| Literature DB >> 32041370 |
Chun Bian1,2, ZhenYu Wang1, John Shi1,3.
Abstract
To explore Auricularia auricula-judae polysaccharides (AAP) as natural anticoagulants for application in the functional food industry, ultrasound assisted extraction (UAE) was optimized for the extraction of AAP by using a response surface methodology (RSM). The maximum extraction yield of crude AAP (14.74 mg/g) was obtained at the optimized extraction parameters as follows: Extraction temperature (74 °C), extraction time (27 min), the ratio of liquid to raw material (103 mL/g), and ultrasound power (198 W). Furthermore, the acidic AAP (aAAP) was precipitated with cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) from crude AAP (cAAP). aAAP was further purified using ion exchange chromatography with a DEAE Purose 6 Fast Flow column to obtain aAAP-1. Additionally, according to the HPLC analysis, the aAAP-1 was mainly composed of mannose, glucuronic acid, glucose, galactose, and xylose, with a molar ratio of 80.63:9.88:2.25:1:31.13. Moreover, the results of the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), prothrombin time (PT), and thrombin time (TT) indicated aAAP-1 had anticoagulant activity, which was a synergic anticoagulant activity by the endogenous and exogenous pathway.Entities:
Keywords: anticoagulation in vitro; chemical composition; corresponding surface optimization; ultrasound assisted extraction
Year: 2020 PMID: 32041370 PMCID: PMC7036816 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25030710
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Effects of a different extraction temperature (A), extraction time (B), liquid-solid ratio (C), and ultrasonic power (D) on the extraction yield.
Box–Benhnken design and results of AAP extraction experiments.
| No. | Codded Variables | Extraction Yield | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | −1 | 9.23 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | −1 | 13.02 |
| 3 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 11.79 |
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15.39 |
| 5 | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 9.59 |
| 6 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 12.67 |
| 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 12.34 |
| 8 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 9.32 |
| 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15.02 |
| 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16.17 |
| 11 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 10.69 |
| 12 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 11.09 |
| 13 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 11.19 |
| 14 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 11.32 |
| 15 | 0 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 9.57 |
| 16 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 11.97 |
| 17 | 0 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 11.76 |
| 18 | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 9.95 |
| 19 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 10.34 |
| 20 | 0 | −1 | −1 | 0 | 9.04 |
| 21 | 0 | 1 | −1 | 0 | 11.98 |
| 22 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 10.26 |
| 23 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15.13 |
| 24 | 1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 11.57 |
| 25 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 1 | 12.34 |
| 26 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 11.07 |
| 27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15.9 |
| 28 | 1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 12.41 |
| 29 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 11.59 |
The ANOVA results for the response surface quadratic models of AAP yield.
| Source | Sum of Squares | DF | Mean Square | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 111.82 | 14 | 7.99 | 40.80 | <0.0001 ** |
| 1.94 | 1 | 1.94 | 9.93 | 0.0071 ** | |
| 1.56 | 1 | 1.56 | 7.98 | 0.0135* | |
| 1.89 | 1 | 1.90 | 9.68 | 0.0076 ** | |
| 0.41 | 1 | 0.41 | 2.08 | 0.1713 | |
|
| 3.01 | 1 | 3.01 | 15.38 | 0.0015 ** |
|
| 1.65 | 1 | 1.65 | 8.44 | 0.0115* |
|
| 2.18 | 1 | 2.18 | 11.12 | 0.0049 ** |
|
| 3.29 | 1 | 3.29 | 16.83 | 0.0011 ** |
|
| 5.64 | 1 | 5.64 | 28.81 | <0.0001 ** |
|
| 8.38 | 1 | 8.38 | 42.81 | <0.0001 ** |
|
| 35.59 | 1 | 35.59 | 181.78 | <0.0001 ** |
|
| 27.19 | 1 | 27.19 | 138.88 | <0.0001 ** |
|
| 35.13 | 1 | 35.13 | 179.46 | <0.0001 ** |
|
| 30.05 | 1 | 30.05 | 153.49 | <0.0001 ** |
| Residual | 2.74 | 14 | 0.20 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 1.75 | 10 | 0.18 | 0.71 | 0.6989 |
| Pure Error | 0.99 | 4 | 0.245 | ||
| Cor Total | 114.56 | 28 | |||
* Significant difference (0.01 < p < 0.05); ** Extreme significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 2Plots of the adequacy about the proposed model. Plot of the predicted and actual values (A); the normal% probability plot (B).
Figure 3Contour plots showing the significant interactions of the extraction parameters. Extraction temperature and extraction time (A), extraction temperature and liquid-solid ratio (B), extraction temperature and ultrasonic power (C), extraction time and liquid-solid ratio (D), extraction time and ultrasonic power (E), and liquid-solid ratio and ultrasonic power (F).
Figure 4Chromatograms of aAAP-1 separated from cAAPon DEAE Purose 6 Fast Flow.
Figure 5HPLC with tandem gel column profiles of aAAP-1.
Figure 6HPLC profiles of aAAP-1 and standard.
Figure 7UV (A) and FT-IR (B) spectrum of aAAP-1.
Anticoagulant activity of aAAP-1.
| Sample | Concentration | Clotting Time(s) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| APTT | PT | TT | ||
| Control a | 28.0 ± 0.3 b | 11.3 ± 0.1 | 17.7 ± 0.1 | |
| Heparin c | 2.0 | 48.7 ± 0.4 | 67.9 ± 0.2 | 32.7 ± 0.3 |
| aAAP-1 | 12.5 | 26.2 ± 0.3 | 16.1 ± 0.2 ** | 20.3 ± 0.1 ** |
| 25.0 | 27.5 ± 0.4 | 26.6 ± 0.5 ** | 21.8 ± 0.1 ** | |
| 50.0 | 47.3 ± 1.7 ** | 73.7 ± 0.9 ** | 28.2 ± 0.2 ** | |
* Significant difference (0.01 < p < 0.05); **Extreme significant difference (p < 0.01). a Samples were all compared with a blank control (saline); b Each clotting time were expressed as means ± SD (n = 3); c the 6th Heparin (196 IU/mg).
Independent variables and levels in BBD.
| Independent Variables | Symbol | Level | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| −1 | 0 | 1 | ||
| Extraction temperature (°C) |
| 60 | 70 | 80 |
| Extraction time (min) |
| 20 | 25 | 30 |
| Liquid-solid ratio (mL/g) |
| 80 | 100 | 120 |
| Ultrasonic power (W) |
| 180 | 225 | 270 |