Hyun Suk Kim1, Jae Hoon Lee1, Sun Hee Moon2, Dong Uk Ahn3, Hyun-Dong Paik1. 1. Department of Food Science and Biotechnology of Animal Resources, Konkuk University, Seoul 05029, Korea. 2. Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, University of Arkansas for Medical Science, Little Rock, Arkansas 72205, USA. 3. Department of Animal Science, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA.
Inflammation is an immune response that can be activated by various conditions and
stimuli which involve the injury of tissue or infection (Medzhitov, 2008). Immune cells and inflammatory mediators are
known to be involved in the inflammatory process. Nitric oxide (NO) is one of the
inflammatory mediators that play a variety of roles in physiological and
pathological immune responses (Chang et al.,
2019). NO is synthesized by the nitric oxide synthase (NOS) family, which
consisting neuronal NOS (nNOS), endothelial NOS (eNOS), and inducible NOS (iNOS).
Under normal conditions, nNOS and eNOS produce the required amount of NO that
regulates cell proliferation and survival, while iNOS produces large amounts of NO
to enhance immunity (Lundberg et al., 1997).
However, the overproduction of NO has been associated with the progression of many
diseases, including chronic inflammation, Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes
mellitus, and cancer (Dali-Youcef et al.,
2013; Sharma et al., 2007). Therefore,
new compounds that inhibit the overproduction of NO are considered candidates for
the production of novel anti-inflammatory agents.Macrophages play a vital role in immune reactions, and the functions of macrophages
that include phagocytosis, antigen presentation, and NO and inflammatory cytokine
production (Lee et al., 2017b). Macrophages
produce pro-inflammatory factors via several cell signaling pathways, including
nuclear factor (NF)-κB and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways
when they are activated by lipopolysaccharides (LPS), which are one of the main
sources of stimulation for macrophages (Ham et al.,
2015; Li et al., 2017). The MAPK
pathways have three different main families, which are Jun amino-terminal kinases
(JNK) pathway, extracellular signal-regulated kinases (ERK) pathway, and p38 pathway
(Ham et al., 2015). This has made the
MAPK pathways the primary targets for the development of novel anti-inflammatory
agents and has placed them at the center of this field of research (Seo et al., 2015).Many peptides produced from various protein sources, such as soy (de Mejia and Dia, 2009), fish (Ahn et al., 2015) and lupine (Millán-Linares et al., 2014), are known
to have anti-inflammatory properties. These peptides inhibit the production of
pro-inflammatory cytokines and NO in immune cells after stimulation. de Mejia and Dia (2009) reported that peptides
derived from soy proteins suppressed the NF-κB pathway and inhibited the
production of inflammatory cytokines in LPS stimulated RAW 264.7 macrophages. Some
egg proteins were also used to prepare anti-inflammatory peptides: Ovotransferrin
peptides (IRW) inhibited the production of several cell adhesion molecules
associated with the onset and progression of inflammation in human endothelial cells
(Huang et al., 2010). Sun et al. (2016) reported that ovomucin
peptides have anti-inflammatory activities by suppressing the NF-κB pathway.
Ovalbumin (OVA) has important functional properties that make it useful for gelling,
foaming, and emulsifying of food products. Many studies have shown that the
hydrolysates or peptides from OVA possess various bioactivities, including
antioxidants (Abeyrathne et al., 2014),
antihypertensive (Matoba et al., 1999), and
antimutagenic effects (Vis et al., 1998).
However, few studies have assessed the anti-inflammatory activity of OVA
hydrolysates in relation to their inhibitory effects on the production of NO in
immune cells.The objectives of present study were to determine the effect of OVA hydrolysates on
the production of NO and the expression of iNOS mRNA, and elucidate the
anti-inflammatory mechanism of OVA hydrolysates in LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7
cells.
