| Literature DB >> 26221086 |
Ravindra Pawar1, Chellandi Mohandass1, Elakkiya Sivaperumal2, Elaine Sabu1, Raju Rajasabapathy1, Tanaji Jagtap3.
Abstract
Awareness on antioxidants and its significance in human healthcare has increased many folds in recent time. Increased demand requisite on welcoming newer and alternative resources for natural antioxidants. Seaweed associated pigmented bacteria screened for its antioxidant potentials reveals 55.5% of the organisms were able to synthesize antioxidant compounds. DPPH assay showed 20% of the organisms to reach a antioxidant zone of 1 cm and 8.3% of the strains more than 3 cm. Pseudomonas koreensis (JX915782) a Sargassum associated yellowish brown pigmented bacteria have better activity than known commercial antioxidant butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) against DPPH scavenging. Serratia rubidaea (JX915783), an associate of Ulva sp. and Pseudomonas argentinensis (JX915781) an epiphyte of Chaetomorpha media , were also contributed significantly towards ABTS (7.2% ± 0.03 to 15.2 ± 0.09%; 1.8% ± 0.01 to 15.7 ± 0.22%) and FRAP (1.81 ± 0.01 to 9.35 ± 0.98; 7.97 ± 0.12 to 18.70 ± 1.84 μg/mL of AsA Eq.) respectively. 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis revealed bacteria that have higher antioxidant activity belongs to a bacterial class Gammaproteobacteria. Statistical analysis of phenolic contents in relation with other parameters like DPPH, ABTS, reducing power and FRAP are well correlated (p < 0.05). Results obtained from the current study inferred that the seaweed associated pigmented bacteria have enormous potential on antioxidant compounds and need to be extracted in a larger way for clinical applications.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidant; epiphytic; pigmented bacteria; seaweeds
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26221086 PMCID: PMC4512047 DOI: 10.1590/S1517-838246120130353
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Braz J Microbiol ISSN: 1517-8382 Impact factor: 2.476
Type of seaweeds used for isolation of epiphytic pigmented bacteria.
| Sr. no. | Type of algae used |
Month, year and site of sample collection
| Number of pigmented bacteria isolated |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chlorophyta (green algae) | |||
| 1. |
| Nov-10-Cabo De Rama | 1 |
| 2. |
| Mar-10-Malvan, Mar-10-Vagator, May-10-Cabo De Rama, July-10-Malvan, July-10-Kunkeshwar, Sep-10-Malvan | 8 |
| 3. |
| Mar-10-Malvan, Sep-10-Vagator, July-10-Malvan, July-10-Kunkeshwar | 6 |
| Phaeophyta (brown algae) | |||
| 4. |
| Sep-10-Kunkeshwar, Jan-11-Malvan | 3 |
| 5. |
| May-10-Cabo De Rama, Sep-10-Cabo De Rama, Sep-10-Kunkeshwar, Nov-10-Cabo De Rama, Jan-11-Vagator, May-10-Vagator | 7 |
| 6. |
| Jan-11-Kunkeshwar | 1 |
| Rhodophyta (red algae) | |||
| 7. |
| Mar-10-Kunkeshwar | 3 |
| 8. |
| Mar-10-Malvan, May-10-Cabo De Rama, July-10-Malvan, Nov-10-Malvan | 4 |
| 9. |
| Mar-10-Malvan, July-10-Kunkeshwar, Sep-10-Malvan, Sep-10-Kunkeshwar, Sep-10-Cabo De Rama, Jan-11-Vagator | 3 |
Example: Jan-11-Vagator indicates the respective sample was collected during January-2011 from sampling site Vagator of CWCI.
Figure 1Sampling locations along the central west coast (CWC) of India.
