| Literature DB >> 33506222 |
Heeok Hong1, Jeong Min Lim1, Damini Kothari1, So Hee Kwon1, Hyuk Cheol Kwon2, Sung-Gu Han2, Soo-Ki Kim1.
Abstract
Recently, yogurt has been extensively studied to further enhance its functions using edible plant extracts. This study was conducted to investigate whether safflower petal (SP) as a natural food additive can be used to develop functional yogurt with improved health benefits. SPs were extracted with ethanol (SPE) and hot water (SPW), and then safflower yogurt was prepared by adding 0%-1.0% of those extracts to plain yogurt. With an increase in the fermentation duration, the pH of SPE and SPW yogurt samples was decreased, whereas titratable acidity and microbial counts were increased. The concentration of total polyphenols and total flavonoids, the activity of antioxidants, and the inhibitory effect on reactive oxygen species (ROS) were higher in SPW yogurt than SPE yogurt. Furthermore, α-glucosidase and lipase activity inhibitory effects of SPW yogurt were higher than those of SPE yogurt. In particular, free radical-scavenging activities, ROS inhibitory effect, and α-glucosidase activity inhibitory effects were significantly increased in SPW yogurt in a dose-dependent manner. Overall, these results suggest that SP extract possesses antioxidant activities and that it can downregulate α-glucosidase and lipase activities. The SP extract may have potential benefits as a natural food additive for the development of functional yogurt. © Korean Society for Food Science of Animal Resources.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidant activity; lipase; safflower petal; yogurt; α-glucosidase
Year: 2021 PMID: 33506222 PMCID: PMC7810396 DOI: 10.5851/kosfa.2020.e88
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Food Sci Anim Resour ISSN: 2636-0772
Proximate analysis of yogurt supplemented with safflower petal extract
| Component | Concentration of safflower petal extract (%) | Total amount (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SPE | SPW | ||
| Moisture | 0.0 | 83.19±0.34b | 83.19±0.34b |
| 0.1 | 82.13±0.14a | 82.59±0.36b | |
| 0.5 | 81.99±0.53a | 81.41±0.05a | |
| 1.0 | 81.67±0.32a | 81.42±0.06a | |
| Ash | 0.0 | 0.80±0.02 | 0.80±0.02 |
| 0.1 | 0.80±0.03 | 0.81±0.03 | |
| 0.5 | 0.81±0.02 | 0.82±0.02 | |
| 1.0 | 0.81±0.03 | 0.81±0.03 | |
| Protein | 0.0 | 3.95±0.11a | 3.95±0.11 |
| 0.1 | 4.33±0.15bB | 3.93±0.25A | |
| 0.5 | 4.37±0.10bB | 4.01±0.15A | |
| 1.0 | 4.40±0.10bB | 3.98±0.06A | |
| Fat | 0.0 | 3.63±0.06 | 3.63±0.06b |
| 0.1 | 3.63±0.15 | 3.40±0.10a | |
| 0.5 | 3.70±0.26 | 3.73±0.16b | |
| 1.0 | 3.73±0.21 | 3.73±0.23b | |
| Lactose | 0.0 | 11.77±0.06a | 11.77±0.06a |
| 0.1 | 12.01±0.26a | 12.03±0.06b | |
| 0.5 | 13.02±0.06b | 13.07±0.12c | |
| 1.0 | 13.11±0.06bB | 13.07±0.06cA | |
| Total solids | 0.0 | 15.75±0.45 | 15.75±0.45 |
| 0.1 | 15.89±0.36 | 15.76±1.01 | |
| 0.5 | 15.95±0.59 | 16.04±0.68 | |
| 1.0 | 16.05±0.44 | 16.02±0.21 | |
Values are mean±SD (n=3).
Different small letters in the same column and capitalized letters in the same row are significantly different (p<0.05).
SPE, safflower petal ethanol extract; SPW, safflower petal hot water extract.
Fig. 1.Changes in pH, titratable acidity, viable cell counts, and viscosity during fermentation of yogurt supplemented with safflower petal extract.
(A, D) pH, (B, E) titratable acidity, (C, F) viable cell counts, and (G, H) viscosity. (A–C) ethanol extracts: •, 0%; ○, 0.1%; ▾, 0.5%; Δ, 1.0%. (D–F) hot water extracts: •, 0%; □, 0.1%; ■, 0.5%; ◊, 1.0%. Different uppercase letters indicate a significant difference (p<0.05).
Antioxidant activity of, and total polyphenol content (TPC) and total flavonoid content (TFC) in yogurt supplemented with safflower petal extract
| Concentration of safflower petal extract (%) | Total amount | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| SPE | SPW | ||
| TPC (μg/mL) | 0.0 | 115.12±28.47 | 282.52±4.47a |
| 0.1 | 93.55±37.28 | 380.52±8.60b | |
| 0.5 | 94.49±30.49 | 381.46±8.61b | |
| 1.0 | 103.86±37.17 | 393.19±0.81b | |
| TFC (μg/mL) | 0.0 | 52.53±10.00a | 180.97±30.97a |
| 0.1 | 57.12±3.98ab | 210.80±2.29b | |
| 0.5 | 73.17±4.59bc | 270.44±11.92c | |
| 1.0 | 77.76±3.97c | 320.90±2.29d | |
| Antioxidant activity | |||
| DPPH (%) | 0.0 | 3.24±0.62 | 5.81±0.61a |
| 0.1 | 1.03±0.58 | 6.69±0.78a | |
| 0.5 | 2.60±0.20 | 7.17±3.94a | |
| 1.0 | 2.79±0.85 | 10.66±1.21b | |
| ABTS (%) | 0.0 | ND | 40.00±1.54a |
| 0.1 | ND | 48.00±3.00b | |
| 0.5 | ND | 48.33±1.76b | |
| 1.0 | ND | 49.67±0.88b | |
Values are mean±SD (n=3).
Different superscripts in the same column are significantly different (p<0.05).
SPE, safflower petal ethanol extract; SPW, safflower petal hot water extract; DPPH, 2,2-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl; ABTS, 2,2′-azino-bis (3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid); ND, not detected.
Fig. 2.Antioxidant effects of yogurt supplemented with safflower petal extract on human colorectal cells.
Fluorescence microscopic image (A). The bar figure was calculated using Image J software (B, C). SPE, safflower petal ethanol extract; SPW, safflower petal hot water extract.
Fig. 3.α-Glucosidase and porcine pancreatic lipase activity inhibitory effects of yogurt supplemented with different concentrations of safflower petal extract.
(A, C) safflower petal ethanol extract, (B, D) safflower petal hot water extract. Different uppercase letters indicate a significant difference (p<0.05).