 36.9, CH 3.96, sept (6.8)
9 19.8, CH3 1.14, d (6.8) 19.3, CH3 1.10, d (6.8)
10 18.9, CH3 1.09, d (6.8) 19.2, CH3 1.09, d (6.8)
11 124.1, CH 6.21, d (9.9) 38.7, CH2 2.67, m
2.54, m
12 16 133.3, CH 5.90, d (9.9) 119.0, CH 4.81, m
13 84.0, C 139.7, C
14 29.0, CH3 1.56, s 16.9, CH3 1.57, s
15 29.9, CH3 1.34, s 40.7, CH2 1.84, t (7.2)
16 45.7, CH2 2.57, m 27.6, CH2 1.91, m
2.41, m
17 118.6, CH 4.90, m 125.0, CH 4.95, t (6.9)
18 137.8, C 132.4, C
19 26.2, CH3 1.59, s 26.0, CH3 1.59, s
20 18.0, CH3 1.48, s 17.7, CH3 1.51, s
21 22.0, CH2 3.18, dd (14.1, 7.4) 38.7, CH2 2.68, m
3.06, dd (14.1, 7.4) 2.51, m
22 123.0, CH 5.09, m 119.3, CH 4.79, m
23 136.2, C 136.0, C
24 16.4, CH3 1.75, s 25.9, CH3 1.58, s
25 40.9, CH2 1.97, t (7.7) 18.3, CH3 1.56, s
1.83, m
26 27.6, CH2 2.06, m 115.0, CH 6.42, d (10.1)
1.89, m
27 125.3, CH 5.05, m 125.1, CH 5.49, d (10.1)
28 132.6, C 82.9, C
29 25.9, CH3 1.66, s 29.2, CH3 1.45, s
30 17.8, CH3 1.56, s 29.1, CH3 1.43, s

Garsubelone E (6) was assigned the molecular formula C30H42O4 by analysis of its 13C NMR and HREIMS data. The 1H and 13C NMR data of 6 (Table 3) resembled those of xanthochymusone K [16]. Instead of a hydroxymethyl in xanthochymusone K, a methyl carbon at δC 18.3 (C-25) appeared in 6, suggesting that 6 possessed a complete prenyl group. This suggestion was further supported by the correlations of Me-24 (δH 1.58) and Me-25 (δH 1.56) with δC 119.3 (C-22) and 136.0 (C-23), as well as 1H–1H COSY correlations of δH 2.68 and 2.51 (H2-21)/δH 4.79 (H-22). The 2D NMR data showed that the other structural features 6 were identical to those of xanthochymusone K (Fig. 2).

2.2 Structural revision of seven PAPs

The previous assignments of some PAPs were controversial and have been proved to be incorrect in this study. Garsubelones B and C have same planar structures and relative configuration to those of hyperselancins A and B (Scheme 1) [28], respectively, however, their reported 1H and 13C NMR spectroscopic data are different (Table 2). The chemical shift of C-7 (δC 47.7) and the difference in chemical shifts of the two H-6 protons (0.05 ppm) of both hyperselancins A and B indicates that the C-7 substituents of the two compounds should be endo according to the Grossman-Jacobs rule [3, 15]. The original authors also referred to the Grossman-Jacobs rule, but unfortunately they seem to have confused the concept of endo/exo and α/β [28]. Hence, we revise the relative configuration of C-7 of hyperselancins A and B (Scheme 1).

Scheme 1

Structural revision of hyperselancins A and B and garcinielliptone F

Garsubelone B were found to share identical 1H and 13C NMR data to garcinielliptone F (Table 4) [29, 30], a PPAP resulting from hydrolysis of the enol ether of garsubelone B, suggesting structural reassignment of garcinielliptone F (Scheme 1). The original authors may have misinterpreted the mass spectrometry data. Interestingly, we detected signals corresponding to another set of non-dominant compound in the NMR spectra of garsubelone B/C and structurally similar compounds: hyperselancins A and B [28], androforin A [31], and hypercohin Ⅰ [32]. Analysis of the 2D NMR data of garsubelone B/C indicated that these signals correspond to positional isomers of the pyran ring (C-2–O–C-16) in this class of compounds (Scheme 2). Based on the HPLC analysis results of garsubelone B (Fig. S1), it can be inferred that this class of compounds exhibits slow tautomerism, with the dominant isomer having the pyran ring positioned at C-4–O–C-16 (Scheme 2).

