| Literature DB >> 34770900 |
Mirtha Navarro-Hoyos1, Elizabeth Arnáez-Serrano2, Silvia Quesada-Mora3, Gabriela Azofeifa-Cordero3, Krissia Wilhelm-Romero1, María Isabel Quirós-Fallas1, Diego Alvarado-Corella1, Felipe Vargas-Huertas1, Andrés Sánchez-Kopper4.
Abstract
There is an increased interest in plum research because of their metabolites' potential bioactivities. In this study, the phenolic profiles of Prunus domestica commercial cultivars (Methley, Pisardii and Satsuma) in Costa Rica were determined by Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography coupled with High Resolution Mass Spectrometry using a quadrupole-time-of-flight analyzer (UPLC-ESI-QTOF MS) on enriched phenolic extracts obtained through Pressurized Liquid Extraction (PLE) under acidic and neutral extraction conditions. In total, 41 different phenolic compounds were identified in the skin and flesh extracts, comprising 11 flavan-3-ols, 14 flavonoids and 16 hydroxycinnamic acids and derivatives. Neutral extractions for the skins and flesh from all of the cultivars yielded a larger number of compounds, and were particularly rich in the number of procyanidin trimers and tetramers when compared to the acid extractions. The total phenolic content (TPC) and antioxidant potential using the DPPH and ORAC methods exhibited better results for neutral extracts with Satsuma skins and Methley flesh, which showed the best values (685.0 and 801.6 mg GAE/g extract; IC50 = 4.85 and 4.39 µg/mL; and 12.55 and 12.22 mmol TE/g extract, respectively). A Two-Way ANOVA for cytotoxicity towards AGS gastric adenocarcinoma and SW620 colon adenocarcinoma indicated a significant difference (p < 0.05) for PLE conditions, with better results for neutral extractions, with Satsuma skin delivering the best results (IC50 = 60.7 and 46.7 µg/mL respectively) along with Methley flesh (IC50 = 76.3 and 60.9 µg/mL, respectively). In addition, a significant positive correlation was found between TPC and ORAC (r = 0.929, p < 0.05), as well as a significant negative correlation (p < 0.05) between TPC and cytotoxicity towards AGS and SW620 cell lines (r = -0.776, and -0.751, respectively). A particularly high, significant, negative correlation (p < 0.05) was found between the number of procyanidins and cytotoxicity against the AGS (r = -0.868) and SW620 (r = -0.855) cell lines. Finally, the PCA clearly corroborated that neutral extracts are a more homogenous group exhibiting higher antioxidant and cytotoxic results regardless of the part or cultivar; therefore, our findings suggest that PLE extracts under neutral conditions would be of interest for further studies on their potential health benefits.Entities:
Keywords: Prunus domestica; QTOF ESI-MS; UPLC; antioxidant; antitumoral; flavonoids; mass spectrometry; plum; polyphenols; procyanidins
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34770900 PMCID: PMC8588404 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26216493
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Total phenolic content for plum samples under acid and neutral extraction conditions.
| Sample | Total Phenolic Content (TPC) | |
|---|---|---|
| Acid Extraction | Neutral Extraction | |
| Methley | ||
| Skin | 539.3 a,* ± 8.55 | 669.1 a,# ± 11.2 |
| Flesh | 567.7 b,* ± 8.40 | 801.6 b,# ± 14.2 |
| Pisardii | ||
| Skin | 438.5 c,* ± 5.08 | 560.5 cd,# ± 8.34 |
| Flesh | 319.9 d,* ± 3.86 | 538.5 d,# ± 13.9 |
| Satsuma | ||
| Skin | 513.9 e,* ± 4.10 | 685.0 a,# ± 14.1 |
| Flesh | 477.2 f,* ± 10.3 | 596.1 c,# ± 4.89 |
1 mg of gallic acid equivalent (GAE)/g extract. 2 Values are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (S.D.). 3 Different superscript letters in the same column or different superscript signs in the same row indicate that the differences are significant at p < 0.05 using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a Tukey post hoc.
