The present study was executed to analyze the functional phytochemicals of hulless barley grass grown under different intensities of ultraviolet stress. The wheat seedlings were imposed to 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 h ultraviolet radiation and harvested in different times at vegetative stage. Specifically, the contents of total polyphenols, total flavonoids, total triterpenes, total polysaccharides, proanthocyanidins, and chlorophyll were determined and antioxidants capacity was evaluated by OH• and 2,2'-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS) scavenging ability. A mathematical model (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution, TOPSIS) was also employed for the comprehensive evaluation of functional components of hulless barley grass at different growth stages. The results showed that the UV stress could efficiently improve/preserve the contents of total polyphenols, total flavonoids, total triterpenes, total polysaccharides, proanthocyanidins, chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, and total chlorophyll, as well as the OH• and ABTS scavenging capacity. TOPSIS evaluation revealed that the highest phytochemical contents were yield on the 15th day under 1.0 h ultraviolet treatment.
The present study was executed to analyze the functional phytochemicals of hulless barley grass grown under different intensities of ultraviolet stress. The wheat seedlings were imposed to 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 h ultraviolet radiation and harvested in different times at vegetative stage. Specifically, the contents of total polyphenols, total flavonoids, total triterpenes, total polysaccharides, proanthocyanidins, and chlorophyll were determined and antioxidants capacity was evaluated by OH• and 2,2'-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS) scavenging ability. A mathematical model (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution, TOPSIS) was also employed for the comprehensive evaluation of functional components of hulless barley grass at different growth stages. The results showed that the UV stress could efficiently improve/preserve the contents of total polyphenols, total flavonoids, total triterpenes, total polysaccharides, proanthocyanidins, chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, and total chlorophyll, as well as the OH• and ABTS scavenging capacity. TOPSIS evaluation revealed that the highest phytochemical contents were yield on the 15th day under 1.0 h ultraviolet treatment.
Hulless barley (Hordeum vulgare L.
var. nudum Hook. f), which is also called naked barley
or qingke in Tibet, is categorized into Poaceae (the grass family).[1−3] Being an excellent barley germplasm resource, hulless barley has
good adaption capacity, strong antiadversity ability and is stable
in yielding.[2] Hulless barley is consumed
as the staple food in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau including Sichuan,
Gansu, Qinghai, and Tibet provinces in China that possesses 77% of
the global hulless barley hereditary assets.[3] The consumption of whole grain flour of hulless barley is progressively
increased as a functional food as it helps to reduce the risks of
diseases, such as diabetes, colonic cancer, high blood pressure, gallstones,
and hyperlipidemia.[4] Recently, cereal grasses
are gaining recognition as functional food with potential medical
and health benefits.[5] The consumption of
barley grass as a herbal medicine has been reported in Compendium
of Materia Medica in Ming Dynasty of ancient China, as well
as in Greek and Roman civilizations.[6,7] Its modern
interest was sparked in the second half of the 20th century by Dr.
Yoshihide Hagiwara who used the grass to nurse himself back to health
from mercury poisoning,[8] which drew much
attention to the therapeutic properties of gramineae grass. In Nepal,
the pressed juice of barley grass, also known as “Jamara Ko
Juice” and usually harvested on the seventh day, is very popular
among residents.[9] Barley grass extract
was proved to possess potentials of antiobesity, antidiabetes, circulatory
disorders prevention, antiarthritis, cholesterol reducing, anticancer,
antianemia, anti-inflammation, antioxidant, and renal difficulties
suppression, which could be attributed to the existence of nutritional
components of fiber, vitamins, or other phytochemicals such as β-glucan,
phenolic acids, flavonoids, and so on.[10−12] However, the information
of functional phytochemicals of hulless barley grass still remains
scarce.In addition, the harsh environment in Tibetan Plateau
including
high salinity, cold temperatures, and drought endows the highland
hulless barley strong ability to resist adversities[13] and the adverse environment influences the content of plant
secondary products.[14] Wu et al.[15] noted that the β-glucan in ripen grains
was dramatically decreased by PEG-simulated drought stress in the
tested Tibet wild barley. Ma et al.[16] found
that 60 mM NaCl treatment on 0–6 days hulless barley seedlings
increased the polyphenol (Free/Bound) contents, while Lilia et al.
showed a different accumulation pattern.[17] Across abiotic stressors, there are a lot of studies on the augmentation
of plant secondary products of functional phytochemicals including
phenolics and flavonoids under drought[18−21] and salinity stress.[22−25] The high ultraviolet radiation, which is also characterized as a
harsh climate, causes certain physiological changes in plants such
as accumulation of UV-B-absorbing compounds.[26] Li et al.[27] found that the contents of
anthocyanin and flavonoid accumulated significantly under UV-B stress
or under the co-treatment of UV-B and NaClstress, while the contents
of photosynthetic pigments and chlorophyll fluorescence decreased.
