| Literature DB >> 24772406 |
Sadaf Yaqoob1, Bushra Sultana1, Muhammad Mushtaq2.
Abstract
Hydrolysates of Trianthema portulacastrum in acidified methanol were evaluated for their total phenolic (TP) constituents and respective antioxidant activities using in vitro assays (i.e., 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical scavenging activity, percent inhibition of linoleic acid peroxidation, and ferric reducing power). The observed results indicate that root, shoot, and leaf fractions of T. portulacastrum contain 50.75~98.09 mg gallic acid equivalents/g dry weight of TP. In addition, these fractions have substantial reducing potentials (0.10~0.59), abilities to inhibit peroxidation (43.26~89.98%), and DPPH radical scavenging capabilities (6.98~311.61 μg/mL IC50). The experimental data not only reveal T. portulacastrum as potential source of valuable antioxidants, but also indicate that acidified methanol may be an ideal choice for the enhanced recovery of phenolic compounds with retained biological potential for the food and pharmaceutical industry.Entities:
Keywords: Trianthema portulacastrum; antioxidant phenolics; effective extraction; reducing power
Year: 2014 PMID: 24772406 PMCID: PMC3999805 DOI: 10.3746/pnf.2014.19.1.027
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prev Nutr Food Sci ISSN: 2287-1098
Hydrolysate yields and total phenolics (TP) concentrations of different parts of T. portulacastrum
| Acidified methanol (N) | Extraction yield (g/100 g) | TP (mg GAE/100 g DW) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||
| Root | Shoot | Leaf | Root | Shoot | Leaf | |
| 5 | 10.43±0.40cA | 10.30±0.28bA | 5.53±0.47aA | 63.60±2.73eA | 50.75±0.11aA | 54.21±2.86dA |
| 2 | 27.36±1.56cB | 12.63±0.15aB | 15.56±0.15bB | 66.46±0.34eA | 56.47±1.67aA | 61.18±0.08dA |
| 1 | 28.43±0.15cB | 15.43±0.45aB | 16.60±0.21bB | 75.23±5.06eB | 58.51±3.32aB | 67.18±0.61dB |
| 0.5 | 33.60±0.39cB | 16.30±0.36aB | 22.26±0.25bB | 76.20±2.12eC | 60.87±0.08aC | 83.37±0.33dC |
| 0.1 | 54.23±0.25cD | 26.29±0.89aD | 38.40±0.29bD | 98.09±0.50eD | 68.63±5.99aD | 91.86±3.86dD |
| 0.01 | 44.30±0.38cC | 17.53±0.25aC | 23.33±0.41bC | 86.08±2.88eC | 62.16±4.57aC | 87.77±0.11dC |
| Aqueous methanol | 16.55±0.45cA | 9.99±0.72aA | 10.42±0.37bA | 61.56±0.67eA | 52.27±1.25aA | 58.13±0.63dA |
The results are mean±SD of experiments conducted in triplicate for each T. Portulacastrum part and solvent acidification level. Superscripted capital and small letters denote variation (P<0.05) among solvent acidification levels and plant parts, respectively.
Fig. 1Comparison of the reducing power of acidified methanol hydrolysates of T. portulacastrum.
Fig. 2Antioxidant potential offered by T. portulacastrum hydrolysate in linoleic acid peroxidation system. Means with capital and small letters indicate variation (P<0.05) among solvent acidification levels and plant parts, respectively.
Pearson’s correlation between yield, TP, and antioxidant activities
| Root | Shoot | Leaf | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||
| Yield | TP | DPPH | Inh | Yield | TP | DPPH | Inh | Yield | TP | DPPH | Inh | |
| TP | 0.821 | 0.695 | 0.849 | |||||||||
| 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||||||||
| DPPH | −0.016ns | 0.491 | −0.201ns | −0.171ns | −0.386ns | −0.725 | ||||||
| 0.945 | 0.02 | 0.360 | 0.459 | 0.474 | 0.000 | |||||||
| Inh | 0.829 | 0.904 | 0.118ns | 0.456 | 0.800 | −0.672 | 0.734 | 0.962 | −0.306ns | |||
| 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.612 | 0.038 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.177 | ||||
| RP | 0.297ns | 0.904 | −0.330ns | 0.389ns | 0.371ns | 0.682 | −0.794 | 0.939 | 0.397ns | 0.572 | −0.767 | 0.604 |
| 0.191 | 0.000 | 0.145 | 0.082 | 0.098 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.075 | 0.007 | 0.000 | 0.004 | |
TP, total phenolics; DPPH, DPPH radical scavenging activity of hydrolysates; Inh, inhibition of linoleic acid peroxidation; RP, reducing power. ns: Not significant.
Significant at P<0.05.
DPPH radical scavenging activity of T. portulacastrum hydrolysates obtained with acidified methanol
| Acidified methanol (N) | Plant parts | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Root | Shoot | Leaf | |
| 5 | 163.95±4.16dB | 116.98±1.13aB | 190.74±4.27dB |
| 2 | 380.43±3.42dE | 201.47±0.84aE | 192.91±4.15dE |
| 1 | 134.61±4.34dD | 230.70±3.05aD | 257.95±3.43dD |
| 0.5 | 417.23±3.35dD | 48.17±4.16aD | 179.32±5.56dD |
| 0.1 | 40.02±0.55dA | 28.87±1.33aA | 54.50±4.03dA |
| 0.01 | 116.97±0.76dC | 311.61±1.02aC | 198.56±4.26dC |
| Control (80% aqueous methanol) | 120.78±3.11dB | 112.76±1.57aB | 190.89±3.53dB |
Values are mean±SD of the minimum inhibitory concentration (IC50).
IC50 was determined by in vitro experiments that were conducted in triplicate.
Superscripted capital and small letters indicate significant variation between solvent fractions used and plant parts investigated, respectively.