| Literature DB >> 25114908 |
Hang Wang1, Gang Li2, Wenyu Zhang1, Chunchao Han1, Xin Xu3, Yong-Ping Li3.
Abstract
Agaricus blazei Murrill (ABM), an edible mushroom native to Brazil, is widely used for nonprescript and medicinal purposes. Alcohol liver disease (ALD) is considered as a leading cause for a liver injury in modern dietary life, which can be developed by a prolonged or large intake of alcohol. In this study, the medium composition of ABM was optimized using response surface methodology for maximum mycelial biomass and extracellular polysaccharide (EPS) production. The model predicts to gain a maximal mycelial biomass and extracellular polysaccharide at 1.047 g/100 mL, and 0.367 g/100 mL, respectively, when the potato is 29.88 g/100 mL, the glucose is 1.01 g/100 mL, and the bran is 1.02 g/100 mL. The verified experiments showed that the model was significantly consistent with the model prediction and that the trends of mycelial biomass and extracellular polysaccharide were predicted by artificial neural network. After that, the optimized medium was used for the submerged culture of ABM. Then, alcohol-induced liver injury in mice model was used to examine the protective effect of ABM cultured using the optimized medium on the liver. And the hepatic histopathological observations showed that ABM had a relatively significant role in mice model, which had alcoholic liver damage.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25114908 PMCID: PMC4119911 DOI: 10.1155/2014/573978
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Variables and experimental design levels for response surface.
| Variables | Coded symbols | Coded levels | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| −1 | 0 | 1 | ||
| Potato |
| 15 | 20 | 25 |
| Glucose |
| 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Wheat bran |
| 1 | 2 | 3 |
Design and experimental results of the four-factor Box-Behnken design.
| Standard | Run order |
|
|
|
The yield of mycelial biomass | The yield of extracellular polysaccharide (g/100 mL) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental | Predicted | Experimental | Predicted | |||||
| 4 | 1 | 25.00 | 3.00 | 2.00 | 1.033 | 1.038 | 0.268 | 0.264 |
| 9 | 2 | 20.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.761 | 0.761 | 0.367 | 0.367 |
| 2 | 3 | 25.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 0.882 | 0.877 | 0.285 | 0.289 |
| 3 | 4 | 15.00 | 3.00 | 2.00 | 0.852 | 0.857 | 0.230 | 0.226 |
| 8 | 5 | 25.00 | 2.00 | 3.00 | 0.936 | 0.931 | 0.243 | 0.247 |
| 5 | 6 | 15.00 | 2.00 | 1.00 | 0.764 | 0.769 | 0.320 | 0.316 |
| 6 | 7 | 25.00 | 2.00 | 1.00 | 0.945 | 0.950 | 0.358 | 0.354 |
| 7 | 8 | 15.00 | 2.00 | 3.00 | 0.755 | 0.750 | 0.205 | 0.209 |
| 11 | 9 | 20.00 | 1.00 | 3.00 | 0.710 | 0.720 | 0.252 | 0.244 |
| 16 | 10 | 20.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 0.841 | 0.841 | 0.264 | 0.264 |
| 14 | 11 | 20.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 0.841 | 0.841 | 0.264 | 0.264 |
| 13 | 12 | 20.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 0.841 | 0.841 | 0.264 | 0.264 |
| 1 | 13 | 15.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 0.701 | 0.696 | 0.246 | 0.246 |
| 9 | 14 | 20.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 0.841 | 0.841 | 0.264 | 0.264 |
| 10 | 15 | 20.00 | 3.00 | 1.00 | 0.912 | 0.901 | 0.318 | 0.326 |
| 15 | 16 | 20.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 0.841 | 0.841 | 0.264 | 0.264 |
| 12 | 17 | 20.00 | 3.00 | 3.00 | 0.902 | 0.902 | 0.235 | 0.235 |
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the fitted quadratic polynomial model for optimization of biomass production and optimization of extracellular glucan production.
| Source | Model | Lack of fit | Pure error | Corrected total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sum of squares | Biomass | 0.12 | 4.412 | 0.000 | 0.12 |
| EPS | 0.031 | 2.643 | 0.000 | 0.031 | |
|
| |||||
| D.f. | Biomass | 9 | 3 | 4 | 16 |
| EPS | 9 | 3 | 4 | 16 | |
|
| |||||
| Mean square | Biomass | 0.014 | 1.471 | 0.000 | |
| EPS | 3.399 | 8.808 | 0.000 | ||
|
| |||||
|
| Biomass | 216.98 | 6.37 | ||
| EPS | 90.04 | 5.84 | |||
|
| |||||
| Probability ( | Biomass | <0.0001 | 0.0753 not significant | ||
| EPS | <0.0001 | 0.0528 not significant | |||
R 2: 0.9964, 0.9914; adj-R 2: 0.9918, 0.9804.
Figure 1The 3D-plot and 2D-projection of response surface represent the interaction between two factors in the yield of mycelial biomass (g/100 mL) by keeping the other two factors constant: (a) potato and glucose (g/100 mL), (b) potato and bran (g/100 mL), and (c) glucose and bran (g/100 mL).
Figure 2The 3D-plot and 2D-projection of response surface represent the interaction between two factors in the yield of extracellular polysaccharide (EPS) (g/100 mL) by keeping the other two factors constant: (a) potato and glucose (g/100 mL), (b) potato and bran (g/100 mL), and (c) glucose and bran (g/100 mL).
Figure 3Predicted trend of mycelial dry weight by ANN.
Figure 4Predicted trend of EPS by ANN.
Figure 5Histopathological analysis of mouse liver sections using hematoxylin and eosin staining. (a) Section from a normal control mouse liver. (b) The liver section that was obtained from alcohol-induced mice showed a variety of cavitation and necrosis in hepatocytes. (c) Liver tissue section prepared from the ABM-fp-treated group showed less cavitation and necrosis compared to (b). (d) Liver tissue section prepared from the ABM-fb-treated group showed less cavitation and necrosis. (e) Liver tissue section prepared from the ABM-fm-treated group showed less cavitation and necrosis compared to (b), but more than (c) and (d).