Moreover, for experimental/herbal use, the barley grass was usually
harvested within 2 weeks.[10,28] Hence, there is still
lack of information on long-term accumulation patterns of the phytochemicals
in hulless barley grass exceeding the prescriptive harvesting times
at the vegetative stage. In the present study, the contents of the
main functional compounds such as polyphenols, flavonoids, proanthocyanins,
triterpenes, polysaccharides, chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, and total chlorophyll and the antioxidant activity of
hulless barley grass at different harvesting times at vegetative stages
(from 10th to 23rd day after sowing of seeds) under different UV-C
stresses were explored, which would provide a theoretical basis for
the healthcare utilization and natural pharmaceuticals sourcing. The
antioxidant capacity was evaluated through OH• and
2,2’-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS)
scavenging ability. The correlation analysis between the phytochemicals
and antioxidant activity was carried out and a mathematic model was
also established for the comprehensive evaluation of the nutrition
of the grass.
Results and Discussion
Total Triterpenes (TT)
Triterpenes,
which were widely distributed in cereals, vegetables, fruits, and
other pharmacological plants and mushrooms, are well known for their
biological effects.[29] In our present study,
the TT contents ranged from 9.50 ± 0.37 to 63.67 ± 9.25
mg UAE/g, which was similar to the level of fruits like jujubes,[14] sugarcane,[30] or other
traditional herbal plants like loquat leaves,[31]Terminalia chebula,[32] bamboo grass,[33] and Ganoderma lingzhi (decreased from the young stage
to mature stage).[34] Barley grass on the
15th day of UV irradiation showed even higher TT contents than these
herbal plants. All of the UV-treated groups showed a similar accumulation
pattern and significantly peaked in the TT contents on the 15th harvest
day (Figure , p < 0.05). The TT contents of the UV-treated groups were
obviously higher than that of the control group before the 17th harvest
day except treatment of UV1.0, UV1.5, and UV2.5 on the 17th day (p < 0.05). On the 19th day, no significant differences
were found between the UV-treated and the control groups in exception
of UV2.5. Before the 21st day, the UV-treated groups had a non-/significant
higher TT content than the control group,; however, on the 23rd day,
the control group significantly outranked the UV1.0, UV1.5, UV2.0,
and UV2.5 groups (p < 0.05). The UV treatment
could lead to the accumulation of TT contents in the short term when
the plants modulate themselves to cope with the UV adverse, but soon
would decrease the TT contents through inhibiting its synthesis or
decomposition.
Figure 1
Total triterpene contents of different UV-treated groups
in different
growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
Total triterpene contents of different UV-treated groups
in different
growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
Total Polyphenol (TP)
The TP contents
of the present study ranged from 111.38 ± 0.00 to 3715.19 ±
65.48 mg GAE/100g. The value of the UV0 group varied from 111.38 ±
0.00 to 498.54 ± 6.08 mg GAE/100g, which shared a similar level
with corn, wheat, and barley and their corresponding sprouts or grass.[28] The TP contents of the UV-treated groups fell
into the same level of vegetables and fruits[35−37] and Pu-erh
tea,[38] but was 5–10 times lower
than tea from Sri Lanka[39] or Argentina.[40] A quite similar accumulation pattern of the
UV-treated groups was found in between the TP and the TT contents
(Figure ), which was
in consistence with previous studies,[33,41] indicating
that polyphenol and triterpene might share some of the synthetic route
that could be affected by the UV radiation. On the 15th harvest day,
an obvious accumulation peak was spotted, and the highest TP content
was found in groups UV0.5 and UV1.0 (no significant differences between
UV0.5 and UV1.0, p < 0.05). All of the UV-treated
groups showed significantly higher TP contents than the control group
before the 19th harvest day and significantly declined from the 21st
to 23rd day (p < 0.05). On the 19th day, the TP
contents of the UV0-, UV1.0-, and UV1.5-treated groups were obviously
lower than the UV0.5, UV2.0, and UV2.5 ones. On the 23rd day, no significant
differences were observed between all of the groups (p < 0.05), meaning long-time UV radiation had adverse effects on
the accumulation of TP. The optimum choice for achieving high TP contents
could be the treatment of UV0.5 with 1-day interval for 15 days.
Figure 2
Total
polyphenol contents of different UV-treated groups in different
growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
Total
polyphenol contents of different UV-treated groups in different
growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
Total Flavonoids (TF)
The TF contents
of the UV groups showed an undulating descent trend (Figure ), in accordance with that
of several hulless barley cultivars of a previous study,[42] whereas the control group declined gradually
(p < 0.05). The TF contents ranged from 32.83
± 0.52 to 248 ± 44.16 mg RE/100g, which was comparable to
some tropical fruits[43,44] and some Chinese herbs,[45] or was much higher than some common vegetables
from Japan.[46] In the present study, except
for the treatment groups of UV0.5 on the 13th day, UV2.0 and UV2.5
on the 17th day, and UV1.5 and UV2.0 on the 19th day, all other treated
groups exhibited significantly higher TF contents than the control
group (p < 0.05). For individual TF, it is recommended
to harvest on the 10th day to accumulate higher contents.
