| Literature DB >> 32370127 |
Luigi Castaldo1,2, Alfonso Narváez1, Luana Izzo1, Giulia Graziani1, Alberto Ritieni1,3.
Abstract
Coffee silverskin (CS), the main by-product in the coffee industry, contains a vast number of human health-related compounds, which may justify its exploitation as a functional food ingredient. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis of the polyphenolic and alkaloid profile through UHPLC-Q-Orbitrap HRMS analysis. The bioaccessibility of total phenolic compounds and changes in the antioxidant activity during an in vitro gastrointestinal digestion were also evaluated through spectrophotometric tests (TPC by Folin-Ciocalteu, ABTS, DPPH, and FRAP), to elucidate their efficacy for future applications in the nutraceutical industry. Caffeoylquinic and feruloylquinic acids were the most representative polyphenols, with a mean concentration of 5.93 and 4.25 mg/g, respectively. Results showed a high content of caffeine in the analyzed CS extracts, with a mean value of 31.2 mg/g, meaning a two-fold increase when compared to coffee brews. Our findings highlighted that both the bioaccessibility and antioxidant activity of CS polyphenols significantly increased in each in vitro gastrointestinal digestion stage. In addition, the colon stage might constitute the main biological site of action of these antioxidant compounds. These results suggest that in vivo, the dietary polyphenols from CS might be metabolized by human colonic microflora, generating metabolites with a greater antioxidant activity, increasing their well-known beneficial effects.Entities:
Keywords: bioaccessibility; chlorogenic acids; coffee silverskin; polyphenols
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32370127 PMCID: PMC7249082 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25092132
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Melanoidin content in different analyzed coffee silverskin (CS) extracts.
| Samples | Melanoidins |
|---|---|
| (mg/g) ± SD | |
| CS1 | 194.4 ± 2.1 |
| CS2 | 173.8 ± 1.3 |
| CS3 | 215.4 ± 2.6 |
| CS4 | 234.9 ± 3.1 |
Chromatographic and spectrometric parameters including ion assignment, theoretical and measured mass (m/z), retention time, accuracy, and sensitivity for the investigated analytes (n = 15). FCQA, feruloyl-caffeoylquinic acid; pCoQA, p-coumaroylquinic acid; CFQA, caffeoyl-feruloylquinic.
| Compounds | Chemical | Adduct | Theoretical | Measured | Accuracy | Retention Time | LOD | LOQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Formula | Mass ( | Mass ( | (Δ mg/kg) | (min) | (mg/kg) | (mg/kg) | ||
| Trigonelline | C7H7NO2 | [M + H]+ | 138.05495 | 138.05487 | −0.58 | 0.4 | 0.05 | 0.16 |
| Theophylline | C7H8N4O2 | [M + H]+ | 181.07200 | 181.07193 | −0.39 | 3.63 | 0.05 | 0.16 |
| Theobromine | C7H8N4O2 | [M + H]+ | 181.07200 | 181.07204 | 0.22 | 3.74 | 0.05 | 0.16 |
| 5-CQA | C16H18O9 | [M − H]− | 353.08780 | 353.08780 | 0.00 | 3.81 | 0.05 | 0.14 |
| Caffeine | C8H10N4O2 | [M + H]+ | 195.08765 | 195.08757 | −0.41 | 3.84 | 0.05 | 0.16 |
| 3,4-FCQA | C26H26O12 | [M − H]− | 529.13245 | 529.13245 | 0.00 | 3.85 | 0.05 | 0.16 |
| 4-CQA | C16H18O9 | [M − H]− | 353.08780 | 353.08768 | −0.34 | 3.9 | 0.05 | 0.14 |
| 3-CQA | C16H18O9 | [M − H]− | 353.08780 | 353.08762 | −0.51 | 3.94 | 0.05 | 0.14 |
| 3- | C16H18O8 | [M − H]− | 337.09289 | 337.09232 | −1.69 | 3.96 | 0.05 | 0.14 |
| 5- | C16H18O8 | [M − H]− | 337.09289 | 337.09290 | 0.03 | 3.99 | 0.05 | 0.14 |
| 3-FQA | C17H20O9 | [M − H]− | 367.10346 | 367.10303 | −1.17 | 3.96 | 0.05 | 0.14 |
| 4 + 5-FQA | C17H20O9 | [M − H]− | 367.10346 | 367.10309 | −1.01 | 4.01 | 0.05 | 0.14 |
| 3,5-diCQA | C25H24O12 | [M − H]− | 515.11950 | 515.11993 | 0.83 | 4.11 | 0.05 | 0.16 |
| 4,5-CFQA | C26H26O12 | [M − H]− | 529.13245 | 529.13495 | 4.72 | 4.14 | 0.05 | 0.16 |
| 3,4-diCQA | C25H24O12 | [M − H]− | 515.11950 | 515.12103 | 2.97 | 4.22 | 0.05 | 0.16 |
Chlorogenic acids’ (CGAs) content in the analyzed CS extracts. Results are shown as the mean value ± SD (n = 3).
