| Literature DB >> 32439943 |
Xinxia Zhang1,2,3, Li Wang4,5,6, Hui Lu7, Zhaoqin Zong7, Zhengxing Chen8,9,10, Yongfu Li1,2, Xiaohu Luo1,2,3, Yanan Li1,2,3.
Abstract
In this paper, electron beam irradiated rice protein hydrolysates (ERPHs) were assessed for their ability to prevent hydrogen peroxide-induced oxidative stress in human HepG-2 cells. The related mechanism was also studied by analyzing the structural changes. Cytotoxicity experiments showed that rice protein hydrolysates pretreated with electron beam irradiation (EBI) were not toxic to cells if appropriate concentrations were applied. Cell viability markedly increased when the cells were treated with ERPHs before H2O2 induction. Furthermore, the ERPHs effectively suppressed H2O2-induced ROS production and lipid peroxidation and increased the protein expression levels of the intracellular antioxidant enzymes SOD, GSH-Px and CAT in H2O2-stressed HepG-2 cells. Consequently, the loss of mitochondrial membrane potential and cell apoptosis was alleviated. Circular dichroism analysis showed that pretreatment of rice protein with EBI significantly changed the secondary structure (the conversion of α-helices to random coils), which is beneficial to the improvement of its antioxidative activity. ERPHs exhibited stronger antioxidative effects than those without irradiation, possibly because of the difference in molecular weight distribution and amino acid composition. These findings indicate an efficient way to produce peptides with better antioxidant activity.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32439943 PMCID: PMC7242389 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-64814-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Schematic illustration of the preparation of bioactive peptide with or without EBI irradiation.
Figure 2(A) The cytotoxic effects of ERPHs on HepG-2 cells. Cells were co-cultured with NRPHs and ERPHs for 72 h and measured by CCK-8 analysis. (B) Proliferative effects of ERPHs and VC on HepG-2 cells. Cells were pre-incubated with NRPHs and ERPHs for 48 h prior to treatment with 0.4 mmol L-1 H2O2 for 4 h. After the treatment, cell viability was determined by CCK-8 analysis. Data are shown as means ± S.D.
Figure 3Effect of ERPHs on the intracellular ROS level. HepG-2 cells were pretreated with NRPHs and ERPHs for 48 h before treatment with 0.4 mM H2O2 for 4 h. Then the cells were exposed to DCFH-DA for 30 min. DCF fluorescence of the treated cells were measured by using a laser scanning confocal microscope. Data are shown as means ± S.D.
Figure 4The effect of ERPHs on SOD, GSH-Px, CAT and MDA activity in H2O2-treated HepG-2 cells. NRPHs and ERPHs were added to the culture 48 h prior to H2O2 addition, then cells were incubated with 0.4 mM H2O2 for 4 h. Data are shown as means ± S.D.
Figure 5Protective effects of ERPHs against H2O2-induced apoptosis in HepG-2 cells. The cells were pretreated with NRPHs and ERPHs for 48 h before treated with 0.4 mM H2O2 for 4 h. Then, cells were me assured by Flow cytometric. (A,B)Apoptosis detection: Annexin V-FITC assay of HepG-2 cells. (C) Alterations of mitochondrial membrane potential (MMP) detect ion: JC-1 assay of HepG-2 cells. Data are shown as means ± S.D.
Effects of EBI pretreatments on the secondary structure content (%) of ERPHs.
| NRPHs | ERPHs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 kGy | 10 kGy | 20 kGy | 30 kGy | ||
| α-Helix | 10.8 ± 0.37 | 8.7 ± 0.37 | 7.2 ± 0.20 | 6.2 ± 0.34 | 5.1 ± 0.15 |
| β-Sheet | 18.6 ± 0.34 | 18.9 ± 0.34 | 19.1 ± 0.19 | 19.6 ± 0.47 | 19.9 ± 0.27 |
| β-Turn | 14.8 ± 0.17 | 14.1 ± 0.17 | 13.8 ± 0.19 | 12.5 ± 0.40 | 11.6 ± 0.23 |
| Random roils | 55.6 ± 0.51 | 58.3 ± 0.51 | 59.2 ± 0.12 | 61.8 ± 0.36 | 63.9 ± 0.18 |
Effects of EBI pretreatments on molecular weight distribution of ERPHs.