Figure 3
Total flavonoids
contents of different UV-treated groups in different
growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
Total flavonoids
contents of different UV-treated groups in different
growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
Total Proanthocyanidins (TPA)
The
total proanthocyanidins (TPA) contents ranged from 1.70 ± 0.63
to 4.60 ± 0.03 mg CE/g, which showed the same level of hulless
barley grains[47] but was higher than whole
rice.[48] The TPA contents of all of the
UV-treated groups decreased dramatically with prolonging of the harvest
day, in accordance with that of Nigella sativa(49) and maize leaves of Arper cultivar,[50] but significantly higher than the control group,
which just showed a nonsignificant decline trend (p < 0.05) (Figure ). On the same harvest day, no significant differences were found
in between all of the UV-treated groups in exception of the ones harvested
on the 19th day. On the 19th day, the TPA contents of the groups of
UV0.5, UV1.0, and UV1.5 were obviously higher than those of UV2.0,
UV2.5, and UV0 (p < 0.05).
Figure 4
Total proanthocyanidins
contents of different UV-treated groups
in different growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
Total proanthocyanidins
contents of different UV-treated groups
in different growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
Total Soluble Polysaccharides
Barley
sprouts are abound with soluble fiber components, especially β-glucan,
and have a lot of beneficial effects on human beings; hence, it draws
much attention.[4,15,51] β-Glucan could be a major part of the polysaccharides.[6] In the present study, the TSP contents (19.75
± 0.19 to 6.83 ± 0.08 mg GE/g) of all of the UV-treated
groups decreased dramatically with the prolonging of growth time,
which was in consistence with β-glucan in previous studies.[42,52] However, the TSP contents of the UV-treated groups were still significantly
higher than those of the control groups (p < 0.05)
(Figure ), of which
the decline trend was more moderate than the UV groups. An interesting
finding was that the rank of the TSP contents of the same harvest
day generally followed UV0.5 > UV1.0 > UV1.5 > UV2.0 >
UV2.5 > UV0,
which might indicate that less intense UV stress reserved more TSP
contents. It could also be inferred that the polysaccharides contributed
to the protection of hulless barley grass from UV stress.
Figure 5
Total soluble
polysaccharides contents of different UVtreated groups
in different growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
Total soluble
polysaccharides contents of different UVtreated groups
in different growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
Chlorophyll
The
effects of UV stress
on the variation patterns of chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, and total chlorophyll (denoted as Ca, Cb, and CTch, respectively) are shown in Figures , 7, and 8. The values of Ca, Cb, and CTch were
ranging from 0.05 to 2.37, 0.00 to 1.87 and from 0.14 to 3.40 mg/g.
For chlorophyll a contents, the UV-treated groups
showed an irregular fluctuating trend, whereas the control group showed
a steady increase trend. From the 13th to 19th day, an increase of Ca content was observed in all groups and an
accumulation peak was spotted on the 19th day in UV-treated groups.
The Cb content of the control group grew
steadily and was higher than that of the UV-treated groups in exception
of the treatment of UV0.5, UV2.0, and UV2.5 on the 10th day, and all
UV groups on the 15th day. An obvious accumulation peak of the UV
groups in Cb content was observed on the
15th day. As for total chlorophyll contents, the control group as
well exhibited a different variation mode from the UV-treated groups,
which varied undulatorily with the harvest day (shown in Figure ). It had been thought
that UV would prompt the decomposition of chlorophyll; however, in
many of the cases, the Ca, Cb, and CTch contents of the
UV-treated groups actually went against the hypothesis. The chlorophyll
was regarded as “green blood” for its beneficial properties;[53] therefore, UV treatment could be a good option
to improve this functional factor.
Figure 6
Total chlorophyll a contents
of different UV-treated
groups in different growth times.
Figure 7
Total
chlorophyll b contents of different UV-treated
groups in different growth times.
Figure 8
Total
chlorophyll contents of different UV-treated groups in different
growth times.
Total chlorophyll a contents
of different UV-treated
groups in different growth times.Total
chlorophyll b contents of different UV-treated
groups in different growth times.Total
chlorophyll contents of different UV-treated groups in different
growth times.
ABTS
Scavenging Ability
The values
of ABTS scavenging capacity were ranging from 0.60 ± 0.04 to
3.13 ± 0.04 mg VCE/g. A similar changing pattern in ABTS scavenging
capacity was shared between the UV-treated groups, the values of which
were significantly higher than the control group (p < 0.05) (Figure ). The ABTS scavenging ability increased moderately except for a
peak which appeared on the 15th day.
Figure 9
ABTS scavenging capacity of different
UV-treated groups in different
growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
ABTS scavenging capacity of different
UV-treated groups in different
growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
OH• Scavenging Capacity
The variation mode of OH• scavenging capacity
was similar to that of the ABTS scavenging ability (shown in Figure ) with value ranging
from 65.86 ± 2.68 to 12.48 ± 1.01 mg VCE/g. Aside from a
peak on the 15th day, the value of the UV-treated groups generally
grew moderately (p < 0.05). The value of the control
group increased moderately but was significantly lower than the UV
groups (p < 0.05).
