| Literature DB >> 31068908 |
Papan K Hor1, Mousumi Ray1, Shilpee Pal1, Kuntal Ghosh2, Jyoti P Soren1, Smarajit Maiti3, Debabrata Bera4, Somnath Singh5, Sanjay Dwivedi6, Miklós Takó7, Pradeep K DasMohapatra1, Keshab C Mondal1.
Abstract
Traditional leavened wheat-based flat bread khambir is a staple food for the high-altitude people of the Western Himalayan region. The health promoting abilities of two types of khambir, yeast added khambir (YAK) and buttermilk added khambir (BAK), were evaluated. A group of microbes like yeast, mold, lactic acid bacteria (LAB), and Bifidobacterium sp. were abundant in both khambir but in varied proportions. Both are enriched with phenolics and flavonoids. The aqueous extracts of both breads strongly inhibited the growth of enteropathogens. Molecular docking experiments showed that phenolic acid, particularly p-coumaric acid, blocked the active sites of β-glucosidase and acetylcholine esterase (AChE), thereby inhibiting their activities. YAK and BAK showed antiradical and antioxidant activity ranging from 46 to 67% evaluated using 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), 2,2-azino-bis-3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid (ABTS), and ferric reducing/antioxidant power (FRAP) assays. The aqueous extract of both khambir samples protected the arsenic toxicity when examined under an in situ rat intestinal loop model study. The arsenic induced elevated levels of superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), reduced glutathione, lipid peroxidation (LPO) and DNA fragmentation, and transmembrane mitochondrial potential was alleviated by khambir extract. These results scientifically supported its age-old health benefit claims by the consumer at high altitude and there are enough potentialities to explore khambir as a medicinal food for human welfare.Entities:
Keywords: antimicrobial; antioxidant; antitoxicant activity; docking; fermented khambir
Year: 2019 PMID: 31068908 PMCID: PMC6491755 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00730
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
FIGURE 1Traditional process of khambir preparation. After overnight incubation of wheat flour and starter (yeast or buttermilk), the fermented dough is divided, and ball shaped by hand (A). The handmade round-shaped dough is baked over a hot stone and then under direct fire (B). The final cleaned and polished brown bread is ready for consumption (C).
Enumeration of different group of microbes in both YAK and BAK.
| Microbial | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total aerobic | Yeast | Mold | LAB | ||||||
| YAK | 8.90 ± 0.33 | 7.96 ± 0.82 | 6.30 ± 1.22 | 1.32 ± 0.14 | 2.86 ± 0.49 | 5.30 ± 1.44 | 0 | 3.30 ± 0.28 | |
| BAK | 11.64 ± 0.77 | 3.30 ± 0.46 | 6.60 ± 0.76 | 2.4 ± 0.13 | 3.23 ± 0.86 | 5.77 ± 1.74 | 0 | 3.77 ± 0.24 | |
Phenolics and flavonoid content in khambir samples.
| Total phenolics (mg/g) | Protocatechuic acid (mg/kg) | p-Hydroxy-benzoic acid (mg/kg) | p-Coumaric acid (mg/kg) | Ferulic acid (mg/kg) | Sinapic acid (mg/kg) | Total flavonoids (mg/g) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YAK | 2.37 ± 0.21 | 18.31 ± 0.46 | 13.87 ± 0.57 | 2.26 ± 0.23 | 16.42 ± 0.82 | ND | 2.23 ± 0.4 |
| BAK | 1.29 ± 0.2 | 16.52 ± 0.43 | 7.53 ± 0.60 | 1.34 ± 0.33 | 18.34 ± 1.68 | ND | 1.60 ± 0.2 |
Antimicrobial activity of aqueous extract of two types of khambir products.
| Target microbes | YAK (zone of inhibition, mm) | AI | BAK (zone of inhibition, mm) | AI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ND | – | ND | – | |
| 6.5 ± 0.6, | 0.56 | ND | – | |
| 6.0 ± 0.6 | 0.36 | 3.5 ± 0.3 | 0.21 | |
| 5.5 ± 0.4 | 0.47 | 4.5 ± 0.4 | 0.39 | |
| 5.2 ± 1.04 | 0.46 | 5.5 ± 0.5 | 0.49 | |
| ND | – | ND | – | |
| 7.5 ± 0.8 | 0.63 | ND | – | |
| 6.2 ± 0.6 | 0.65 | ND | – | |
| 7.0 ± 0.6 | 0.56 | 7.2 ± 0.7 | 0.58 | |
| 8.5 ± 0.8 | 0.94 | 6.5 ± 0.7 | 0.76 |
FIGURE 2Evaluation of bioactivities of aqueous extract of yeast added khambir (YAK) and buttermilk added khambir (BAK). Changes of β-glucosidase (A), acetylcholine esterase (B), trypsin (C) inhibitory activities, and in vitro antioxidant (D) activities (DPPH, ABTS, FRAP) of fermented khambir, i.e., YAK and BAK in respect to control (unfermented) were determined. The activity of enzymes (without any additive) was considered as 100%. (E) The alteration of mitochondrial transmembrane potential in respect to emitted fluorescence level of Rhodamine 123 during exposure of arsenic and arsenic + khambir extract (BAK) in in situ intestinal loop model study. The control is indicated the fluorescence intensity of control tissue. Data presented as the mean ± standard deviation of five replicates. Different superscripts (alphabet) on the bar indicated the level of significance difference (p < 0.05) among respective groups.