Table 4

1H and 13C NMR data for garcinielliptone F and garsubelone B in CDCl3

No. Garcinielliptone Fa Garsubelone Bb
δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz) δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz)
1 83.5, C 83.5, C
2 188.3, C 188.4, C
3 114.5, C 114.5, C
4 170.8, C 170.8, C
5 56.7, C 56.7, C
6 39.2, CH2 1.89, dd (13.2, 3.2) 39.2, CH2 1.89, dd (13.2, 4.0)
1.39, m 1.40, brt (13.2)
7 43.3, CH 1.44, m 43.4, CH 1.48, m
8 46.8, C 46.8, C
9 206.3, C 206.3, C
10 209.0, C 209.0, C
11 42.5, CH 2.07, m 42.5, CH 2.09, overlap
12 16 20.5, CH3 1.11, d (6.4) 20.5, CH3 1.11, d (6.6)
13 21.5c, CH3 1.02, d (6.4) 21.5, CH3 1.02, d (6.6)
14 115.4, CH 6.47, d (10.0) 115.4, CH 6.47, d (10.0)
15 123.7, CH 5.34, d (10.0) 123.7, CH 5.34, d (10.0)
16 81.9, C 81.9, C
17 28.6, CH3 1.39, s 28.6, CH3 1.39, s
18 28.3, CH3 1.43, s 28.4, CH3 1.44, s
19 29.0, CH2 2.49, dd (14.8, 6.0) 29.0, CH2 2.49, dd (14.2, 6.9)
2.41, dd (14.8, 8.0) 2.41, dd (14.2, 6.9)
20 119.3, CH 5.00, t (7.0) 119.3, CH 5.00, t (6.9)
21 133.3, C 133.8, C
22 25.7d, CH3 1.65e, s 25.7, CH3 1.65, s
23 18.1, CH3 1.67, s 18.1, CH3 1.67, s
24 26.5, CH2 2.09, m 26.5, CH2 2.09, overlap
1.67, m 1.63, overlap
25 122.6, CH 4.95, t (7.2) 122.7, CH 4.96, t (7.3)
26 133.8, C 133.3, C
27 25.9, CH3 1.64, s 25.9, CH3 1.64, s
28 17.8d, CH3 1.54e, s 17.8, CH3 1.54, s
29 22.9, CH3 1.22, s 23.0, CH3 1.22, s
30 15.6c, CH3 1.00, s 15.7, CH3 1.00, s
aData from the literature
bData that we acquired
c,d,eExchanged pairs of signals, respectively

Scheme 2

Transformation between 7 and 7a

Garcinielliptone G was reported along with garcinielliptone F and was later found to induce apoptosis in acute leukemia cells [29, 30, 33]. However, the structure of garcinielliptone G was also misassigned due to the misuse of MS data. In 2021, hyperscabin D with the same skeleton was reported [34], and its 1H and 13C NMR data (particularly the signals near the pyran ring) showed excellent agreement with those of garcinielliptone G (Table 5). The IR spectrum of hyperscabin D did not show absorption peak corresponding to hydroxyl groups, nor were any signals of active hydrogen observed in the 1H spectrum [34]. The above evidence supports the correct assignment of hyperscabin D and our structural revision of garcinielliptone G (Scheme 3).

Table 5

1H and 13C NMR data for garcinielliptone G and hyperscabin D in CDCl3

No. Garcinielliptone Ga Hyperscabin Da, b
δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz) δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz)
1 82.8, C 83.7, C
2 209.1, C 209.7, C
3 192.4, C 192.6, C
4 90.2, C 89.8, C
5 61.0, C 60.8, C
6 40.2, CH2 2.53, m 39.6, CH2 2.61, dd (13.8, 4.4)
1.34, m 1.37, dd (13.8, 10.5)
7 43.1, CH 1.65, m 43.5, CH 1.85, m
8 55.8, C 57.9, C
9 205.7, C 205.3, C
10 206.5, C 206.9, C
11 39.7, CH 2.50, m 39.7, CH 2.50, sept (6.6)
12 16 19.7, CH3 1.01, d (6.8) 19.8, CH3 1.03, d (6.6)
13 19.6, CH3 0.90, d (6.8) 19.7, CH3 0.95, d (6.6)
14 122.8, CH 6.01, d (10.8) 123.0, CH 6.02, d (10.5)
15 156.2, CH 6.97, d (10.8) 156.0, CH 6.98, d (10.5)
16 74.1, C 74.2, C
17 30.0, CH3 1.67, s 30.1, CH3 1.69, s
18 29.9, CH3 1.44, s 29.8, CH3 1.45, s
19 27.4, CH2 1.60, m 28.0, CH2 2.08, m
2.05, dd (13.2, 8.0) 2.50, m
20 122.5, CH 5.04, t (6.4) 118.6, CH 5.14, t (6.3)
21 133.0, C 133.6, C
22 25.7, CH3 1.71, s 25.9, CH3 1.63, s
23 17.8, CH3 1.58, s 17.7, CH3 1.47, s
aData from the literature
bPartial data