Figure 10
OH• scavenging capacity of different UV-treated
groups in different growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
OH• scavenging capacity of different UV-treated
groups in different growth times. Vertical bars represent SD (n=3).
Correlation Analysis
The correlation
coefficients of total triterpenes, total polyphenols, total flavonoids,
total proanthocyandins, total soluble polysaccharides, chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, total chlorophyll, and
ABTS and OH• scavenging abilities on different harvest
days are shown in Tables –7.
Table 1
Correlation Coefficients of Total
Triterpenes, Total Polyphenols, Total Flavonoids, Total Proanthocyandins,
Total Soluble Polysaccharides, Chlorophyll a, Chlorophyll b, Total Chlorophyll, and ABTS and OH• Scavenging Abilities of Hulless Young Barley Grass on the 10th Harvest
Daya,b
correlation results on d10
TT
TP
TF
TPA
TSP
Ca
Cb
CTch
ABTS
OH
TT
1
0.967**
0.776
0.638
0.773
0.355
0.402
0.709
0.906*
0.950**
TP
1
0.725
0.553
0.703
0.170
0.472
0.665
0.965**
0.973**
TF
1
0.934**
0.968**
0.604
0.237
0.686
0.818*
0.578
TPA
1
0.981**
0.651
0.151
0.617
0.651
0.417
TSP
1
0.612
0.228
0.681
0.776
0.581
Ca
1
–0.518
0.074
0.184
0.097
Cb
1
0.815*
0.460
0.467
CTch
1
0.661
0.610
ABTS
1
0.882*
OH
1
Correlations between the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.
**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).
Table 7
Correlation Coefficients of Total
Triterpenes, Total Polyphenols, total flavonoids, Total Proanthocyandins,
Total Soluble Polysaccharides, Chlorophyll a, Chlorophyll b, Total Chlorophyll, and ABTS and OH• Scavenging Ability of Hulless Young Barley Grass on the 23rd Harvest
Daya,b
correlation results on d23
TT
TP
TF
TPA
TSP
Ca
Cb
CTch
ABTS
OH
TT
1
0.543
–0.415
–0.477
–0.319
–0.701
0.029
–0.279
–0.866*
–0.687
TP
1
–0.418
–0.186
0.005
–0.542
–0.193
–0.389
–0.673
–0.656
TF
1
0.946**
0.870*
0.363
–0.229
–0.027
0.743
0.780
TPA
1
0.961**
0.311
–0.282
–0.092
0.713
0.687
TSP
1
0.209
–0.140
–0.022
0.511
0.469
Ca
1
0.245
0.629
0.596
0.610
Cb
1
0.908*
–0.290
–0.427
CTch
1
0.025
–0.079
ABTS
1
0.934**
OH
1
Correlations between
the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.
**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).
Correlations between the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).On the 10th day (Table ), the TP, TT, and TF contents showed a significant
positive
correlation with ABTS scavenging ability (p <
0.01, p < 0.05, and p < 0.05,
respectively). The TP and TT contents significantly correlated with
OH• scavenging ability (the correlation coefficients
were 0.973 and 0.950, respectively, P < 0.01).
Based on the correlation coefficients (r), the functional
factors that contributed to the ABTS/OH• scavenging
ability were of the order: TP > TT > TF > TPA.On the
13th day (Table ), the TPA, TT, and TP positively correlated
with ABTS scavenging ability (r = 0.960**, 0.886*,
and 0.832*, respectively), whereas TP, TF, and TPA significantly correlated
with OH• scavenging ability (p <
0.05). According to the correlation coefficients, it could be seen
that the main phytochemicals that contributed to ABTS scavenging ability
followed the order TPA > TT > TP > TF. The main phytochemicals
contributing
to OH• scavenging ability followed the order TP
> TF > TPA > TT.
Table 2
Correlation Coefficients
of Total
Triterpenes, Total Polyphenols, Total Flavonoids, Total Proanthocyandins,
Total Soluble Polysaccharides, Chlorophyll a, Chlorophyll b, Total Chlorophyll, and ABTS and OH• Scavenging Abilities of Hulless Young Barley Grass on the 13th Harvest
Daya,b
correlation results on d13
TT
TP
TF
TPA
TSP
Ca
Cb
CTch
ABTS
OH
TT
1
0.811
0.742
0.784
0.767
–0.803
–0.853*
–0.837*
0.886*
0.705
TP
1
0.987**
0.685
0.671
–0.708
–0.757
–0.741
0.832*
0.916*
TF
1
0.561
0.547
–0.717
–0.753
–0.742
0.733
0.865*
TPA
1
0.994**
–0.348
–0.440
–0.410
0.960**
0.824*
TSP
1
–0.360
–0.450
–0.419
0.947**
0.799
Ca
1
0.995**
0.998**
–0.550
–0.404
Cb
1
0.999**
–0.631
–0.481
CTch
1
–0.604
–0.456
ABTS
1
0.890*
OH
1
Correlations between
the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.