Figure 1HPLC chromatograms of: (A) Methley skin, (B) Methley flesh, and (C) Pisardii flesh extracts (PLE, neutral conditions), and (D) Satsuma skin extract (PLE, acid conditions) in a Phenomenex Luna RP18 C-18 column (150 mm × 4.6 mm × 4 µm) using a Xevo G2-XS QTOF Mass spectrometer (Waters™, Manchester, UK) in a mass range from 100 to 1500 amu.
Profile of phenolic compounds identified by UPLC-ESI-QTOF MS analysis for plum skin and flesh samples under acidic and neutral PLE conditions.
| # | Tentative Identification | [M-H]− | tR (min) | MS2 Fragments | Formula |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hydroxycinnamic acids and derivatives | |||||
| 1 | Caffeoylferuloylquinic acid (I of II) | 529.1365 | 2.89 | [529]: 353, 367, 191, 179 | C26H25O12 |
| 3 | 325.0917 | 4.42 | [325]: 145, 163, 187 | C15H17O8 | |
| 5 | Caffeoyl hexoside | 341.0884 | 7.13 | [341]: 161, 179 | C15H17O9 |
| 6 | Caffeoylquinic acid isomer | 353.0869 | 7.56 | [353]: 191, 145 | C16H17O9 |
| 7 | 325.0917 | 7.96 | [325]: 145, 163, 187 | C15H17O8 | |
| 12 | 325.0917 | 9.98 | [325]: 145 | C15H17O8 | |
| 13 | Feruloylquinic acid isomer (I of III) | 367.1021 | 10.23 | [367]: 161, 134 | C17H19O9 |
| 15 | Feruloylquinic acid isomer (II of III) | 367.1021 | 11.45 | [367]: 193, 134 | C17H19O9 |
| 19 | Caffeoylferuloylquinic acid (II of II) | 529.1365 | 12.8 | [529]: 353, 367, 191, 179 | C26H25O12 |
| 21 | 337.0919 | 14.78 | [337]:173 | C16H17O8 | |
| 22 | 337.0919 | 15.29 | [337]:173 | C16H17O8 | |
| 23 | Feruloylquinic acid isomer (III of III) | 367.1021 | 15.65 | [367]: 193, 134 | C17H19O9 |
| 24 | Methyl- | 351.1082 | 16.99 | [351]: 177, 293, 235, 191, 133 | C17H19O8 |
| 25 | Di-O-acetyl-O- | 571.1675 | 17.44 | [571]: 553, 529, 511, 487, 307 | C25H31O15 |
| 29 | Methyl- | 351.1082 | 20.55 | [351]:177, 293, 235, 191, 133 | C17H19O8 |
| 30 | Di-O-acetyl-O- | 571.1675 | 21.03 | [571]: 529, 511, 307, 175 | C25H31O15 |
| Flavonoids | |||||
| 4 | Kaempferol-deoxyhexoside | 447.0913 | 5.89 | [447]: 300, 285 | C21H19O11 |
| 18 | Quercetin-deoxyhexoside (I of II) | 447.0913 | 12.57 | [447]: 300, 301 | C21H19O11 |
| 31 | Quercetin-hexoside (I of III) | 463.0901 | 21.95 | [463]: 300, 301 | C21H19O12 |
| 32 | Quercetin-rutinoside (I of II) | 609.1488 | 22.86 | [609]:300, 301 | C27H29O16 |
| 33 | Quercetin-hexoside (II of III) | 463.0875 | 23.89 | [463]: 300, 301 | C21H19O12 |
