| Literature DB >> 26703543 |
Bartosz Fotschki1, Jerzy Juśkiewicz2, Michał Sójka3, Adam Jurgoński4, Zenon Zduńczyk5.
Abstract
Raspberry pomace is a source of polyphenols, which nutritional and health promoting properties are not sufficiently known. The aim of this 8-weeks study was to scrutinize if raspberry extracts (REs) with different ellagitannins to flavan-3-ols ratios might favorably affect the caecal fermentation processes and blood lipid profile in rats. Forty male Wistar rats were fed with a standard diet or its modification with two types of REs (E1 and E2) characterized by different ratios of ellagitannins to flavan-3-ols (7.7 and 3.1 for E1 and E2, respectively) and added to a diet at two dosages of polyphenolic compounds (0.15 and 0.30% of a diet; L and H treatments, respectively). Irrespective of polyphenols dietary level, both REs reduced the activity of bacterial β-glucuronidase, increased production of butyric acid in the caecum and reduced triacylglycerols in blood plasma. The E1 treatment at both dosages caused more effective reduction in the concentration of ammonia and elevated acetate level in the caecal digesta than E2. On the other hand, only the E2 treatment lowered value of the atherogenic index when compared with control group. When comparing dosages of REs, a higher one was more potent to reduce the activity of bacterial β-glucosidase, β-, α-galactosidase and lowered value of the HDL profile in plasma. To conclude, REs may favorably modulate the activity of the caecal microbiota and blood lipid profile in rats; however, the intensity of these effects may be related to the dosages of dietary polyphenols and to their profile, e.g., ellagitannins to flavan-3-ols ratio.Entities:
Keywords: HDL cholesterol; Wistar rats; ellagitannins; flavan-3-ols; microbial activity; proanthocyanidins; short-chain fatty acids
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26703543 PMCID: PMC6331806 DOI: 10.3390/molecules201219878
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Body weight (BW) and basic indicators of the gastrointestinal function of rats.
| Parameters | Group 1 | Extract (E) | Dosage (D) | E × D | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | E1L | E2L | E1H | E2H | ||||
| BW, g | 271 ± 3.70 | 275 ± 4.03 | 274 ± 3.81 | 269 ± 3.84 | 273 ± 2.80 | 0.696 | 0.305 | 0.567 |
| Stomach pH | 2.38 ± 0.306 | 3.31 ± 0.211 * | 3.68 ± 0.291 * | 3.28 ± 0.284 * | 3.41 ± 0.220 * | 0.324 | 0.554 | 0.647 |
| Small intestine: | ||||||||
| Total mass 2 | 2.47 ± 0.037 | 2.37 ± 0.046 | 2.36 ± 0.065 | 2.38 ± 0.057 | 2.43 ± 0.070 | 0.801 | 0.499 | 0.603 |
| pH | 7.19 ± 0.139 | 6.82 ± 0.083 * | 6.98 ± 0.067 | 6.82 ± 0.076 * | 6.76 ± 0.089 * | 0.593 | 0.177 | 0.176 |
| Caecum | ||||||||
| Tissue 2 | 0.278 ± 0.008 | 0.269 ± 0.010 | 0.274 ± 0.012 | 0.277 ± 0.014 | 0.276 ± 0.009 | 0.848 | 0.677 | 0.823 |
| Digesta 2 | 1.21 ± 0.081 | 1.11 ± 0.058 | 1.07 ± 0.088 | 1.03 ± 0.104 | 1.17 ± 0.097 | 0.584 | 0.917 | 0.323 |
| Dry matter (%) | 23.0 ± 0.503 | 24.0 ± 0.612 | 25.3 ± 0.759 * | 24.3 ± 0.634 | 25.1 ± 0.628 * | 0.129 | 0.969 | 0.699 |
| Ammonia (mg/g) | 0.255 ± 0.014 | 0.199 ± 0.014 * | 0.255 ± 0.007 | 0.188 ± 0.008 * | 0.235 ± 0.016 | 0.000 | 0.203 | 0.742 |
| pH | 7.05 ± 0.177 | 6.62 ± 0.133 | 6.58 ± 0.092 * | 6.72 ± 0.120 | 7.10 ± 0.121 | 0.164 | 0.013 | 0.080 |
| Colon | ||||||||
| Tissue 2 | 0.437 ± 0.011 | 0.374 ± 0.018 * | 0.398 ± 0.020 | 0.352 ± 0.013 * | 0.378 ± 0.011 * | 0.131 | 0.193 | 0.974 |
| Digesta 2 | 0.324 ± 0.051 | 0.270 ± 0.044 | 0.432 ± 0.048 | 0.344 ± 0.033 | 0.407 ± 0.063 | 0.027 | 0.619 | 0.316 |
| pH | 7.07 ± 0.129 | 6.44 ± 0.142 * | 6.45 ± 0.098 * | 6.29 ± 0.135 * | 6.60 ± 0.086 * | 0.182 | 0.994 | 0.221 |
Values are expressed as mean ± standard error of mean; E × D, interaction between investigated extracts and dosage of extracts; 1 C, was fed a standard diet for laboratory rodents; E1L, E2L were fed diet with low dosage of raspberry extracts characterized by different ratio of the ETs to flavan-3-ols (7.7 and 3.1 respectively); E1H, E2H were fed diet with high dosage of raspberry extracts characterized by different ratio of the ETs to flavan-3-ols (7.7 and 3.1 respectively); 2 g/100 g BW; * Data significantly different with the control group at p ≤ 0.05 (t-Student test).