Scheme 3

Structural revision of garcinielliptone G

In 2023, Quan et al. reported two polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols, garxanthochins A and B (Scheme 4), from G. xanthochymus [35]. However, the 1H and 13C NMR data of garxanthochin A are identical to those of xanthochymusone K reported by our group (Table 6) [16]. The chemical shifts of C-25 (δC 61.8) and C-28 (δC 81.5) does not support the linkage of C-4–O–C-25 but support the linkage of C-4–O–C-28. In the 1H–1H COSY spectrum, a broad singlet at δH 2.22 (hydroxyl hydrogen) shows correlation with δH 3.79 (H-25b) [16], which further confirms our structural reassignment of garxanthochin A. Since garxanthochin B has been assigned the same carbon skeleton as garxanthochin A and their NMR data are similar except for the C-1 acyl substituent, we also revise the structure of garxanthochin B (Scheme 4).

Scheme 4

Structural revision of garxanthochins A and B

Table 6

1H and 13C NMR data for garxanthochins A and B and xanthochymusone K in CDCl3

No. Garxanthochin Aa Xanthochymusone Kb Garxanthochin Ba
δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz) δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz) δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz)
1 107.3, C 107.1, C 107.9, C
2 196.4, C 196.1, C 196.5, C
3 57.8, C 57.6, C 57.8, C
4 171.4, C 171.2, C 171.4, C
5 106.8, C 106.5, C 106.9, C
6 186.9, C 186.7, C 187.0, C
7 208.1, C 207.9, C 207.6, C
8 35.8, CH 3.92, m 35.6, CH 3.95, sept (6.8) 42.1, CH 3.81, dd (13.7, 6.9)
9 19.3, CH3 1.12c, d (6.8) 19.1, CH3 1.12, d (6.8) 16.4, CH3 1.10, m
10 18.8, CH3 1.07c, d (6.8) 18.6, CH3 1.10, d (6.8) 26.9, CH2 1.33, m
10a 12.0, CH3 0.92, t, (7.4)
11 39.1, CH2 2.61, dd (13.7, 7.8) 38.9, CH2 2.63, dd (13.6, 7.4) 39.0, CH2 2.61, dd (13.7, 7.7)
2.48, d (7.1) 2.51, dd (13.6, 7.4) 2.48, d (7.2)
12 16 117.4, CH 4.81, t (7.2) 117.2, CH 4.83, t (7.4) 117.4, CH 4.80, dd (8.1, 7.0)
13 139.5, C 139.2, C 139.4, C
14 16.6, CH3 1.51, t (3.5) 16.4, CH3 1.54, s 16.6, CH3 1.51, d (1.9)
15 40.0, CH2 1.84, d (6.6) 39.7, CH2 1.89, m 40.0, CH2 1.83, m
1.85, m
16 26.9, CH2 1.87, m 26.7, CH2 1.89, m 27.1, CH2 1.86, m
1.86, m
17 124.1, CH 4.96, dd (6.7. 5.4) 123.9, CH 4.98, t (6.8) 124.1, CH 4.95, m
18 131.8, C 131.6, C 131.8, C
19 25.9, CH3 1.61, s 25.6, CH3 1.63, s 25.9, CH3 1.61, d (0.7)
20 17.8, CH3 1.54d, s 17.6, CH3 1.54, s 17.8, CH3 1.54d, s
21 35.7, CH2 2.92, dd (13.5, 10.4) 35.5, CH2 2.94, dd (13.6, 10.2) 35.9, CH2 2.92, dd (13.5, 10.4)
2.50, d (7.1) 2.51, m 2.50, d (6.8)
22 122.1, CH 4.90, dd (10.7, 6.0) 121.8, CH 4.92, dd (10.2, 5.5) 122.0, CH 4.90, dd (9.8, 4.2)
23 138.5, C 138.4, C 138.6, C
24 22.3, CH3 1.66, s 22.1, CH3 1.68, s 22.3, CH3 1.65, d (1.2)
25 61.8, CH2 4.29, d (12.0) 61.6, CH2 4.30, d (12.0) 61.8, CH2 4.30, dd (14.7, 12.2)
3.78, d (12.0) 3.79, brd (12.0) 3.77, m
26 114.8, CH 6.45, d (10.0) 114.6, CH 6.47, d (10.0) 114.8, CH 6.45, d (10.1)
27 123.8, CH 5.36, d (10.1) 123.5, CH 5.38, d (10.0) 123.8, CH 5.35, d (10.1)
28 81.5, C 81.3, C 81.5, C
29 29.0, CH3 1.46, s 28.8, CH3 1.48, s 29.0, CH3 1.46, s
30 28.9, CH3 1.45, s 28.7, CH3 1.47, s 28.9, CH3 1.45, s
aData from the literature
bData that we acquired
cExchanged signals
dRevised data based on the spectra provided by the original authors

