| Literature DB >> 34195030 |
Suriya Chaiwong1, Usana Chatturong1, Rachanee Chanasong2, Watcharakorn Deetud1, Kittiwoot To-On1, Supaporn Puntheeranurak1, Ekarin Chulikorn3, Tanwarat Kajsongkram4, Veerada Raksanoh1, Kroekkiat Chinda1, Nanteetip Limpeanchob5, Kanittaporn Trisat5, Julintorn Somran6, Nitra Nuengchamnong7, Piya Prajumwong1, Krongkarn Chootip1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Metabolic disease encompasses most contemporary non-communicable diseases, especially cardiovascular and fatty liver disease. Mulberry fruits of Morus alba L. are a favoured food and a traditional medicine. While they are anti-atherosclerotic and reduce hyperlipidemic risk factors, studies need wider scope that include ameliorating cardiovascular and liver pathologies if they are to become clinically effective treatments. Therefore, the present study sought to show that freshly dried mulberry fruits (dMF) might counteract the metabolic/cardiovascular pathologies in mice made hyperlipidemic by high-fat diet (HF). EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE: C57BL/6J mice were fed for 3 months with either: i) control diet, ii) HF, iii) HF+100 mg/kg dMF, or iv) HF+300 mg/kg dMF. Body weight gain, food intake, visceral fat accumulation, fasting blood glucose, plasma lipids, and aortic, heart, and liver histopathologies were evaluated. Adipocyte lipid accumulation, autophagy, and bile acid binding were also investigated. RESULTS ANDEntities:
Keywords: Cardiovascular; DPPH, 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; Hyperlipidemia; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; Liver; Morus alba; Mulberry fruit; TC, total cholesterol; TG, triglyceride; dMF, Dried mulberry fruit
Year: 2021 PMID: 34195030 PMCID: PMC8240167 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcme.2021.02.006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Tradit Complement Med ISSN: 2225-4110
Fig. 1Total ion Chromatogram (TIC) of dMF aqueous sample (20 mg/mL) monitor in (A) ESI-positive mode, and (B) ESI-negative mode. The peak numbers correspond to compounds identified in Table 1.
MS data of (±) ESI- QTOF-MS/MS and the structure elucidation of dMF aqueous sample.
| Peak | RT (min) | adduct | Fragmentation (MS/MS) | Tentative Identification | Formula | Error (ppm) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.119 | 324.1299 | [M-H]- | 144.0656 | 2-O-alpha- | C12H23NO9 | 0.32 |
| 2.613 | 326.1447 | [M+H]+ | 164.092 | 2-O-alpha- | C12H23NO9 | −0.44 | |
| 2 | 2.882 | 104.1071 | [M]+ | 60.0814 | Choline | C5H14NO | 4.22 |
| 3 | 2.935 | 266.1243 | [M+H]+ | 248.1138,230.1035,182.0812,98.0600 | D-1-[(3-Carboxypropyl)amino]-1-deoxyfructose | C10H19NO7 | −3.28 |
| 4 | 3.173 | 179.0562 | [M-H]- | 89.0236,59.0137 | Glucose | C6H12O6 | −0.49 |
| 3.118 | 203.0535 | [M+Na]+ | 112.1140,84.0823 | Glucose | C6H12O6 | −4.39 | |
| 5 | 3.306 | 277.0332 | [M-H2O]- | 96.9690,78.9586 | Caffeoylmalic acid | C13H12O8 | 7.86 |
| 6 | 3.405 | 191.0562 | [M-H]- | 85.0288 | Quinic acid | C7H12O6 | −0.46 |
