| Literature DB >> 29509678 |
Kai Peng1,2,3, Qianqian Huang4, Zhongjun Xu5, Tim A McAllister6, Surya Acharya7, Irene Mueller-Harvey8, Christopher Drake9, Junming Cao10, Yanhua Huang11, Yuping Sun12, Shunxi Wang13, Yuxi Wang14.
Abstract
Conservation methods have been shown to affect forage nutrient composition and value, but little information is available about the effect of forage conservation on plant condensed tannins (CT). The objective of this study was to assess the effects of conservation method on the concentration, chemical composition and biological activity of CT. Whole-plant purple prairie clover (PPC, Dalea purpurea Vent.) was harvested at full flower and conserved as freeze-dried forage (FD), hay (HAY) or silage (SIL). Concentration of CT in conserved PPC was determined by the butanol-HCl-acetone method. Structural composition, protein-precipitation capacity and anti-bacterial activity of CT isolated from conserved forage were determined by in situ thiolytic degradation followed by HPLC-MS analysis, a protein precipitation assay using bovine serum albumin and ribulose 1,5-disphosphate carboxylase as model proteins and by an Escherichia coli (E. coli) growth test, respectively. Conservation method had no effect on concentration of total CT, but ensiling decreased (p < 0.001) extractable CT and increased (p < 0.001) protein- and fiber-bound CT. In contrast, hay-making only increased (p < 0.01) protein-bound CT. Regardless of conservation method, epigallocatechin (EGC), catechin (C) and epicatechin (EC) were the major flavan-3-ol units, and gallocatechin (GC) was absent from both terminal and extension units of PPC CT. The SIL CT had the lowest (p < 0.001) EGC, but the highest (p < 0.01) EC in the extension units. Similarly, SIL CT exhibited a lower (p < 0.001) mean degree of polymerization (mDP), but higher (p < 0.001) procyanidins (PC) than FD or HAY CT. The protein-precipitating capacity of CT in conserved PPC ranked (p < 0.001) as FD > HAY > SIL. E. coli growth n M9 medium was inhibited by 25-100 µg/mL of CT isolated from FD, HAY and SIL (p < 0.05), but preservation method had no effect on the ability of CT to inhibit bacterial growth. The results demonstrated that ensiling decreased the extractability and protein-precipitating capacity of CT by increasing the proportions of PC. Purple prairie clover conserved as hay retained more biologically active CT than if it was conserved as silage.Entities:
Keywords: Escherichia coli; conservation method; protein precipitation; purple prairie clover; tannin composition
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29509678 PMCID: PMC6017389 DOI: 10.3390/molecules23030586
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Chemical composition (g/kg DM) of whole-plant purple prairie clover conserved as freeze-dried forage (FD), hay (HAY) or silage (SIL) (n = 3).
| Item | FD | HAY | SIL | SEM | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Organic matter | 924 | 923 | 913 | 3.96 | 0.174 |
| Crude protein (N × 6.25) | 158 | 157 | 165 | 2.20 | 0.058 |
| Neutral detergent fibre | 439 b | 497 a | 480 a | 5.74 | 0.001 |
| Acid detergent fibre | 405 b | 422 a | 417 a | 2.38 | 0.006 |
| Acid detergent lignin | 79.8 b | 98.3 a | 90.1 a,b | 2.79 | 0.009 |
| Water-soluble carbohydrate | 25.4 a | 11.5 b | 2.4 c | 0.34 | <0.001 |
| Total phenols 1 | 66.2 a | 51.4 b | 28.6 c | 0.95 | <0.001 |
| Condensed tannins (CT) | |||||
| Extractable CT | 70.2 a | 64.1 a | 27.4 b | 1.53 | <0.001 |
| Fibre-bound CT | 5.2 b | 5.6 b | 7.1 a | 0.17 | <0.001 |
| Protein-bound CT | 9.0 c | 12.4 b | 44.3 a | 0.17 | <0.001 |
| Total CT | 84.5 | 82.2 | 78.9 | 1.45 | 0.083 |
1 Determined as tannic acid equivalent. a, b, c Means with different letters differ within rows (p < 0.05). SEM, standard error of the mean.