Since we revised the relative configuration of garcicowins C and D in 2022 [13], we have further noticed that their derivative, 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin C [36], also exhibits the same configurational error. As shown in Table 7, the 1H and 13C NMR data of the core carbon skeleton of 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin C shows excellent agreement (particularly around the C-30 and C-34 stereocenters) with those of xanthochymusone H, whose structure was confirmed by single-crystal X-ray diffraction data [13]. So we firstly revise the relative configuration of C-23 and C-27 of 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin C. Furthermore, the opposite optical rotations of 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin C and xanthochymusone H ([α]D = –68.6 and + 60, respectively) and almost opposite experimental CD data indicate that their absolute configurations are opposite [λmaxε) 223 (+ 5.2), 267 (− 8.5), 311 (+ 2.1) nm for 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin C; λmaxε) 224 (− 8.8), 258 (+ 7.2), 302 (− 0.25) nm for xanthochymusone H] [13, 36]. Ultimately, we reassign the absolute configuration of 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin C as shown (Scheme 5).

Table 7

Partial 1H and 13C NMR data for 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin C and xanthochymusone H

No. 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin Ca Xanthochymusone Hb
δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz) δC, type δH mult. (J in Hz)
1 69.2 C 70.7, C
2 193.8, C 196.1, C
3 129.1, C 124.2, C
4 170.8, C 173.9, C
5 48.1, C 49.5, C
6 38.1, CH 2.60, d (14.5) 38.8, CH2 2.63, m
1.89, dd (14.5, 7.5) 1.95, dd (14.3, 7.2)
7 46.4, CH 1.51, m 47.6, CH 1.58, overlap
8 46.7, C 47.8, C
9 209.0, C 209.6, C
22 33.2, CH2 2.32, t (14.0) 34.5, CH2 2.34, t (14.1)
1.75, dd (14.0, 2.5) 1.74, dd (14.1, 2.8)
23 42.8, CH 2.46, m 44.2, CH 2.52, m
24 143.5, C 145.5, C
25 113.9, CH2 4.84, s 114.5, CH2 4.85, s
4.80, s 4.84, s
26 20.3, CH3 1.66, s 20.7, CH3 1.67, s
27 79.7, CH 4.20, t (9.0) 81.6, CH 4.33, dd (10.6, 8.9)
28 121.4, CH 5.01, brd (9.0) 124.2, CH 5.04, d (8.9)
29 141.7, C 143.3, C
30 25.7, CH3 1.61, s 25.9, CH3 1.62, s
31 17.8, CH3 1.10, s 18.1, CH3 1.14, s
37 26.8, CH3 1.00, s 27.2, CH3 1.01, s
38 22.3, CH3 1.18, s 22.8, CH3 1.16, s
aData from the literature, recorded in CDCl3
bData from the literature, recorded in methanol-d4

Scheme 5

Structural revision of 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin C

The antiproliferative activities of all the isolates against two human hepatocellular carcinoma cell lines Huh-7 and Hep G2 through CCK-8 assay were preliminary evaluated [37]. Sorafenib was chosen as the positive control (IC50 9.7 and 16.6 µM, respectively). Compound 1 exhibited moderate cytotoxic activities against Hep G2 cells with IC50 value 7.3 µM, while other compounds did not show obvious activity (IC50 > 50 µM).