Materials and Methods
Materials and reagents
OVA was isolated from egg white using the method of Abeyrathne et al. (2013). Briefly, egg white was diluted
with an equal volume of distilled water, homogenized for 1 min using a
hand-blender (Kitchen-Aid) at high speed (set at 9) and used. Lysozyme,
ovomucin, and ovotransferrin were sequentially removed from the diluted egg
white using the method developed by Abeyrathne et
al. (2014). Lysozyme was removed first from the egg white solution:
Amberlite FPC 3500 resin (5 g/100 mL diluted egg white) was added to the diluted
egg white solution and stirred overnight in a 4°C walk-in cooler using an
overhead stirrer set at 250 rpm (RW20 digital, IKA Works, Wilmington, NC, USA)
to trap lysozyme. After filtering out the resins, the pH of the lysozyme-free
egg white solution was adjusted to 4.75 using 3 N HCl to precipitate ovomucin.
The precipitated ovomucin was removed by centrifugation at 3,500×g for 30
min at 4°C (Sorvall Evolution RC superspeed centrifuge, Thermo
Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), and then the lysozyme- and ovomucin-free egg
white was added with ammonium sulfate (5.0%, wt/vol) and citric acid
(2.5%, wt/vol) and held for 12 h at 4°C to precipitate
ovotransferrin, which was removed by centrifugation at 3,500×g for 30
min. The resulting supernatant, which was mainly composed of OVA and ovomucoid,
was added with 100% ethanol to the final concentration of 35%, and
then centrifuged. After removing the residual ovomucoid using 4 volumes of
35% of ethanol, the resulting precipitant was washed with 4 volumes of
distilled water twice, the pH adjusted to pH 12.0 to dissolve OVA, and then
brought the pH down to 10.0 using 1N HCl. Finally, the dissolved OVA was heated
at 70°C for 15 min to precipitate impurities, centrifuged, and then
lyophilized using a freeze-dryer (Labconco, Kansas City, MO, USA). The purity
and yield of the isolated OVA was 97% and 97.7%.Fetal bovine serum (FBS), Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium
(DMEM), penicillin-streptomycin, and phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) were
purchased from Hyclone Laboratories, Inc. (Logan, MI, USA).
N-(1-naphthyl)-ethylenediamine, sulfanilamide, thiazolyl blue tetrazolium
bromide (MTT), LPS, and bovineserum albumin (BSA) were purchased from
Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA). For PCR analysis, RNeasy Mini Kit for total
RNA isolation was purchased from Qiagen (Milan, Italy), RevertAid™ First
Strand cDNA Synthesis Kit was purchased from Thermo Fisher Scientific (Carlsbad,
CA, USA), and SYBR reagent was purchased from PhileKorea (Daejeon, Korea). For
Western blotting analysis, cell lysis buffer, inhibitor cocktail containing
protease and phosphatase inhibitor, and a Protein Assay Kit were purchased from
Thermo Fisher Scientific. Primary antibodies for total or phosphorous from MAPKs
(p38, JNK, and ERK), iNOS, and β-actin were obtained from Santa Cruz
Biotechnology (Dallas, TX, USA). A secondary antibody (Goat anti-mouse IgG-HRP)
and other reagents for western blotting were purchased from Bio-Rad (Hercules,
CA, USA). All other chemicals used were of analytical reagent grade.
Preparation of OVA hydrolysates
Because the functional activity of peptides varies depending on their amino acid
sequence, length, and structural characteristics (Hartmann and Meisel, 2007), four different proteolytic
enzymes were used in this study. OVA (10 mg/mL) were hydrolyzed using one of the
following proteases: Trypsin (from bovine pancreas, EC 3.4.21.5. Sigma-Aldrich),
Promod 278P (endopeptidase, EC 3.4.24.28, BISION, Sungnam, Korea), Multifect PR
14L (thermophilic-bacterial protease from Geobacillus
stearothermophilus, EC 3.4.24.27, BISION), and Protex 6L (alkaline
protease from Bacillus licheniformis, EC 3.4.21.65, BISION).
