| Literature DB >> 28362352 |
Shehu Muhammad Auwal1,2, Mohammad Zarei3,4, Azizah Abdul-Hamid5, Nazamid Saari6.
Abstract
The stone fish is an under-utilized sea cucumber with many nutritional and ethno-medicinal values. This study aimed to establish the conditions for its optimum hydrolysis with bromelain to generate angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitory hydrolysates. Response surface methodology (RSM) based on a central composite design was used to model and optimize the degree of hydrolysis (DH) and ACE-inhibitory activity. Process conditions including pH (4-7), temperature (40-70 °C), enzyme/substrate (E/S) ratio (0.5%-2%) and time (30-360 min) were used. A pH of 7.0, temperature of 40 °C, E/S ratio of 2% and time of 240 min were determined using a response surface model as the optimum levels to obtain the maximum ACE-inhibitory activity of 84.26% at 44.59% degree of hydrolysis. Hence, RSM can serve as an effective approach in the design of experiments to improve the antihypertensive effect of stone fish hydrolysates, which can thus be used as a value-added ingredient for various applications in the functional foods industries.Entities:
Keywords: ACE inhibitory hydrolysates; central composite design; degree of hydrolysis; response surface methodology; stone fish
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28362352 PMCID: PMC5408250 DOI: 10.3390/md15040104
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mar Drugs ISSN: 1660-3397 Impact factor: 5.118
Proximate composition of freeze-dried stone fish (Actinopyga lecanora) sample powder in comparison with other sea cucumber species.
| Sea Cucumber Species | Moisture (%) | Ash (%) | Fat (%) | Protein (%) | Carbohydrate (%) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.11 ± 0.142 | 39.80 ± 0.608 | 2.03 ± 0.113 | 45.39 ± 0.044 | 7.68 ± 0.001 | Present study | |
| 6–6.5 | 17.91–44.53 | 1.17–2.44 | 39.77–60.18 | - | [ | |
| 8.28 ± 0.23 | 46.43 ± 0.51 | 0.71 ± 0.12 | 44.58 ± 1.01 | - | [ | |
| 10.23 ± 1.03 | 48.22 ± 1.02 | 0.55 ± 0.12 | 36.99 ± 0.62 | - | [ |
All the values are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD).
Central composite experimental design, predicted and response values of the two dependent variables under different reaction conditions.
| Run Order | X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | % Degree of Hydrolysis (Y1) | % ACE Inhibition (Y2) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predicted | Experimental | Predicted | Experimental | |||||
| 1 | 4 | 70 | 2 | 30 | 36.34 | 34.49 | 63.88 | 64.70 |
| 2 | 5.5 | 55 | 1.25 | 195 | 54.64 | 56.66 | 71.82 | 68.24 |
| 3 | 5.5 | 55 | 0.5 | 195 | 43.68 | 42.10 | 63.46 | 64.86 |
| 4 | 4 | 70 | 0.5 | 360 | 31.17 | 29.96 | 59.71 | 59.66 |
| 5 | 5.5 | 55 | 1.25 | 360 | 55.52 | 57.82 | 66.34 | 65.49 |
| 6 | 7 | 55 | 1.25 | 195 | 44.19 | 43.00 | 69.18 | 70.95 |
| 7 | 7 | 40 | 0.5 | 360 | 32.41 | 32.25 | 50.37 | 51.35 |
| 8 | 7 | 40 | 0.5 | 30 | 24.35 | 23.96 | 43.51 | 42.81 |
| 9 | 4 | 70 | 0.5 | 30 | 28.03 | 28.25 | 60.53 | 60.92 |
| 10 | 4 | 40 | 2 | 360 | 53.34 | 51.99 | 79.61 | 79.55 |
| 11 | 5.5 | 55 | 1.25 | 195 | 54.64 | 54.81 | 71.82 | 72.30 |
| 12 | 7 | 70 | 0.5 | 30 | 28.43 | 29.25 | 49.12 | 49.31 |
| 13 | 4 | 40 | 0.5 | 360 | 32.00 | 31.89 | 73.54 | 72.73 |
| 14 | 5.5 | 40 | 1.25 | 195 | 53.83 | 51.86 | 74.56 | 72.83 |
| 15 | 5.5 | 70 | 1.25 | 195 | 55.45 | 57.56 | 69.08 | 68.95 |
| 16 | 5.5 | 55 | 1.25 | 195 | 54.64 | 53.56 | 71.82 | 72.30 |
| 17 | 5.5 | 55 | 2 | 195 | 56.20 | 58.64 | 80.18 | 80.05 |
| 18 | 5.5 | 55 | 1.25 | 195 | 54.64 | 53.95 | 71.82 | 72.30 |
| 19 | 5.5 | 55 | 1.25 | 195 | 54.64 | 54.05 | 71.82 | 72.16 |
| 20 | 7 | 40 | 2 | 360 | 49.13 | 50.62 | 80.44 | 81.16 |
| 21 | 5.5 | 55 | 1.25 | 30 | 43.41 | 41.98 | 63.32 | 61.27 |