| Compounds | CS1 | CS2 | CS3 | CS4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average (mg/g) ± SD | Average (mg/g) ± SD | Average (mg/g) ± SD | Average (mg/g) ± SD | |
| 3-CQA | 0.21 ± 0.02 | 0.40 ± 0.04 | 0.51 ± 0.03 | 1.54 ± 0.06 |
| 4-CQA | 0.45 ± 0.03 | 2.46 ± 0.12 | 2.65 ± 0.11 | 2.61 ± 0.04 |
| 5-CQA | 0.96 ± 0.05 | 2.38 ± 0.61 | 0.85 ± 0.09 | 1.78 ± 0.06 |
| 3- | 0.04 ± 0.001 | 0.21 ± 0.04 | 0.15 ± 0.03 | 4.30 ± 0.31 |
| 5- | 0.31 ± 0.04 | 0.24 ± 0.08 | 0.13 ± 0.01 | 2.67 ± 0.04 |
| 3-FQA | 1.51 ± 0.16 | 0.87 ± 0.09 | 0.75 ± 0.04 | 0.79 ± 0.05 |
| 4 + 5-FQA | 6.79 ± 0.42 | 5.36 ± 0.19 | 3.46 ± 0.20 | 3.46 ± 0.09 |
| 3,4-diCQA | 0.05 ± 0.01 | n. d. | n. d. | n. d. |
| 3,5-diCQA | 1.40 ± 0.11 | 0.69 ± 0.08 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | n. d. |
| 3,4-FCQA | 0.25 ± 0.06 | n. d. | 0.19 ± 0.03 | n. d. |
| 4,5-CFQA | 0.07 ± 0.01 | n. d. | n. d. | n. d. |
|
| 12.04 | 12.61 | 8.77 | 17.15 |
The differences between average values were evaluated by using Tukey’s test at the level of significance p < 0.05.
Alkaloids’ content in the analyzed CS extracts. Results are shown as the mean value ± SD (n = 3).
| Alkaloids | CS1 | CS2 | CS3 | CS4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average (mg/g) ± SD | Average (mg/g) ± SD | Average (mg/kg) ± SD | Average (mg/g) ± SD | |
| Trigonelline | 22.5 ± 0.3 | 16.3 ± 0.2 | 20.4 ± 0.3 | 23.7 ± 0.3 |
| Theobromine | 0.3 ± 0.01 | 0.2 ± 0.02 | 0.3 ± 0.03 | 0.0 ± 0.01 |
| Theophylline | 0.1 ± 0.02 | 0.1 ± 0.01 | 0.1 ± 0.02 | 0.1 ± 0.01 |
| Caffeine | 33.6 ± 0.4 | 29.2 ± 0.5 | 27.7 ± 0.4 | 34.3 ± 0.6 |
|
| 56.39 | 45.73 | 48.47 | 58.19 |
The differences between average values were evaluated by using Tukey’s test at the level of significance p < 0.05.
