Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
20 September 2024 | Story André Damons | Photo Supplied
zebrafish-blue-in-aquarium
Zebrafish blue in an aquarium.

A researcher from the University of the Free State (UFS) hopes to make living with epilepsy and other diseases of the central nervous system (CNS) easier by using South African plants extracts which may have anti-epileptic properties and testing them on zebrafish larvae.

Prof Anke Wilhelm, Associate Professor and Divisional Head of Organic Chemistry in the UFS Department of Chemistry, focuses her research on the isolation of active GABAergic compounds (substances that affect the brain’s GABA system, which helps control nervous system activity) by using a test that measures the movement of zebrafish larvae.

Even though obtaining regulatory approval for use as a treatment for epilepsy is a long and complex process, Prof Wilhelm hopes to contribute to the better pain management of people suffering from epilepsy and diseases of the CNS through an affordable alternative drug with less side effects.

The tests are done in a zebrafish bioassay (an analytical method to determine the potency of a substance by its effect on living animals) housed at the UFS’ Chemistry Department.

Why zebrafish larvae?

Prof Wilhelm, who is a National Research Foundation Y2-rated synthetic organic chemist, says zebrafish share about 70% of their genes with humans, and about 84% of human genes known to be associated with diseases have a counterpart in zebrafish. This makes them a valuable model for studying human biology and disease.

“Zebrafish are powerful tools for modelling a wide range of CNS diseases, contributing significantly to the understanding of disease mechanisms and the development of potential treatments,” she says. “Mood disorders, anxiety, insomnia, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are all diseases which may be studied through this bioassay.”

She explains that the zebrafish larvae are studied seven days after fertilisation in their bioassay. The larvae are incubated with the specific plant extract at a certain (non-toxic) concentration for three hours. Pentylenetetrazol (PTZ), a GABAA receptor antagonist that has been extensively used in rodent models for acute seizure and anxiety, is then administered to induce concentration-dependent seizures in the zebrafish larvae.

“GABA receptor antagonists are drugs that inhibit the action of gamma-aminobutyric acid, the chief inhibitory neurotransmitter in the mammalian central nervous system,” Prof Wilhelm says. “A specialised infrared camera is then used to track the movement of the larvae inside a chamber. The data is then converted into a graph which shows the movement of each larva over 30 minutes.

“If lowering of movement is observed at a specific concentration it means that the plant extract may have the potential to be used as an epileptic drug, since it has the ability to counteract the induced seizure in the larvae. This bioassay is extremely useful in drug discovery and toxicity screening of plant extracts.”

Zebrafish embryos, she says, develop quickly, with major organs forming within 36 hours of fertilisation. This rapid development allows researchers to observe the effects of experiments in a short period. The maintenance of a zebrafish model is less costly and labour-intensive than using a rodent model. “The use of zebrafish larvae allows for high-throughput screening due to their small size and transparency, which facilitates observation of CNS-related effects. Their genetic and physiological similarities to humans make them a valuable model for early-stage drug discovery.”

Potential uses

The next step in the research, according to Prof Wilhelm, is to identify a single compound from a natural source which may have potential anti-epileptic activity while causing less side effects than current drugs on the market. Researchers would then investigate the possibility of synthesising such a compound on a large scale, to eliminate the use of a natural resource and promote sustainability.

“Many plant extracts which I have screened show a synergistic effect in the zebrafish bioassay, meaning that the extract or the combination of compounds shows potential, but the isolated compounds are inactive. Even if a plant extract shows promise in preclinical and early clinical studies, obtaining regulatory approval for use as a treatment for epilepsy is a long and complex process.

“This includes demonstrating consistent efficacy, safety, and quality in large-scale clinical trials. One of the major challenges in using plant extracts is the lack of standardisation. The concentration of active compounds in plant extracts can vary depending on factors like the plant's growing conditions, harvest time, and extraction methods. This variability makes it difficult to ensure consistent efficacy and safety, therefore this is a time-consuming process.”

Green chemistry

After being approached by Dr Glen Taylor, Senior Director of the UFS Directorate Research Development (DRD), in 2017, regarding funding for Noldus Daniovision equipment, Prof Wilhelm received training from Prof Matthias Hamburger of the University of Basel in Switzerland on how to use such equipment. The larval zebrafish locomotive bioassay was established at the UFS Chemistry Department during 2017 and 2018 and now provides a third-stream income for the department, in conjunction with the Department of Genetics, where the adult zebrafish are housed.

Prof Wilhelm’s other research interests include green chemistry, food sustainability, and recycling. She is looking into green extraction techniques using non-conventional extraction methods to recover valuable bioactive compounds from agricultural and food residues. “Techniques like ultrasound, microwave-assisted extraction, and the use of deep eutectic solvents are becoming popular for their efficiency and alignment with circular economy principles.”

