| Literature DB >> 32650394 |
Luz Verónica Pacheco1, Javier Parada2, José Ricardo Pérez-Correa3, María Salomé Mariotti-Celis4, Fernanda Erpel3, Angara Zambrano5, Mauricio Palacios6,7,8.
Abstract
The increment of non-communicable chronic diseases is a constant concern worldwide, with type-2 diabetes mellitus being one of the most common illnesses. A mechanism to avoid diabetes-related hyperglycemia is to reduce food digestion/absorption by using anti-enzymatic (functional) ingredients. This research explored the potential of six common Chilean seaweeds to obtain anti-hyperglycemic polyphenol extracts, based on their capacity to inhibit key enzymes related with starch digestion. Ethanol/water hot pressurized liquid extraction (HPLE), which is an environmentally friendly method, was studied and compared to conventional extraction with acetone. Total polyphenols (TP), antioxidant activity, cytotoxicity and inhibition capacity on α-glucosidase and α-amylase were analyzed. Results showed that the Durvillaea antarctica (cochayuyo) acetone extract had the highest TP content (6.7 ± 0.7 mg gallic acid equivalents (GAE)/g dry seaweed), while its HPLE ethanol/water extract showed the highest antioxidant activity (680.1 ± 11.6 μmol E Trolox/g dry seaweed). No extract affected cell viability significantly. Only cochayuyo produced extracts having relevant anti-enzymatic capacity on both studied enzymes, showing a much stronger inhibition to α-glucosidase (even almost 100% at 1000 µg/mL) than to α-amylase. In conclusion, from the Chilean seaweeds considered in this study, cochayuyo is the most suitable for developing functional ingredients to moderate postprandial glycemic response (starchy foods), since it showed a clear enzymatic inhibition capacity and selectivity.Entities:
Keywords: cochayuyo; enzyme inhibition; hypoglycemic effect; seaweed polyphenols; starch digestion
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32650394 PMCID: PMC7401274 DOI: 10.3390/md18070353
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mar Drugs ISSN: 1660-3397 Impact factor: 5.118
Figure 1HT-29 cell viability at different dry extracts concentrations: (A) the ethanolic extract at 24 h incubation; (B) the ethanolic extract at 48 h incubation; (C) the acetone extract at 24 h incubation; (D) the acetone extract at 48 h incubation. Each point represents the mean of viable cells ± SD (n = 2). The dashed line is the cell viability using the positive control (DMSO 16.7%). The 100% viability was assigned to the cell culture without extracts.
Antioxidant activity of the seaweed extracts.
| Species | Type | Total Polyphenolsmg | DPPH | ORAC | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ethanol | Acetone | Ethanol | Acetone | Ethanol | Acetone | ||
|
| Brown | 7.4 ± 0.2 b | 6.7 ± 0.7 a | 48.5 ± 4.2 a | 27.8 ± 2.2a | 680.1 ± 11.6 a | 64.7 ± 0.0 a |
| Red | 3.2 ± 0.3 a | 3.4 ± 0.2 a | 4.8 ± 0.4 b | 4.7 ± 0.2 c | 277.8 ± 15.5 bc | 6.9 ± 0.5 c | |
|
| Brown | 3.3 ± 0.2 b | 3.8 ± 0.1 a | 6.6 ± 0.7 a | 10.7 ± 0.6 a | 448.3 ± 33.4 a | 21.3 ± 1.3 b |
| Red | 4.8 ± 0.3 b | 6.0 ± 0.3 a | 5.4 ± 0.3 ab | 6.9 ± 0.1 bc | 371.6 ± 12.3 ab | 18.1 ± 0.9 b | |
|
| Red | 1.9 ± 0.1 a | 3.1 ± 0.1 a | 2.2 ± 0.1 c | 7.05 ± 0.8 b | 208.1 ± 10.4 c | 8.7 ± 0.6 c |
| Red | 2.2 ± 0.0 b | 3.1 ± 0.1 a | 6.5 ± 0.4 ab | 10.6 ± 0.9 a | 455.3 ± 3.4 a | 30.7 ± 2.9 a | |
Different letters indicate the statistically significant differences for the Tukey multiple range test with 95% confidence, into each column.
Figure 2Percentages of the α-amylase activity under different concentrations of ethanol (A) and acetone (B) extracts (µg/mL). The points represent the average enzymatic activity (%) ± standard deviation (n = 3).
Figure 3Percentages of α-glucosidase activity under different concentrations of ethanol (A) and acetone (B) extracts (µg/mL). Points represent the average enzymatic activity (%) ± standard deviation (n = 3).
The IC50 values (μg extract/mL) of brown seaweeds for α-glucosidase inhibition.
| Species | Extract Type | |
|---|---|---|
| Ethanol | Acetone | |
|
| 473.4 ± 0.9 b | 466 ± 1.3 a |
|
| 5317.6 ± 0.75 e | 479.2 ± 1.7 c |
| Acarbose | 797.85 ± 1.1 d | |
Different letters indicate the statistically significant differences for the Tukey multiple range test with 95% confidence.
Figure 4Macroalgae used in this study. The red macroalgae species (A) Pyropia sp., (B) M. laminarioides, (C) Gelidium sp., (D) Nothogenia sp.; and the brown macroalgae species (E) D. antarctica and (F) L. spicata. (Photograph by Mauricio Palacios- IDEAL Center).