| Literature DB >> 33807371 |
Luigi Castaldo1, Luana Izzo1, Stefania De Pascale2, Alfonso Narváez1, Yelko Rodriguez-Carrasco3, Alberto Ritieni4.
Abstract
Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill.) waste contains a broad range of bioactive molecules, including polyphenols, which have poor bioaccessibility during gastrointestinal digestion. This work aimed to investigate the bioaccessibility of total phenolic compounds and the antioxidant capacity during simulated gastrointestinal digestion using two nutraceutical formulations based on non-acid-resistant (NAR) and acid-resistant (AR) capsules containing aqueous-based extracts from fennel waste. Moreover, to obtain a comprehensive investigation of the polyphenolic constituents of the fennel waste extract, a high-resolution mass spectrometry (Q-Orbitrap) analysis was performed. Notably, chlorogenic acids, such as 4-caffeoylquinic acid and 3,4-dicaffeoylquinic acid, were the most detected compounds found in assayed samples (1.949 and 0.490 mg/g, respectively). After in vitro gastrointestinal digestion, the extract contained in AR capsules displayed higher bioaccessibility in both the duodenal and colonic stages (1.96 and 5.19 mg GAE/g, respectively) than NAR capsules (1.72 and 3.50 mg GAE/g, respectively), suggesting that the acidic gastric conditions negatively affected the polyphenol compounds released from the NAR capsules. Therefore, the aqueous extract of fennel waste could be proposed as an innovative and easily available source of dietary polyphenols. Furthermore, the use of an AR capsule could improve the polyphenol bioaccessibility and can be proposed as a nutraceutical formulation.Entities:
Keywords: bioactive compounds; food waste valorization; health-promoting compounds; nutraceutical; polyphenols
Year: 2021 PMID: 33807371 PMCID: PMC8037122 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26071968
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Chromatographic and spectrometric parameters of the investigated compounds (n = 24).
| Compound | RT (min) | Adduct Ion | Chemical Formula | Theoretical Mass | Measured Mass ( | Product Ion | Accuracy | LOD (mg/kg) | LOQ (mg/kg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Protocatechuic acid | 2.31 | [M-H]− | C7H6O4 | 153.01930 | 153.01857 | 109.0284 | −4.77 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Epigallocatechin | 2.84 | [M-H]− | C15H14O7 | 305.06675 | 305.0665 | 219.06580; 159.10190; 121.02846; 109.02807 | −0.82 | 0.026 | 0.078 |
| 4-Caffeoylquinic acid | 3.00 | [M-H]− | C16H18O9 | 353.08780 | 353.08798 | 191.05594; 84.98998 | 0.51 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Epicatechin | 3.17 | [M-H]− | C15H14O7 | 289.07176 | 289.07202 | 221.94647; 203.09201; 161.04478 | 0.90 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Gallocatechin | 3.19 | [M-H]− | C15H14O8 | 305.06676 | 305.06681 | 219.06254; 159.10185; 109.02836; 121.02847 | 0.16 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Caffeic acid | 3.23 | [M-H]− | C9H8O4 | 179.03498 | 179.03455 | 134.99960 | −2.40 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Catechin | 3.34 | [M-H]− | C15H14O6 | 289.07175 | 289.07205 | 247.02241; 205.10712; 151.03923; 125.02335 | 1.04 | 0.026 | 0.078 |
| Syringic acid | 3.36 | [M-H]− | C9H10O5 | 197.04555 | 197.04503 | 182.02153; 166.99791 | −2.64 | 0.026 | 0.078 |
| 3.46 | [M-H]− | C9H8O3 | 163.04001 | 163.03937 | 119.04917 | −3.92 | 0.013 | 0.039 | |
| Vitexin | 3.48 | [M-H]− | C21H20O10 | 431.09837 | 431.09711 | 341.10803; 311.05457; 269.13815 | −2.92 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| 3,4-Dicaffeoylquinic acid | 3.51 | [M-H]− | C16H18O12 | 515.11950 | 515.11993 | 353.08667; 191.94507 | 0.83 | 0.026 | 0.078 |
| Ferulic acid | 3.55 | [M-H]− | C10H10O4 | 193.05063 | 193.05016 | 178.02666; 149.06009; 134.99963 | −2.43 | 0.026 | 0.078 |
| Naringin | 3.56 | [M-H]− | C27H32O14 | 579.17193 | 579.17212 | 459.09421; 339.03604; 271.04913 | 0.33 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Rutin | 3.59 | [M-H]− | C27H30O16 | 609.14611 | 609.14673 | 300.99911; 271.05026; 255.12390 | 1.02 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Isoquercetin | 3.61 | [M-H]− | C21H20O12 | 463.08820 | 463.08853 | 431.09848; 187.09698; 174.95542 | 0.71 | 0.026 | 0.078 |
| Myricitrin | 3.62 | [M-H]− | C21H20O12 | 463.08820 | 463.08701 | 316.02126; 178.97646 | −2.57 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Diosmin | 3.64 | [M-H]− | C28H31O15 | 607.16684 | 607.16534 | 300.99796; 284.03838 | −2.47 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Ellagic acid | 3.65 | [M-H]− | C14H6O8 | 300.99899 | 300.99911 | 245.91669; 29.93712; 185.01208; 117.00336 | 0.40 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Kaempferol 3 glucoside | 3.68 | [M-H]− | C21H20O11 | 447.09195 | 447.09329 | 284.03079; 255.02881; 227.07033 | 3.00 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Myricetin | 3.73 | [M-H]− | C14H10O8 | 317.03029 | 317.02924 | 178.87917; 151.00217; 137.02290 | −3.31 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Quercetin | 3.88 | [M-H]− | C15H10O7 | 301.03538 | 301.03508 | 273.04007; 174.95551 | −1.00 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Naringenin | 3.91 | [M-H]− | C15H12O5 | 271.0612 | 271.0611 | 235.92595; 151.03917 | −0.37 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
| Luteolin | 3.98 | [M-H]− | C15H10O6 | 285.04046 | 285.04086 | 174.95486; 89.02095 | 1.40 | 0.026 | 0.078 |
| Genistein | 4.05 | [M-H]− | C15H10O5 | 269.04554 | 269.04562 | 241.14435; 213.14908; 151.03935 | 0.30 | 0.013 | 0.039 |
Abbreviations: LOD: limit of detection; LOQ: limit of quantification.