| 34 | Quercetin-hexoside (III of III) | 463.0875 | 25.46 | [463]: 300, 301 | C21H19O12 |
| 35 | Quercetin-pentoside (I of II) | 433.0764 | 25.95 | [433]: 300, 301 | C20H17O11 |
| 36 | Quercetin-pentosylpentoside | 565.1208 | 26.24 | [565]: 300, 301 | C25H25O15 |
| 37 | Quercetin-pentoside (II of II) | 433.0769 | 27.5 | [433]: 300, 301 | C20H17O11 |
| 38 | Quercetin-rutinoside isomer (II of II) | 609.1488 | 27.86 | [609]:300, 301 | C27H29O16 |
| 39 | Quercetin-deoxyhexoside (II of II) | 447.0913 | 28.68 | [447]: 300, 301 | C21H19O11 |
| 40 | Quercetin-acetylhexoside | 505.0974 | 29.09 | [505]: 300, 301 | C23H21O13 |
| 41 | Quercetin 3-O-p-coumaroyl acetylhexoside | 651.1553 | 34.27 | [651]: 633, 505, 487, 301, 300 | C32H27O15 |
| 42 | Quercetin | 301.0353 | 37.25 | [301]: 283, 273, 257, 255, 179, 151 | C15H9O7 |
| Flavan-3-ols | |||||
| 8 | Procyanidin dimer A (I of II) | 575.1183 | 8.05 | [575]: 285, 289, 423, 449 | C30H23O12 |
| 9 | Procyanidin B-type trimer (I of III) | 865.2014 | 8.28 | [865]: 287, 289, 575, 577, 695, 713, 739 | C45H37O18 |
| 10 | Catechin | 289.0704 | 8.81 | [289]: 245, 271 | C15H13O6 |
| 11 | Procyanidin B-type dimer (I of II) | 577.1332 | 9.27 | [577]: 287, 289, 407, 425, 451, 559 | C30H25O12 |
| 14 | Procyanidin B-type trimer (II of III) | 865.2014 | 11.25 | [865]: 287, 289, 575, 577, 695, 713, 739 | C45H37O18 |
| 16 | Procyanidin B-type tetramer | 1153.2579 | 11.86 | [1153]: 287, 289, 575, 577, 863, 865, 983, 1001, 1027, 1135 | C60H49O24 |
| 17 | Epicatechin | 289.0704 | 12.16 | [289]: 245, 271 | C15H13O6 |
| 20 | Procyanidin A-type trimer | 863.1790 | 13.71 | [863]: 287, 575, 711 | C45H35O18 |
| 26 | Procyanidin B-type trimer (III of III) | 865.1993 | 18.28 | [865]: 287, 289, 575, 577, 695, 713, 739 | C45H37O18 |
| 27 | Procyanidin A-type dimer | 575.1183 | 18.74 | [575]: 285, 289, 423, 449 | C30H23O12 |
| 28 | Procyanidin B-type dimer (II of II) | 577.1332 | 19.89 | [577]: 287, 289, 407, 425, 451, 559 | C30H25O12 |
| Other acids | |||||
| 2 | Quinic acid | 191.0554 | 3.08 | [191]: 173, 127 | C7H11O6 |
Figure 2Hydroxycinnamic acid derivatives’ structures and main fragments.
Figure 3Flavonoids’ structure and main fragments.
Figure 4Flavan-3-ol monomer’s structure and main fragments.
Figure 5Procyanidin’s A-type structure and main fragments.
Figure 6Procyanidin’s B-type structure and main fragments.
DPPH and ORAC antioxidant activities for plum samples under acid and neutral extraction conditions.