**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).
Correlations between
the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).On the 15th day (Table ), all of the phytochemicals
except chlorophyll a had a significantly positive
correlation with ABTS and
OH• free-radical scavenging ability. On the 17th
day (Table ), the TPA and TP contents showed a significant correlation
with ABTS scavenging ability (p < 0.01) and OH• scavenging ability (p < 0.05).
Interestingly, both the ABTS and OH• scavenging
abilities had a negative correlation with chlorophyll b. The main phytochemicals contributing to ABTS and OH• scavenging abilities were of the order TPA > TP > TT >
TF.
Table 3
Correlation Coefficients of Total
Triterpenes, Total Polyphenols, Total Flavonoids, Total Proanthocyandins,
Total Soluble Polysaccharides, Chlorophyll a, Chlorophyll b, Total Chlorophyll, and ABTS and OH• Scavenging Abilities of Hulless Young Barley Grass on the 15th Harvest
Daya,b
correlation results on d15
TT
TP
TF
TPA
TSP
Ca
Cb
CTch
ABTS
OH
TT
1
0.942**
0.949**
0.927**
0.913*
–0.042
0.996**
0.977**
0.960**
0.990**
TP
1
0.793
0.993**
0.994**
0.243
0.933**
0.980**
0.969**
0.975**
TF
1
0.779
0.749
–0.283
0.951**
0.877*
0.870*
0.901*
TPA
1
0.996**
0.252
0.917*
0.966**
0.969**
0.966**
TSP
1
0.306
0.897*
0.959**
0.956**
0.955**
Ca
1
–0.075
0.155
0.185
0.035
Cb
1
0.973**
0.956**
0.985**
CTch
1
0.990**
0.984**
ABTS
1
0.969**
OH
1
Correlations between
the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.
**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).
Table 4
Correlation Coefficients of Total
Triterpenes, Total Polyphenols, Total Flavonoids, Total Proanthocyandins,
Total Soluble Polysaccharides, Chlorophyll a, Chlorophyll b, Total Chlorophyll, and ABTS and OH• Scavenging Abilities of Hulless Young Barley Grass on the 17th Harvest
Daya,b
correlation results on d17
TT
TP
TF
TPA
TSP
Ca
Cb
CTch
ABTS
OH
TT
1
0.468
0.282
0.620
0.648
0.090
–0.732
–0.540
0.591
0.573
TP
1
0.515
0.947**
0.949**
–0.106
–0.725
–0.603
0.966**
0.883*
TF
1
0.419
0.593
0.528
0.007
0.191
0.406
0.112
TPA
1
0.976**
0.011
–0.767
–0.594
0.973**
0.911*
TSP
1
0.138
–0.695
–0.494
0.943**
0.828*
Ca
1
0.490
0.734
–0.174
–0.391
Cb
1
0.952**
–0.823*
–0.925**
CTch
1
–0.703
–0.859*
ABTS
1
0.950**
OH
1
Correlations between
the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.
**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).
Correlations between
the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).Correlations between
the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).On the 19th day (Table ), only the TPA and
TT contents correlated
significantly with ABTS and OH• scavenging abilities,
respectively (p < 0.05). On the 21st day, just
TPA contents showed a significant correlation with ABTS and OH• scavenging abilities (p < 0.01, p < 0.05 respectively) (Table ). However, on the
23rd day (Table ), the TT content was found to have a significantly
negative correlation with ABTS scavenging ability, which was opposite
to the previous results on the 15th day, and the reason behind this
remained unclear. If it could be explained that on different growth
stages the varied relationship between the phytochemicals and antioxidant
activity was due to the contents of different compounds, how could
the hypothesis interpret the inconsistence of the correlation between
the TT contents and antioxidant activity? Hence, conclusions could
not be made that a phytochemical correlated to or contributed to its
antioxidant capacity from one single test, because the TT demonstrated
positive correlation with ABTS scavenging ability on the 10th, 13th,
and 15th days but negatively correlated with it on the 23rd day. Another
interesting finding was that the TPA always showed a positive correlation
with TSP.
Table 5
Correlation Coefficients of Total
Triterpenes, Total Polyphenols, Total Flavonoids, Total Proanthocyandins,
Total Soluble Polysaccharides, Chlorophyll a, Chlorophyll b, Total Chlorophyll, and ABTS and OH• Scavenging Ability of Hulless Young Barley Grass on the 19th Harvest
Daya,b
correlation results on d19
TT
TP
TF
TPA
TSP
Ca
Cb
CTch
ABTS
OH
TT
1
0.829*
0.696
0.546
0.404
0.561
–0.490
0.305
0.695
0.892*
TP
1
0.628
0.225
0.194
0.539
–0.125
0.433
0.419
0.671
TF
1
0.070
0.043
0.170
–0.324
0.021
0.153
0.444
TPA
1
0.938**
0.740
–0.556
0.439
0.900*
0.799
TSP
1
0.855*
–0.294
0.648
0.724
0.632
Ca
1
0.040
0.914*
0.566
0.607
Cb
1
0.442
–0.750
–0.701
CTch
1
0.203
0.260
ABTS
1
0.939**
OH
1
Correlations between the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.
**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).
Table 6
Correlation Coefficients of Total
Triterpenes, Total Polyphenols, Total Flavonoids, Total Proanthocyandins,
Total Soluble Polysaccharides, Chlorophyll a, Chlorophyll b, Total Chlorophyll, and ABTS and OH• Scavenging Ability of Hulless Young Barley Grass on the 21st Harvest
Daya,b
correlation results on d21
TT
TP
TF
TPA
TSP
Ca
Cb
CTch
ABTS
OH
TT
1
0.628
0.881*
0.811
0.937**
–0.718
–0.937**
–0.935**
0.653
0.610
TP
1
0.888*
0.692
0.810
–0.044
–0.633
–0.385
0.392
0.442
TF
1
0.881*
0.971**
–0.331
–0.882*
–0.687
0.666
0.711
TPA
1
0.932**
–0.311
–0.954**
–0.716
0.928**
0.854*
TSP
1
–0.483
–0.962**
–0.817*
0.753
0.727
Ca
1
0.571
0.884*
–0.256
–0.160
Cb
1
0.888*
–0.861*
–0.769
CTch
1
–0.633
–0.527
ABTS
1
0.907*
OH
1
Correlations between
the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.
**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).
Correlations between the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).Correlations between
the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).Correlations between
the data obtained
were run using a standard Pearson correlation.**P < 0.01;
*P < 0.05 (two-tailed).
TOPSIS Ranking Results
The decision
matrix for ranking was established as X = (x), where m represents groups under
different UV treatments on different harvest days and n represents the six criteria of TT, TP, TF, TPA, TSP, and CTch contents. The weight of each individual criterion was ω = 1. The positive and negative ideal solutions
(A+ and A–, respectively) are shown below.The relative closeness (Rj) to the ideal solution was calculated and expressed
as in Figure . The
higher the Rj value, the higher the comprehensive
content of the main phytochemicals. The top five groups of comprehensively
high phytochemicals contents were (ranking from the highest amount)
UV0.5, UV2.0, UV1.0, UV1.5, and UV2.5 harvested on the 15th day.
Figure 11
Rj values of different UV-treated groups
harvested on different days. Rj meant
the closeness coefficient. The augmentation of Rj values progressively augmented the functional phytochemical
contents.
Rj values of different UV-treated groups
harvested on different days. Rj meant
the closeness coefficient. The augmentation of Rj values progressively augmented the functional phytochemical
contents.
Principal
Components Analysis (PCA) of the
UV Treatments × Harvest Day Interactions
PCA was performed
to elucidate on quality parameters (TT, TP, TF, TPA, TSP, CTch, and ABTS/OH• scavenging
ability) under different UV stress at different harvest days. The
similarities or differences among the UV-treated groups are intuitively
seen from Figure . The first PCA axis, explaining 94.55% of the variance, correlated
with TT, TP, and antioxidant activity. The second PCA axis accounted
for 5.32% of the variance correlated with TF, TPA, and TSP, which
showed high contents on the 10th and 13th days.
Figure 12
PCA of the UV treatments
× harvest date interactions in six
treatments in seven harvest periods. PC1 explained 94.55% of the variance
and correlated with TT, TP, and antioxidant activity. PC2 accounted
for 5.32% of the variance and correlated with TF, TPA, and TSP.
PCA of the UV treatments
× harvest date interactions in six
treatments in seven harvest periods. PC1 explained 94.55% of the variance
and correlated with TT, TP, and antioxidant activity. PC2 accounted
for 5.32% of the variance and correlated with TF, TPA, and TSP.
Conclusions
The
UV treatments could efficiently improve the contents of the
main functional phytochemicals in hulless barley grass, namely, TT,
TP, TF, TPA, TSP, and CTch. The harvest day and UV density
also affected the compounds content. The highest values of the compounds
contents were 63.67 ± 9.25 mg UAE/g, 3175 ± 65.48 mg GAE/100g,
248.28 ± 44.16 mg GAE/100g, 45.97 ± 0.31 mg CE/g, 19.75
± 0.19 mg GE/g, and 3.40 mg/g and were observed in groups of
UV2.0 on the 15th day, UV0.5 on the 15th day, UV2.0 on the 10th day,
UV0.5 on the 10th day, UV0.5 on the 10th day, and UV2.0 on the 23rd
day, respectively. According to the correlation analysis, the main
functional factors contributing to the antioxidant ability varied
with growth period, and even the same phytochemical such as TT correlated
positively or negatively with antioxidant activity based on the difference
of harvest time. TOPSIS analysis showed that the top five groups with
comprehensively high phytochemical contents ranking from the highest
amount were UV0.5-, UV2.0-, UV1.0-, UV1.5-, and UV2.5-treated groups
harvested on the 15th day, which lay a theoretical basis for the production
of grass leaves powder of optimum quality.