FIGURE 3Molecular docking between p-coumaric acid with acetylcholine esterase (A) and β-glucosidase (B). Docked proteins have been shown as gray surface models (i); proteins have been visualized as ribbons docked with p-coumaric acid (stick, magenta) (ii); and docked p-coumaric acid (stick, magenta) at the active sites of proteins (iii).
Activity of antioxidant defense related biomarkers in intestinal epithelia during exposure of arsenic.
| Group | SOD (U) | Catalase (U) | MDA (nM/g) | GSH (mg/g) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Untreated control | 1.72 ± 0.03 | 1.87 ± 0.07 | 119.42 ± 6.65 | 31.43 ± 1.27 |
| 1.75 ± 0.12 | 1.92 ± 0.06 | 92.46 ± 4.34∗ | 31.87 ± 2.83 | |
| Arsenic | 0.64 ± 0.04∗∗ | 1.19 ± 0.06∗∗ | 165.24 ± 6.2∗∗ | 49.82 ± 5.86∗∗ |
| YAK + arsenic | 1.17 ± 0.04∗ | 1.55 ± 0.05 | 104.42 ± 5.72 | 38.43 ± 5.66∗ |
| BAK + arsenic | 1.62 ± 0.03 | 1.85 ± 0.05 | 96.04 ± 3.45∗ | 35.19 ± 4.11 |
FIGURE 4Determination of the genotoxic protective effects of khambir extracts against arsenic toxicity by Comet assay. Fluorescent microscopic image of (A) control tissue, (B) arsenic treated, (C) co-supplementation of arsenic and YAK, and (D) co-supplementation of arsenic and BAK; (E) graphical representation of the comet tail length of different experiments. The comet tail length was calculated as the distance between the end of nuclei heads and end of each tail. Values are expressed as the mean ± SD (n = 100); different superscripts (alphabet) on the bar indicate the different levels of significance (p < 0.05) among respective groups.
Multiple correlation test among the phenolic, in vitro and in vivo antioxidant profiles, and other health beneficial effects.
| Total phenolics | Total flavonoids | Protocatechuic acid | p-hydroxy-benzoic acid | p-coumaric acid | Ferulic acid | ACE | BG | DPPH | ABTS | FRAP | SOD | Catalase | MDA | GSH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total phenolics | 1 | 0.956 | 0.895 | 0.992 | 0.872 | 0.675 | −0.282 | −0.442 | 0.765 | 0.849 | 0.673 | 0.423 | 0.427 | −0.718 | −0.644 |
| Total flavonoids | 1 | 0.987 | 0.911 | 0.689 | 0.862 | −0.552 | −0.687 | 0.921 | 0.967 | 0.861 | 0.671 | 0.675 | −0.892 | −0.841 | |
| Protocatechuic acid | 1 | 0.832 | 0.562 | 0.933 | −0.680 | −0.796 | 0.972 | 0.995 | 0.932 | 0.782 | 0.786 | −0.953 | −0.918 | ||
| p-Hydroxy-benzoic acid | 1 | 0.927 | 0.576 | −0.159 | −0.326 | 0.678 | 0.775 | 0.574 | 0.305 | 0.310 | −0.625 | −0.543 | |||
| p-Coumaric acid | 1 | 0.227 | 0.224 | 0.053 | 0.352 | 0.481 | 0.224 | −0.075 | −0.070 | −0.286 | −0.188 | ||||
| Ferulic acid | 1 | −0.898 | −0.960 | 0.992 | 0.963 | 1.000 | 0.954 | 0.956 | −0.998∗ | −0.999∗ | |||||
| ACE | 1 | 0.985 | −0.834 | −0.747 | −0.900 | −0.989 | −0.988 | 0.870 | 0.915 | ||||||
| BG | 1 | −0.916 | −0.850 | −0.961 | −1.000 | −1.000 | 0.942 | 0.971 | |||||||
| DPPH | 1 | 0.990 | 0.991 | 0.907 | 0.909 | −0.998∗ | −0.985 | ||||||||
| ABTS | 1 | 0.962 | 0.838 | 0.841 | −0.978 | −0.951 | |||||||||
| FRAP | 1 | 0.955 | 0.957 | −0.998∗ | −0.999∗ | ||||||||||
| SOD | 1 | 1.000 | −0.934 | −0.965 | |||||||||||
| Catalase | 1 | −0.936 | −0.967 | ||||||||||||
| MDA | 1 | 0.995 | |||||||||||||
| GSH | 1 |