Activity of microbial enzymes in the caecum digesta of rats (μmol/h/g).
| Parameters | Group 1 | Extract (E) | Dosage (D) | E × D | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | E1L | E2L | E1H | E2H | ||||
| α-Glucosidase | 11.3 ± 1.366 | 11.0 ± 0.638 | 11.9 ± 1.058 | 11.7 ± 0.906 | 11.6 ± 1.194 | 0.695 | 0.826 | 0.621 |
| β-Glucosidase | 1.67 ± 0.118 | 2.59 ± 0.294 * | 2.94 ± 0.383 * | 1.57 ± 0.217 | 1.56 ± 0.298 | 0.582 | 0.000 | 0.556 |
| α-Galactosidase | 6.86 ± 0.415 | 6.77 ± 0.749 | 6.57 ± 0.556 | 3.90 ± 0.844 * | 4.85 ± 0.660 * | 0.602 | 0.003 | 0.425 |
| β-Galactosidase | 26.9 ± 1.526 | 26.9 ± 2.722 | 27.3 ± 6.127 | 10.9 ± 2.063 * | 11.0 ± 1.480 * | 0.954 | 0.000 | 0.966 |
| β-Glucuronidase | 5.48 ± 0.582 | 5.34 ± 0.599 a | 3.85 ± 0.171 a,b,* | 2.68 ± 0.284 b,* | 4.24 ± 0.878 a,b | 0.950 | 0.051 | 0.011 |
Values are expressed as mean ± standard error of mean; E × D, interaction between investigated extracts and dosage of extracts; 1 C, was fed a standard diet for laboratory rodents; E1L, E2L were fed diet with low dosage of raspberry extracts characterized by different ratio of the ETs to flavan-3-ols (7.7 and 3.1 respectively); E1H, E2H were fed diet with high dosage of raspberry extracts characterized by different ratio of the ETs to flavan-3-ols (7.7 and 3.1 respectively); a,b Data with different superscripts in the same column are significantly different with each other at p ≤ 0.05 (Duncan test done only in the case of significant E × D interaction); * Data significantly different with the control group at p ≤ 0.05 (t-Student test).
Short-chain fatty acids (SCFA) in the caecum digesta of rats.
| Parameters | Group 1 | Extract (E) | Dosage (D) | E × D | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | E1L | E2L | E1H | E2H | ||||
| SCFA, (μmol/g digesta) | ||||||||
| Acetate | 42.6 ± 2.080 | 52.7 ± 2.769 * | 40.1 ± 2.210 | 46.1 ± 2.771 | 43.8 ± 2.774 | 0.009 | 0.592 | 0.062 |
| Propionate | 10.8 ± 0.667 | 10.7 ± 0.649 a | 9.49 ± 1.121 a,b | 8.43 ± 0.74 b,* | 9.72 ± 0.757 a,b | 0.605 | 0.085 | 0.049 |
| Isobutyrate | 0.451 ± 0.047 | 0.380 ± 0.073 | 0.366 ± 0.099 | 0.772 ± 0.565 | 0.482 ± 0.138 | 0.613 | 0.400 | 0.647 |
| Butyrate | 8.11 ± 1.001 | 15.7 ± 2.123 a,b,* | 11.9 ± 1.714 b,* | 11.8 ± 0.887 b,* | 16.9 ± 1.385 a,* | 0.686 | 0.720 | 0.009 |
| Isovalerate | 0.435 ± 0.056 | 0.338 ± 0.074 | 0.362 ± 0.095 | 0.190 ± 0.041 * | 0.245 ± 0.043 * | 0.563 | 0.058 | 0.818 |
| Valerate | 0.785 ± 0.087 | 0.864 ± 0.123 | 0.693 ± 0.089 | 0.417 ± 0.060 * | 0.611 ± 0.080 | 0.904 | 0.007 | 0.055 |
| PSCFA | 1.67 ± 0.134 | 1.58 ± 0.263 | 1.42 ± 0.253 | 1.38 ± 0.639 | 1.34 ± 0.161 | 0.790 | 0.707 | 0.874 |
| SCFA total | 63.2 ± 3.833 | 81.6 ± 3.393 a,* | 62.9 ± 3.538 b | 67.7 ± 3.995 b | 71.8 ± 3.875 a,b | 0.058 | 0.507 | 0.005 |
| SCFA profile (%) | ||||||||