Enzymes were added at 1:50 (enzyme: substrate) ratio, and then the mixture was
incubated for 4 h under optimal conditions: Trypsin (pH 8.0, 40°C),
Promod 278P (pH 6.5, 45°C), Multifect PR 14L (pH 8.0, 70°C), and
Portex 6L (pH 7.0, 60°C). To inactivate the enzymes, the mixture was
heated for 10 min at 100°C, and then centrifuged at 2,000×g for 20
min. The supernatant was lyophilized using a freeze-dryer. The OVA hydrolysates
produced by Trypsin, Promod 278P, Multifect PR 14L, and Protex 6L were named as
OHT, OHPM, OHMF, OHP, respectively, and the size of OVA hydrolysates was
determined using sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (15% gel).
Cell lines and culture conditions
The RAW 264.7 cell line, which is a murine macrophage, was purchased from the
KCLB (Korean Cell Line Bank, Seoul, Korea). The medium used for the growth of
RAW 264.7 cells was DMEM that contained 1% penicillin-streptomycin and
10% FBS (heat-inactivated). RAW 264.7 cells were grown at 37°C in
a humidified 5% CO2 incubator (MCO-18AIC, Sanyo, Osaka, Japan)
and were sub-cultured at 70%–80% confluence.
Cell viability assay
The MTT assay (Lee et al., 2017b) was used
for determining the effects of OVA and OVA hydrolysates on cell viability of RAW
264.7 cells. After measuring NO concentration in the medium, an aliquot of the
MTT solution (2.5 mg/mL) was added to each well and incubated for an additional
4 h. Supernatants were removed, and dimethyl sulfoxide was added to the wells to
dissolve the formazan crystals. The absorbance of each well was then measured
using a microplate reader (Emax, Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) at 570
nm. Cell viability was calculated using the following equation:
Measurement of NO production
RAW 264.7 cells (2×105 cells/well) were plated into a 96-well
plate for 2 h, then 2 mg/mL of OVA and OVA hydrolysates were treated and
incubated for 24 h. NO concentration was measured using the Griess reagent
(Kim et al., 2018). One hundred
μL of supernatant mixed with 100 μL of the Griess reagent and the
mixture was incubated for 15 min at room temperature. The absorbance at 540 nm
was recorded for each well, using a microplate reader. NO concentration was
calculated using a standard curve made of sodium nitrate.
Inhibition of NO production
RAW 264.7 cells (2×105 cells/well) were plated into a 96-well
plate and various concentrations (0.5, 1, or 2 mg/mL) of OVA hydrolysates were
treated for 2 h. After that, the plate was further incubated with or without LPS
(100 ng/mL) for 24 h. NO concentration was then measured and calculated using
the Griess reagent as mentioned above.
PCR analysis (RT-PCR and quantitative real-time PCR)
RAW 264.7 cells (5×105 cells/well) were plated into a 6-well
plate and various concentrations (0.5, 1, or 2 mg/mL) of OVA hydrolysates were
added and incubated for 24 h. At the end of incubation, the samples in the plate
were treated with LPS (0 or 100 ng/mL) and then incubated for 24 h. Total RNA
was isolated using the RNA isolation kit according to the manufacturers'
instructions and synthesized to cDNA using a synthesis kit. Synthesized cDNA was
used in PCR analysis as template DNA. The primer sequences were shown as
follows: iNOS (forward 5’-CCCTTCCGAAGTTTCTGGCAGCAGC-3’, reverse
5’-GGCTGTCAGAGCCTCGTGGCTTTGG-3’), and β-actin (forward
5’-GTGGGCCGCCCTAGGCACCAG-3’, reverse
5’-GGAGGAAGAGGATGCGGCAGT-3’). The RT-PCR reaction was conducted
under the following reaction conditions: 95°C for 5 min (initiation), and
followed by 25 cycles of 95°C for 30 s (denaturation), specified
temperature of each primer for 30 s (annealing), 72°C for 45 s
(extension), and followed by a final extension at 72°C for 10 min. The
final products were then evaluated by 1.2% agarose gel electrophoresis
with DNA SafeStain (Thermo Fisher Scientific). For quantitative real-time PCR
analysis, SYBR reagent was used and the reaction was conducted under the
following reaction conditions: 95°C for 2 min (initiation) followed by 40
cycles of 95°C for 5 s (denaturation), 60°C for 30 s (annealing/
extension). The amplified results were analyzed using the delta-delta Ct method
and normalized to β-actin. The purity of PCR products was assessed by
analyzing the melting curve.
