| Literature DB >> 31443409 |
Davi Vieira Teixeira da Silva1, Aline D'Avila Pereira2, Gilson Teles Boaventura2, Roberto Stefan de Almeida Ribeiro3, Maurício Afonso Verícimo3, Carla Eponina de Carvalho-Pinto3, Diego Dos Santos Baião1, Eduardo Mere Del Aguila1, Vania M Flosi Paschoalin4.
Abstract
Oxidative stress is a common condition described in risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Betanin, a bioactive pigment from red beetroot demonstrates anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. The main aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term intake of betanin against oxidative stress in a rodent model, a common condition described in several risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Oxidative stress was induced in Wistar rats by a hyperlipidemic diet for 60 days, followed by betanin administration (20 mg·kg-1) through oral gavage for 20 days. Plasma biochemical parameters and antioxidant enzyme activities were evaluated. Lipid peroxidation and histopathological changes were determined in the liver. The hyperlipidemic diet caused hyperglycemia, hyperinsulinemia, insulin resistance, and increases in alanine transaminase and aspartate transaminase levels. Oxidative stress status was confirmed by reduction of antioxidant enzyme activities, increased lipid peroxidation, and liver damage. Purified betanin regulated glucose levels, insulin, and insulin resistance. Hepatic damage was reversed as evidenced by the reduction in alanine transaminase and aspartate transaminase levels and confirmed by histological analyses. Betanin reduced hepatic malondialdehyde and increased superoxide dismutase, catalase, and glutathione peroxidase activities. Short-term betanin intake modulated biochemical parameters, reversed hepatic tissue damage, and attenuated oxidative stress in Wistar rats.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidant activity; beetroot; hepatic damage reversal; hyperlipidemia; lipid peroxidation; oxidative stress
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31443409 PMCID: PMC6769636 DOI: 10.3390/nu11091978
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Ingredients and nutritional feed composition (100 g).
| Ingredients | Standard AIN-93G | High-Fat AIN-93G |
|---|---|---|
| Casein (g) | 20 | 20 |
| Starch (g) | 52.9 | 27.95 |
| Soy oil (g) | 7 | 7 |
| Lard (g) | 0 | 25 |
| Sugar (sucrose, g) | 10 | 10 |
| Minerals (mg) | 1.52 | 1.52 |
| Calcium | 500 | 500 |
| Phosphorus | 300 | 300 |
| Magnesium | 50 | 50 |
| Sodium | 104 | 104 |
| Potassium | 360 | 360 |
| Chloride | 163 | 163 |
| Sulfur | 30 | 30 |
| Iron | 4 | 4 |
| Zinc | 4 | 4 |
| Manganese | 1 | 1 |
| Vitamins | 5.5 | 5.5 |
| Nicotinic acid (mg) | 1.5 | 1.5 |
| Pantothenic acid (mg) | 1.5 | 1.5 |
| Pyridoxine (mg) | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| Thiamine (mg) | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| Riboflavin (mg) | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| Folic acid (mg) | 0.2 | 0.2 |
| Biotin (mg) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Vitamin B12 (µg) | 2.5 | 2.5 |
| Vitamin K (µg) | 90 | 90 |
| Vitamin E (µg) | 400 | 400 |
| Vitamin A (µg) | 120 | 120 |
| Vitamin D (µg) | 3 | 3 |
| 0.3 | 0.3 | |
| Colin (g) | 0.25 | 0.25 |
| Cellulose (g) | 5 | 5 |
| Total | 100 | 100 |
| PTN (g) | 17.3 | 17.3 |
| CHO (g) | 54.2 | 29.2 |
| LIP (g) | 7 | 32 |
| SFA (g) | 1.1 | 10.9 |
| MUFA (g) | 1.7 | 12.9 |
| PUFA (g) | 3.6 | 6.4 |
| Cholesterol (g) | 0 | 0.02 |
| Total fiber (g) | 5 | 5 |
| kcal | 349 | 474 |
kcal—kilocalories; PTN—protein; CHO—carbohydrate; LIP—lipids; SFA—saturated fatty acids; MUFA—monounsaturated fatty acids; PUFA—polyunsaturated fatty acids.
Figure 1Experimental design of the study. (A) phase 1: CONT 60 - control group 60 days of standard AIN-93G feed; HF 60 - high-fat group 60 days of high-fat feed. (B) phase 2: CONT 80 - control group 80 days of standard AIN-93M feed; CONT 80+BET - control group 80 days of standard AIN-93M feed + betanin by 20 days; HF 80 - high-fat group 80 days of high-fat feed; HF 80+BET - high-fat group 80 days of high-fat feed + betanin by 20 days.Glu: glucose; HOMA: homeostatic model assessment; TG: triglycerides; TC: total cholesterol; AST: aspartate aminotransferase; ALT: alanine aminotransferase; GPx: glutatione peroxidase; CAT: catalase; SOD: superoxide dismutase; TBARS: thiobarbituric acid reactive substances.