Bioaccessibility of total phenolic content evaluated by the Folin-Ciocalteu method in non-digested samples and during the simulated in vitro digestion.
| Samples | TPC in CS1 | TPC in CS2 | TPC in CS3 | TPC in CS4 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mg GAE/g ± SD | % | mg GAE/g ± SD | % | mg GAE/g ± SD | % | mg GAE/g ± SD | % | |
| Not digested | 5.7 ± 0.1 | 5.8 ± 0.2 | 6.5 ± 0.2 | 6.9 ± 0.3 | ||||
| Digestion Stage | ||||||||
| OS | 7.4 ± 0.3 | 28.2 | 7.3 ± 0.3 | 24.7 | 8.5 ± 0.3 | 33.0 | 8.3 ± 0.3 | 20.9 |
| GS | 7.6 ± 0.3 | 32.0 | 7.8 ± 0.4 | 34.5 | 10.1 ± 0.5 | 59.1 | 9.4 ± 0.6 | 37.0 |
| DS | 8.4 ± 0.4 | 46.7 | 8.7 ± 0.4 | 48.8 | 10.3 ± 0.4 | 62.2 | 10.1 ± 0.2 | 47.2 |
| PS | 8.1 ± 0.5 | 40.9 | 8.3 ± 0.5 | 42.7 | 9.7 ± 0.3 | 52.7 | 10.4 ± 0.4 | 51.5 |
| VS | 6.2 ± 0.5 | 8.0 | 6.9 ± 0.6 | 18.6 | 7.4 ± 0.4 | 16.2 | 8.1 ± 0.3 | 18.0 |
| Total colon stage | 14.3 ± 0.5 | 148.9 | 15.2 ± 0.6 | 161.3 | 17.1 ± 0.4 | 168.9 | 18.5 ± 0.4 | 169.5 |
OS: oral stage; GS: gastric stage; DS: duodenal stage; PS: Pronase E stage; VS: Viscozyme stage; GAE: gallic acid equivalents; TPC: total phenolic content; %: percentage of increase or decrease in TPC (not digested vs. digested stage). The differences between average values were evaluated by using Tukey’s test at the level of significance p < 0.05.
Antioxidant activity of digested samples evaluated by ABTS, DPPH, and FRAP assays expressed as mmol Trolox/kg of CS extract.
| ABTS mmol Trolox/kg ± SD | DPPH mmol Trolox/kg ± SD | FRAP mmol Trolox/kg ± SD | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CS1 | CS2 | CS3 | CS4 | CS1 | CS2 | CS3 | CS4 | CS1 | CS2 | CS3 | CS4 | |
| Not digested | 23.5 ± 0.2 | 19.1 ± 0.3 | 28.3 ± 0.3 | 29.1 ± 0.4 | 8.1 ± 0.1 | 6.7 ± 0.1 | 9.5 ± 0.2 | 11.2 ± 0.2 | 14.4 ± 0.3 | 15.8 ± 0.3 | 18.3 ± 0.5 | 17.2 ± 0.4 |
| Digestion Stage | ||||||||||||
| OS | 30.5 ± 0.3 | 28.7 ± 0.4 | 33.8 ± 0.4 | 37.0 ± 0.5 | 10.3 ± 0.2 | 10.0 ± 0.1 | 12.0 ± 0.1 | 13.6 ± 0.2 | 17.2 ± 0.1 | 19.2 ± 0.2 | 22.9 ± 0.3 | 21.8 ± 0.4 |
| GS | 30.8 ± 0.3 | 24.7 ± 0.3 | 36.8 ± 0.4 | 36.9 ± 0.5 | 9.7 ± 0.2 | 8.1 ± 0.1 | 14.0 ± 0.3 | 13.5 ± 0.4 | 16.2 ± 0.4 | 18.7 ± 0.3 | 17.5 ± 0.5 | 24.0 ± 0.6 |
| DS | 43.4 ± 1.6 | 35.3 ± 0.8 | 49.4 ± 1.1 | 52.4 ± 0.6 | 20.5 ± 0.2 | 10.7 ± 0.3 | 22.9 ± 0.3 | 22.8 ± 0.4 | 16.5 ± 0.5 | 16.7 ± 0.2 | 19.3 ± 0.3 | 22.2 ± 0.3 |