Western blot analysis
RAW 264.7 cells (2×106 cells/well) were plated into a 6-well
plate and OVA hydrolysates were treated and incubated for 24 h. After that, LPS
was added to each well and further incubated for 45 min. RAW 264.7 cells were
washed with PBS and lysed using the Radioimmunoprecipitation assay (RIPA) lysis
and extraction buffer (Thermo Fisher Scientific) with protease/phosphatase
inhibitor. Total protein concentration was measured by Lowry’s method.
And the same concentration (25 μg) of proteins were separated by
12% SDS-PAGE gel and transferred to polyvinylidene fluoride membrane
(PVDF) membranes. After blocking with 5% skim milk or 5% BSA
dissolved in TBST (Tris-buffered saline with 1% Tween-20) for 1 h,
membranes incubated with primary antibody iNOS, β-actin, total or
phosphorous from of MAPKs (p38, JNK, and ERK) in 5% skim milk or
5% BSA overnight at 4°C. After washing 3 times with TBST, the
membranes were incubated with secondary antibody (Goat anti-mouse IgG-HRP) for 2
h at room temperature. After washing, the protein bands were detected using a
chemiluminescent ECL kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific).
Statistical analysis
SPSS 18.0 software (Chicago, IL, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Data
were expressed as mean±SD. All data were taken from three independent
experiments. For analysis between two samples, the Student's t-test was used.
One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Duncan’s multiple range
test was used for the analysis between multiple samples. The significance of
differences was reported at the level of p<0.05.
Results and Discussion
Hydrolysis of OVA
The OVA standard (lane 1) showed two thick bands near 45 kDa, and our OVA (lane
2) showed a similar band pattern (Fig. 1).
Lanes 3–6 showed the results for the OVA hydrolysates prepared using
Multifect 14L hydrolysate (OHMF), Promod 278P hydrolysate (OHPM), Protex 6L
hydrolysate (OHPT), and trypsin (OHT), respectively. Although the same amounts
of samples were loaded on lanes 3–6 (1 mg/mL), the density of the band
observed around 45 kDa in Lane 4 was lighter than that of other lanes,
indicating that Promod 278P hydrolyzed OVA better than other enzymes used. Also,
lanes 3–6 showed different band patterns: lanes 5 and 6 showed more
peptide bands than lanes 3 and 4 in the areas where the molecular weights were
<25 kDa. This means that the four proteolytic enzymes produced different
kinds of peptides from the OVA. Also, this is why each OVA hydrolysate exhibited
different activities. Lee and Paik (2019)
reported that the biological activity of protein hydrolysates and peptides were
closely related to their amino acid sequence, length, and composition. Some
researchers purified and identified some of the main peptides to determine their
functional activity, but many others examined the functional activity of protein
hydrolysates or mixtures of various peptides (Bhaskar et al., 2019; Lee et al.,
2017a; Millán-Linares et al.,
2014). In this study, we have investigated the anti-inflammatory
activity of OVA hydrolysates, instead of individual peptides in the
hydrolysates, in LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells.
Fig. 1.
SDS-PAGE of OVA and OVA hydrolysates.
M, marker; lane 1, standard OVA (Sigma-Aldrich); lane 2, OVA; lane 3,
OHMF (hydrolysates treated with Multifect 14L); lane 4, OHPM
(hydrolysates treated with Promod 278P); lane 5, OHPT (hydrolysates
treated with Protex 6L); lane 6, OHT (hydrolysates treated with
trypsin). SDS-PAGE, sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis ; OVA, ovalbumin.
SDS-PAGE of OVA and OVA hydrolysates.
M, marker; lane 1, standard OVA (Sigma-Aldrich); lane 2, OVA; lane 3,
OHMF (hydrolysates treated with Multifect 14L); lane 4, OHPM
(hydrolysates treated with Promod 278P); lane 5, OHPT (hydrolysates
treated with Protex 6L); lane 6, OHT (hydrolysates treated with
trypsin). SDS-PAGE, sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis ; OVA, ovalbumin.
