| Literature DB >> 21234347 |
A Robaszkiewicz1, G Bartosz, M Lawrynowicz, M Soszyński.
Abstract
One of the nutritional benefits of mushrooms is the presence of bioactive secondary metabolites which have been reported to exert various beneficial effects in vivo. Therefore, we selected thirteen frequently consumed species of Polish mushrooms and determined the concentration of polyphenols, flavonoids, β-carotene, and lycopene in aqueous and methanolic extracts of dried fruiting bodies as well as their reducing power and ability to scavenge ABTS cation radical. We found that the concentration of antioxidants is different in different species and in various parts of the fruiting body of mushrooms. We observed a strong correlation (r > 0.9) between the concentration of total phenolics and reducing power/scavenging effects in both aqueous and methanolic extracts, while this correlation was moderate for flavonoids. Beta-carotene did not contribute discernibly to the antioxidative properties of the extracts, while lycopene had a significant contribution to the scavenging activity of methanolic mushroom extracts.Entities:
Year: 2010 PMID: 21234347 PMCID: PMC3017951 DOI: 10.1155/2010/173274
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nutr Metab ISSN: 2090-0724
The content of total phenolics (μg of gallic acid equivalents/mg of dried mushrooms) and flavonoids (μg of quercetin equivalents/mg of dried mushrooms) of edible Polish mushrooms.
| Mushroom |
(Total phenolics |
(Flavonoids | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methanolic extract | Aqueous extract | Methanolic extract | Aqueous extract | |
|
| 4.49 ± 0.16 | 13.01 ± 1.48 | 0.73 ± 0.07 | 3.86 ± 0.10 |
|
| 3.61 ± 0.10 | 10.78 ± 0.33 | 0.52 ± 0.03 | 1.97 ± 0.04 |
|
| 4.24 ± 0.13 | 8.28 ± 0.46 | 1.34 ± 0.07 | 1.23 ± 0.01 |
|
| 4.85 ± 0.30 | 7.39 ± 1.67 | 0.57 ± 0.04 | 3.03 ± 0.06 |
|
| 1.82 ± 0.09 | 8.39 ± 0.65 | 1.81 ± 0.08 | 7.74 ± 0.23 |
|
| 2.66 ± 0.16 | 8.67 ± 0.35 | 1.23 ± 0.10 | 3.89 ± 0.02 |
|
| 2.25 ± 0.14 | 9.63 ± 0.75 | 1.48 ± 0.03 | 6.70 ± 0.11 |
|
| 0.94 ± 0.08 | 3.93 ± 0.09 | 0.14 ± 0.01 | 1.74 ± 0.28 |
|
| 3.35 ± 0.07 | 12.89 ± 1.52 | 1.38 ± 0.06 | 5.90 ± 0.19 |
|
| 0.77 ± 0.03 | 2.39 ± 0.23 | 0.24 ± 0.03 | 0.42 ± 0.04 |
|
| 1.90 ± 0.09 | 4.80 ± 0.36 | 0.41 ± 0.01 | 2.41 ± 0.05 |
|
| 1.01 ± 0.20 | 3.88 ± 0.13 | 0.17 ± 0.04 | 1.4 ± 0.05 |
|
| 2.04 ± 0.13 | 5.23 ± 0.49 | 0.50 ± 0.11 | 2.812 ± 0.06 |
|
| 1.64 ± 0.89 | 4.54 ± 0.17 | 0.26 ± 0.02 | 1.72 ± 0.18 |
|
| 1.44 ± 0.09 | 5.23 ± 0.65 | 0.37 ± 0.20 | 0.31 ± 0.01 |
|
| 4.78 ± 0.24 | 6.64 ± 0.60 | 1.89 ± 0.04 | 3.14 ± 0.05 |
|
| 4.15 ± 0.35 | 7.44 ± 0.71 | 3.27 ± 0.10 | 2.57 ± 0.13 |
|
| 4.00 ± 0.07 | 5.48 ± 0.42 | 3.02 ± 0.07 | 3.33 ± 0.08 |
|
| 4.05 ± 0.15 | 2.16 ± 0.07 | 2.18 ± 0.10 | 1.12 ± 0.03 |
|
| 2.17 ± 0.39 | 10.30 ± 1.50 | 0.918 ± 0.37 | 5.13 ± 0.07 |
|
| 1.95 ± 0.30 | 7.51 ± 0.50 | 0.75 ± 0.04 | 2.18 ± 0.03 |
|
| 1.85 ± 0.69 | 4.71 ± 1.12 | 1.65 ± 0.19 | 1.44 ± 0.03 |
|
| 0.66 ± 0.30 | 4.00 ± 0.50 | 0.65 ± 0.17 | 0.99 ± 0.03 |
|
| 0.02 ± 0.02 | 1.65 ± 0.10 | 0.06 ± 0.02 | 0.51 ± 0.20 |
The concentration of total phenolics and flavonoids was estimated spectrophotometrically. Each value represents mean ± SD, n ≥ 3.
