| Literature DB >> 28579887 |
Ye Yuan1, Yang Liu2, Mengdi Liu2, Qian Chen3, Yuanyuan Jiao3, Yan Liu4, Zhaoli Meng3.
Abstract
The extraction conditions and biological activities of polysaccharides from wild Russula griseocarnosa (PRG) were investigated. Response Surface Methodology (RSM) with a Box-Behnken Design (BBD) was used to optimize extraction conditions. The optimal extraction parameters of PRG were as follows: extracting time 4 h, extraction temperature 77.3 °C and liquid-solid ratio 42.5 g/L. Furthermore, the data demonstrated that PRG exhibited antioxidant activities evidenced by reducing power to scavenge the DPPH, ABTS, hydroxyl radical and superoxide radical. PRG showed the activity of anti-cervical carcinoma cells Hela and Siha. In conclusion this study offered an efficient extraction method of wild Russula griseocarnosa polysaccharide, and the results suggested PRG had good antioxidant and inhibitory activities against cervical carcinoma cells, and PRG could be developed as a novel natural functional food.Entities:
Keywords: Anti-tumor activity; Antioxidant activity; Polysaccharide; Response surface methodology; Russula griseocarnosa
Year: 2017 PMID: 28579887 PMCID: PMC5447442 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsps.2017.04.018
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi Pharm J ISSN: 1319-0164 Impact factor: 4.330
The three variables and levels in quadratic orthogonal rotation combination design.
| Independent variables | Symbol | Levels | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| −1 | 0 | 1 | ||
| Time (h) | X1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Temperature (°C) | X2 | 70 | 80 | 90 |
| Liquid-solid ratio (g/L) | X3 | 30 | 40 | 50 |
Box-Behnken design and results for the yield.
| Run | Coded variable levels | Experimental values (%) | Predicted values (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X1 | X2 | X3 | |||
| 1 | −1.00 | 0.00 | −1.00 | 4.21 | 4.28 |
| 2 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 5.48 | 5.36 |
| 3 | −1.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 4.27 | 4.27 |
| 4 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 5.16 | 5.36 |
| 5 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 3.95 | 4.08 |
| 6 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.00 | 4.54 | 4.48 |
| 7 | 0.00 | 1.00 | −1.00 | 4.46 | 4.52 |
| 8 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 5.30 | 5.36 |
| 9 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 5.43 | 5.36 |
| 10 | 1.00 | 0.00 | −1.00 | 4.41 | 4.41 |
| 11 | 0.00 | −1.00 | −1.00 | 3.44 | 3.31 |
| 12 | 0.00 | −1.00 | 1.00 | 4.30 | 4.24 |
| 13 | 1.00 | −1.00 | 0.00 | 4.86 | 4.99 |
| 14 | −1.00 | −1.00 | 0.00 | 3.51 | 3.57 |
| 15 | 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 5.00 | 4.93 |
| 16 | −1.00 | 1.00 | 0.00 | 5.25 | 5.12 |
| 17 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 5.43 | 5.36 |
Fig. 1The effects of extraction conditions on the PRG yield. (A) Extraction time. (B) Extraction temperature. (C) Liquid-solid ratio.
Fig. 2The response surface plot (A, C and E) and contour plots (B, D and F) indicating the effects of factors (X1, extraction time, X2, extraction temperature, X3, liquid-solid ratio) and their interactions on the PRG yield.
Analysis of variance for the fitted quadratic polynomial model.
| Source | Sum of squares | DF | Mean square | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 6.77 | 9 | 0.75 | 32.96 | <0.0001 |
| X1 | 0.31 | 1 | 0.31 | 13.49 | 0.0079 |
| X2 | 0.55 | 1 | 0.55 | 23.91 | 0.0018 |
| X3 | 0.12 | 1 | 0.12 | 5.47 | 0.0519 |
| X1X2 | 1.06 | 1 | 1.06 | 46.45 | 0.0002 |
| X1X3 | 0.070 | 1 | 0.070 | 3.07 | 0.1230 |
| X2X3 | 0.47 | 1 | 0.47 | 20.54 | 0.0027 |
| X12 | 0.16 | 1 | 0.16 | 6.83 | 0.0347 |
| X22 | 1.66 | 1 | 1.66 | 72.59 | <0.0001 |
| X32 | 2.03 | 1 | 2.03 | 89.05 | <0.0001 |
| Residual | 0.16 | 7 | 0.023 | ||
| Lack of fit | 0.092 | 3 | 0.031 | 1.81 | 0.2849 |
| Pure error | 0.068 | 4 | 0.017 | ||
| Cor total | 6.93 | 16 |
R2 = 0.98, adjusted R2 = 0.95, C.V.% = 3.25%.
Significant, p < 0.05.
Very significant, p < 0.01.
Highly significant, p < 0.001.
Non-significant, p > 0.05.
Fig. 3Antioxidant activities of PRG. (A) DPPH radical scavenging activity, (B) ABTS radical scavenging activity, (C) hydroxyl radical scavenging activity, (D) superoxide radical scavenging activity.
Fig. 4PRG induced cell damage in both Hela and Siha cells. PRG dose-dependently suppressed cell viability after 24 h.