| Literature DB >> 31952312 |
Jose Manuel Silvan1, Anna Michalska-Ciechanowska2, Adolfo J Martinez-Rodriguez1.
Abstract
The consumption of plums in a fresh form is seasonal, therefore the transformation of plum juice extracts into powdered form is a good alternative for its longer availability throughout the year. The drying process can moderate the physical and chemical properties of the plum extracts, thus, this study examined the changes in biological activity, i.e., antibacterial, antioxidant, and anti-inflammatory properties moderated by freeze, vacuum, and spray drying. It was suggested that the drying processes and the applied parameters might moderate the content of polyphenolic compounds in the powders, which influence the different levels of growth inhibition against the foodborne pathogens (17% to 58% of inhibition), demonstrating a strain-dependent effect. These powders could also induce cellular protection against oxidative stress by preventing intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) accumulation (23% to 37% of reduction), but the level of antioxidant capacity may be determined by the conditions applied during the drying process. Moreover, plum extract powders exhibited a greater anti-inflammatory capacity (24% to 39% of inhibition), which would be influenced both, by the type of treatment used and by the temperature used in each treatment. The results demonstrate that the selection of the drying method can be an effective tool for modulating the composition, physical, and bioactive properties of plum extracts powders.Entities:
Keywords: Prunus domestica L.; antibacterial; antioxidant anti-inflammatory; bioactive properties; drying; plum extracts; polyphenolics
Year: 2020 PMID: 31952312 PMCID: PMC7023223 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms8010119
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Physical properties of the plum extracts powders (PEP) obtained after different drying techniques.
| Moisture Content (%) | Water Activity (-) | Colour | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| FD | 7.34 ± 0.14 d | 0.289 ± 0.001 d | 42.84 ± 0.13 b | 23.37 ± 0.1 d | 10.73 ± 0.03 d | 25.72 ± 0.10 c | 24.67 ± 0.13 b |
| VD 40 °C | 3.74 ± 0.17 c | 0.227 ± 0.002 b | 40.28 ± 0.05 a | 17.73 ± 0.04 c | 7.64 ± 0.01 b | 19.31 ± 0.03 b | 23.33 ± 0.05 a |
| VD 60 °C | 7.17 ± 0.04 d | 0.243 ± 0.001 c | 43.10 ± 0.67 b | 16.94 ± 0.61 b | 8.33 ± 0.10 c | 18.88 ± 0.59 b | 26.19 ± 0.56 c |
| VD 80 °C | 3.29 ± 0.08 b | 0.242 ± 0.001 c | 40.40 ± 0.09 a | 13.56 ± 0.02 a | 6.64 ± 0.02 a | 15.11 ± 0.03 a | 26.09 ± 0.07 c |
| SPD | 2.44 ± 0.06 a | 0.146 ± 0.002 a | 45.76 ± 0.02 c | 24.97 ± 0.06 e | 13.15 ± 0.03 e | 28.22 ± 0.04 d | 27.78 ± 0.09 d |
Freeze drying (FD); Vacuum drying 40 °C (VD 40 °C), 60 °C (VD 60 °C), 80 °C (VD 80 °C); Spray drying (SPD); colour parameters (L*, a*, b*), chroma (C*) and hue (h). Different letters (a,b,c,d,e) within the same column indicated statistical differences between samples (p ≤ 0.05; LSD Tukey).
Content of identified major phenolic compounds in plum extracts powders (PEP) obtained by selected drying methods (g/100 g db).