News Archive

Bloemfontein's quality of tap water compares very favourably with bottled water
2009-08-04

The quality of the drinking water of five suburbs in Bloemfontein is at least as good as or better than bottled water. This is the result of a standard and chemical bacterial analysis done by the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Centre for Environmental Management in collaboration with the Institute for Groundwater Studies (IGS).

Five samples were taken from tap water sources in the suburbs of Universitas, Brandwag, Bain’s Vlei, Langenhoven Park and Bayswater and 15 samples were taken of different brands of still and unflavoured bottled water. The samples were analysed at the laboratory of the IGS, while the interpretation of the analysis was done by the Centre for Environmental Management.

“We wanted to evaluate the difference in quality for human consumption between tap water and that of the different brands of bottled water,” said Prof. Maitland Seaman, Head of the Centre for Environmental Management.

“With the exception of two samples produced by multinational companies at their plants in South Africa, the different brands of bottled water used for the study were produced by South African companies, including a local small-scale Bloemfontein producer,” said Prof. Seaman.

According to the labels, the sources of the water vary from pure spring water, to partial reverse osmosis (as an aid to standardise salt, i.e. mineral, content), to only reverse osmosis (to remove salts). (Reverse osmosis is a process in which water is forced under pressure through a pipe with minute pores through which water passes but no – or very low concentrations of – salts pass.)

According to Prof. Seaman, the analysis revealed some interesting findings, such as:

• It is generally accepted that drinking water should have an acceptable level of salt content, as the body needs salts. Most mineral contents were relatively higher in the tap water samples than the bottled water samples and were very much within the acceptable range of drinkable water quality. One of the bottled samples, however, had a very low mineral content, as the water was produced by reverse osmosis, as stated on the bottle. While reverse osmosis is used by various producers, most producers use it as an aid, not as a single method to remove nearly all the salts. Drinking only such water over a prolonged period may probably have a negative effect on the human physiology.

• The pH values of the tap water samples (8,12–8,40) were found to be slightly higher (slightly alkaline), like in all south-eastern Free State rivers (from where the water is sourced) than the pH of most of the bottled water samples, most of which are sourced and/or treated in other areas. Two brands of bottled water were found to have relatively low pH levels (both 4,5, i.e. acidic) as indicated on their bottles and as confirmed by the IGS analysis. The health implication of this range of pH is not significant.

• The analysis showed differences in the mineral content given on the labels of most of the water bottles compared to that found by IGS analysis. The possibility of seasonal fluctuation in content, depending on various factors, is expected and most of the bottling companies also indicate this on their labels. What was a rather interesting finding was that two pairs of bottled water brands claimed exactly the same mineral content but appeared under different brand names and were also priced differently. In each case, one of the pair was a well-known house brand, and the other obviously the original producer. In one of these paired cases, the house brand stated that the water was spring water, while the other (identical) “original” brand stated that it was spring water treated by reverse osmosis and oxygen-enriched.

• Nitrate (NO3) levels were uniformly low except in one bottled sample, suggesting a low (non-threatening) level of organic pollution in the source water. Otherwise, none of the water showed any sign of pollution.

• The bacterial analysis confirmed the absence of any traces of coliforms or E.coli in any of the samples, as was also indicated by the bottling companies. This is very reassuring. What is not known is how all these waters were sterilised, which could be anything from irradiation to chlorine or ozone treatment.

• The price of the different brands of bottled water, each containing 500 ml of still water, ranged between R3,99 and R8,99, with R5,03 being the average price. A comparison between the least expensive and the most expensive bottles of water indicated no significant difference in quality. In fact, discrepancies were observed in the most expensive bottle in that the amount of Calcium (Ca) claimed to be present in it was found to be significantly different from what the analysis indicated (29,6 mg/l versus 0,92 mg/l). The alkalinity (CaCO3 mg/l) indicated on the bottle was also found to differ considerably (83 mg/l versus 9,4 mg/l). The concentration of Total Dissolved Salts (TDS) was not given on the product.

“The preference for bottled water as compared to Bloemfontein’s tap water from a qualitative perspective as well as the price discrepancy is unjustifiable. The environmental footprint of bottled water is also large. Sourcing, treating, bottling, packaging and transporting, to mention but a few of the steps involved in the processing of bottled water, entail a huge carbon footprint, as well as a large water footprint, because it also requires water for treating and rinsing to process bottled water,” said Prof. Seaman.

Media Release
Lacea Loader
Deputy Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
3 August 2009

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept