| Literature DB >> 32613282 |
Bruna S Menezes1, Lucas S Solidade1, Aparecido A Conceição1, Manoel N Santos Junior1, Patrícia L Leal1, Edy S de Brito2, Kirley M Canuto2, Simone Mendonça3, Félix G de Siqueira4, Lucas M Marques5.
Abstract
The fungal kingdom has been widely studied as a source of bioactive compounds of interest to the pharmaceutical and food industry. This paper studies the production of natural red pigments by Fusarium solani BRM054066 in the submerged fermentation system, using Doehlert experimental design to determine optimal cultivation conditions. The chemical composition of the red pigment was determined by Nuclear Magnetic Resonance spectroscopy (NMR) and Ultra-Performance Liquid Chromatography coupled to Mass Spectrometry (UPLC-MS). Antioxidant activity was assessed by the ability to sequester of free radical DPPH. In the analysis of anti-inflammatory activity, murine peritoneal macrophages activated by LPS were used, and the gene expression of TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10 and IL-17 was determined using qPCR. As a result, it was found that agitation at 200 rpm and glucose concentration ≥ 20 g/L promote the best results in the production of red pigment. The chemical compounds identified were two naphthoquinones, fusarubin and dihydrofusarubin, and an anthraquinone, a bostrycoidin, being fusarubin the majority compound. The red pigment showed antioxidant activity by scavenge 50% of the DPPH radical, in a concentration of 24 µg/mL. The pigment also showed an effective anti-inflammatory capacity by reducing the overexpression of the pro-inflammatory cytokines TNF-α, IL-1β and IL-6 and promoting the production of anti-inflammatory IL-10 and IL-17, in murine macrophages activated by LPS (p < 0.05). According to the results, the fungus F. solani BRM054066, under optimized conditions of cultivation, proved to be a promising source of biologically active natural pigments with wide industrial applicability.Entities:
Keywords: Bioactive compounds; Doehlert design; Natural red pigment; Submerged fermentation
Year: 2020 PMID: 32613282 PMCID: PMC7329961 DOI: 10.1186/s13568-020-01054-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AMB Express ISSN: 2191-0855 Impact factor: 3.298
Doehlert two-factor experimental design (agitation and time) along with experimental and predicted values
| Experiment number | Pigment concentration μg/mL | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental | Predicted | |||||
| 1 | 0.866 | − 0.5 | 200 | 4 | 192.22 | 203.16 |
| 2 | 0.866 | 0.5 | 200 | 10 | 276.00 | 265.06 |
| 3 | 0 | − 1 | 100 | 1 | 0.00 | − 15.01 |
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 7 | 140.67 | 147.18 |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 7 | 147.52 | 147.18 |
| 6 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 7 | 153.34 | 147.18 |
| 7 | 0 | 1 | 100 | 13 | 93.78 | 108.79 |
| 8 | − 0.866 | − 0.5 | 0 | 4 | 34.06 | 53.14 |
| 9 | − 0.866 | 0.5 | 0 | 10 | 134.12 | 115.04 |
xA: Coded Agitation variable; xT: Coded Time variable; XA: Agitation (RPM). XT: Time (days)
Estimated effect of independent variables (agitation and incubation time) on pigment production
| Factor | Effect | Standard error | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 147.1767 | 3.661540 | ||
| 150.0200 | 6.341974 | |||
| 73.9900 | 8.684105 | |||
| 61.9000 | 3.661540 | |||
| 2.894702 | ||||
| 6.341974 |
: Agitation variable; : Time variable. : t-Value in Student’s t test. p: p-Value
aSignificant factors at 95% of confidence level
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) of the regression mode’l (Eq. 1)
| Source of variation | Sum of squares | Degree of freedom | Mean squares | F-value | F-taba |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression | 52087.40 | 4 | 13021.85 | 34.76 | 6.39 |
| Residual | 1498.50 | 4 | 374.6254 | ||
| Lack of fit | 1418.06 | 2 | 709.0301 | 17.63 | 19.00 |
| Pure error | 80.44 | 2 | 40.22063 | ||
| Total | 53585.90 | 8 |
R2 = 0.97204; Adjusted R2 = 0.94407
aListed F-value (95%)
Fig. 1Surface response graphs for pigment concentration as a function of agitation and time cultivation
factor experimental design (glucose and incubation time) along with experimental and predicted values
| Experiment number | Pigment concentration (μg/mL) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental | Predicted | |||||
| 1 | − 0.5 | 0.866 | 7 | 9 | 9.34 | 15.77 |
| 2 | 0.5 | 0.866 | 17 | 9 | 113.12 | 106.69 |
| 3 | − 1 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 3.12 | − 3.31 |
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 6 | 38.17 | 30.63 |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 6 | 23.39 | 30.63 |
| 6 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 6 | 30.33 | 30.63 |
| 7 | 1 | 0 | 22 | 6 | 150.78 | 157.21 |
| 8 | − 0.5 | − 0.866 | 7 | 3 | 14.61 | 21.04 |
| 9 | 0.5 | − 0.866 | 17 | 3 | 97.06 | 90.63 |
xG: Coded Glucose variable; xT: Coded Time variable; XG: Glucose (g/L); XT: Time (days)
Estimated effect of independent variables (glucose and incubation time) on pigment production
| Factor | Effect | Standard error | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 30.63000 | 4.26925 | 7.17455 | 0.018879a |
| 80.25833 | 4.26925 | 18.79915 | 0.002818a | |
| 23.16000 | 3.37514 | 6.86193 | 0.020584a | |
| 5.39500 | 7.39457 | 0.72959 | 0.541519 | |
| 32.64500 | 10.12543 | 3.22406 | 0.084228 | |
| 10.66500 | 7.39457 | 1.44228 | 0.285981 |
: Glucose variable; : Time variable; : t-Value in Student’s t-test. p: p-Value
aSignificant factors at 95% of confidence level
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) of the regression model (Eq. 2)
| Source of variation | Sum of squares | Degree of freedom | Mean squares | F-value | F-tab |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression | 21525.77 | 2 | 10762.89 | 60.44 | 5.14 |
| Residual | 1068.52 | 6 | 178.0866 | ||
| Lack of fit | 959.16 | 4 | 239.7901 | 4.39 | 19.25 |
| Pure error | 109.36 | 2 | 54.6796 | ||
| Total | 22594.29 | 8 | 2824.286 |
R2 = 0.95271; Adjusted R2 = 0.93694
aListed F-value (95%)
Fig. 2Surface response chart for pigment concentration as a function of glucose concentration and time cultivation
Fig. 3Relative gene expression in murine macrophages stimulated with LPS and treated with the pigment of F. solani BRM054066, in different concentrations. a Expression of TNF-α. b Expression of IL-1β. c Expression of IL-6. d Expression of IL-10. e Expression of IL-17. The treatments were analyzed by the Anova-one way parametric test and Bonferroni post-test (GraphPad Prism® software version 7.0). LPS was used as a positive control and PBS was used as the negative control. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05, represented by the * symbol, compared to the positive control (LPS)