| Process | NRPHs | ERPHs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RPHs fractions (%) | 5 kGy | 10 kGy | 20 kGy | 30 kGy | |
| >5kD | 3.68 ± 0.03 | 1.88 ± 0.05 | 1.55 ± 0.12 | 1.23 ± 0.05 | 0.46 ± 0.11 |
| 3–5 kD | 4.06 ± 0.08 | 2.82 ± 0.11 | 2.59 ± 0.07 | 2.18 ± 0.12 | 0.99 ± 0.15 |
| 1–3 kD | 15.18 ± 0.13 | 15.35 ± 0.15 | 15.47 ± 0.07 | 15.50 ± 0.11 | 15.68 ± 0.09 |
| <1 kD | 77.08 ± 0.15 | 79.95 ± 0.09 | 80.39 ± 0.28 | 81.09 ± 0.16 | 82.87 ± 0.08 |
Effects of EBI pretreatments on amino acid composition (g/100 g of protein) of ERPHs.
| Amino acid | NRPHs | ERPHs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 kGy | 10 kGy | 20 kGy | 30 kGy | ||
| Asp | 8.26 ± 0.17 | 8.88 ± 0.33 | 9.4 ± 0.12 | 9.93 ± 0.19 | 10.33 ± 0.28 |
| Glu | 14.5 ± 0.1 | 14.87 ± 0.08 | 15.97 ± 0.04 | 16.42 ± 0.07 | 17.44 ± 0.08 |
| Ser | 4.03 ± 0.1 | 3.06 ± 0.04 | 3.01 ± 0.07 | 3.33 ± 0.07 | 3.44 ± 0.1 |
| His | 1.95 ± 0.06 | 2.03 ± 0.19 | 2.1 ± 0.05 | 2.3 ± 0.07 | 2.4 ± 0.14 |
| Gly | 4.68 ± 0.05 | 3.93 ± 0.29 | 3.78 ± 0.05 | 3.72 ± 0.06 | 3.01 ± 0.08 |
| Thr | 1.57 ± 0.06 | 2.65 ± 0.11 | 3.03 ± 0.1 | 3.17 ± 0.11 | 3.26 ± 0.11 |
| Arg | 7.12 ± 0.13 | 7.92 ± 0.75 | 8.29 ± 0.35 | 8.46 ± 0.49 | 8.87 ± 0.33 |
| Ala | 4.21 ± 0.13 | 4.87 ± 0.04 | 5.09 ± 0.13 | 5.69 ± 0.04 | 5.92 ± 0.06 |
| Tyr | 2.87 ± 0.17 | 2.69 ± 0.06 | 2.99 ± 0.05 | 3.35 ± 0.09 | 3.37 ± 0.12 |
| Cys-s | 0.49 ± 0.32 | 0.46 ± 0.16 | 0.39 ± 0.15 | 0.24 ± 0.22 | 0.17 ± 0.32 |
| Val | 5.38 ± 0.07 | 5.61 ± 0.11 | 5.98 ± 0.14 | 6.27 ± 0.16 | 6.39 ± 0.15 |
| met | 1.61 ± 0.03 | 0.91 ± 0.04 | 0.9 ± 0.08 | 0.66 ± 0.06 | 0.66 ± 0.09 |
| Phe | 4.28 ± 0.09 | 4.61 ± 0.06 | 4.8 ± 0.04 | 5.16 ± 0.14 | 5.33 ± 0.07 |
| Ile | 3.71 ± 0.1 | 4.72 ± 0.06 | 4.92 ± 0.04 | 5.17 ± 0.04 | 5.46 ± 0.04 |
| Leu | 6.2 ± 0.03 | 6.82 ± 0.06 | 7.77 ± 0.05 | 8.43 ± 0.19 | 9.4 ± 0.22 |
| Lys | 1.88 ± 0.43 | 3.01 ± 0.19 | 3.27 ± 0.26 | 3.58 ± 0.08 | 3.75 ± 0.27 |
| Pro | 3.55 ± 0.07 | 3.73 ± 0.06 | 4.16 ± 0.07 | 4.22 ± 0.13 | 4.35 ± 0.13 |
| TAAA (%)a | 64.61 | 64.93 | 65.66 | 65.36 | 66.39 |
aTotal antioxidant related amino acid ratio. Take Asp, Glu, Arg, Phe, Leu and Pro as representatives.