Figure 1HPLC chromatograms (280 nm) of thiolysis reaction products that were obtained from (a) freeze-dried; (b) hay and (c) silage of whole-plant purple prairie clover. Terminal units: C = catechin, EC = epicatechin; Extension units as BM-adducts: EGC-BM = epigallocatechin, C-BM = catechin, EC-BM = epicatechin, where BM = benzyl mercaptan.
Flavan-3-ol composition (% molar percentages) in condensed tannins of whole-plant purple prairie clover conserved as freeze-dried forage (FD), hay (HAY) or silage (SIL).
| Terminal Units (%) | Extension Units (%) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GC 1 | EGC | C | EC | GC-BM 2 | EGC-BM | C-BM | EC-BM | |
| FD | 0 | 0 | 1.56 a | 4.26 b | 0 | 23.50 b | 2.42 b | 68.26 a |
| HAY | 0 | 0 | 1.26 b | 4.13 b | 0 | 27.97 a | 2.19 b | 64.45 b |
| SIL | 0 | 0 | 1.29 b | 6.94 a | 0 | 19.17 c | 3.78 a | 68.82 a |
| SEM | - | - | 0.063 | 0.282 | - | 0.928 | 0.164 | 0.743 |
| - | - | 0.008 | <0.001 | - | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.002 | |
1 GC = gallocatechin, EGC = epigallocatechin, C = catechin, EC = epicatechin. 2 Extension units as BM-adducts: EGC-BM = epigallocatechin, C-BM = catechin, EC-BM = epicatechin, where BM = benzyl mercaptan. a, b, c Means with different letters differ within columns (p < 0.05). SEM, standard error of the mean.
Structural composition of condensed tannins from whole-plant purple prairie clover conserved as freeze-dried forage (FD), hay (HAY) or silage (SIL).
| mDP 1 | PC (%) 2 | PD (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FD | 17.3 a | 76.5 b | 23.5 b | 96.0 a | 4.0 b |
| HAY | 18.6 a | 72.0 c | 28.0 a | 96.6 a | 3.4 b |
| SIL | 12.4 b | 80.8 a | 19.2 c | 94.9 b | 5.1 a |
| SEM | 0.66 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.20 | 0.20 |
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
1 mDP = mean degree of polymerization; 2 PC = procyanidin tannins (C + EC); PD = prodelphinidin tannins (GC + EGC); 3 cis = cis isomers of flavan-3-ol subunits (EC + EGC); trans = trans isomers of flavan-3-ol subunits (C + GC); a, b, c Means in a column with different letters differ within columns (p < 0.05). SEM, standard error of the mean.
Figure 2Precipitation of bovine serum albumin (BSA; a) and spinach ribulose 1,5-disphosphate carboxylase (Rubisco; b) by condensed tannins (CT) isolated from freeze-dried purple prairie clover (♦FD), or conserved as hay (■HAY) or silage (▲SIL). The dash lines relate to corresponding CT data which were fitted to a SigmaPlot curve as described under statistical analysis. Bars indicate standard error and where not visible, fall within symbols.
Precipitating capacities of condensed tannins from purple prairie clover conserved as freeze-dried forage (FD), hay (HAY) or silage (SIL).