The content of β-carotene and lycopene of edible Polish mushrooms (μg/g of dried mushrooms).
| Mushroom |
| Lycopene ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methanolic extract | Aqueous extract | Methanolic extract | Aqueous extract | |
|
| 0.729 ± 0.025 | 0.402 ± 0.077 | 0.076 ± 0.048 | 0.262 ± 0.015 |
|
| 0.467 ± 0.116 | 0.007 ± 0.034 | 0.019 ± 0.007 | 0.058 ± 0.049 |
|
| 1.350 ± 0.162 | 0.136 ± 0.056 | 0.069 ± 0.006 | 0.103 ± 0.003 |
|
| 0.718 ± 0.079 | 0.098 ± 0.007 | 0.062 ± 0.017 | 0.087 ± 0.001 |
|
| 0.752 ± 0.007 | 0.114 ± 0.001 | 0.038 ± 0.028 | 0.084 ± 0.007 |
|
| 2.626 ± 0.336 | 0.184 ± 0.025 | 0.461 ± 0.173 | 0.102 ± 0.002 |
|
| 0.683 ± 0.075 | 0.113 ± 0.017 | 0.114 ± 0.024 | 0.086 ± 0.014 |
|
| 0.270 ± 0.049 | 0.098 ± 0.046 | 0.068 ± 0.084 | 0.082 ± 0.025 |
|
| 3.307 ± 0.271 | 0.163 ± 0.009 | 0.379 ± 0.029 | 0.110 ± 0.002 |
|
| 3.275 ± 0.053 | 0.499 ± 0.027 | 0.105 ± 0.044 | 0.124 ± 0.025 |
|
| 0.511 ± 0.038 | 0.499 ± 0.022 | 0.117 ± 0.020 | 0.374 ± 0.023 |
|
| 0.384 ± 0.028 | 0.069 ± 0.026 | 0.011 ± 0.005 | 0.137 ± 0.042 |
|
| 0.426 ± 0.011 | 0.045 ± 0.074 | 0.109 ± 0.015 | 0.047 ± 0.030 |
|
| 0.519 ± 0.029 | 0.107 ± 0.026 | 0.051 ± 0.022 | 0.107 ± 0.005 |
|
| 0.317 ± 0.008 | 0.001 ± 0.006 | 0.195 ± 0.005 | 0.009 ± 0.008 |
|
| 6.242 ± 0.540 | 0.200 ± 0.079 | 1.951 ± 0.153 | 0.127 ± 0.039 |
|
| 7.730 ± 0.484 | 0.016 ± 0.028 | 1.219 ± 0.025 | 0.048 ± 0.035 |
|
| 15.256 ± 0.785 | 3.382 ± 0.204 | 15.388 ± 0.998 | 3.464 ± 0.108 |
|
| 11.016 ± 0.470 | 0.584 ± 0.037 | 7.347 ± 0.644 | 0.420 ± 0.007 |
|
| 0.265 ± 0.019 | 0.192 ± 0.151 | 0.023 ± 0.011 | 0.157 ± 0.108 |
|
| 0.319 ± 0.034 | 0.012 ± 0.006 | 0.058 ± 0.007 | 0.030 ± 0.012 |
|
| 18.649 ± 0.024 | 1.905 ± 0.268 | 0.001 ± 0.022 | 0.013 ± 0.006 |
|
| 4.753 ± 0.271 | 0.439 ± 0.013 | 0.125 ± 0.065 | 0.039 ± 0.012 |
|
| 0.233 ± 0.053 | 0.098 ± 0.024 | 0.001 ± 0.002 | 0.084 ± 0.006 |
The content of β-carotene and lycopene in the extracts of dried mushrooms was estimated spectrophotometrically after extraction with the acetone: hexane mixture. Each value represents mean ± SD, n ≥ 3.
