Journal of Drug Research in Ayurvedic Sciences

Register      Login

VOLUME 4 , ISSUE 1 ( January–March, 2019 ) > List of Articles


A Comparative Pharmacological Evaluation of Antianxiety Activity of Raw and Traditionally Shodhita (Processed) Rhizome of Vacha (Acorus calamus L.)

Rabinarayan Acharya, Savita Bhatt, Basti K Ashok, Basavaiah Ravishankar

Keywords : Anxiety, Diazepam, Plus maze, Shodhana, Vacha.,Acorus calamus

Citation Information : Acharya R, Bhatt S, Ashok BK, Ravishankar B. A Comparative Pharmacological Evaluation of Antianxiety Activity of Raw and Traditionally Shodhita (Processed) Rhizome of Vacha (Acorus calamus L.). J Drug Res Ayurvedic Sci 2019; 4 (1):29-32.

DOI: 10.5005/jdras-10059-0067

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 00-03-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Background: Vacha (Acorus calamus L.; Acoraceae), one of the well-known drug of Ayurvedic pharmacopeia, is highlighted for its Medhya (brain tonic), Sanjnasthapana (restores lost consciousness), Deepana (appetizer), Pachana (digestive), etc., properties and hence used extensively in therapeutics. Ayurvedic pharmacopeias like Chakradatta, Bhaishajya Ratnavali, and Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia of India (API) have recommended Shodana (processing) of Vacha using certain media like Gomutra, Mundi Kwatha, Gandhodaka, etc. It has been reported by us that subjecting to Shodhana is not only safe to use but also enhances the therapeutic activity of Vacha. Aim: To assess the antianxiety activity of raw and shodhita (processed) Vacha rhizomes in different experimental animal models. Materials and methods: Swiss albino mice of either sex weighing 24 ± 4 g, of either sex, were administered with raw and shodhita Vacha (16 mg/kg body weight) along with distilled water. Diazepam (2 mg/kg body weight) was used as a standard drug. Results and conclusion: Pretreatment with both raw and classically processed Vacha samples exhibited significant antianxiety activity; among them, the observed activity in shodhita Vacha was found to be better. The present study confirms the antianxiety activity of raw and shodhita Vacha. But when subjected to the traditional Shodhana procedure, the efficacy of Vacha rhizomes get enhanced.

PDF Share
  1. Agnivesha. Samhita C. In: Shastry K, Chaturvedi G, ed. Varanasi: Chaukambha Bharati Academy; 2001. pp. 72, 80, 81, 83, 94 and 791.
  2. Sushruta, Samhita S. In: Shastri KA, ed. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthan; 2002. pp. 13, 143, 145 and 147.
  3. Kaiyadeva. Kaiyadeva Nighantu, Oushadhi varga/1215–1217. In: Sharma PV, ed. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Orientalia; 2001. pp. 224–225.
  4. Chakrapanidatta. Chakradatta. In: Dwivedi R, ed. Varanasi: Chaukamba Sanskrit Samsthan; 2005. p. 155.
  5. Govind Das. Bhaishajya Ratnavali. In: Mishra B, ed. vol. 19. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Surabharati Prakashan; 2008. p. 570.
  6. Anonymous. The Ayurvedic pharmacopoeia of India, Part 1. 1st ed. vol. 2. New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of India; 1999. pp. 168–170.
  7. Anonymous. Herb directory, Annual Report: Department of ISM and H. vol. 1(X); 1998. pp. 18–25.
  8. Savitha D Bhat, Ashok BK, Rabinarayan Acharya, Exploring the concept of Vacha (Acorus calamus Linn.) Shodhana in Ayurveda, IJRAP. vol. 3(3); May–June, 2012.
  9. Bhat SD, Ashok BK, Acharya R, et al. A comparative acute toxicity evaluation of raw and classically processed rhizomes of Vacha (Acorus calamus Linn.). Indian J Nat Prod Res 2012;3(4):506–511.
  10. Bhat SD, Ashok BK, Acharya R, et al. Anticonvulsant activity of raw and classically processed Vacha (Acorus calamus Linn.) rhizomes. AYU 2012;33(1):119–122. DOI: 10.4103/0974-8520.100328.
  11. Bhavamishra. Nighantu B. In: Pandey GS, ed. Varanasi, India: Chaukhambha Bharati Academy; 2006. p. 44.
  12. Agarwal SL, Dandiya PC, Sing KP, et al. A note on the preliminary studies of certain pharmacological actions of Acorus calamus. J Am Pharm Assoc 1956;45(9):655–656. DOI: 10.1002/jps.3030450921.
  13. Shukla PK, Khanna VK, Ali MM. Protective effect of Acorus calamus against acrylamide induced neurotoxicity. Phytother Res 2002;16(3):256–260. DOI: 10.1002/ptr.854.
  14. Pandit Narahari. Rajanighantu. In: Tripathi I, Varga D, ed. Varanasi: Chowkhamba Krishnadas Academy; 2003. p. 26.
  15. Paget GE, Barnes JM. Evaluation of drug activities. In: Lawrence DR, Bacharach AL, ed. Pharmacometrics, vol. 1. New York: Academic Press; 1964. p. 161.
  16. Bhattacharya SK, Satyan KS. Experimental methods for evaluation of psychotropic agents in rodents: I-anti-anxiety agents. Indian J Exp Biol 1997;35(6):565–575.
  17. Lister RG. The use of a plus-maze to measure anxiety in the mouse. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 1987;92(2):180–185. DOI: 10.1007/BF00177912.
  18. Novas ML, Wolfman C, Medina JH, et al. Proconvulsant and anxiogenic effects of n-butyl-h-carboline-3-carboxylate, on endogenous benzodiazepine binding inhibitor from brain. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1988;30(2):331–336. DOI: 10.1016/0091-3057(88)90463-7.
  19. Frussa-Filho R, Palermo-Neto J. Effect of single and long term droperidol administration on open field and stereotyped behaviour of rats. Physiol Behav 1991;50(4):825–830. DOI: 10.1016/0031-9384(91)90024-I.
  20. Maj J, Rogoz Z, Skuza G, et al. Repeated trimipramine induces dopamine D2/D3 and alpha 1-adrenergic upregulation. J Neural Transm 1998;105(2–3):329–342. DOI: 10.1007/s007020050062.
  21. Carlsson A, Lindquist M, Magnusson T, et al. On the presence of 3 hydroxytyramine in brain. Science 1958;127(3296):471. DOI: 10.1126/science.127.3296.471.
  22. Weiss SM, Wadsworth G, Fletcher A, et al. Utility of ethological analysis to overcome locomotor confounds in elevated maze models of anxiety. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 1998;23(2):265–271. DOI: 10.1016/S0149-7634(98)00027-X.
  23. Cupp MJ. Toxicology and clinical pharmacology of herbal products. Totowa, New Jersey, USA: Humana Press; 2000. pp. 171–175.
  24. Gupta V, Bansal P, Kumar S, et al. Therapeutic efficacy of phytochemicals as anti-anxiety-a review. J Pharm Res 2010;3(1):174–179.
PDF Share