In conclusion, we have isolated six new polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols (16) and two known analogues from the fruits of G. xanthochymus and G. subelliptica. Compound 1 exhibits moderate antiproliferative activity against HepG2 cell lines. Furthermore, the structures of seven polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols (hyperselancins A and B, garcinielliptones F and G, garxanthochins A and B, and 13,14-didehydroxygarcicowin C) are revised by analysis of NMR and other spectroscopic data. Our structural confirmation work has cleared the obstacles for subsequent research on these natural products.

3 Experimental section

3.1 General experimental procedures

Optical rotations were measured on a Jasco P-1020 polarimeter. UV spectra were recorded on a Shimadzu UV-2401PC spectrometer. IR spectra were recorded on a Bruker FT-IR Tensor-27 infrared spectrophotometer with KBr disks. 1D and 2D NMR spectra were recorded on a Bruker DRX-600 spectrometer using TMS as an internal standard. Unless otherwise specified, chemical shifts (δ) are expressed in ppm with reference to the solvent signals. ESIMS and HREIMS data were acquired on Waters Xevo TQS and Waters AutoSpec Premier P776 mass spectrometers, respectively. Semi-preparative HPLC was performed on an Agilent 1100 HPLC with a Zorbarx SB-C18 (9.4 × 250 mm) column. Silica gel (200–300 mesh, Qingdao Marine Chemical Co., Ltd., Qingdao, People's Republic of China) were used for column chromatography. Fractions were monitored by TLC (GF 254, Qingdao Marine Chemical Co., Ltd.), and spots were visualized by heating silica gel plates immersed in H2SO4 in EtOH.

3.2 Plant material

James Stribling and Louise King collected the fruits of G. xanthochymus from the Fruit and Spice Park (Miami, FL) in February 2020. Prof. Xing-Wei Yang and his students collected the fruits of G. subelliptica from the treelawn nearby the Shenzhen campus of Sun Yat-sen University in August 2022.

3.3 Extraction and isolation

The dried fruits of G. xanthochymus (1.2 kg) were extracted twice with MeOH (5 L each time) at room temperature for 24 h to yield a crude extract (680 g) after evaporation in vacuo. The residue was suspended in H2O and partitioned with EtOAc and H2O to yield the EtOAc fraction (120 g). This fraction was subjected to column chromatography over silica gel eluted with petroleum ether–EtOAc in gradients (20:1, 10:1, 6:1, 5:1, 5:2, 1:1, and 0:1) to obtain ten fractions (Fr. A–J). A portion of Fr. D (5 g) was separated by semipreparative HPLC eluting with MeOH–H2O (88:12) to yield four subfractions (Fr. D1-D4). Fr. D4 (174 mg) was further purified via preparative TLC and semipreparative HPLC to afford compounds 2 (16 mg) and 3 (15 mg). Fr. E (11.8 g) was chromatographed on a silica gel column, eluting with petroleum ether–EtOAc (3:1 to 0:1), to gather Fr. E1–E3. Using semipreparative HPLC (MeCN–H2O, 65:35), Fr. E3.4 (548 mg) afforded compound 1 (8 mg).

The dried fruits of G. subelliptica (5.3 kg) were extracted three times with MeOH (6–8 L each time) at room temperature for 24 h to yield a crude extract after evaporation in vacuo. The residue was suspended in H2O and partitioned with EtOAc and H2O to yield the EtOAc fraction (211 g). This fraction was subjected to column chromatography over silica gel eluting with petroleum ether–EtOAc in gradients (95:1, 9:1, 4:1, 1:1, 1:2, and 0:1) and industrial MeOH to obtain six fractions (Fr. A–F). Fr. A (14.4 g) was fractionated by silica gel column chromatography using petroleum ether–EtOAc (200:1 to 100:1) as eluents to provide three subfractions (Fr. A1–A3). Fr. A2 (1.5 g) was purified by semi-preparative HPLC (MeCN–H2O, 99:1 to 100:0) to produce compounds 5 (9 mg), 6 (12 mg), and 8 (3 mg). A portion (200 mg) of A3 (6.7 g) was purified by semipreparative HPLC (MeCN–H2O, 95:5 to 100:0) to obtain compounds 4 (10 mg) and 7 (16 mg).

Xanthochymusone N (1): yellow gum; [α]D25 –16 (c 0.1, MeOH); UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 232 (4.07), 293 (3.82), 327 (3.78) nm; IR (KBr) vmax 3400, 2918, 2850, 1724, 1621, 1467, 1377, 1261, 1095, 1032, 802, 667 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data, see Table 1; negative ESIMS m/z 635 [M – H]; HRESIMS m/z 635.3586 (cacld for C38H51O8, 635.3584).

Xanthochymusone O (2): yellow gum; [α]D25 –21 (c 0.1, MeOH); UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 206 (4.25), 234 (3.91), 293 (3.56), 333 (3.53) nm; IR (KBr) vmax 3427, 2968, 2928, 2857, 1726, 1624, 1474, 1394, 1380, 1290, 1178, 889 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data, see Table 1; HRESIMS m/z 601.3522 [M + H]+ (cacld for C38H49O6, 601.3524).

(–)-Garciyunnanin L (3): yellow gum; [α]D25 –21 (c 0.1, MeOH); CD (0.0002 M, MeOH) λmaxε) 211 (− 13.5), 230 (+ 1.9), 250 (− 1.2), 285 (− 4.4), 305 (+ 3.5), 330 (− 0.8) nm.

Garsubelone C (4): colorless gum; [α]D25 + 6 (c 0.06, MeOH); UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 204 (3.97), 258 (3.69), 317 (3.38) nm; IR (KBr) vmax 2972, 2928, 1727, 1639, 1587, 1453, 1413, 1370, 1336, 1115 cm−1; CD (0.0004 M, MeOH) λmaxε) 202 (− 8.0), 219 (+ 0.7), 239 (+ 0.7), 265 (− 2.2), 293 (− 1.9), 321 (+ 5.0), 347 (− 0.5) nm; 1H and 13C NMR data, see Table 2; positive ESIMS m/z 519 [M + K]+; HRESIMS m/z 503.3134 (cacld for C31H44O4Na, 503.3137).

Garsubelone D (5): red gum; [α]D25 + 220 (c 0.05, MeOH); UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 209 (4.13), 238 (3.89), 332 (3.74) nm; IR (KBr) vmax 3424, 2975, 2927, 1659, 1526, 1447, 1382, 1179, 1143, 1107, 891, 802, 745 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data, see Table 5; positive ESIMS m/z 489 [M + Na]+; HRESIMS m/z 489.2978 (cacld for C30H42O4Na, 489.2981).

Garsubelone E (6): red gum; [α]D25 + 36 (c 0.05, MeOH); UV (MeOH) λmax (log ε) 207 (4.04), 265 (4.05), 354 (3.54) nm; IR (KBr) vmax 3430, 2973, 2926, 1655, 1526, 1461, 1361, 1196, 1142, 1103, 887, 714 cm−1; 1H and 13C NMR data, see Table 5; positive ESIMS m/z 505 [M + K]+; HRESIMS m/z 489.2976 (cacld for C30H42O4Na, 489.2981).

3.4 Cytotoxicity assay

Two human hepatocellular carcinoma cell lines (Huh-7 and Hep G2) were cultured in DMEM containing 10% FBS at 37 ℃ with 5% CO2. Cells (Huh-7 and Hep G2) were seeded on 96-well plates with 10, 000 cells per well and incubated for 24 h. All isolated compounds were added with a serial dilution (50, 25, 12.5, 6.25, 3.125 µM) and cultivated in the cell incubator for another 24 h. 10 µL of the Cell Counting Kit-8 (Biosharp, Shanghai, China) was added to the medium and incubated for 2–4 h, absorbance was measured by Multiskan GO microplate reader at a wavelength of 450 nm. Sorafenib (Solarbio, Shanghai, China) was used as a positive control. The half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) value was measured and calculated by GraphPad Prism 8 software.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Natural Sciences Foundation of China (82404843) and Natural Sciences Foundation of Guangdong Province (No. 2025A1515010551) for financial support. The project was also funded by State Key Laboratory for Chemistry and Molecular Engineering of Medicinal Resources, Guangxi Normal University (CMEMR2023-B11).

Author contributions

Xing-Wei Yang and Xia Liu conceived and designed the study. Yong-Ge Fu and Zhi-Hong Xu performed the isolation and purification of the compounds. Yi-Qi Huang performed the pharmacological experiments. Yong-Ge Fu and Yi-Qi Huang analyzed the data. Xing-Wei Yang wrote the manuscript, and all authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

Declarations

Competing interest

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Hemshekhar M, Sunitha K, Santhosh MS, Devaraja S, Kemparaju K, Vishwanath BS, Niranjana SR, Girish KS. An overview on genus Garcinia: phytochemical and therapeutical aspects. Phytochem Rev. 2011;10(3): 325-51. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kumar S, Sharma S, Chattopadhyay SK. The potential health benefit of polyisoprenylated benzophenones from Garcinia and related genera: ethnobotanical and therapeutic importance. Fitoterapia. 2013;89: 86-125. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yang XW, Grossman RB, Xu G. Research progress of polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols. Chem Rev. 2018;118(7): 3508-58. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yang XW, Deng X, Liu X, Wu CY, Li XN, Wu B, Luo HR, Li Y, Xu HX, Zhao QS, Xu G. Hypercohin A, a new polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinol possessing an unusual bicyclo[5.3.1]hendecane core from Hypericum cohaerens. Chem Commun. 2012;48(48): 5998-6000. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Luo Y, Grossman RB, Nie XB, Yang XW. Total synthesis and structural reassignment of garcinielliptone FC, a polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinol with diverse bioactivity. Chem Commun. 2023;59(41): 6215-8. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yang XW, Ding Y, Zhang JJ, Liu X, Yang LX, Li XN, Ferreira D, Walker LA, Xu G. New acylphloroglucinol derivatives with diverse architectures from Hypericum henryi. Org Lett. 2014;16(9): 2434-7. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hu YL, Hu K, Kong LM, Xia F, Yang XW, Xu G. Norascyronones A and B, 2,3,4- nor-polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols from Hypericum ascyron. Org Lett. 2019;21(4): 1007-10. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yang XW, Grossman RB. Revision of the structure of hypatulone A by NMR, computations, and biosynthetic considerations. Org Lett. 2020;22(2): 760-3. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yang XW, Li MM, Liu X, Ferreira D, Ding Y, Zhang JJ, Liao Y, Qin HB, Xu G. Polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinol congeners possessing diverse structures from Hypericum henryi. J Nat Prod. 2015;78(4): 885-95. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yang XW, Yang J, Xu G. Skeleton reassignment of type C polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols. J Nat Prod. 2017;80(1): 108-13. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grossman RB, Yang XW. Structural revision of garcinielliptin oxide and garcinielliptone E. J Nat Prod. 2020;83(6): 2041-4. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang X, Nie XB, Grossman RB, Ji TF, Yang XW. Structural revision of hyperibrin B and hyperscabrones H and I by biosynthetic considerations, NMR analysis, and chemical synthesis. J Nat Prod. 2021;84(7): 2059-64. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Xu ZH, Grossman RB, Qiu YF, Luo Y, Lan T, Yang XW. Polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols bearing a lavandulyl-derived substituent from Garcinia xanthochymus fruits. J Nat Prod. 2022;85(12): 2845-55. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Qiu YF, Grossman RB, Yang XW. Structure revision of type B polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols fused to a partly reduced furan ring. J Nat Prod. 2023;86(10): 2391-7. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ciochina R, Grossman RB. Polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols. Chem Rev. 2006;106(9): 3963-86. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Xu ZH, Luo Y, Qiu YF, Yang XW, Lan T. Prenylated acylphloroglucinols from the fruits of Garcinia xanthochymus. Fitoterapia. 2023;165: 105427. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wang YL, Ye YS, Fu WW, Wu R, Xiang Q, Lao YZ, Yang JL, Tan HS, Yang XW, Yang BC, Xu HX, Xu G. Garsubelone A, the first dimeric polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols with complicated heptacyclic architecture from Garcinia subelliptica. Org Lett. 2019;21(5): 1534-7. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhao F, Watanabe Y, Nozawa H, Daikonnya A, Kondo K, Kitanaka S. Prenylflavonoids and phloroglucinol derivatives from hops (Humulus lupulus). J Nat Prod. 2005;68(1): 43-9. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zheng D, Chen Y, Wan S, Jiang J, Chen S, Zheng C, Zhou H, Xu G, Zhang H, Xu H. Polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinol congeners from Garcinia yunnanensis Hu with inhibitory effect on α-hemolysin production in Staphylococcus aureus. Bioorg Chem. 2021;114: 105074. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Che Hassan NKN, Taher M, Susanti D. Phytochemical constituents and pharmacological properties of Garcinia xanthochymus-a review. Biomed Pharmacother. 