Cell viability and NO production by OVA and OVA hydrolysates
The effects of OVA and OVA hydrolysates on cell viability were evaluated using
MTT assay to confirm that the changes of NO production by the LPS-stimulated RAW
264.7 cells were not the result of cytotoxicity of the hydrolysates. As shown in
Fig. 2, the viability of the RAW 264.7
cells in all groups was above 90%, indicating that all concentrations
(0.5–2 mg/mL) of OVA and OVA hydrolysates were not toxic to the RAW 264.7
cells. Thus, we could confirm that the changes of NO production in RAW 264.7
cells by the OVA and OVA hydrolysate treatments were not the result of
cytotoxicity.
Fig. 2.
Cell viability of RAW 264.7 cells treated with OVA and OVA
hydrolysates.
■: 0.5 mg/mL, ▢: 1 mg/mL, □: 2 mg/mL. All values are
represented as mean±SD of triplicate experiments. OVA, ovalbumin;
OHMF, hydrolysates treated with Multifect 14L; OHPM, hydrolysates
treated with Promod 278P; OHPT, hydrolysates treated with Protex 6L;
OHT, hydrolysates treated with trypsin.
Cell viability of RAW 264.7 cells treated with OVA and OVA
hydrolysates.
■: 0.5 mg/mL, ▢: 1 mg/mL, □: 2 mg/mL. All values are
represented as mean±SD of triplicate experiments. OVA, ovalbumin;
OHMF, hydrolysates treated with Multifect 14L; OHPM, hydrolysates
treated with Promod 278P; OHPT, hydrolysates treated with Protex 6L;
OHT, hydrolysates treated with trypsin.OVA has been widely used as an antigen in experimental animal models (including
as an inhalant) and dietary allergy study (Mine
and Yang, 2008). Some studies reported that OVA increased iNOS and
COX-2 expression by activating NF-κB pathways in RAW 264.7 cells (Lee et al., 2011). However, this
allergenicity could be decreased by heat, pH, and enzymatic hydrolysis because
these parameters could alter protein structure (Ballmer-Weber et al., 2016; Duan et
al., 2014).Thus, to confirm the inflammatory response to OVA (allergenicity) and its
hydrolysates, RAW 264.7 cells were treated with OVA and OVA hydrolysates and the
amount of NO produced was determined. As shown in Fig. 3, LPS (100 ng/mL) treatment increased the NO production level
to 27.61±1.96 μM and addition of OVA to the LPS-stimulated RAW
264.7 cells increased the NO production level to 19.48±1.40 μM.
However, the addition of OVA hydrolysate to the LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells
produced less than 1 μM of NO (OHMF, OHPM, OHPT, and OHT showed
0.20±0.08, 0.17±0.08, 0.22±0.07, and 0.13±0.13
μM, respectively), which were similar to the amount produced in the cells
added with distilled water (negative control; 0.55±0.26 μM),
indicating that OVA hydrolysates did not affect NO production.
Fig. 3.
Nitric oxide production in RAW 264.7 cells.
All values represent the mean±SD of triplicate experiments.
*** Represents a statistically significant difference of
p<0.001 (Student’s t-test) compared with the negative
control. (–): distilled water, (+): LPS 100 ng/mL, All
extracts were used at a concentration of 2 mg/mL. OVA, ovalbumin; OHMF,
hydrolysates treated with Multifect 14L; OHPM, hydrolysates treated with
Promod 278P; OHPT, hydrolysates treated with Protex 6L; OHT,
hydrolysates treated with trypsin; LPS, lipopolysaccharide.
Nitric oxide production in RAW 264.7 cells.
All values represent the mean±SD of triplicate experiments.