Materials
and Methods
Chemicals
Ascorbic acid, gallic acid,
vanilline, and Folin-Ciocalteu reagent were purchased from Sinopharm
Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd (Shanghai, China). Rutin and catechin were
bought from Shanghai Yuanye Bio-Technology Co., Ltd (Shanghai, China).
Ursolic acid and 2,2′-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzthiazoline-6-sulfonic
acid) (ABTS) were, respectively, purchased from Cool Chemistry Co.,
Ltd (Beijing, China) and Shanghai Aladdin Bio-Chem Technology Co.,
Ltd (Shanghai, China). Hoagland reagents were bought from Qingdao
Hope Bio-Technology Co., Ltd (Qingdao, China). All other chemicals
or reagents were of analytical or HPLC grade.
Plant
Materials and UV Treatment
UV Treatment
Hulless barley seeds
were purchased from Taobao online retail platform
and planted in plant tissue culture rack in a growth chamber. The
seeds were washed thrice, sown evenly in four rectangular pieces in
a 32.5 × 24.5 × 4.5 cm hydroponic tray (80 ± 2 g/tray),
and then immersed in deionized water for 24 h in the dark to let malt.
The germinated seeds were grown in 1/2 Hoagland solution (refreshed
every another day) at 22 ± 1 °C under a light irradiance
of 16 h photoperiod (20 W). Six-day-old seedlings were brought to
impose UV radiation (40 W, Ozone free) for 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and
2.5 h and are noted as UV0.5, UV1.0, UV1.5, UV2.0, and UV2.5 groups,
respectively, while the control group was noted as UV0. All of the
UV-treated groups were rested for 1–2 days and then harvested.
The grass sampling was conducted on the 10th, 13th, 15th, 17th, 19th,
21st, and 23rd days after sowing of seeds and immediately freeze-dried.
Preparation of Hulless Barley Grass Extracts
Grass extracts to be analyzed for total triterpenes (TT), total
polyphenol (TP), total flavonoids (TF), total proanthocyanidins (TPA),
and antioxidant activity were prepared as follows: The dried grass
was ground using an electric grinder and passed through an 80-mesh
sieve. A 0.5 g weight sample of each treated group was defatted using
ligarine (30–60 °C) for 30 min and ultrasonicated with
25 mL of 80% methanol for 20 min. The mixture was filtered and rinsed,
and the residues were reextracted twice. The three filtrates were
pooled, evaporated under vacuum at 45 °C, redissolved, and brought
to 50 mL with 80% menthol. Extracts were prepared for total soluble
polysaccharides analysis as follows: The above residues (0.2 g) were
again extracted twice using 100 mL of deionized water in a boiling
water bath for 30 min. The crude polysaccharides were combined and
standardized to 250 mL. All of the extracts were stored at −20
°C in the dark until use except the polysaccharides extracts,
which were stored at 0–4 °C and detected within 2 days.
Determination of Total Triterpenes Content
The TT contents were detected using the vanillin-HClO4 assay method[30] with some modifications.
Five-times diluted grass extracts or aliquots (0.5 mL) of 0.2–1.2
mL of ursolic acid solution (0.1 mg/mL) were evaporated to dryness
in a 100 °C water bath and added in 0.2 mL of vanillin/acetic
acid solution (W/V). Perchloric acid (1.0 mL) was mixed in before
incubation for 10 min in a 60 °C water bath. After the mixture
was chilled to ambient temperature, 5 mL of acetic acid was added
and let to stand for 15 min. The absorbance was detected at 548 nm
versus a blank solution. The results were expressed on a dry basis
as mg ursolic acid equivalent/g (mg UAE/g DW).
Determination
of Total Polyphenol Content
The TP contents were determined
using Folin-Ciocalteu colorimetric
method[54,55] with slight adjustment. Briefly, 125 μL
of the grass extracts or standard gallic acid solutions (0–600
μg/mL) was well mixed with 125 μL of Folin-Ciocalteu reagents.
The mixtures were allowed to rest for 6 min and then reacted with
1.25 mL of 7% Na2CO3 (aqueous solution). Deionized
water was added to adjust to the final volume of 4 mL. After 90 min
standing at room temperature, the samples were measured at 760 nm
versus the blank. The TP contents were calculated using an equation
from the standard curve and expressed as mg gallic acid equivalents/100g
on basis of dry weight (mg GAE/100g DW).
Determination
of Total Flavonoids Content
A colorimetrical method[56−58] with minor modification was employed
for the detection of TF contents. The grass extracts or standard rutin
solution (2.0 mL, 10–60 mg/L) were mixed with 0.75 mL of 5%
NaNO2 solution. After 5 min, 0.5 mL of 10% Al(NO3)3 was added and mixed well. The mixtures were let to
stand for 6 min before addition of 4 mL of 5% NaOH to terminate the
reaction and standardized to 25 mL. Finally, the absorbance was detected
after 15 min. A standard curve was plotted to draw an equation, which
was used to calculate the TF contents. The results were expressed
as rutin equivalent on a dry weight basis (denoted as mg RE/100g).