| 7 | 3.993 | 280.1402 | [M+H]+ | 262.1334,244.1219,216.1273,72.0821 | N-(1-Deoxy-1-fructosyl)valine | C11H21NO7 | −4.0 |
| 8 | 3.999 | 133.0139 | [M-H]- | 115.0026,71.0135 | Malic acid | C4H6O5 | 2.61 |
| 9 | 4.896 | 191.0197 | [M-H]- | 111.0085,87.0085,57.0345 | Citric acid | C6H8O7 | 2.75 |
| 4.914 | 215.0173 | M + Na]+ | 193.1245 | Citric acid | C6H8O7 | −5.01 | |
| 10 | 5.771 | 132.102 | [M+H]+ | 86.0962 | Leucine | C6H13NO2 | −0.72 |
| 11 | 7.943 | 166.0868 | [M+H]+ | 120.0803,84.9595 | C9H11NO2 | −3.28 | |
| 12 | 9.18 | 611.1591 | [M + H2O]- | 475.1425,285.0384,241.0488,149.0227,125.0235 | Cyanidin 3-rutinoside | C27H31O15 | 4.35 |
| 9.183 | 593.1487 | [M-H]- | 284.0306,125.0231 | Cyanidin 3-rutinoside | C27H31O15 | 4.2 | |
| 9.191 | 595.1671 | [M]+ | 449.1066,287.0544,213.0523 | Cyanidin 3-rutinoside | C27H31O15 | −1.35 | |
| 13 | 9.366 | 353.0857 | [M-H]- | 191.0548,179.0353,135.0442 | Caffeoylquinic acid | C16H18O9 | 5.96 |
| 14 | 9.441 | 771.1941 | [M-H]- | 609.1396,463.0809,301.0323 | Quercetin 3-O-glucosyl-rutinoside | C33H40O21 | 6.27 |
| 15 | 9.641 | 579.1693 | [M]+ | 433.1119,271.0589 | Pelargonidin 3-rutinoside | C27H31O14 | 3.59 |
| 9.704 | 433.1135 | [M]+ | 271.0592 | Pelargonidin 3-glucoside | C21H21O10 | −0.06 | |
| 16 | 9.718 | 339.0696 | [M-H]- | 177.0175 | p-Coumaric acid glucuronide | C15H16O9 | 7.54 |
| 17 | 9.947 | 611.1588 | [M + H2O]- | 475.1420,285.0386,241.0480,149.0232,125.0234 | Cyanidin 3-O-(6″-O-α-rhamnopyranosyl-β- | C27H31O15 | 4.84 |
| 9.947 | 635.159 | [M+Na]+ | 489.0969,331.0972,309.0337,287.0475 | −1.17 | |||
| 18 | 10.1008 | 465.1008 | [M + H2O]- | 329.0846,285.0385,241.0479,125.0227 | Cyanidin 3-glucoside | C21H21O11 | 6.56 |
| 19 | 10.363 | 353.0867 | [M-H]- | 191.0542,179.0334,135.0442 | Caffeoylquinic acid | C16H18O9 | 3.13 |
| 20 | 10.625 | 492.3185 | [M+H]+ | 474.3042,330.2628,252.2317,70.0647 | Morusimic acid derivative | C24H45NO9 | −3.64 |
| 21 | 10.654 | 563.2117 | [M+H]+ | 401.1551,365.1188 | 5,7-Dihydroxy-3′,4′-dimethoxy-8-(3-hydroxy-3-methylbutyl)-isoflavone 7-glucoside | C28H34O12 | 1.07 |
| 22 | 10.96 | 353.0857 | [M-H]- | 191.0545 | Caffeoylquinic acid | C16H18O9 | 5.96 |
| 23 | 11.125 | 492.3181 | [M+H]+ | 330.2626,268.2625,250.2519,85.0278 | Morusimic acid derivative | C24H45NO9 | −2.83 |
| 24 | 11.328 | 492.3177 | [M+H]+ | 330.2622,268.2624,250.2518 | Morusimic acid derivative | C24H45NO9 | −2.01 |
| 25 | 11.635 | 578.316 | [M+H]+ | 534.3233,330.2615,268.2621,250.2517 | Morusimic acid derivative | C27H47NO12 | 1.91 |
| 26 | 11.895 | 534.3266 | [M+H]+ | 474.3032,372.2722,312.2521,250.2516 | Morusimic acid derivative | C26H47NO10 | 1.26 |
| 27 | 11.818 | 609.1421 | [M-H]- | 300.0258 | Rutin | C27H30O16 | 6.58 |
| 28 | 12.019 | 330.2638 | [M+H]+ | 312.2522,250.2517,70.0645 | Morusimic acid derivative | C18H35NO4 | 0.26 |
| 29 | 12.23 | 330.2636 | [M+H]+ | 312.2516,250.2519 | Morusimic acid derivative | C18H35NO4 | 0.86 |
| 30 | 12.359 | 303.0496 | [M-H]- | 167.0337,165.0167,109.0285 | Taxifolin | C15H12O7 | 4.71 |