Trolox equivalent anitoxidant capacity (μmol of Trolox/g dried mushroom) and reducing power (μg of gallic acid/g of dried mushroom) of edible Polish mushrooms.
| Mushroom | TEAC ( | Reducing power ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methanolic extract | Aqueous extract | Methanolic extract | Aqueous extract | |
|
| 19.81 ± 0.35 | 62.30 ± 1.77 | 5.75 ± 0.45 | 13.37 ± 0.69 |
|
| 17.58 ± 1.55 | 46.68 ± 1.66 | 6.57 ± 0.46 | 14.60 ± 1.04 |
|
| 19.68 ± 1.00 | 42.76 ± 1.66 | 5.18 ± 0.39 | 9.52 ± 0.30 |
|
| 19.38 ± 2.94 | 30.49 ± 4.38 | 8.09 ± 0.24 | 9.10 ± 1.69 |
|
| 6.72 ± 0.73 | 40.85 ± 3.12 | 2.21 ± 0.32 | 8.14 ± 0.33 |
|
| 11.80 ± 2.53 | 40.34 ± 1.33 | 2.51 ± 0.20 | 8.57 ± 0.42 |
|
| 9.44 ± 0.79 | 43.38 ± 3.39 | 3.80 ± 0.36 | 10.21 ± 0.16 |
|
| 4.62 ± 2.57 | 16.28 ± 1.27 | 1.81 ± 0.13 | 6.85 ± 0.35 |
|
| 12.22 ± 0.40 | 52.49 ± 1.94 | 5.51 ± 0.42 | 13.86 ± 1.35 |
|
| 0.99 ± 0.77 | 3.81 ± 0.17 | 1.80 ± 0.74 | 2.03 ± 0.07 |
|
| 8.48 ± 1.13 | 13.43 ± 1.02 | 1.69 ± 0.30 | 2.09 ± 0.23 |
|
| 4.71 ± 1.81 | 13.19 ± 0.59 | 1.30 ± 0.05 | 3.08 ± 0.15 |
|
| 9.36 ± 2.16 | 14.86 ± 0.51 | 1.85 ± 0.29 | 2.04 ± 0.26 |
|
| 6.16 ± 1.04 | 14.20 ± 0.19 | 1.64 ± 0.07 | 4.17 ± 0.26 |
|
| 4.79 ± 0.48 | 13.08 ± 0.37 | 1.47 ± 0.29 | 2.76 ± 0.23 |
|
| 19.68 ± 0.24 | 32.65 ± 1.99 | 6.00 ± 0.61 | 7.08 ± 0.25 |
|
| 17.92 ± 1.19 | 23.52 ± 0.36 | 5.78 ± 0.50 | 6.31 ± 0.60 |
|
| 18.25 ± 1.33 | 12.76 ± 0.22 | 4.91± 0.47 | 5.03 ± 0.570 |
|
| 20.54 ± 1.89 | 8.31 ± 0.07 | 4.59 ± 0.28 | 2.43 ± 0.30 |
|
| 8.92 ± 0.04 | 36.08 ± 0.37 | 2.25 ± 0.11 | 8.99 ± 0.25 |
|
| 5.09 ± 0.89 | 21.83 ± 3.13 | 2.90 ± 0.08 | 9.64 ± 0.29 |
|
| 7.17 ± 1.70 | 11.48 ± 2.34 | 1.24 ± 0.04 | 2.29 ± 0.41 |
|
| 1.75 ± 0.34 | 10.22 ± 4.11 | 0.59 ± 0.01 | 2.74 ± 0.21 |
|
| 0.42 ± 1.48 | 6.01 ± 0.36 | 0.13 ± 0.02 | 1.17 ± 0.24 |
Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity and reducing power were determined spectrophotometrically. Each value represents mean ± SD, n ≥ 3.
The correlation between the concentrations of antioxidants and TEAC/reducing power.
|
| ||
|---|---|---|
| TEAC | Reducing power | |
| Total phenolics (aqueous extract) | 0.95 ± 0.02d | 0.92 ± 0.03d |
| Total phenolics (methanolic extract) | 0.98 ± 0.01d | 0.93 ± 0.03d |
| Flavonoids (aqueous extract) | 0.68 ± 0.11b | 0.57 ± 0.14a |
| Flavonoids (methanolic extract) | 0.58 ± 0.14d | 0.45 ± 0.17b |
|
| −0.27 ± 0.19 | −0.09 ± 0.21 |
|
| 0.28 ± 0.19 | 0.25 ± 0.20 |
| Lycopene (aqueous extract) | −0.16 ± 0.20 | −0.23 ± 0.20 |
| Lycopene (methanolic extract) | 0.41 ± 0.17a | 0.10 ± 0.21 |
The Pearson correlation coefficient between TEAC/reducing power and the concentration of antioxidants was calculated and tested with Student's t-test: a P ≤ .05, b P ≤ .01, c P ≤ .005, and d P ≤ .001.
Figure 1The correlation between the concentration of phenolic compounds and Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity. The Pearson correlation coefficient between Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity and total concentration of phenolics was calculated and tested with Student's t-test. The linear regression was determined with the least-squares method.