*** Represents a statistically significant difference of
p<0.001 (Student’s t-test) compared with the negative
control. (–): distilled water, (+): LPS 100 ng/mL, All
extracts were used at a concentration of 2 mg/mL. OVA, ovalbumin; OHMF,
hydrolysates treated with Multifect 14L; OHPM, hydrolysates treated with
Promod 278P; OHPT, hydrolysates treated with Protex 6L; OHT,
hydrolysates treated with trypsin; LPS, lipopolysaccharide.
Inhibitory effects of OVA hydrolysates on NO production
As shown in Fig. 4, the positive control
(LPS, 100 ng/mL) showed high production of NO (28.39 ±1.63 μM).
OVA hydrolysates showed significant inhibitory effects on NO production. At a
concentration of 2 mg/mL, OHMF inhibited NO production by 24.24±1.35
μM. The OHPT and OHT treatments showed dose-dependent inhibitions of NO
production at 0.5, 1, or 2 mg/mL (OHPT: 25.17±1.46, 21.15±1.35,
and 17.01±0.84 μM, OHT: 23.28±1.35, 19.46±1.07, and
13.99±2.22 μM, respectively).
Fig. 4.
Inhibitory effects of OVA hydrolysates on nitric oxide production in
LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells.
■: 0.5 mg/mL, ▢: 1 mg/mL, □: 2 mg/mL. All values
represent the mean±SD of triplicate experiments. Bars labeled
with different letters represent statistically significant differences.
(–): distilled water, (+): LPS 100 ng/mL, OVA, ovalbumin;
OHMF, hydrolysates treated with Multifect 14L; OHPM, hydrolysates
treated with Promod 278P; OHPT, hydrolysates treated with Protex 6L;
OHT, hydrolysates treated with trypsin; LPS, lipopolysaccharide.
Inhibitory effects of OVA hydrolysates on nitric oxide production in
LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells.
■: 0.5 mg/mL, ▢: 1 mg/mL, □: 2 mg/mL. All values
represent the mean±SD of triplicate experiments. Bars labeled
with different letters represent statistically significant differences.
(–): distilled water, (+): LPS 100 ng/mL, OVA, ovalbumin;
OHMF, hydrolysates treated with Multifect 14L; OHPM, hydrolysates
treated with Promod 278P; OHPT, hydrolysates treated with Protex 6L;
OHT, hydrolysates treated with trypsin; LPS, lipopolysaccharide.Under normal conditions, NO performs an important function in the inflammatory
response (Kumar et al., 2017). When
inflammation is induced, an appreciable level of NO is secreted by
immune-activated macrophages at the site of inflammation. However, the
overproduction of NO causes various complications as a result of chronic
inflammation (Cho et al., 2011).
Therefore, the inhibitory effect of OVA hydrolysates on NO production in
LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells is a relevant measure to releave the inflammatory
activity (Kim and Kim, 2019). Several
studies have suggested that the peptides in the hydrolysates prepared using
proteolytic enzymes exerted anti-inflammatory activity by inhibiting NO
production in the LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells (Kim et al., 2013; Lai et
al., 2011). As shown in the results, OHT showed the highest
inhibitory effect on NO production in the LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells.
Therefore, OHT was selected for further analysis.
Effect of OHT on gene and protein expression of iNOS
To understand the inhibition mechanism of NO production by OTH, the amount of
iNOS and the expression of iNOS mRNA were evaluated using Western blotting and
PCR analysis, respectively.The inducible NO synthase is strongly linked to the regulation of NO production
during the inflammatory responses. Hence, many researchers have tried to find
new substances that can inhibit its enzyme production (Shanura Fernando et al., 2018). As shown in Fig. 5A, the production of iNOS was
significantly decreased dose-dependently by OHT. The expression of iNOS mRNA
(Fig. 5B) also significantly decreased
when treated with OHT (p<0.05). These decreases, 23.34±3.56,
43.79±2.59, and 63.87±1.47% at 0.1, 0.5, and 2 mg/mL of
OHT, respectively, also showed dose-dependence. The expression of iNOS was not
affected when the RAW 264.7 cells were treated with OHT only.
Fig. 5.
Effects of ovalbumin tryptic hydrolysate (OHT) on the expression of
iNOS protein (A), and gene transcription (B) in LPS-induced RAW 264.7
cells.