| Acetate | 67.4 ± 1.680 | 64.6 ± 2.245 | 64.0 ± 1.930 | 68.2 ± 1.755 | 60.8 ± 1.332 * | 0.039 | 0.900 | 0.080 |
| Propionate | 17.2 ± 0.817 | 14.5 ± 1.079 | 15.3 ± 1.764 | 12.5 ± 0.849 * | 13.7 ± 1.218 * | 0.424 | 0.173 | 0.855 |
| Butyrate | 12.7 ± 1.131 | 19.0 ± 2.174 * | 18.4 ± 1.782 * | 17.5 ± 0.974 * | 23.6 ± 1.382 * | 0.104 | 0.274 | 0.054 |
| PSCFA | 2.69 ± 0.264 | 1.97 ± 0.344 | 2.35 ± 0.468 | 1.86 ± 0.744 * | 1.89 ± 0.245 * | 0.679 | 0.564 | 0.727 |
| SCFA pool 2 | 76.8 ± 7.503 | 90.4 ± 5.821 a | 66.5 ± 4.834 b | 68.8 ± 7.084 b | 84.2 ± 8.391 a,b | 0.524 | 0.769 | 0.006 |
Values are expressed as mean ± standard error of mean; E × D, interaction between investigated extracts and dosage of extracts; PSCFA, putrefaction short chain fatty acid; 1 C, was fed a standard diet for laboratory rodents; E1L, E2L were fed diet with low dosage of raspberry extracts characterized by different ratio of the ETs to flavan-3-ols (7.7 and 3.1 respectively); E1H, E2H were fed diet with high dosage of raspberry extracts characterized by different ratio of the ETs to flavan-3-ols (7.7 and 3.1 respectively); 2 μmol/100g BW; a,b Data with different superscripts in the same column are significantly different with each other at p ≤ 0.05 (Duncan test done only in the case of significant E × D interaction); * Data significantly different with the control group at p ≤ 0.05 (t-Student test).
Plasma lipid profile in rats.
| Parameters | Group 1 | Extract (E) | Dosage (D) | E × D | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | E1L | E2L | E1H | E2H | ||||
| TG (mmol/L) | 1.270 ± 0.095 | 0.930 ± 0.080 * | 0.924 ± 0.105 * | 0.895 ± 0.109 * | 0.794 ± 0.111 * | 0.605 | 0.426 | 0.644 |
| TC (mmol/L) | 3.08 ± 0.211 | 2.34 ± 0.087 * | 2.65 ± 0.150 | 2.67 ± 0.147 | 2.49 ± 0.177 * | 0.666 | 0.565 | 0.098 |
| HDL (mmol/L) | 1.52 ± 0.092 | 1.24 ± 0.051 * | 1.37 ± 0.070 | 1.22 ± 0.057 * | 1.18 ± 0.102 * | 0.565 | 0.166 | 0.266 |
| HDL profile 2 | 49.9 ± 1.701 | 53.3 ± 1.676 | 52.0 ± 1.943 | 46.4 ± 2.481 | 47.5 ± 2.226 | 0.975 | 0.012 | 0.584 |
| AI 3 | −0.187 ± 0.065 | −0.316 ± 0.071 | −0.420 ± 0.061 * | −0.352 ± 0.090 | −0.429 ± 0.082 * | 0.249 | 0.774 | 0.869 |
Values are expressed as mean ± standard error of mean; E × D, interaction between investigated extracts and dosage of extracts; TG, triacylglycerols; TC, total cholesterol; HDL, HDL-cholesterol; AI, atherogenic index; 1 C, was fed a standard diet for laboratory rodents; E1L, E2L were fed diet with low dosage of raspberry extracts characterized by different ratio of the ETs to flavan-3-ols (7.7 and 3.1 respectively); E1H, E2H were fed diet with high dosage of raspberry extracts characterized by different ratio of the ETs to flavan-3-ols (7.7 and 3.1 respectively); 2 % of TC; 3 log(TG/HDL); * Data significantly different with the control group at p ≤ 0.05 (t-Student test).