| Protein 1 | Parameters 2 | FD | HAY | SIL | SEM | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BSA | 3.1 a | 2.9 b | 2.4 c | 0.01 | <0.001 | |
| 323 b | 467 a | 541 a | 0.01 | <0.001 | ||
| 244 a | 185 b | 200 b | 7.72 | 0.004 | ||
| 124 c | 172 b | 223 a | 2.57 | <0.001 | ||
| Rubisco | 3.4 a | 3.3 b | 3.0 c | 0.02 | <0.001 | |
| 173 | 166 | 152 | 11.10 | 0.428 | ||
| 120 b | 152 b | 242 a | 17.14 | 0.006 | ||
| 62 c | 70 b | 97 a | 1.08 | <0.001 |
a, b, c Means within a row followed by different letters differ (p < 0.05). 1 BSA = bovine serum albumin; Rubisco = ribulose 1, 5-disphosphate carboxylase. 2 Parameters were obtained by fitting the amount of precipitated protein (mg) and amount of CT (μg) incubated with the equation: y = a/(1 + exp(−(x−b)/c)), where y = mg of protein (BSA or Rubisco) precipitated, x = μg of CT incubated, a = estimated maximal amount (mg) of protein (BSA or Rubisco) precipitated, b = sigmoidal centre (μg of CT at the 50% of maximal protein precipitation), and c = sigmoidal width. PP: protein-precipitating capacity, expressed as μg CT required to precipitate 1 mg of protein. SEM, standard error of the mean.
Effects of condensed tannins in purple prairie clover conserved as freeze-dried forage (FD), hay (HAY) or silage (SIL) on the growth of the Escherichia coli 25922 and 35218.
| Strain | Parameter | Conservation Method | Tannin Concentration (µg/mL) | SEM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 25 | 50 | 100 | |||||
| FD | 1.24 a | 1.06 B,b | 1.06 b | 0.91 c | 0.032 | <0.001 | ||
| HAY | 1.23 a | 1.12 A,b | 1.02 c | 0.98 c | 0.018 | <0.001 | ||
| SIL | 1.25 a | 1.15 A,b | 1.00 c | 0.94 c | 0.016 | <0.001 | ||
| SEM | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.03 | 0.03 | ||||
| 0.598 | 0.008 | 0.368 | 0.250 | |||||
| FD | 0.52 b | 0.59 A,b | 0.85 a | 0.82 a | 0.028 | <0.001 | ||
| HAY | 0.53 b | 0.49 B,b | 0.86 a | 0.89 a | 0.011 | <0.001 | ||
| SIL | 0.52 b | 0.51 B,b | 0.82 a,b | 0.95 a | 0.073 | 0.006 | ||
| SEM | 0.004 | 0.012 | 0.030 | 0.085 | ||||
| 0.422 | 0.003 | 0.659 | 0.570 | |||||
| FD | 1.04 a | 0.92 b | 0.92 b | 0.91 b | 0.014 | <0.001 | ||
| HAY | 1.06 a | 0.91 b | 0.90 b | 0.86 b | 0.015 | <0.001 | ||
| SIL | 1.05 a | 0.89 b | 0.91 b | 0.91 b | 0.016 | <0.001 | ||
| SEM | 0.011 | 0.018 | 0.015 | 0.016 | ||||
| 0.572 | 0.583 | 0.747 | 0.133 | |||||
| FD | 0.32 b | 0.32 b | 0.33 b | 0.41 A,a | 0.016 | 0.011 | ||
| HAY | 0.32 b | 0.30 b | 0.32 b | 0.39 B,a | 0.007 | <0.001 | ||
| SIL | 0.31 c | 0.34 b,c | 0.35 a,b | 0.38 B,a | 0.006 | <0.001 | ||
| SEM | 0.008 | 0.016 | 0.011 | 0.005 | ||||
| 0.530 | 0.310 | 0.158 | 0.032 | |||||
Note: The values were obtained by fitting the OD600 to the modified Gompertz equation, In (ODt/OD0) = A × exp{−exp ((µ × e/A) × (L − t) + 1)}, where A is the logarithmic increase of bacterial population, µ is maximum growth rate (per hour), L is the lag time, t is the time (in hours), and ODt and OD0 are the optical densities obtained at time t and at zero hour, respectively. Means with different letters differ (p < 0.05). A, B Capital letters show differences between conservation methods. a, b, c Lowercase show differences between tannin concentrations. SEM, standard error of the mean.