All values represent the mean±SD of triplicate experiments. Bars
labeled with different letters represent significant differences. iNOS,
inducible nitric oxide synthase; LPS, lipopolysaccharide.
Effects of ovalbumin tryptic hydrolysate (OHT) on the expression of
iNOS protein (A), and gene transcription (B) in LPS-induced RAW 264.7
cells.
All values represent the mean±SD of triplicate experiments. Bars
labeled with different letters represent significant differences. iNOS,
inducible nitric oxide synthase; LPS, lipopolysaccharide.After stimulation, macrophages produced increased amount of iNOS, indicating that
the pro-inflammatory response is directly related to the production of NO. The
overexpression of iNOS enzyme produces excessive amount of NO and leads to the
pathogenesis of various inflammatory diseases, septic shock, and cancer (Lai et al., 2011). Many studies reported
that natural compounds including carbohydrates, protein, and flavonoids have
anti-inflammatory activity by suppressing iNOS expression, resulting in the
inhibition of NO production (Ham et al.,
2015; Shanura Fernando et al.,
2018; Sun et al., 2016). Thus,
our results suggested that OHT inhibited NO production by inhibiting iNOS
expression.
Effect of OHT on phosphorylation of the MAPK pathway
The Western blotting was performed to confirm whether the MAPK pathway is
involved in the anti-inflammatory activity of OHT in LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7
cells. The JNK, ERK, and p38 pathway are part of the MAPK pathway whose
phosphorylation increases their inflammatory activity. As shown in Fig. 6, the phosphorylation of JNK, ERK, and
p38 in RAW 264.7 cells increased after the cells were treated with LPS (45 min).
However, when RAW 264.7 cells were co-treated with LPS and OHT (2 mg/mL), OHT
inhibited the phosphorylation of JNK and ERK but did not affect the
phosphorylation of p38.
Fig. 6.
Effects of ovalbumin tryptic hydrolysate (OHT) on phosphorylation of
MAPK genes (p38, ERK, and JNK) in LPS-induced RAW 264.7 cells.
LPS, lipopolysaccharide; ERK, extracellular signal-regulated kinases,
JNK, Jun amino-terminal kinases.
Effects of ovalbumin tryptic hydrolysate (OHT) on phosphorylation of
MAPK genes (p38, ERK, and JNK) in LPS-induced RAW 264.7 cells.
LPS, lipopolysaccharide; ERK, extracellular signal-regulated kinases,
JNK, Jun amino-terminal kinases.The MAPK pathway is known to regulate several cellular responses (e.g., cell
survival, proliferation, and apoptosis) following exposure to various stimuli
such as stress, shock, and pro-inflammatory cytokines (Pearson et al., 2001). Also, many studies indicated that
the phosphorylation of MAPK was associated with the pro-inflammatory signaling,
and up-regulate the production of IL-6, iNOS, and COX-2 in LPS-stimulated
macrophages (Gao et al., 2012; Ham et al., 2015). Therefore, effective
anti-inflammatory materials should show inhibitory activity on the
phosphorylation of MAPK genes. Crebanine, isolated from Stephania
venosa, inhibits the production of NO, iNOS, COX-2, and
PGE2, and also inhibits pro-inflammatory cytokines including
TNF-α and IL-6 by suppressing the MAPK signaling pathways (Intayoung et al., 2016). A study with
sophocarpine, which is an alkaloid from Sophora
alopecuroides L., indicated that sophocarpine attenuated the
phosphorylation of p38 and JNK, resulted in the inhibition of NO production
(Gao et al., 2012), which was similar
to our results.
Conclusion
This study demonstrated that OVA hydrolysate treated with trypsin (OHT) showed
significant anti-inflammatory activity. The OHT inhibited NO production in the
LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells by suppressing the production of iNOS and the
expression of iNOS mRNA. Also, it was confirmed that the anti-inflammatory activity
of OHT was through the inhibition of JNK and ERK pathways. Therefore, the tryptic
hydrolysates of OVA could be used as an anti-inflammatory agent in food
products.