| PS | 36.0 ± 0.4 | 22.1 ± 0.2 | 32.7 ± 0.4 | 42.6 ± 0.8 | 16.5 ± 0.1 | 13.0 ± 0.3 | 18.5 ± 0.2 | 21.2 ± 0.3 | 17.5 ± 0.1 | 16.6 ± 0.3 | 19.7 ± 0.5 | 21.6 ± 0.4 |
| VS | 25.7 ± 0.7 | 20.4 ± 0.3 | 29.3 ± 0.4 | 31.9 ± 0.5 | 8.7 ± 0.1 | 7.5 ± 0.1 | 10.5 ± 0.3 | 12.2 ± 0.3 | 11.7 ± 0.1 | 10.6 ± 0.2 | 13.7 ± 0.1 | 18.6 ± 0.2 |
| Total colon stage | 61.7 ± 0.3 | 42.6 ± 0.2 | 61.9 ± 0.4 | 74.5 ± 0.7 | 25.2 ± 0.1 | 20.5 ± 0.2 | 29.0 ± 0.3 | 33.5 ± 0.3 | 29.2 ± 0.1 | 27.2 ± 0.3 | 27.2 ± 0.3 | 40.3 ± 0.3 |
OS: oral stage; GS: gastric stage; DS: duodenal stage; PS: Pronase E stage; VS: Viscozyme stage; ABTS and DPPH: free-radical scavenging; FRAP ferric reducing/antioxidant power; Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEAC). The differences between average values were evaluated by using Tukey’s test at the level of significance p < 0.05.
Correlation between TPC evaluated by Folin-Ciocalteu and antioxidant activity evaluated by the ABTS, DPPH, and FRAP methods. The correlation coefficients among means were determined using Pearson’s method.
| Assay | Oral Stage | Gastric Stage | Duodenal Stage | Pronase E Stage | Viscozyme L Stage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ABTS | 0.885 | 0.84 | 0.823 | 0.631 | 0.677 |
| DPPH | 0.882 | 0.941 | 0.652 | 0.875 | 0.82 |
| FRAP | 0.557 | 0.379 | 0.861 | 0.968 | 0.861 |
Composition of stock solutions of simulated digestion fluid. SSF: simulated salivary fluid, SGF: simulated gastric fluid, and SIF: simulated intestinal fluid.
| SSF (pH 7) | SGF (pH 3) | SIF (pH 7) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Salt Solution | Stock Concentration (mol/L) | mL of Stock Added to Prepare 0.4 L (mL) | Final Salt Concentration in Sample (mmol/L) | mL of Stock Added to Prepare 0.4 L (mL) | Final Salt Concentration in Sample (mmol/L) | mL of Stock Added to Prepare 0.4 L (mL) | Final Salt Concentration in Sample (mmol/L) |
| KCl | 0.5 | 15.1 | 15.1 | 6.9 | 6.9 | 6.8 | 6.8 |
| KH2PO4 | 0.5 | 3.7 | 1.35 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| NaHCO3 | 1 | 6.8 | 13.68 | 12.5 | 25 | 42.5 | 85 |
| NaCl | 2 | - | - | 11.8 | 47.2 | 9.6 | 38.4 |
| MgCl2(H2O)6 | 0.15 | 0.5 | 0.15 | 0.4 | 0.12 | 1.1 | 0.33 |
| NH4(CO3)2 | 0.5 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.5 | 0.5 | - | - |
| CaCl2(H2O)2 | 0.3 | - | 1.5 | - | 0.15 | - | 0.6 |