| 22 | 4 | 40 | 0.5 | 30 | 23.95 | 25.03 | 66.69 | 67.96 |
| 23 | 7 | 70 | 0.5 | 360 | 31.57 | 32.90 | 48.30 | 47.71 |
| 24 | 4 | 70 | 2 | 360 | 52.50 | 51.25 | 63.06 | 62.68 |
| 25 | 7 | 40 | 2 | 30 | 28.06 | 26.69 | 73.58 | 73.24 |
| 26 | 7 | 70 | 2 | 30 | 32.14 | 32.65 | 76.48 | 75.70 |
| 27 | 4 | 40 | 2 | 30 | 32.26 | 34.68 | 72.75 | 73.94 |
| 28 | 4 | 55 | 1.25 | 195 | 46.09 | 48.14 | 74.46 | 74.40 |
| 29 | 5.5 | 55 | 1.25 | 195 | 54.64 | 53.82 | 71.82 | 72.16 |
| 30 | 5.5 | 55 | 1.25 | 195 | 54.64 | 53.79 | 71.82 | 72.16 |
| 31 | 7 | 70 | 2 | 360 | 48.30 | 47.25 | 75.66 | 76.70 |
Process variables: X1, hydrolysis pH; X2, hydrolysis temperature °C, X3, hydrolysis E/S ratio (%) and X4, hydrolysis time (min). Response variables; Y1, degree of hydrolysis (DH, %) and Y2, ACE-inhibitory activity (%). ACE; angiotensin I-converting enzyme.
Analysis of variance and estimated regression coefficients for DH (Y1) and ACE-inhibitory activity (Y2) quadratic models.
| Source | Coefficients | F | P | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Y1 | Y2 | Y1 | Y2 | Y1 | Y2 | Y1 | Y2 | |
| Regression | 131.01 | 176.83 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| Linear | 105.89 | 138.63 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| Squares | 260.02 | 216.90 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| Interaction | 23.63 | 114.74 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| Lack-of-Fit | 0.076 | 0.771 | ||||||
| Constant | −116.530 | 129.843 | −9.149 | 22.841 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| X1 | 47.132 | −15.625 | 9.284 | −17.372 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| X2 | 0.151 | −0.675 | 3.439 | −7.217 | 0.003 | 0.000 | ||
| X3 | 29.774 | −14.882 | 5.801 | −6.493 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| X4 | 0.105 | 0.152 | 5.730 | 15.029 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| X1·X1 | −4.226 | −9.213 | 0.000 | |||||
| X3·X3 | −8.371 | −4.562 | 0.000 | |||||
| X4·X4 | −0.000 | −0.000 | −5.017 | −14.728 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| X1·X2 | 0.131 | 9.023 | 0.000 | |||||
| X1·X3 | −1.024 | 5.335 | −2.646 | 18.400 | 0.016 | 0.000 | ||
| X2·X3 | −0.060 | −2.081 | 0.050 | |||||
| X2·X4 | −0.000 | −0.001 | −2.824 | −5.885 | 0.010 | 0.000 | ||
| X3·X4 | 0.026 | 7.477 | 0.000 | |||||
| Y1; SD = 1.74, R2 = 98.50%, R2 (adj) = 97.74% | ||||||||
| Y2; SD = 1.30, R2 = 98.70%, R2 (adj) = 98.14% | ||||||||
F = Fisher, t = Student’s t test, P = probability, X1 = hydrolysis pH, X2 = hydrolysis temperature (°C), X3 = hydrolysis E/S ratio (%), X4 = hydrolysis time (min), SD = standard deviation, R2 = R squared, R2 (adj) = adjusted R squared.
Figure 1Response surface plots for the effects of independent factors on degree of hydrolysis: (a) pH and E/S ratio; (b) temperature and time (c) enzyme/substrate (E/S) ratio and time.
Figure 3Response optimization for the hydrolysis parameters, predicted responses, and their level of desirability. Y1 = degree of hydrolysis (DH, %), Y2 = ACE-inhibitory activity (%), D = Composite desirability for YI and Y2 responses, d1 = individual desirability of Y1, d2 = individual desirability of Y2. Optimum selected conditions of pH, temperature, enzyme/substrate ratio and time are shown in red whereas the maximum predicted responses of Y1 and Y2 are shown in blue.
Figure 2Response surface plots for the effects of the independent factors on angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitory activity: (a) pH and temperature; (b) pH and E/S ratio; (c) temperature and E/S ratio (d) temperature and time.
Figure 4Functional properties of stone fish hydrolysates prepared using bromelain as influenced by pH; (a) Solubility profile (b) Foaming capacity and (c) Foam stability. Each value represents a mean of triplicate determinations.