| Literature DB >> 33182637 |
Mina Kim1, Dong-Geon Nam1, Wan-Taek Ju2, Jeong-Sook Choe1, Ae-Jin Choi3.
Abstract
Mulberry (Morus alba L.) leaves (MLs), originally used to feed silkworms, have recently been recognized as a food ingredient containing health-beneficial, bioactive compounds. In this study, the extrusion process was applied for the enhancement of the amount of extractable flavonoids from MLs. Extrusion conditions were optimized by water solubility index, total phenolic content, and total flavonoid content (TF) using response surface methodology, and antioxidative stress activities were evaluated in macrophage cells. According to the significance of regression coefficients of TF, the optimal extrusion parameters were set as barrel temperature of 114 °C, moisture feed content of 20%, and screw speed of 232 rpm. Under these conditions, the TF of extruded ML reached to 0.91% and improved by 63% compared with raw ML. Fifteen flavonoids were analyzed using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatograph coupled with photodiode array detection and quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UPLC-PDA-QTOF/MS), and the extrusion resulted in increases in quercetin-3-gentiobioside, quercetin-3,7-di-O-glucoside, kaempferol-3,7-di-O-glucoside, rutin, isoquercitrin, and moragrol C. Besides, regarding antioxidative activity, extruded ML water extract inhibited the production of H2O2-induced reactive oxygen species and attenuated nuclear morphology alterations in macrophage cells. The findings of this study should be useful in food processing design to improve the extractable functional compounds in MLs.Entities:
Keywords: Morus alba; apoptosis; flavonoid; leaf; macrophage; reactive oxygen species
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33182637 PMCID: PMC7697072 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25225231
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Experimental design using Box-Behnken design and the response values.
| Run No. | Independent Variables | Dependent Variables | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coded Levels | Actual Levels | Responses | |||||||
| X1 | X2 | X3 | T | M | S | WSI (%) | TP (%) | TF (%) | |
| 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 34.54 ± 0.41 | 1.04 ± 0.02 | 0.65 ± 0.02 |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 120 | 30 | 250 | 39.26 ± 0.10 | 1.22 ± 0.03 | 1.00 ± 0.03 |
| 2 | −1 | −1 | 0 | 110 | 20 | 250 | 41.88 ± 0.14 | 1.37 ± 0.01 | 1.09 ± 0.03 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 130 | 40 | 250 | 41.18 ± 0.29 | 1.31 ± 0.01 | 0.94 ± 0.03 |
| 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 120 | 40 | 300 | 39.20 ± 0.15 | 1.23 ± 0.00 | 0.91 ± 0.01 |
| 5 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 110 | 30 | 300 | 40.78 ± 0.39 | 1.31 ± 0.00 | 0.97 ± 0.02 |
| 6 | 0 | −1 | −1 | 120 | 20 | 200 | 42.06 ± 0.31 | 1.40 ± 0.02 | 1.10 ± 0.02 |
| 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 120 | 30 | 250 | 40.58 ± 0.21 | 1.36 ± 0.02 | 1.03 ± 0.02 |
| 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 120 | 30 | 250 | 40.53 ± 0.30 | 1.36 ± 0.01 | 1.03 ± 0.01 |
| 9 | 1 | −1 | 0 | 130 | 20 | 250 | 41.55 ± 0.15 | 1.39 ± 0.01 | 1.04 ± 0.02 |
| 10 | 0 | −1 | 1 | 120 | 20 | 300 | 41.54 ± 0.18 | 1.32 ± 0.02 | 1.02 ± 0.01 |
| 11 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 130 | 30 | 200 | 39.12 ± 0.27 | 1.30 ± 0.01 | 0.91 ± 0.05 |
| 12 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 110 | 30 | 200 | 38.97 ± 0.15 | 1.29 ± 0.01 | 0.93 ± 0.02 |
| 13 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 130 | 30 | 300 | 40.93 ± 0.32 | 1.20 ± 0.14 | 0.98 ± 0.02 |
| 14 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 110 | 40 | 250 | 39.57 ± 0.10 | 1.23 ± 0.01 | 0.83 ± 0.02 |
| 15 | 0 | 1 | −1 | 120 | 40 | 200 | 38.78 ± 0.36 | 1.24 ± 0.01 | 0.81 ± 0.03 |
-, raw mulberry leaf powder. X1, T, barrel temperature (°C); X2, M, feed moisture content (%); X3, S, screw speed (rpm). WSI, water solubility index; TP, total phenolic content; TF, total flavonoid content. Means with different superscripts letters in each column are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Regression summaries for independent variables.
| Parameters | Regression Parameter Coefficients | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| WSI (%) | TP (%) | TF (%) | |
| T (X1) | 0.195 | 0.0009 | 0.0067 |
| M (X2) | −1.038 ** | −0.0590 * | −0.0941 *** |
| S (X3) | 0.439 | −0.0215 | 0.0168 |
| T × M (X1X2) | 0.487 | 0.0167 | 0.0401 * |
| T × S (X1X3) | . | −0.0312 | . |
| M × S (X2X3) | . | 0.0173 | 0.0441 ** |
| T × T (X12) | 0.256 | . | −0.0304 * |
| M × M (X22) | 0.697 | . | . |
| S × S (X32) | −0.396 | −0.0355 | −0.0395 * |
| F-value (model) | 3.38 | 2.08 | 25.19 *** |
| Lack of fit | NS | NS | NS |
| R2 | 0.772 | 0.676 | 0.962 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.544 | 0.351 | 0.924 |
| Predicted R2 | 0 | 0 | 0.773 |
T, barrel temperature (°C); M, feed moisture content (%); S, screw speed (rpm). WSI, water solubility index; TP, total phenolic content; TF, total flavonoid content. Asterisks indicate significant difference (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001). NS, not significant.
Figure 1Response surface plots showing (a) the effects of temperature and moisture content, (b) the effects of screw speed and moisture content, and (c) the effects of screw speed and temperature on total flavonoid content. Temp, barrel temperature (°C); Moisture, feed moisture content (%); Speed, screw speed (rpm). TF, total flavonoid content (%).
Figure 2Liquid chromatograms of flavonoids in (a) raw mulberry leaves and (b) the optimal extruded mulberry leaves (114 °C, 20%, 232 rpm). (c–f) Mass spectrum of major flavonoids. (c) Quercetin 3-gentiobioside, (d) Quercetin 3-O-rutinoside, (e) Quercetin 3-O-glucoside, and (f) Kaempferol 3-O-glucoside. The names of the flavonoids are listed in Table 3.
Contents of flavonoids (mg 100 g/dry weight) isolated from optimal extruded mulberry leaves extract.
| Peak No. | Compound | MW | Fragment Ions ( | Raw | Extrusion | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Quercetin 3-gentiobioside | 627 | 649, 627, 465, 303 | 95.94 ± 8.05 | 152.75 ± 4.99 *** | [ |
| 2 | Quercetin 3- | 772 | 795, 773, 627, 611, 465, 303 | 15.79 ± 1.19 *** | 2.81 ± 0.05 | [ |
| 3 | Quercetin 3,7-di- | 626 | 649, 627, 465, 303 | 44.84 ± 2.84 | 57.06 ± 5.17 * | [ |
| 4 | Kaempferol 3- | 756 | 779, 757, 611, 595, 449, 287 | 3.84 ± 0.34 ** | 2.48 ± 0.11 | [ |
| 5 | Quercetin 3- | 756 | 779, 757, 611, 465, 449, 303 | 9.96 ± 1.32 | 19.71 ± 0.67 *** | [ |
| 6 | Kaempferol 3- | 740 | 763, 741, 595, 449, 433, 287 | 22.13 ± 1.05 | 22.71 ± 0.90 | [ |
| 7 | Quercetin 3- | 610 | 633, 611, 465, 449, 303 | 196.79 ± 24.06 | 267.32 ± 12.39 * | [ |
| 8 | Kaempferol 3- | 594 | 617, 595, 449, 433, 287 | 21.56 ± 2.12 | 19.75 ± 0.68 | [ |
| 9 | Quercetin 3- | 464 | 487, 465, 303 | 368.65 ± 48.46 | 497.27 ± 20.32 * | [ |
| 10 | Quercetin 3- | 550 | 573, 551, 465, 303 | 137.93 ± 20.95 | 147.39 ± 17.40 | [ |
| 11 | Kaempferol 3- | 594 | 617, 594, 447, 287 | 53.46 ± 4.82 | 58.89 ± 2.70 | [ |
| 12 | Kaempferol 3-O-(6’’- | 680 | 703, 681, 535, 433, 287 | 9.27 ± 1.07 | 17.78 ± 0.79 *** | [ |
| 13 | Kaempferol 3- | 448 | 471, 449, 287 | 225.64 ± 23.23 | 266.02 ± 10.79 | [ |
| 14 | Kaempferol 3- | 534 | 557, 535, 449, 287 | 105.81 ± 9.71 | 102.07 ± 11.77 | [ |