| Compound | FD | VD 40 °C | VD 60 °C | VD 80 °C | SPD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Neochlorogenic acid | 10.25 ± 0.12 c | 10.18 ± 0.02 c | 8.85 ± 0.11 b | 6.45 ± 0.02 a | 11.04 ± 0.33 c |
| 3-feruoylquinic acid | 10.51 ± 0.06 c | 9.96 ± 0.11 c | 8.51 ± 0.36 b | 5.42 ± 0.15 a | 11.69 ± 0.28 d |
| 3- | 4.41 ± 0.09 ab | 4.73 ± 0.11 b | 4.59 ± 0.15 ab | 4.05 ± 0.21 a | 5.30 ± 0.14 c |
| Chlorogenic acid | 4.14 ± 0.01 c | 3.96 ± 0.01 bc | 3.58 ± 0.02 ab | 3.36 ± 0.12 a | 4.70 ± 0.04 d |
| Methyl 3-caffeoylquinate | 0.25 ± 0.01 a | 0.37 ± 0.01 ab | 0.55 ± 0.02 b | 7.08 ± 0.11 d | 3.92 ± 0.06 c |
| Total phenolic acids | 29.56 | 29.20 | 26.08 | 26.36 | 36.65 |
|
| |||||
| Quercetin-3- | 1.25 ± 0.01 c | 0.09 ± 0.01 a | 0.24 ± 0.04 b | 1.09 ± 0.16 c | 1.88 ± 0.17 d |
| Quercetin-3- | 5.01 ± 0.05 d | 1.29 ± 0.01 b | 1.41 ± 0.01 c | 1.47 ± 0.06 c | 0.73 ± 0.04 a |
| Quercetin-3- | 0.73 ± 0.01 a | 5.24 ± 0.02 c | 5.14 ± 0.07 c | 4.58 ± 0.09 b | 6.11 ± 0.14 d |
| Quercetin-3- | 1.03 ± 0.01 c | 1.04 ± 0.01 c | 0.89 ± 0.11 b | 0.61 ± 0.01 a | 1.21 ± 0.09 d |
| Total flavonols | 8.02 | 7.66 | 7.68 | 7.75 | 9.93 |
|
| |||||
| Cyanidin-3- | 0.27 ± 0.02 c | 0.26 ± 0.01 c | 0.24 ± 0.04 b | 0.17 ± 0.03 a | 0.28 ± 0.01 c |
| Cyanidin-3- | 0.70 ± 0.01 bc | 0.70 ± 0.00 bc | 0.66 ± 0.11 ab | 0.53 ± 0.03 a | 0.78 ± 0.04 bc |
| Peonidin-3- | 0.0058 ± 0.0001 b | 0.0058 ± 0.0002 b | 0.0055 ± 0.0009 b | 0.0044 ± 0.0007 a | 0.0065 ± 0.0003 c |
| Total anthocyanins | 0.97 | 0.96 | 0.90 | 0.70 | 1.07 |
|
| 38.55 | 37.82 | 34.66 | 34.81 | 47.65 |
Freeze drying (FD); Vacuum drying 40 °C (VD 40 °C), 60 °C (VD 60 °C), 80 °C (VD 80 °C); Spray drying (SPD); different letters (a,b,c,d) within the rows indicate significant differences between samples (p ≤ 0.05; LSD Tukey test).
Figure 1Effect of PEP (1 mg/mL) on foodborne bacteria growth after 24 h of incubation. Results represent the percentage of growth inhibition respect to the untreated control (100% of growth) and are expressed as mean ±SD (n = 3). Bars marked with asterisk indicate significant growth inhibition respect to the control by t-test (p ≤ 0.05). Freeze drying (FD); Vacuum drying 40 °C (VD 40 °C), 60 °C (VD 60 °C), 80 °C (VD 80 °C); Spray drying (SPD).
Figure 2Protective effect of PEP (1 mg/mL) on intracellular ROS production. HT-29 cells were incubated with the powders for 24 h and then treated with 2.5 mM TBHP for 3 h, and ROS production was determined. Values are expressed as a percentage relative to the control conditions and are represented by mean ±SD (n = 3). Bars with different letters indicate significant differences on ROS production by ANOVA post hoc LSD Tukey test (p ≤ 0.05). Freeze drying (FD); Vacuum drying 40 °C (VD 40 °C), 60 °C (VD 60 °C), 80 °C (VD 80 °C); Spray drying (SPD).
Figure 3Effect of PEP (1 mg/mL) on nitric oxide (NO) production in LPS-stimulated RAW264.7 macrophage cells. Values are expressed as a percentage relative to the LPS-stimulated control group and are represented by mean ±SD (n = 3). Bars with different letters indicate significant differences on NO production by ANOVA LSD Tukey test (p ≤ 0.05). Freeze drying (FD); Vacuum drying 40 °C (VD 40 °C), 60 °C (VD 60 °C), 80 °C (VD 80 °C); Spray drying (SPD).