Primary antioxidant screening results of DPPH decolorization assay.
| Sr. no. | Culture code | Pigmentation |
Antioxidant zone size (cm)
| Source | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| a | b | b-a | ||||
| 1. | PIGB 1 | Orange | 0.4 | 3.1 | 2.7 |
|
| 2. | PIGB 10 | Yellow | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.6 |
|
| 3. | PIGB 12 | Yellow | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0 |
|
| 4. | PIGB 13 | Yellow | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0 |
|
| 5. | PIGB 16 | Yellow | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0 |
|
| 6. | PIGB 18 | Red | 0.6 | 2.5 | 1.9 |
|
| 7. | PIGB 20 | Orange | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0 |
|
| 8. | PIGB 28 | Pale yellow | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.6 |
|
| 9. | PIGB 29 | Pale yellow | 0.2 | 1.1 | 0.9 |
|
| 10. | PIGB 30 | Pale yellow | 0.4 | 0.13 | 0.9 |
|
| 11. | PIGB 33 | Pale yellow | 0.4 | 0.9 | 0.5 |
|
| 12. | PIGB 44 | Pale yellow | 1.0 | 2.6 | 1.6 |
|
| 13. | PIGB 45 | Yellow | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.5 |
|
| 14. | PIGB 46 | Pale yellow | 0.5 | 4.0 | 3.5 |
|
| 15. | PIGB 47 | Red/orange | 0.5 | 2.8 | 2.3 |
|
| 16. | PIGB 48 | Yellow | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0 |
|
| 17. | PIGB 54 | Pale yellow | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0 |
|
| 18. | PIGB 55 | Pale orange | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0 |
|
| 19. | PIGB 57 | Pale yellow | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0 |
|
| 20. | PIGB 62 | Orange | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0 |
|
| 21. | PIGB 76 | Creamy | 0.4 | 1.5 | 1.1 |
|
| 22. | PIGB 77 | Yellowish brown | 0.7 | 5.0 | 4.3 |
|
| 23. | PIGB 78 | Peach | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0 |
|
| 24. | PIGB 79 | Orange | 0.7 | 3.5 | 2.8 |
|
| 25. | PIGB 80 | Orange/Red | 0.3 | 1.7 | 1.4 |
|
| 26. | PIGB 86 | Pale yellow | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0 |
|
| 27. | PIGB 87 | Creamy | 0.5 | 1.3 | 0.8 |
|
| 28. | PIGB 88 | Pink | 0.5 | 5.4 | 4.9 |
|
| 29. | PIGB 110 | Yellow | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0 |
|
| 30. | PIGB 112 | Creamy | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0 |
|
| 31. | PIGB 115 | Creamy | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0 |
|
| 32. | PIGB 116 | Yellow | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0 |
|
| 33. | PIGB 117 | Creamy | 0.4 | 2.3 | 1.9 |
|
| 34. | PIGB 119 | Brown | 0.2 | 2.8 | 2.6 |
|
| 35. | PIGB 126 | Pale orange | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0 |
|
| 36. | PIGB 140 | Pale orange | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 |
|
a: Colony size, b: Zone of DPPH decolorization, b-a: Final of zone of antioxidant.
Antioxidant activities of extracellular bacterial extracts by DPPH and ABTS radical scavenging assay. Values are mean ± SD (n = 3).