| 31 | 12.4 | 566.4252 | [M+H]+ | 548.4148,435.3319,322.2468,209.1637,114.0909,96.0798 | Unidentified | ||
| 32 | 12.591 | 581.3327 | [M+H]+ | 114.1270,72.0801 | Unidentified | ||
| 33 | 12.797 | 723.4976 | [M + HCOO]- | 677.4926 | Contaminate from Nylon membrance | ||
| 12.804 | 701.493 | M + Na]+ | |||||
| 34 | 13.092 | 826.5528 | [M+Cl]- | 790.5746 | Contaminate from Nylon membrance | ||
| 814.506 | [M+Na]+ | ||||||
| 35 | 13.72 | 303.0496 | [M-H]- | 285.0383,177.0183,125.0232,57.0344 | (2e)-1-(2,4,6-trihydroxyphenyl)-3-(3,4,5-trihydroxyphenyl)prop-2-en-1-one | C15H12O7 | 4.71 |
| 36 | 16.73 | 274.2752 | [M+H]+ | 256.2637,106.086088.0753,70.0651,57.0697 | Hexadecasphinganine | C16H35NO2 | −4.17 |
| 37 | 16.841 | 318.3015 | [M+H]+ | 256.2646,88.0760,70.0653,57.0701 | Phytosphingosine | C18H39NO3 | −3.86 |
Fig. 2(A) Growth rates by weight through the 3 month protocol. The white bars are averaged values for the 3 month period for each treatment. Error bars are SEMs and the P-values are for unpaired, 2-tailed comparisons denoted by the dotted lines. (B) Food intake averaged over 12 weeks. n = 7 mice. Data pooled with more values from previous study. (C) Weights of visceral fat after 3 months of treatment. Dotted lines compare high fat diet with all other groups. P-values in red compare control with each dMF dose. (D) Liver weights.
Plasma lipid profiles and blood glucose level at 3 months.
| Parameters | Control | HF | HF + dMF100 mg/kg | HF + dMF 300 mg/kg |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 60.9 ± 1.2 | 127.6 ± 4.6∗∗ | 118.4 ± 4.5∗∗ | 116.7 ± 9.4∗∗ | |
| 70.5 ± 4.1 | 70.2 ± 2.7 | 49.5 ± 3.6∗∗,### | 46.8 ± 1.9∗∗,### | |
| 37.2 ± 2.1 | 34.9 ± 4.3 | 44.2 ± 1.0∗,## | 46.4 ± 0.6∗∗,### | |
| 19.4 ± 2.8 | 71.4 ± 5.0∗∗ | 64.5 ± 8.1∗ | 64.5 ± 12.0∗ | |
| 1.6 ± 0.1 | 3.6 ± 0.2∗∗ | 2.62 ± 0.1∗,## | 2.59 ± 0.2∗,## | |
| 95.5 ± 1.6 | 97.3 ± 5.2 | 94.8 ± 4.2 | 97.7 ± 2.9 | |
| 94.2 ± 2.5 | 113.7 ± 3.9∗∗ | 94.3 ± 0.7### | 99.8 ± 3.0# | |
Control, normal diet; HF, high-fat diet; HF + dMF 100, high fat diet+100 mg/kg dried mulberry fruit powder; HF + dMF 300, high-fat diet+300 mg/kg dried mulberry fruit powder; TC, total cholesterol; TGs, triglycerides; HDL, high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL, low density lipoprotein cholesterol. Values are means ± SEM (n = 6). ∗P < 0.01, ∗∗P < 0.001 vs. control. #P < 0.05, ##P < 0.01, ###P < 0.001 vs. high fat diet.
Fig. 3The histological observation of the aorta and heart stained using Masson’s trichrome. Collagen fibers in the tunica media are stained in blue. (A) Aorta at a 10× magnification; (B) Aorta at a 40× magnification, (C) Heart at a 4× magnification, (D) Cardiomyocyte at a 10× magnification. Control, normal diet; HF, high-fat diet; HF + dMF100, high-fat diet +100 mg/kg dried mulberry fruit powder; HF + dMF300, high-fat diet +300 mg/kg dried mulberry fruit powder. TI, Tunica intima; TM, Tunica media; TA, Tunica adventitia; LV, Left ventricle; RV, Right ventricle; LCW, Left cardiac wall; RCW, Right cardiac wall; IS, Interventricular septum.