Phenolic fractions of raspberry extracts.
| Compound (mg/100 g) | Extract 1 (E1) | Extract 2 (E2) |
|---|---|---|
| Ellagitannins | ||
| Ellagitannin derivatives * | 2070.2 ± 103.1 | 4774.7 ± 110.2 |
| Lambertianin C | 15406.9 ± 407 | 22500.1 ± 414.3 |
| Sanguiin H-6 | 11464.3 ± 11.4 | 20427.4 ± 306.0 |
| Ellagic acid | 804.1 ± 23.6 | 215.8 ± 23.6 |
| Total ellagitannins | 29745.5 ± 399.9 | 47702.2 ± 881.8 |
| Flavan-3-ols | ||
| (+)-Catechin | 79.1 ± 1.6 | 186.0 ± 2.8 |
| (−)-Epicatechin | 238.7 ± 8.1 | 4352.4 ± 62.6 |
| Procyanidins | 3528.9 ± 84.2 | 10713.2 ± 1037.7 |
| Terminal units (%) | ||
| (+)-Catechin | 2.4 ± 0.1 | 3.9 ± 0.2 |
| (−)-Epicatechin | 49.6 ± 0.4 | 54.0 ± 0.8 |
| Extension units (%) | ||
| (+)-catechin | 45.8 ± 0.3 | 40.0 ± 1.3 |
| (−)-Epicatechin | 2.3 ± 0.0 | 2.1 ± 0.0 |
| mDP | 1.93 ± 0.0 | 1.73 ± 0.0 |
| Total flavan-3-ols | 3846.8±77.7 | 15251.6 ± 1103.1 |
| Anthocyanins | ||
| Cyanidin-3-sophoroside ** | 100.9 ± 0.9 | 241.3 ± 0.3 |
| Cyanidin-3-glucosyl- rutinoside ** | 12.5 ± 0.1 | 49.0 ± 0.6 |
| Cyanidin-3-glucoside | 76.2 ± 0.9 | 63.2 ± 0.4 |
| Cyanidin-3-rutinoside ** | 9.8 ± 0.0 | 21.0 ± 0.2 |
| Pelargonidin-3-glucoside ** | 4.3 ± 0.0 | 2.7 ± 0.2 |
| Total anthocyanins | 203.6 ± 1.7 | 377.2 ± 0.8 |
| Total polyphenols | 33795.1 ± 479.3 | 63331 ± 1985.7 |
Values are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3); mDP, mean degree of procyanidin polymerization; * The content calculated based on sanguiin H-6 standard; ** The content calculated on cyaniding-3-glucoside standard.
Basic compounds of the raspberry extracts.
| Compound (%) | Extract 1 (E1) | Extract 2 (E2) |
|---|---|---|
| Dry matter | 98.8 | 98.4 |
| Crude ash | 5.2 | 0.3 |
| Crude protein | 6.8 | 2.2 |
| Crude fat | 0.2 | 0.1 |
| Carbohydrates | 49.8 | 27 |
| Total dietary fiber | 2.4 | 8 |
| Total polyphenols | 33.8 | 63.3 |
Composition of the group-specific diets.
| Ingredient (%) | Group 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | E1L | E2L | E1H | E2H | |
| Casein | 14.8 | 14.8 | 14.8 | 14.8 | 14.8 |
| 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | |
| α-Cellulose | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| FOS | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Soy oil | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
| Cholesterol | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| Mineral mix 2 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 |
| Vitamin mix 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Extract1 | - | 0.45 | - | 0.90 | - |
| Extract2 | - | - | 0.24 | - | 0.48 |
| Corn starch | 64 | 63.55 | 63.76 | 63,1 | 63.52 |
| Polyphenols (%) | - | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.30 | 0.30 |
1 C, was fed a standard diet for laboratory rodents; E1L, E2L were fed diet with low dosage of raspberry extract contained 33.8 g/100 g and 63.3 g/100 g polyphenols, respectively; E1H, E2H were fed diet with high dosage of raspberry extract contained 33.8 g/100 g and 63.3 g/100 g, polyphenols, respectively; 2 Recommended for the AIN-93G diet [44].
Figure 1Concentration of polyphenols in diets with raspberry extracts. E1L, E2L were fed diet with low dosage of raspberry extracts characterized by different ratio of the ETs to flavan-3-ols (7.7 and 3.1 respectively); E1H, E2H were fed diet with high dosage of raspberry extracts characterized by different ratio of the ETs to flavan-3-ols (7.7 and 3.1 respectively); E1, diet with raspberry extract 1; E2, diet with raspberry extract 2.