| Literature DB >> 35276777 |
Adriana Maite Fernández-Fernández1,2,3, Eduardo Dellacassa4, Tiziana Nardin5, Roberto Larcher5, Cecilia Ibañez1, Dahiana Terán1, Adriana Gámbaro1, Alejandra Medrano-Fernandez1, María Dolores Del Castillo2.
Abstract
In the present work the feasibility of Tannat grape skin (TGS) as a functional ingredient in the formulation of two snacks (yogurt and biscuits) was studied. The research provided novel information on the effects of the food matrix and digestion process, under simulated human oral gastrointestinal conditions, in the bioaccessibility of TGS bioactive compounds composing of the snacks with health promoting properties (antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and antidiabetic). TGS polyphenolic profile was analyzed by ultra-high performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) finding mainly flavonoids, phenolic acids, and anthocyanins, which may exert antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and carbohydrase inhibition capacities. TGS digest showed antioxidant and antidiabetic potential compared to the undigested sample (p < 0.05). Yogurt and biscuits with TGS were developed with the nutrition claims "no-added sugars" and "source of fiber" and were digested in vitro to evaluate the bioaccessibility of compounds with health promoting properties after food processing and digestion. After in vitro simulation of digestion, bioactive properties were enhanced for control and TGS snacks which may be attributed to the formation/release of compounds with health-promoting properties. Biscuits showed significant increase in ABTS antioxidant capacity and yogurt showed increased α-glucosidase inhibition capacity by the addition of TGS (p < 0.05). Polyphenols from TGS and bioactive peptides from snacks which may be released during digestion might be responsible for the observed bioactivities. Consumer's acceptance of TGS yogurt and biscuits showed scores of 6.3 and 5.1 (scale 1-9), respectively, showing TGS yogurt had higher overall acceptance. Sensory profile assessed by check-all-that-apply + just-about-right (CATA+JAR) showed most of the attributes were evaluated as "just about right", supporting good food quality. The developed yogurt presented adequate shelf-life parameters for 28 days. TGS yogurt with higher acceptability showed reduced ROS formation (p < 0.05) induced by tert-butyl hydroperoxide (1 mM) in CCD-18Co colon cells and RAW264.7 macrophages when pre-treated with concentrations 500-1000 and 100-500 µg/mL of the digests, respectively. Moreover, TGS yogurt digest pre-treatment reduced nitric oxide (NO) production (p < 0.05) in lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced RAW264.7 macrophages, showing anti-inflammatory potential. Bioactive peptides generated during lactic fermentation and digestion process may be contributors to intracellular effects. In conclusion, yogurt and biscuits with Tannat grape skin addition were obtained with nutrition claims "no-added sugars" and "source of fiber" with the potential to modulate key biochemical events associated with diabetes pathogenesis.Entities:
Keywords: Tannat grape skin; anti-inflammatory; antioxidant; bioaccessibility; diabetes; functional foods; sensory analysis; sustainable ingredient; α-amylase; α-glucosidase
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35276777 PMCID: PMC8840580 DOI: 10.3390/nu14030419
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Yogurt and biscuit formulations.
| Yogurt Formulations (g) | Biscuits Formulations | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ingredients | Control | TGS | Ingredients | Control | TGS |
| UHT whole fluid milk (mL) | 800 | 800 | Butter | 10 | 10 |
| Skim milk powder | 16 | 16 | Sunflower oil | 4.25 | 4.25 |
| Modified cassava starch | 4 | 4 | Egg | 14 | 14 |
| Gelatin | 4 | 4 | Baking powder | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| CRL inulin (soluble fiber) | 10 | 10 | Salt | 0.08 | 0.08 |
| Stevia | 0.32 | 0.32 | Sweetener | 4 | 4 |
| Byproduct | 0 | 4 (0.5%) | Wheat flour | 67.17 | 47.17 |
| YO-MIX 495 LYO ferment | 250 DCU | Byproduct | 0 | 20 | |
Data on identification of phenolic compounds composing TGS analyzed by UHPLC-MS/MS.
