| Literature DB >> 35011095 |
Nikita Agarwal1, Nikolai Kolba1, YeonJin Jung1, Jacquelyn Cheng1, Elad Tako1.
Abstract
Saffron (Crocus sativus L.) is known as the most expensive spice. C. sativus dried red stigmas, called threads, are used for culinary, cosmetic, and medicinal purposes. The rest of the flower is often discarded, but is now being used in teas, as coloring agents, and fodder. Previous studies have attributed antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, hepatoprotective, neuroprotective, anti-depressant, and anticancer properties to C. sativus floral bio-residues. The aim of this study is to assess C. sativus flower water extract (CFWE) for its effects on hemoglobin, brush boarder membrane (BBM) functionality, morphology, intestinal gene expression, and cecal microbiome in vivo (Gallus gallus), a clinically validated model. For this, Gallus gallus eggs were divided into six treatment groups (non-injected, 18 Ω H2O, 1% CFWE, 2% CFWE, 5% CFWE, and 10% CFWE) with n~10 for each group. On day 17 of incubation, 1 mL of the extracts/control were administered in the amnion of the eggs. The amniotic fluid along with the administered extracts are orally consumed by the developing embryo over the course of the next few days. On day 21, the hatchlings were euthanized, the blood, duodenum, and cecum were harvested for assessment. The results showed a significant dose-dependent decrease in hemoglobin concentration, villus surface area, goblet cell number, and diameter. Furthermore, we observed a significant increase in Paneth cell number and Mucin 2 (MUC2) gene expression proportional to the increase in CFWE concentration. Additionally, the cecum microbiome analysis revealed C. sativus flower water extract altered the bacterial populations. There was a significant dose-dependent reduction in Lactobacillus and Clostridium sp., suggesting an antibacterial effect of the extract on the gut in the given model. These results suggest that the dietary consumption of C. sativus flower may have negative effects on BBM functionality, morphology, mineral absorption, microbial populations, and iron status.Entities:
Keywords: Crocus sativus; gene expression; intestine; microbiome; petal; polyphenols; saffron
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35011095 PMCID: PMC8747550 DOI: 10.3390/nu14010220
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
DNA sequences of primers used.
| Analyte | Forward Primer (5′→3′) | Reverse Primer (5′→3′) | Base Pair | GI Identifier |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Iron Metabolism | ||||
| DcytB | CATGTGCATTCTCTTCCAAAGTC | CTCCTTGGTGACCGCATTAT | 103 | 20,380,692 |
| DMT1 | TTGATTCAGAGCCTCCCATTAG | GCGAGGAGTAGGCTTGTATTT | 101 | 206,597,489 |
| Ferroportin | CTCAGCAATCACTGGCATCA | ACTGGGCAACTCCAGAAATAAG | 98 | 61,098,365 |
| Zinc Metabolism | ||||
| ZIP1 | TGCCTCAGTTTCCCTCAC | GGCTCTTAAGGGCACTTCT | 144 | 107,055,139 |
| ZnT1 | GGTAACAGAGCTGCCTTAACT | GGTAACAGAGCTGCCTTAACT | 105 | 54,109,718 |
| Inflammatory Response | ||||
| NF-κβ | CACAGCTGGAGGGAAGTAAAT | TTGAGTAAGGAAGTGAGGTTGAG | 100 | 2,130,627 |
| TNF-α | GACAGCCTATGCCAACAAGTA | TTACAGGAAGGGCAACTCATC | 109 | 53,854,909 |
| IL8 | TCATCCATCCCAAGTTCATTCA | GACACACTTCTCTGCCATCTT | 105 | 395,872 |
| BBM functionality | ||||
| SGLT1 | GCATCCTTACTCTGTGGTACTG | TATCCGCACATCACACATCC | 106 | 8,346,783 |
| SI | CCAGCAATGCCAGCATATTG | CGGTTTCTCCTTACCACTTCTT | 95 | 2,246,388 |
| MUC2 | CCTGCTGCAAGGAAGTAGAA | GGAAGATCAGAGTGGTGCATAG | 155 | 423,101 |
Dcytb, duodenal cytochrome b; DMT1, divalent metal transporter 1; ZIP1, Zrt-, Irt-like proteins; ZnT1, zinc transporter 1; NF- κβ, nuclear factor kappa beta; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor; IL8, interleukin 8; SGLT1, sodium-glucose cotransporter 1; SI, sucrose isomaltase; MUC2, mucin 2.
Concentration of polyphenols in the CFWE prepared.
| Polyphenolic Compounds | % * |
|---|---|
| Malvidin 3,5-di-O-glucoside | 0.03 |
| Kaempferol-3-O-glucoside | 7.90 |
| Quercetin-3-O-gluside | 0.37 |
| Kaempferol-3-O-sophoroside | 91.70 |
* Table shows % polyphenols from total assessed.