| 15 | Kaempferol 3-O-(2″- | 534 | 557, 535, 449, 287 | 7.55 ± 0.65 | 6.70 ± 00.71 | [ |
| Quercetin-based flavonoid | 859.95 ± 102.59 | 1124.60 ± 54.57 * | ||||
| Kaempferol-based flavonoid | 459.23 ± 43.28 | 516.11 ± 26.94 | ||||
| Total flavonoid | 1319.17 ± 145.87 | 1640.71 ± 81.25 * |
All samples were analyzed in positive ion mode (m/z, [M + H]+) using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatograph coupled with photodiode array detection and quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Each value is expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD). Raw group compared with extrusion group by independent t-test (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001). MW, molecular weight.
Total phenolic content, total flavonoid content, and radical scavenging IC50 values of freeze-dried water extract from optimal extruded mulberry leaves.
| TP | TF | DPPH• | ABTS•+ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw | 38.94 ± 2.06 | 37.87 ± 0.59 | 7.09 ± 0.91 | 5.85 ± 0.03 |
| Extrusion | 51.43 ± 1.11 * | 43.75 ± 0.78 * | 2.95 ± 0.66 * | 4.47 ± 0.20 * |
TP, total phenol content; TF, total flavonoid content, GAE, gallic acid equivalents; QE, quercetin equivalents; FDW, freeze-dried weight; DPPH•, 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl; ABTS•+, 2,2′-azino-bis-(3-ethylbenzthiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) diammonium salt; IC50, the half maximal inhibitory concentration. Each value is expressed as the mean ± SD. Raw group compared with extrusion group by independent t-test (* p < 0.05).
Figure 3Protective effect of extruded mulberry leaves water extract against H2O2-induced oxidative damage in RAW 264.7 cells. (a) Cells were pretreated with or without extract for 2 h and then cultured with H2O2 for 24 h. (b) The cells were stained with Hoechst 33,342 solution and nuclei were observed using a fluorescence microscope (magnification, 400×; scale bar, 50 μm). ML, mulberry leaves; R, raw ML water extract; E, extruded ML water extract. Data are expressed as the means ± SD. Different uppercase letters for (R) or lowercase letters for (E) represent significant differences between groups according to analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Duncan’s multiple range test (p < 0.05).
Figure 4Inhibition of H2O2-induced reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation by extruded mulberry leaves’ water extract in RAW 264.7 cells. (a) The degree of ROS production as measured by dichlorofluorescein fluorescence and (b) images obtained by fluorescence microscopy (magnification, 200×; scale bar, 100 μm). ML, mulberry leaves; R, raw ML water extract; E, extruded ML water extract. Data are expressed as the means ± SD. Different uppercase letters for (R) or lowercase letters for (E) represent significant differences between groups according to ANOVA followed by Duncan’s multiple range test (p < 0.05). H2O2-stimulated group without sample treatment compared with unstimulated control group by independent t-test (‡‡‡ p < 0.001). R group compared with E group by independent t-test (* p < 0.05).