Plasma biochemical parameters after phase 1 intake of distinct feeds.
| Phase 1 Study | ||
|---|---|---|
| Parameters | CONT 60 | HF 60 |
| Glucose (mg·dL−1) | 83.3 ± 3.1 | 120.2 ± 8.0* |
| Insulin (µUi·mL−1) | 32.9 ± 2.6 | 38.5 ± 3.6 |
| HOMA-IR (mmol·L−1) | 6.7 ± 0.5 | 11.3 ± 1.2* |
| TC (mg·dL−1) | 47.6 ± 2.0 | 58.1 ± 2.1* |
| TG (mg·dL−1) | 27.1 ± 1.9 | 31.7 ± 4.4* |
| AST (U·L−1) | 133.1 ± 8.4 | 216.2 ± 10.5* |
| ALT (U·L−1) | 40.0 ± 3.2 | 48.4 ± 6.2 |
Values are expressed as means ± SD. The symbol* denotes difference from CONT 60 at a p < 0.05 significance level. CONT 60: control group fed the standard feed AIN-93G; HF 60: high-fat group fed the hyperlipidemicfeed. Animals (n = 36) were fed for 60 days. HOMA-IR: insulin resistance assessment by homeostatic model assessment; TC: total cholesterol; TG: triglycerides; AST: aspartate aminotransferase; ALT: alanine aminotransferase.
Plasma biochemical parameters after phase 2 of feed supplementation.
| Phase 2 Study | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biochemical Parameters | CONT 80 | CONT 80+BET | HF 80 | HF 80+BET |
| Glucose (mg·dL−1) | 124.9 ± 12.3a | 112.6 ± 16.5a | 137.2 ± 23.4b | 106.6 ± 8.3a |
| Insulin (µUi·mL−1) | 42.7 ± 5.3a | 36.7 ± 6.9a | 59.8 ± 4.9b | 39.4 ± 7.1a |
| HOMA-IR (mmol·L−1) | 13.2 ± 2.3a | 10.2 ± 2.1a | 20.4 ± 4.9b | 10.9 ± 1.7a |
| TC (mg·dL−1) | 43.7 ± 7.7a | 45.7 ± 3.9a | 69.7 ± 10.8b | 71.7 ± 5.5b |
| TG (mg·dL−1) | 20.3 ± 5.1a | 19.6 ± 3.1a | 38.8 ± 8.6b | 28.6 ± 5.9a |
| AST (U·L−1) | 193.0 ± 74.5a | 172.0 ± 49.5a | 265.5 ± 60.3b | 137.6 ± 27.3a |
| ALT (U·L−1) | 68.4 ± 2.8a | 56.1 ± 10.4b | 78.2 ± 7.3c | 37.6 ± 7.2b |
Values are expressed as means ± SD. Different letters on the same line indicate differences between CON T80, CONT 80+BET, HF 80, and HF 80+BET at a p < 0.05 significance level. CONT 80: control group fed the standard feed AIN-93M; CONT 80+BET: control group fedthe standard feed plus betanin (20 mg·kg−1); HF 80: high-fat group fed the hyperlipidemic feed; HF 80+BET: high-fat group fed the hyperlipidemic feed plus betanin (20 mg·kg−1). HOMA-IR: insulin resistance assessment by homeostatic model assessment; TC: total cholesterol; TG: triglycerides; AST: aspartate aminotransferase; ALT: alanine aminotransferase.
Figure 2Antioxidant activity of glutathione peroxidase (GPx) (A), catalase (CAT) (B), superoxide dismutase (SOD) (C), and liver malondialdehyde (MDA) (D) concentrations after phase 1 and GPx (E), CAT (F), SOD (G), and MDA (H) after phase 2 of high-fat feed intake. The symbol* in Figure 2A,B,D indicates differences between the CONT 60 (control group fed the standard feed AIN-93G)and HF 60 (high-fat group fed the hyperlipidemicfeed)at a p < 0.05 significance level. Different letters in Figure 2E–H indicate differences at a p < 0.05 significance level.
Figure 3Histopathological liver alterations of rats fed the high-fat feed during phase 1 (A–C). Panel A shows the thickening of connective tissue capsule in the portal triad (a), proliferation of bile ducts (b), anddilation of the portal vein branch (c). Panel B indicates the presence of mononuclear cell inflammatory infiltrates (a); hematoxylin and eosin(H&E), 40×. Panel C indicates the presence of hepatocyte necrosis areas (a) and micro and macro vesicular steatosis (b). Panel D represents the liver of animals fed the standard feed AIN-93G. Photographs were recorded at 20× magnification (H&E staining).
Figure 4Histopathological liver alterations of rats fed the high-fat feed during phase 2 (Panel A) and the high-fat feed plus betanin (Panel B). Panel A displays centrilobular vein congestion (a), macro vesicular degenerations, andnecrosis (b). Panel B indicates normal hepatocytes suggestive of a regenerative cellular process in the high-fat group supplemented with betanin (a), with a histological architecture resembling healthy animals from the control group (Panel C). Photographs were recorded at 20× magnification (H&E staining).