Average hemoglobin and body weight in all groups.
| Treatment Group | Average Hemoglobin (g/dL) | Average Body Weight (g) |
|---|---|---|
| No Injection | 12.52 ± 0.91 a | 42.06 ± 1.35 a |
| 18 Ω H2O | 10.13 ± 0.71 a,b | 42.16 ± 1.28 a |
| 1% CFWE | 12.26 ± 0.72 a | 42.96 ± 0.91 a |
| 2% CFWE | 11.15 ± 0.56 a | 42.13 ± 0.68 a |
| 5% CFWE | 10.24 ± 0.73 a | 42.89 ± 0.77 a |
| 10% CFWE | 9.62 ± 1.21 b | 42.88 ± 0.96 a |
Values are means ± SEM, n = 10. a, b Treatment groups not indicated by the same letter are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 1Effect of the intra-amniotic administration of increasing concentration of CFWE and controls on duodenal gene expression. Values are the means (AU: arbitrary units) ± SEM, n = 6. a, b, c genes (column wise) not indicated by the same letter are significantly different (p < 0.05). Dcytb, duodenal cytochrome b; DMT1, divalent metal transporter 1; ZIP1, Zrt-, Irt-like proteins; ZnT1, zinc transporter 1; NF-κβ, nuclear factor kappa beta; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor; IL8, interleukin 8; SGLT1, sodium-glucose cotransporter 1; SI, sucrose isomaltase; MUC2, mucin 2.
Figure 2Cross-section of the duodenum (Gallus gallus). (A) Points out a Paneth cell that is stained light purple. (B) Represents a neutral goblet cell, stained light purple. (C) Points to an acidic goblet cell, stained bright blue. Stain used: AB/PAS.
Effect of intra-amniotic administration of investigated concentration of CFWE and controls on goblet cell type and total number of goblet cells in duodenal villi and crypts.
| Treatment Group | Average Goblet Cell Number Per Villi | Total Villi Goblet | Total Crypt Goblet | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acidic | Neutral | Mixture | |||
| No Injection | 36.76 ± 0.85 a | 0.02 ± 0.01 a | 0.3 ± 0.06 a | 37.08 ± 0.86 a | 8.33 ± 0.25 a |
| 18 Ω H2O | 32.92 ± 0.68 b | 0 ± 0 a | 0.05 ± 0.03 b | 32.97 ± 0.68 b | 7.44 ± 0.22 b |
| 1% CFWE | 29.28 ± 0.86 c | 0.03 ± 0.02 a | 0.04 ± 0.02 a | 29.34 ± 0.87 c | 6.73 ± 0.22 c |
| 10% CFWE | 22.49 ± 0.5 d | 0.01 ± 0.01 a | 0.01 ± 0.01 b | 22.51 ± 0.5 d | 6.68 ± 0.22 c |
Values are the means ± SEM, n = 5. a–d Treatment groups not indicated by the same letter are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Effect of intra-amniotic administration of different concentration of CFWE on Paneth cell number and diameter.
| Treatment Group | Paneth Cell Number | Paneth Cell Diameter | Crypt Depth |
|---|---|---|---|
| No Injection | 2.24 ± 0.08 b | 1.56 ± 0.03 c | 45.77 ± 1.32 b |
| 18 Ω H2O | 1.89 ± 0.07 c | 1.89 ± 0.05 b | 50.73 ± 1.1 a |
| 1% CFWE | 1.93 ± 0.07 c | 1.67 ± 0.03 c | 32.81 ± 0.73 d |
| 10% CFWE | 2.56 ± 0.08 a | 2.47 ± 0.06 a | 37.75 ± 0.8 c |
Values are the means ± SEM, n = 5. a–d Treatment groups not indicated by the same letter are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Effect of intra-amniotic administration of treatments and controls on villi surface area and goblet cell diameter in duodenal villi and crypts.
| Treatment Group | Average Surface Area (mm2) | Villi Goblet Cell Diameter (µM) | Crypt Goblet Cell Diameter (µM) |
|---|---|---|---|
| No Injection | 168.19 ± 3.72 a | 4.65 ± 0.06 b | 2.98 ± 0.06 c |
| 18 Ω H2O | 171.45 ± 4.2 a | 5.13 ± 0.06 a | 3.32 ± 0.07 a |
| 1% CFWE | 137.91 ± 3.4 b | 4.18 ± 0.06 c | 3.11 ± 0.06 b,c |
| 10% CFWE | 116.41 ± 2.71 c | 3.95 ± 0.06 d | 3.17 ± 0.06 a,b |
Values are the means ± SEM, n = 5. a–d groups not indicated by the same letter are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 3Heatmap showing the effect of different concentrations of dietary CFWE supplementation compared with controls on the populations of Lactobacillus, Clostridium, Escherichia coli, and Bifidobacterium in Gallus gallus cecum. The relative abundance is expressed in arbitrary units (AU). Values are the means ± SEM, n = 5. a–c groups not indicated by the same letter are significantly different (p < 0.05).