| Literature DB >> 29228569 |
Wei Zhan1, Xin Liao2, Ru-Jia Xie3, Tian Tian3, Lei Yu3, Xing Liu3, Jing Liu2, Po Li4, Bing Han3, Ting Yang3, Bei Zhang5, Li-Jun Cai6, Rui Li6, Qin Yang3.
Abstract
To determine the effects ofanthocyanins from blueberries on hepatic stellate cell (HSCs-T6) and on histone acetylation during liver fibrosis induced by CCl4 in rats. Fifty male SD rats weighing 180 ± 20g were randomly placed into a control group, a hepatic fibrosis group, a blueberry treatment group, a blueberry intervention group, and a natural recovery group. After the rats were sacrificed, the livers and the liver indexes were measured, and the pathological changes were observed by HE staining and Masson staining. The blood was analyzed for the four indexes of liver fibrosis and liver function; nucleoprotein from liver tissues and karyoplasm were isolated to determine the expression of acH3K9, acH3K14, and acH3K18 by Western blotting. Compared with the lethal rate of the control group, the median lethal rate of HSCs-T6 cells treated with a the 50μmol/L concentration was 66.94% (P < 0.05). The protein expression on α-SMA, type I collagen, TIMP1 significantly decreased (P < 0.05) following treatment with 50 ug/ml of anthocyanin for 36 h; moreover, the expression of acH3K9, acH3K14 and acH3K18 modification were up-regulated (P < 0.05). Furthermore, compared with the liver in the model group, the liver in the intervention group showed the most obvious improvement (P < 0.01), and its karyoplasm had increased expression of acH3K9, acH3K14 and acH3K18 (P<0.01). Regulating histone acetylation could improve liver function and liver fibrosis indexes in rats with hepatic fibrosis. The mechanism might be related to certain genes that promote apoptosis, so as to inhibit the effect of anti hepatic fibrosis.Entities:
Keywords: anthocyanin; blueberry; hepatic stellate cell; histone acetylation; liver fibrosis
Year: 2017 PMID: 29228569 PMCID: PMC5722521 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.17842
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Comparative analysis of the content of cyanidin-3-glucosid in Guizhou blueberry from 2011 to 2013
| Year | The content of cyanidin-3-glucosid (mg/100g) |
|---|---|
| 2011 | 308.94±806.56 |
| 2012 | 180.68±796.91* |
| 2013 | 215.60±346.45* |
Vs 2011, there are differences in 2012 and 2013(*P < 0.05); Vs 2012, there was no difference of anthocyanin content in 2013 (P > 0.05).
Molar Absorptivity of Different Anthocyanins
| Anthocyanin | Solvent system | λvis-max (nm) | Molar absorptivity (ε) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cyd | 0.1% HCl in ethanol | 510.5 | 24600 | Schou, 1927 |
| 0.1% HCl in ethanol | 547 | 34700 | ||
| Cyd-3-ara | 15:85 0.1 N HCl/ethanol | 538 | 44400 | Zapsalis and Francis, 1965 |
| 15:85 0.1 N HCl/ethanol | 535 | 44460 | Fuleki and Francis, 1968a | |
| Cyd-3,5-diglu | 0.1 N HCl | 520 | 30175 | Niketic-Aleksic and Hrazdina, 1972 |
| Methanolic HCl | 508.5 | 35000 | Brouillard and El Hache Chahine, 1980 | |
| Cyd-3-gal | 0.1% HCl in methanol | 530 | 34300 | Siegelman and Hendricks, 1958 |
| 15:85 0.1 N HCl/ethanol | 535 | 44900 | Sakamura and Francis, 1961 | |
| 15:85 0.1 N HCl/ethanol | 535 | 46200 | Zapsalis and Francis, 1965 | |
| 15:85 0.1 N HCl/ethanol | 535 | 46230 | Fuleki and Francis, 1968a | |
| HCl in methanol | 530 | 30200 | Swain, 1965 | |
| Cyd-3-glu | Aqueous buffer, pH 1 | 510 | 26900 | Jurd and Asen, 1966 |
| 0.1 N HCl | 520 | 25740 | McClure, 1967 | |
| 1% HCl in methanol | 530 | 34300 | ||
| 10% ethanol, pH 1.5 | 512 | 18800 | ||
| Cyd-3-rut | Aqueous buffer, pH 0.9 | 510 | 7000 | |
| 1% HCl | 523 | 28840 | Swain, 1965 | |
| Cyd-3-sam-5-glu | Aqueous buffer, pH 0.9 | 522 | 3600 | Figueiredo et al., 1996 |
| Cyd-3-sam-5-glu + sinapic + caffeic + malonic | Aqueous buffer, pH 0.9 | 538 | 21200 | Figueiredo et al., 1996 |
| Cyd-3-sam-5-glu + sinapic + ferulic | Aqueous buffer, pH 0.9 | 528 | 15100 | Figueiredo et al., 1996 |
| Cyd-3-sam-5-glu + sinapic + ferulic + malonic | Aqueous buffer, pH 0.9 | 538 | 20100 | Figueiredo et al., 1996 |
| Cyd-3-sam-5-glu + sinapic + p-coum + malonic | Aqueous buffer, pH 0.9 | 536 | 19000 | Figueiredo et al., 1996 |
| Cyd-3-soph-5-glu | Methanolic HCl | 524 | 37150 | Hrazdina et al., 1977 |