| Sample | DPPH | ORAC | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acid Extraction | Neutral Extraction | Acid Extraction | Neutral Extraction | |
| Methley | ||||
| Skin | 7.59 ab,* ± 0.28 | 5.79 a,# ± 0.13 | 9.23 a,^ ± 0.31 | 10.91 b,& ± 0.07 |
| Flesh | 6.81 bc,* ± 0.24 | 4.39 b,# ± 0.15 | 8.74 ab,^ ± 0.13 | 12.22 a,& ± 0.17 |
| Pisardii | ||||
| Skin | 12.72 d,* ± 0.20 | 8.57 c,# ± 0.24 | 7.45 cd,^ ± 0.11 | 9.71 c,& ± 0.31 |
| Flesh | 12.44 d,* ± 0.35 | 8.17 c,# ± 0.25 | 7.04 d,^ ± 0.13 | 9.76 c,& ± 0.44 |
| Satsuma | ||||
| Skin | 6.73 c,* ± 0.17 | 4.85 b,# ± 0.04 | 8.53 b,^ ± 0.18 | 12.55 a,& ± 0.40 |
| Flesh | 8.40 a,* ± 0.20 | 4.96 b,# ± 0.15 | 7.79 c,^ ± 0.15 | 10.05 bc,& ± 0.07 |
1 Values are expressed as the mean ± S.D. 2,3 Different superscript letters in the same column or different superscript signs in the same row indicate that the DPPH IC50 or ORAC differences are significant at p < 0.05 using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a Tukey post hoc statistical test.
Figure 7Correlation between (A) Total Phenolic Contents (TPC) and DPPH antioxidant scavenging values, (B) TPC and ORAC antioxidant capacity values, and (C) DPPH and ORAC values.
Cytotoxicity of P. domestica samples extracted under acidic and neutral conditions for gastric (AGS) and colon (SW-620) carcinoma cells, as well non-tumoral cells (Vero).
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Methley | |||
| Skin | 403 a,* ± 13 (1.2) | 318 a,# ± 5 (1.6) | >500 a,& |
| Flesh | 196 b,* ± 9 (2.6) | 161 b,# ± 5 (3.1) | >500 a,& |
| Pisardii | |||
| Skin | >500c | >500 c | >500 a |
| Flesh | >500 c,* | 387 d,# ± 24 (1.3) | >500 a,* |
| Satsuma | |||
| Skin | 340 d,* ± 29 (1.5) | 255 e,# ± 16 (2.0) | >500 a,& |
| Flesh | >500 c | >500 c | >500 a |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Methley | |||
| Skin | 186 a,* ± 7 (2.7) | 122 a,# ± 7 (4.1) | >500 a,& |
| Flesh | 76.3 b,* ± 6.8 (6.6) | 60.9 bc,* ± 4.1 (8.2) | >500 a,# |
| Pisardii | |||
| Skin | 83.1 b,* ± 5.2 (6.0) | 67.9 b,# ± 2.4 (7.4) | >500 a,& |
| Flesh | 125 c,* ± 10 (4.0) | 132 a,* ± 3 (3.8) | >500 a,# |
| Satsuma | |||
| Skin | 60.7 b,* ± 4.6 (6.2) | 46.7 c,* ± 1.5 (8.1) | 378 b,# ± 33 |
| Flesh | 75.0 b,* ± 5.1 (6.6) | 73.0 b,* ± 4.1 (6.8) | >500 a,# |
1 Values are expressed as the mean ± D.E. 2 Different superscript letters in the same column or different superscript signs in the same row indicate that the IC50 differences are significant at p < 0.05 using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a Tukey post hoc statistical test. 3 (SI) = Selectivity Index.
Figure 8Cytotoxicity dose-response curves of the plum extracts on AGS and SW620 tumor cell lines. The results are presented as the mean ± SE of three independent experiments. (A) Skin samples in SW620 cells. (B) Skin samples in AGS cells. (C) Flesh samples in SW620 cells. (D) Flesh samples in AGS cells. Sample names: C-F-E: Cultivar-Fruit Part-Extraction. Cultivars: M (Methley), P (Pisardii), S (Satsuma). Fruit part: Sk (skin), Fl (flesh). Extraction: A (acidic PLE acid conditions), N (neutral PLE conditions).
Figure 9Plane defined by two first principal components (PC1 and PC2) resulting from the principal component analysis (PCA) of PLE polyphenolic extracts of P. domestica (n = 12). Sample names: C-F-E—Cultivar-Fruit Part-Extraction. Cultivar: M (Methley), P (Pisardii), S (Satsuma). Fruit part: s (skin), f (flesh). Extraction: a (acidic PLE conditions), n (neutral PLE conditions).