Determination of Total Proanthocyanidins Content
The TPA contents were measured using modified vanillin-H2SO4 assay method.[59] Five-times
diluted grass extracts or aliquots (0.5 mL) of catechin standard solution
(20–100 μg/mL catechin in 80% methanol), 2.5 mL of 30%
sulfuric acid/acetic acid solution (V/V), and 2.5 mL of 1% vanillin/acetic
acid (W/V) were subsequently added and mixed evenly. A control mixture
of the sample was prepared using 80% methanol instead of vanillin
standards. After incubation for 15 min in a 30 °C water bath,
the absorbance was measured at 500 nm versus the control. The TPA
contents were calculated from the standard curve and expressed as
mg catechin equivalents/g sample (mg CE/g DW).
Determination
of Total Soluble Polysaccharides
(TSP) Content
The detection of total polysaccharides contents
was conducted using phenol–sulfuric acid assay method.[60,61] The standard D-glucose solution (1.2 mL, 10–50 μg/mL)
or samples were mixed with 0.2 mL of 6% phenol and then 2.5 mL of
H2SO4. After incubation in a 50 °C water
bath for 30 min, the absorbance was measured at 490 nm versus a blank.
The contents were expressed as mg glucose equivalent/g DW (mg GE/g
DW).
Determination of Chlorophyll a, Chlorophyll b, and Total Chlorophyll Content
The chlorophyll contents were measured using the methods previously
reported[62,63] with some modifications. The grass powder
(0.2 mg) was mixed with 20 mL of 80% acetone for 30 min prior to absorbance
(A) reading at 663 and 645 nm. Chlorophyll concentration
in grams per liter was calculated using the following equationswhere Ca and Cb are the concentrations of chlorophyll a and chlorophyll b, respectively.The contents of chlorophyll were
expressed as mg/g DW.
TOPSIS Model Establishments
The TOPSIS
(Technique Performance by Similarity to Ideal Solution) mathematical
model to solve ranking problems of multiple criteria decision making
was employed to comprehensively evaluate the effect of different UV
densities on the phytochemicals. The specific performances were referred
to the procedures proposed by Hwang and Yoon.[64]
Antioxidant Activity
ABTS
Scavenging Activity
The ABTS
scavenging activity of the grass extracts was evaluated based on previous
reports,[65,66] with some adjustments. The ABTS solution
was prepared by the reaction of 10 mL of 7 mM ABTS (prepared in 20
mM pH4.5 acetate buffer) and 10 mL of 2.45 mM potassium persulfate
for 12–14 h at room temperature in the dark. The ABTS working
solution was made by diluting ABTS solution to an absorbance of 0.7
± 0.01 at 734 nm using acetate buffer. Then, 3 mL of the working
solution was mixed with 2 mL of each sample or standard solution (5,
10, 15, 20, and 25 μg/mL ascorbic acid). The absorbance was
read at 734 nm after standing for 30 min at room temperature. ABTS
scavenging ability was calculated as followswhere A0 is the
absorbance of the mixture of 2 mL of 80% methanol and 3 mL of ABTS
working solution; A1 is the absorbance
of the mixture of 2 mL of grass extracts or standard solution and
3 mL 80% methanol; and A2 is the absorbance
of the mixture of 2 mL of grass extracts or standard solution and
ABTS working solution. The ABTS scavenging ability of the sample was
calculated using a standard curve and expressed as μg Vc equivalent/g
DW.
OH• Scavenging Activity
OH• scavenging activity was measured according
to a previously reported assay[67,68] with some adjustments.
Briefly, 2.0 mL of 6.0 mM FeSO4, 2.0 mL of sample solutions
or standard ascorbic acid solution (5, 10, 15, 20, 25 μg/mL),
and 2 mL of 6.0 mM hydrogen peroxide were subsequently added. After
10 min of rest, 2.0 mL of 6 mM salicylic acid solution was mixed in.
The absorbance was read at 510 nm versus deionized water as a blank
after 30 min reaction, and the OH• scavenging activity
were calculated from the following equationwhere A2 is the
absorbance of 2 mL of the sample solution mixed with 2 mL of FeSO4, 2 mL of H2O2, and 2 mL of salicylic
acid; A1 is the absorbance of the mixture
without H2O2; and A0 is the absorbance of the mixture without sample solution. The OH• scavenging ability of the sample was calculated from
a standard curve and expressed as μg Vc equivalent/g DW.
Statistical Analysis
All of the
tests were performed in triplicate. The results were shown as mean
± standard deviation (SD). The difference analysis was carried
out using Duncan’s new multiple range tests. The correlation
analysis was conducted using a standard Pearson correlation. All of
the statistics handling including principal component analysis were
carried out using IBM SPSS Statistics version 20.0 software (IBM Corp.).
Asterisks indicate significant differences (**p <
0.01, *p < 0.05).
Authors: Ali Alqahtani; Wannit Tongkao-on; Kong M Li; Valentina Razmovski-Naumovski; Kelvin Chan; George Q Li Journal: Phytochem Anal Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 3.373