| Cyd-3-soph-5-glu + malonic | Methanolic HCl | 528 | 32360 | Hrazdina et al., 1977 |
| Cyd-3-soph-5-glu + sinapic | Methanolic HCl | 528 | 37150 | Hrazdina et al., 1977 |
| Cyd-3-soph-5-glu + di-sinapic | Methanolic HCl | 530 | 38020 | Hrazdina et al., 1977 |
| Cyd-3-soph-5-glu + ferulic | Methanolic HCl | 528 | 32360 | Hrazdina et al., 1977 |
| Cyd-3-soph-5-glu + di-ferulic | Methanolic HCl | 530 | 34670 | Hrazdina et al., 1977 |
| Cyd-3-soph-5-glu + p-coumaric | Methanolic HCl | 526 | 38020 | Hrazdina et al., 1977 |
| Cyd-3-soph-5-glu + di-p-coumaric | Methanolic HCl | 528 | 32360 | Hrazdina et al., 1977 |
| Dpd | 0.1% HCl in ethanol | 522.5 | 34700 | Schou, 1927 |
Figure 1Chromatogram of Cyanidin-3-glucosid
Figure 2the RTCA of inhibition of HSCs-T6 proliferation by different concentration groups
The RTCA xCELLigence values of HSCs-T6 (%. Mean±SD. n=4)
| Co-culturing time | Control | Anthocyanin concentration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50ug/ml | 100ug/ml | 150ug/ml | 200ug/ml | |||
| Cell index | 36h | 2.29±0.44 | 0.756±0.014* | 0.526±0.007* | 0.348±0.006* | 0.217±0.007* |
| Inhibition rate | 36h | 1.00±0.00 | 0.669±0.006* | 0.745±0.047* | 0.848±0.003* | 0.905±0.003* |
*P<0.05 νs control group.
Figure 3Detection of anthocyanin induced apoptosis in HSCs-T6 cells by Annexin V fluorimetric method
Figure 4Detection of the apoptosis of HSCs-T6 cells treated with different concentrations of blueberry anthocyanins for 36h
Figure 5the expression of α-SMA, TIMP1, type I collagen in control group and HSCs-T6 cells treated with 50ug/ml of blueberry anthocyanin for 36h
Figure 6The expression of acH3K9, acH3K14, acH3K18 in control group and HSCs-T6 cells treated with 50ug/ml of blueberry anthocyanin for 36h
The levels of ALT and AST in rats of different groups ( ±s, n=8)
| Group | ALT(U/L) | AST(U/L) |
|---|---|---|
| Normal | 32.12±4.48 | 124.14±6.44 |
| Liver fibrosis | 1098.19±154.50a | 673.21±72.38a |
| Blueberry treatment | 102.85±22.07b | 223.90±20.26b |
| Blueberry intervention | 46.40±9.54bc | 154.77±6.33bc |
| Natural recovery | 121.79±5.94 | 270.37±27.54 |
vs Normal group;P<0.01. vs Liver fibrosis group,P<0.05.
vs Natural recovery group,P<0.05.
Four comparison of liver fibrosis in rats of each group ( ±s, n=8)
| Group | HA(ng/ml) | LN(ng/ml) | PIIINP(ng/ml) | CIV(ng/ml) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | 104.19±2.87 | 0.23±0.01 | 0.00±0.00 | 0.20±0.03 |
| Liver fibrosis | 579.17±66.55a | 0.20±0.00 | 0.00±0.00 | 1.27±0.06a |
| Blueberry treatment | 206.69±15.44b | 0.20±0.00 | 0.00±0.00 | 0.46±0.05bc |
| Blueberry intervention | 135.70±7.47bc | 0.20±0.00 | 0.00±0.00 | 0.34±0.06bc |
| Natural recovery | 194.81±5.23 | 0.20±0.00 | 0.00±0.00 | 0.66±0.09 |
vs Normal group;P<0.01. vs Liver fibrosis group,P<0.05.
vs Natural recovery group,P<0.05.
Figure 7Comparison of HE and Masson staining in liver of rats in each group
(a-1) Normal group: HE staining, ×40, normal hepatic cell morphology. (b-1) Modal group: HE staining, ×40, disruption of structure of hepatic lobules, false leaflet formation. (c-1) Treatment group: HE staining, ×40, the collagen fibers are linked to each other, and are wrapped around the liver. (d-1) Intervention group: HE staining, ×40, Collagen fibers extend and are not connected to each other. (e-1) Natural recovery group: HE staining, ×40, Collagen fibers extend and connect with each other. (a-2) Normal group: HE staining, ×100, normal hepatic cell morphology. (b-2) Modal group: HE staining, ×100, disruption of structure of hepatic lobules. (c-2) Treatment group: HE staining, ×100, complete destruction of hepatic leaflet structure. (d-2) Intervention group: HE staining, ×100, Collagen fibers to mild periportal extension. (e-2) Natural recovery group: HE staining, ×100, Collagen fibers extend significantly. (a-3) Normal group: Masson staining, ×200, normal hepatic cell morphology. (b-3) Modal group: Masson staining, ×100, fiber hyperplasia. (c-3) Treatment group: Masson staining, ×100, structural disorder of hepatic lobe. (d-3) Intervention group: Masson staining, ×100, Collagen fibers extend outward from the central veins. (e-3) Natural recovery group: Masson staining, ×100, Collagen fibers extend outward.
Figure 8the protein modification of liver group of rats in each group