Polyphenol content in the assayed extracts. The results are displayed as average value (mg/g) and standard deviation (SD).
| Compounds | Average (mg/g) | SD |
|---|---|---|
| PHENOLIC ACIDS | ||
|
| ||
| Caffeic acid | 0.049 | 0.002 |
| 4-CQA | 1.949 | 0.142 |
| 3,4 diCQA | 0.490 | 0.035 |
| Ferulic acid | 0.258 | 0.001 |
| <LOQ | ||
| SUM | 2.745 | 0.067 |
|
| ||
| Syringic acid | <LOQ | |
| Protocatechuic acid | <LOQ | |
| FLAVONOIDS | ||
|
| ||
| Luteolin | 0.024 | 0.004 |
| Vitexin | <LOQ | |
| Diosmin | <LOQ | |
| Kaempferol 3 glucoside | <LOQ | |
| SUM | 0.024 | 0.004 |
|
| ||
| Catechin | 0.021 | 0.002 |
| Epicatechin | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Epigallocatechin | <LOQ | |
| Gallocatechin | <LOQ | |
| SUM | 0.028 | 0.002 |
|
| ||
| Naringenin | 0.018 | 0.001 |
| Naringin | <LOQ | |
| SUM | 0.018 | 0.001 |
|
| ||
| Quercetin | 0.019 | 0.005 |
| Isoquercetin | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Rutin | <LOQ | |
| SUM | 0.028 | 0.004 |
|
| ||
| Genistein | <LOQ | |
| Myricetin | 0.021 | 0.001 |
| Myricitrin | 0.039 | 0.001 |
| SUM | 0.060 | 0.002 |
|
| ||
| Ellagic acid | 0.101 | 0.003 |
| TOTAL POLYPHENOLS | 5.824 | 0.037 |
Statistical differences were evaluated by Tukey’s test; p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant (n = 3).
Total phenolic content in the investigated samples.
| Samples | TPC mg GAE/g ± SD | |
|---|---|---|
|
| 8.22 ± 0.31 | - |
|
|
|
|
| Digestion Stage | ||
| Oral stage | n.d. | n.d. |
| Gastric stage | 1.04 ± 0.12 | n.d. |
| Duodenal stage | 1.72 ± 0.11 | 1.96 ± 0.05 |
| Pronase E | 1.86 ± 0.16 | 3.26 ± 0.27 |
| Viscozyme L | 1.64 ± 0.12 | 1.93 ± 0.06 |
|
| 3.50 ± 0.14 | 5.19 ± 0.15 |
Statistical differences were evaluated by Tukey’s test; p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant (n = 3). n.d.: not detected.
Antioxidant activity evaluated by DPPH, ABTS and FRAP assays.
| - | DPPH mmol/kg ± SD | ABTS mmol/kg ± SD | FRAP mmol/kg ± SD | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 14.2 ± 0.9 | - | 17.7 ± 1.4 | - | 12.3 ± 1.1 | - |
| - |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
| Oral stage | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
| Gastric stage | n.d. | 1.36 ± 0.2 | n.d. | 1.7 ± 0.2 | n.d. | 0.7 ± 0.1 |
| Duodenal stage | 2.2 ± 0.4 | 1.9 ± 0.4 | 3.6 ± 0.5 | 2.9 ± 0.3 | 1.4 ± 0.2 | 1.1 ± 0.1 |
| Pronase E stage | 4.2 ± 0.1 | 2.1 ± 0.2 | 5.4 ± 0.3 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 4.2 ± 0.4 | 3.2 ± 0.2 |
| Viscozyme L stage | 1.8 ± 0.7 | 1.6 ± 0.1 | 3.0 ± 0.4 | 2.5 ± 0.1 | 3.5 ± 0.2 | 2.2 ± 0.1 |
|
| 5.0 ± 0.4 | 3.7 ± 0.2 | 8.4 ± 0.4 | 6.5 ± 0.2 | 7.7 ± 0.3 | 5.4 ± 0.2 |
Statistical differences were evaluated by Tukey’s test; p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant (n = 3). n.d.: not detected.