Aortic wall thickness and collagen content, and hepatic lipid accumulation.
| Parameters | Control | HF | HF + dMF100 | HF + dMF300 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 275 ± 8 | 386 ± 11∗ | 314 ± 6 ∗,## | 338 ± 6∗,## | |
| 31.5 ± 1.3 | 48.9 ± 1.2∗ | 39.5 ± 1.6∗,## | 40.9 ± 1.4∗,## | |
| 33.6 ± 2.1 | 51.9 ± 1.2∗∗ | 43.0 ± 2.6∗, # | 42.0 ± 1.6∗, # |
Control, normal diet; HF, high-fat diet; HF + dMF100, high-fat diet+100 mg/kg dried mulberry fruit powder; HF + dMF300, high-fat diet+300 mg/kg dried mulberry fruit powder. Aortic wall thickness was measured as the perpendicular distance between the inner wall of the tunica intima to the outer extremity of the tunica media. Hepatic lipid was the area occupied by oil red O positive staining and expressed as the proportion of region of interest area. Values are means ± SEM (n = 5 mice). ∗P < 0.01, ∗∗P < 0.001 vs. Control. #P < 0.05, ##P < 0.01 vs. HF.
Fig. 4Oil-Red-O partition into hepatic fat droplets in frozen sections of livers from mice fed diets as indicated. CV, central vein; PT, portal triad;. HF, high-fat diet; dMF, dried mulberry fruit powder.
Fig. 5Representative photomicrographs of immunohistochemical staining for LC3 in control group (A), HF group (B), HF + dMF100 (C), HF + dMF300 (D), neocortical neurons showing somatic and dendritic staining as a positive control (E) and proportion of positive cells (F). Proportion of LC3 positive cells was not different between groups. Values are mean ± SEM (n = 4). Control, normal diet; HF, high-fat diet; HF + dMF 100, high-fat diet +100 mg/kg dried mulberry fruit powder; HF + dMF 300, high-fat diet +300 mg/kg dried mulberry fruit powder.
Fig. 6Representative photomicrographs of immunohistochemical staining for p62 in brown for the control group (A), HF group (B), HF + dMF 100 (C), and HF + dMF 300 (D). Proportion of p62 positive cells was not different between groups (E). Values are mean ± SEM (n = 4). Control, normal diet; HF, high-fat diet; HF + dMF100, high-fat diet +100 mg/kg dried mulberry fruit powder; HF + dMF300, high-fat diet +300 mg/kg dried mulberry fruit powder.
Fig. 7Effect of dried mulberry fruit (dMF, 20–1000 μg/mL) in cultured 3T3-L1 adipocytes on (A) Lipogenesis (lipid accumulation) measured by oil red O staining; (B) Cell viability using the MTT assay; (C) Lipid loss by lipolysis; and (D) Cell viability using the MTT assay. Values are means ± SEM (n = 3), ∗P < 0.05 vs. Control.
Binding of dMF or cholestyramine to bile acids (taurocholic acid and taurodeoxycholic acid) in vitro.
| Concentrations of dMF or cholestyramine (mg/mL) | Bile acid binding | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Taurocholic acid | Taurodeoxycholic acid | |||
| dMF (% of control) | Cholestyramine (% of control) | dMF (% of control) | Cholestyramine (% of control) | |
| 0 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 ± 0.0 |
| 0.1 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 4.9 ± 11.3 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 8.2 ± 13.8 |
| 1 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 47.2 ± 3.0∗∗ | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 87.3 ± 3.7∗ |
| 5 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 83.6 ± 2.1∗∗ | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 93.8 ± 2.1∗∗ |
| 10 | 16.6 ± 5.9## | 87.7 ± 1.7∗∗ | 10.2 ± 25.5# | 96.5 ± 2.6∗∗ |
dMF, dried mulberry fruit powder. Values are means ± SEM (n = 3).
∗P < 0.01, ∗∗P < 0.001 vs. control. #P < 0.01, ##P < 0.001 vs. cholestyramine at the same concentration.