2018;106: 1378-89. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Baggett S, Protiva P, Mazzola EP, Yang H, Ressler ET, Basile MJ, Weinstein IB, Kennelly EJ. Bioactive benzophenones from Garcinia xanthochymus fruits. J Nat Prod. 2005;68(3): 354-60. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lyles JT, Negrin A, Khan SI, He K, Kennelly EJ. In vitro antiplasmodial activity of benzophenones and xanthones from edible fruits of Garcinia species. Planta Med. 2014;80(8/9): 676-81. PubMed Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Youn UJ, Sripisut T, Miklossy G, Turkson J, Laphookhieo S, Chang LC. Bioactive polyprenylated benzophenone derivatives from the fruits extracts of Garcinia xanthochymus. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2017;27(16): 3760-5. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chen Y, Gan F, Jin S, Liu H, Wu S, Yang W, Yang G. Adamantyl derivatives and rearranged benzophenones from Garcinia xanthochymus fruits. RSC Adv. 2017;7(28): 17289-96. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Xu J, Jin S, Gan F, Xiong H, Mei Z, Chen Y, Yang G. Polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols from Garcinia xanthochymus fruits exhibit antitumor effects through inhibition of the STAT3 signaling pathway. Food Funct. 2020;11(12): 10568-79. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jin S, Wang W, Gan F, Xie W, Xu J, Chen Y, Mei Z, Yang G. Discovery of novel polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols from the fruits of Garcinia xanthochymus as antitumor agents by suppressing the STAT3 signaling. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(19): 10365. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chien SC, Chyu CF, Chang IS, Chiu HL, Kuo YH. A novel polyprenylated phloroglucinol, garcinialone, from the roots of Garcinia multiflora. Tetrahedron Lett. 2008;49(36): 5276-8. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fobofou SA, Franke K, Porzel A, Brandt W, Wessjohann LA. Tricyclic acylphloroglucinols from Hypericum lanceolatum and regioselective synthesis of selancins A and B. J Nat Prod. 2016;79(4): 743-53. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Weng JR, Lin CN, Tsao LT, Wang JP. Terpenoids with a new skeleton and novel triterpenoids with anti-inflammatory effects from Garcinia subelliptica. Chem Eur J. 2003;9(22): 5520-7. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lin KW, Huang AM, Yang SC, Weng JR, Hour TC, Pu YS, Lin CN. Cytotoxic and antioxidant constituents from Garcinia subelliptica. Food Chem. 2012;135(2): 851-9. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wang K, Wang YY, Gao X, Chen XQ, Peng LY, Li Y, Xu G, Zhao QS. Polycyclic polyprenylated acylphloroglucinols and cytotoxic constituents of Hypericum androsaemum. Chem Biodivers. 2012;9(6): 1213-20. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Liu X, Yang XW, Chen CQ, Wu CY, Zhang JJ, Ma JZ, Wang H, Yang LX, Xu G. Bioactive polyprenylated acylphloroglucinol derivatives from Hypericum cohaerens. J Nat Prod. 2013;76(9): 1612-8. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yun Y, Shioura M, Hitotsuyanagi Y, Yotsumoto S, Takahashi Y, Aoyagi Y, Kinoshita T, Takeya K, Inoue H. Garcinielliptone G from Garcinia subelliptica induces apoptosis in acute leukemia cells. Molecules. 2021;26(9): 2422. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ma J, Zang YD, Zhang JJ, Li CJ, Li Y, Su YL, Wang AG, Zhang DM. Nine prenylated acylphloroglucinols with potential anti-depressive and hepatoprotective activities from Hypericum scabrum. Bioorg Chem. 2021;107: 104529. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Quan F, Luan X, Zhang J, Gao W, Yan J, Li P. Cytotoxic isopentenyl phloroglucinol compounds from Garcinia xanthochymus using LC-MS-based metabolomics. Metabolites. 2023;13(2): 258. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cheng LY, Tsai YC, Fu SL, Cheng MJ, Sung PJ, Chung MI, Chen JJ. Acylphloroglucinol derivatives from Garcinia multiflora with anti-inflammatory effect in LPS-induced RAW 264.7 macrophages. Molecules. 2018;23(10): 2587. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Peng T, Wonganan O, Zhang Z, Yu J, Xi R, Cao Y, Suksamrarn A, Zhang G, Wang F. A 2-benzylmalonate derivative as STAT3 inhibitor suppresses tumor growth in hepatocellular carcinoma by upregulating β-TrCP E3 ubiquitin ligase. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(7): 3354. CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2025

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1. School of Pharmaceutical Sciences (Shenzhen), Sun Yat-Sen University, Shenzhen 518107, People's Republic of China
  2. 2. Department of Pharmacy, Chongqing Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Chongqing 400021, China