| Sample conc. (mg/mL) | DPPH scavenging assay (%) | EC 50 (mg/mL) | ABTS scavenging assay (%) | EC 50 (mg/mL) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| 1 | 10.9 ± 0.28 | 31.13 ± 4.15 | 1.8 ± 0.01 | 46.14 ± 3.49 |
| 5 | 13.7 ± 0.39 | 4.7 ± 0.01 | ||
| 10 | 22.4 ± 0.33 | 8.4 ± 0.03 | ||
| 15 | 28.7 ± 0.92 | 15.7 ± 0.22 | ||
|
| ||||
| 1 | 47.3 ± 0.77 | 1.17 ± 0.06 | 19.2 ± 0.05 | 9.41 ± 0.09 |
| 5 | 76.1 ± 2.61 | 38.9 ± 1.98 | ||
| 10 | 93.4 ± 6.54 | 53.4 ± 2.75 | ||
| 15 | 95.6 ± 5.61 | 69.5 ± 1.00 | ||
|
| ||||
| 1 | 18.0 ± 0.17 | 10.31 ± 0.48 | 7.2 ± 0.03 | 88.34 ± 2.15 |
| 5 | 35.5 ± 0.32 | 9.3 ± 0.03 | ||
| 10 | 53.0 ± 0.56 | 11.3 ± 0.03 | ||
| 15 | 57.5 ± 3.03 | 15.2 ± 0.09 | ||
| Standards | ||||
| Sample conc. (μg/mL) |
DPPH
| EC 50 (μg/mL) |
| Sample conc. (μM/mL) |
| 40 | 56.6 ± 1.63 | 24.33 ± 1.82 | 78.0 ± 1.14 | 5.74 ± 1.26 |
| 80 | 80.3 ± 0.61 | 97.6 ± 1.25 | ||
| 120 | 82.8 ± 0.72 | 99.6 ± 1.18 | ||
| 160 | 84.3 ± 1.34 | 99.5 ± 1.06 | ||
Standards used for various assays:
DPPH scavenging assay - BHT,
ABTS scavenging assay -Quercetin.
Sample concentrations used for ABTS standard were 1.0, 5.0, 10.0 and 15.0 μM/mL respectively.
FRAP and total phenolic contents in extracellular ethyl acetate extracts of selected bacterial strains.
| Sample | Sample conc. (mg/mL) | FRAP assay (μg/mL of AsA Eq.) | Total phenolic content assay (mg/mL of GAE) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1 | 7.97 ± 0.12 | 0.09 ± 0.01 |
| 5 | 10.80 ± 0.13 | 0.17 ± 0.01 | |
| 10 | 14.11 ± 2.3 | 0.24 ± 0.02 | |
| 15 | 18.70 ± 1.84 | 0.31 ± 0.00 | |
|
| 1 | 5.90 ± 0.13 | 0.21 ± 0.01 |
| 5 | 23.26 ± 4.96 | 0.34 ± 0.02 | |
| 10 | 35.17 ± 0.36 | 0.65 ± 0.02 | |
| 15 | 47.01 ± 0.27 | 0.83 ± 0.05 | |
|
| 1 | 1.81 ± 0.01 | 0.08 ± 0.01 |
| 5 | 4.76 ± 0.05 | 0.21 ± 0.01 | |
| 10 | 7.46 ± 0.12 | 0.32 ± 0.01 | |
| 15 | 9.35 ± 0.98 | 0.48 ± 0.07 |
AsA Eq.: Ascorbic acid equivalents, GEA: Gallic acid equivalents.
Figure 2Reducing potentials of selected bacteria.*Concentrations of the sample: 1, 5, 10, 15 mg/mL, STD: standard compound used i.e. ascorbic acid.
Figure 3Correlation analysis of antioxidant parameteres. PIGB 46; PIGB 77; PIGB 88. A. TPC Vs DPPH (PIGB 46; r 2 : 0.976, PIGB 77; r 2 : 0.741, PIGB 88; r 2 : 0.855) p = 0.004, B. TPC Vs ABTS (PIGB 46; r 2 : 0.872, PIGB 77; r 2 : 0.964, PIGB 88; r 2 : 0.790) p = 0.009, C. TPC Vs Reducing power (PIGB 46; r 2 : 0.979, PIGB 77; r 2 : 0.725, PIGB 88; r 2 : 0.943) p = 0.01, D. TPC Vs FRAP (PIGB 46; r 2 : 0.971, PIGB 77; r 2 : 0.962, PIGB 88; r 2 : 0.975) p = 0.01.
16S rRNA identity for high potent antioxidant strains.
| Isolate | Isolation source | Closest match (accession number) | Phylogenetic group | Similarity (%) | Pigmentation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIGB 46 |
|
| γ-proteobacteria | 97 | Yellow |
| PIGB 77 |
|
| γ-proteobacteria | 100 | Yellow/brown |
| PIGB 88 |
|
| γ-proteobacteria | 99 | Pink |