| Literature DB >> 34836223 |
Paula Aranaz1,2, Adriana Peña1, Ariane Vettorazzi3, María José Fabra4,5, Antonio Martínez-Abad4,5, Amparo López-Rubio4,5, Joan Pera6, Javier Parladé6, Massimo Castellari7, Fermín I Milagro1,2,8, Carlos J González-Navarro1.
Abstract
In recent years, food ingredients rich in bioactive compounds have emerged as candidates to prevent excess adiposity and other metabolic complications characteristic of obesity, such as low-grade inflammation and oxidative status. Among them, fungi have gained popularity for their high polysaccharide content and other bioactive components with beneficial activities. Here, we use the C. elegans model to investigate the potential activities of a Grifola frondosa extract (GE), together with the underlying mechanisms of action. Our study revealed that GE represents an important source of polysaccharides and phenolic compounds with in vitro antioxidant activity. Treatment with our GE extract, which was found to be nongenotoxic through a SOS/umu test, significantly reduced the fat content of C. elegans, decreased the production of intracellular ROS and aging-lipofuscin pigment, and increased the lifespan of nematodes. Gene expression and mutant analyses demonstrated that the in vivo anti-obesity and antioxidant activities of GE were mediated through the daf-2/daf-16 and skn-1/nrf-2 signalling pathways, respectively. Taken together, our results suggest that our GE extract could be considered a potential functional ingredient for the prevention of obesity-related disturbances.Entities:
Keywords: bioactive compounds; food ingredients; insulin; metabolic syndrome; nutraceutical fungi; obesity
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34836223 PMCID: PMC8620745 DOI: 10.3390/nu13113968
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Characterization of the GE extract composition. Mean value ± standard deviation.
| % Total Weight | |
|---|---|
| Yield (wt %) a | 6.6 ± 0.5 |
| Ash (wt %) | 7.2 ± 0.2 |
| Protein (wt %) | 23.1 ± 0.1 |
| Carbohydrates b (wt %) | 38.3 ± 3.4 |
| of which | |
| Glucose (β-glucan) | 20.9 ± 2.6 |
| Galactose | 5.6 ± 0.4 |
| Mannose | 5.2 ± 0.3 |
| Fucose | 5.1 ± 0.1 |
| Glucuronic acid | 0.8 ± 0.2 |
| Xylose | 0.3 ± 0.1 |
| Other c | <0.5 |
| Total Phenolics (mg GAE/g) | 25.9 ± 0.2 |
| TEAC (µg TE/g) | 55.3 ± 1.4 |
a on a dry basis; b estimated as the sum of all detected monosaccharide units; c corresponding to rhamnose, arabinose, N-acetylglucosamine, and galacturonic acid, only present in trace amounts or not detected.
Figure 1Results from SOS/umu test with (black) or without (grey) S9 activation. (A) Bacterial survival is shown as a percentage. Concentrations are considered nontoxic if survival is >80%. (B) Genotoxicity. A compound is considered genotoxic if the induction factor is ≥2 at nontoxic concentrations for the bacteria in any of the conditions tested.
Figure 2Grifola frondosa extract (GE) reduces the fat content of C. elegans from L1 to L4 independently of the effect on worm development. (A) Microscopic visualization of the worm fat content of control and GE (10 and 20 µg/mL)-treated worms after staining with Nile Red. (B) Nile Red staining quantification of control and GE-treated (10 and 20 µg/mL) worms. Orlistat (6 µg/mL) was used as the positive control. (C) Oil Red O staining quantification of control and GE-treated worms (20 µg/mL). (D) Length (µM) of GE-treated and untreated worms on day 1 of adulthood. (E) Area (µM2) of GE-treated and untreated worms on day 1 of adulthood. All results are expressed as the mean ± SEM relative to NGM control worms. Significance refers to the effect of the treatments with respect to NGM control worms (ANOVA followed by LSD test, *** p < 0.001). (F) Microscope observation of the presence of eggs (black arrows) and L1 larvae (white arrows) in control (NGM) and GE-supplemented plates.
Figure 3Gene expression levels of lipogenesis-related genes (A), β-oxidation-related genes (B), and daf-2/daf-16 and skn-1/nrf-2 signalling pathways (C). Results are expressed as the fold difference expression levels of each gene in GE-treated worms compared with the control, calculated with the 2-∆∆Ct method. Significance refers to the effect of GE with respect to untreated control worms (ANOVA followed by LSD comparisons, # p < 0.1; ** p < 0.01).
Figure 4Grifola extract (GE) reduces C. elegans fat accumulation in a glucose-loaded medium through daf-16 and daf-2 up-regulation. (A) Nile Red quantification of NGM-control and GE (20 µg/mL)-treated worms grown in a medium supplemented with glucose (10 mM). Orlistat (6 µg/mL) was used as the positive control. The results are expressed as the mean ± SEM relative to untreated control worms. (B) Expression levels of skn-1, daf-16, and daf-2 genes in GE-treated worms in comparison with the untreated control worms grown in a medium with glucose overload. Results are expressed as the fold-difference expression levels of each gene in GE-treated worms compared with the control, calculated with the 2−∆∆Ct method. (C) Nile Red quantification of NGM control and GE (20 µg/mL)-treated worms for skn-1 and daf-16 mutants. (D) Nile Red quantification of NGM control and GE (20 µg/mL)-treated daf-16 mutant worms grown in a medium supplemented with glucose. Significance refers to the effect of the treatments with respect to NGM-control worms (* p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001).
Figure 5Grifola extract (GE) exhibits in vivo antioxidant activity. (A) Microscope detection of the ROS production (stained by DHE) in control and GE-treated (20 µg/mL) worms. (B) Quantification of the ROS production (determined by DHE) in GE-treated worms in comparison with untreated control worms (mean ± SD relative to untreated control worms). Significance refers to the effect of GE with respect to untreated control worms (Student’s t-test, ** p < 0.01). (C) Percentage of survival during time (h) of control and GE-treated (20 µg/mL) L4 worms incubated at 35 °C. (D) DHE quantification of ROS production in GE-treated worms in comparison with untreated control worms for skn-1 and daf-16 mutants.
Figure 6Grifola extract (GE) lengthens the C. elegans lifespan. (A) Lifespan analysis of GE-treated worms (10 and 20 µg/mL) compared with untreated control worms. (B) Worm median survival of untreated and GE-treated nematodes. Significance refers to the effect of GE with respect to untreated control worms (Mantel–Cox test, ** p < 0.01). (C) Microscope detection of the lipofuscin aging pigment in control and GE-treated worms. (D) Quantification of lipofuscin aging pigment in GE-treated worms compared with untreated control worms (mean ± SD). Significance refers to the effect of GE with respect to untreated control worms (Student’s t-test, *** p < 0.001).