| Negative ESI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compound 1 | TGS 2 | RT [min] | [M-H]− ( | Fragments ( |
| 3-Phenyllactic acid | 0.0268 | 10.6 | 165.0559 | 147.0455, 119.0504 |
| Salipurposid | 0.0019 | 11.8 | 433.1154 | 271.0607, 151.0041 |
| Astragalin isomer 1 | 0.0027 | 11.1 | 447.0944 | 284.0334, 227.0356 |
| Astragalin isomer 2 | 0.0071 | 11.2 | 447.0949 | 284.0334, 227.0356 |
| Caffeic acid | 0.0113 | 9.5 | 179.0354 | 135.0455 |
| cis-Aconitic acid | 0.0673 | 2.8 | 173.0094 | 129.0197, 85.0297 |
| Eriodictyol | 0.0021 | 13.6 | 287.0570 | 151.0041, 135.0456 |
| Gallic acid | 0.0990 | 3.7 | 169.0145 | 125.0247 |
| Isorhamnetin | 0.0311 | 14.9 | 315.0519 | 300.0283, 151.0037 |
| Myricetin | 0.0473 | 12.3 | 317.0310 | 178.9989, 151.0040 |
| Quercetin-3-galacturonide | 0.1190 | 10.7 | 477.0685 | 301.0361, 151.0039 |
| Quercetin | 0.1181 | 13.5 | 301.0361 | 151.0040, 107.0141 |
| Quercetin-3β-D-glucoside | 0.0578 | 10.7 | 463.0900 | 300.0282, 271.0254 |
| Syringic acid | 0.0003 | 11.2 | 197.0459 | 182.0225, 123.0091 |
| Vanillic acid | 0.0007 | 10.8 | 167.0352 | 152.0118, 123.0091 |
| Vanillyl alcohol | 0.0073 | 5.2 | 153.0561 | 138.0325, 123.0091 |
| Naringenin | 0.0036 | 14.8 | 271.0620 | 151.0041, 119.0505 |
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Cyanidin 3-(6-O-acetylglucoside) | 0.00011 | 9.8 | 491.1184 | 287.0550 |
| Cyanidin-3-O-(6-p-coumaroyl) glucoside | 0.00032 | 10.9 | 595.1446 | 287.0550 |
| Cyanidin-3-pyranoside | 0.00021 | 8.5 | 449.1078 | 287.0550 |
| Delphinidin-3-(6-O-acetylglucoside) | 0.00014 | 9.2 | 507.1133 | 303.0500 |
| Delphinidin-3-O-(6-p-coumaroyl) glucoside | 0.00087 | 10.5 | 611.1395 | 303.0500 |
| Delphinidin-3-pyranoside | 0.00094 | 7.8 | 465.1027 | 303.0500 |
| Malvidin-3-(6-O-acetylglucoside) | 0.01076 | 10.4 | 535.1446 | 331.0800 |
| Malvidin-3-O-(6-p-coumaroyl) glucoside | 0.01766 | 11.5 | 639.1708 | 331.0800 |
| Malvidin-3-pyranoside | 0.02569 | 9.2 | 493.1340 | 331.0800 |
| Peonidin-3-(6-O-acetylglucoside) | 0.00105 | 10.4 | 505.1341 | 301.0700 |
| Peonidin-3-O-(6-p-coumaroyl) glucoside | 0.00194 | 11.5 | 609.1603 | 301.0700 |
| Peonidin-3-pyranoside | 0.00206 | 9.2 | 463.1235 | 301.0700 |
| Petunidin-3-(6-O-acetylglucoside) | 0.00134 | 9.9 | 521.1290 | 317.0700 |
| Petunidin-3-O-(6-p-coumaroyl) glucoside | 0.00294 | 11.0 | 625.1552 | 317.0700 |
| Petunidin-3-pyranoside | 0.00013 | 11.2 | 479.1184 | 317.0700 |
1 Compound Discoverer 3.1 (mzCloud library, Advanced Mass Spectral Database). 2 Results normalized with TIC area (area/area TIC). 3 Identified as proposed by Ivanova et al. [26].
Results of antioxidant and antidiabetic bioaccessible compounds estimated by analysis of total polyphenol content (TPC), antioxidant capacity by ABTS and ORAC-FL, α-glucosidase and α-amylase inhibition capacities.
| Analysis | TGS | TGS Digest |
|---|---|---|
| TPC (mg GAE/g sample) | 29.85 ± 2.20 b | 7.41 ± 0.50 a |
| ABTS (µmol TE/g sample) | 28.28 ± 1.27 b | 18.13 ± 2.05 a |
| ORAC-FL (µmol TE/g sample) | 150.3 ± 11.1 b | 128.3 ± 13.3 a |
| α-glucosidase (IC50, mg/mL) | 11.67 ± 0.71 c | 8.23 ± 0.44 b |
| α-amylase (IC50, mg/mL) | 11.65 ± 0.11 b | 102.80 ± 8.93 c |
TGS: Tannat grape skin powder. IC50: half maximal inhibitory concentration. Results are expressed as mean values ± SD (n = 3). Different letters indicate significant differences (Tukey, p < 0.05) between values in the same row. Sample solutions were prepared in triplicate and assayed in triplicate.
Figure 1Effects of food processing and digestion on antioxidants and inhibitors of carbohydrases composing snacks formulated with TGS. Results shown in the figure correspond to the data obtained by: ABTS (a) and ORAC-FL (b) α-glucosidase (c) and α-amylase (d). Bars and error bars represent mean values and standard deviation. Results on antioxidant capacity are expressed as µmol TE/g sample and the results of enzymatic inhibition capacity are expressed as IC50 values (half maximal inhibitory concentration) in mg/mL. Lowest IC50 means highest inhibitory capacity. Different letters indicate significant differences (Tukey, p < 0.05) between mean values of each set of data. T test was carried out to compare mean values of TGS snacks and their respective control snacks (formulations without TGS).
Figure 2Time course of pH (a), titratable acidity (g lactic acid/100 g yogurt) (b), and ABTS (µmol TE/g yogurt) (c) during storage in the fridge for 28 days of yogurts without (control) and with addition (0.5%) of TGS. Error bars represent standard deviation.
Figure 3Sensory evaluation study with consumers (n = 75) of TGS yogurt (a) and TGS biscuits (b) using CATA + JAR. Frequency of mention in percentage for just-about-right scores for each dimension (too little, JAR, too much) and each attribute. The number represents the percentage of consumers who selected an attribute as “just about right”. White bars represent the percentage of consumers who selected the shown attributes contributing to the sensory profile of TGS yogurt and biscuit.
Figure 4Induced ROS formation in healthy human colon cells (CCD-18Co) (a) and mouse macrophages (RAW264.7) (b) treated with 0.5% TGS yogurt digest prior to the oxidative damage. Positive control (C+): cells treated with tert-butyl hydroperoxide (1 mM). Prevention assay: cells were treated with samples for 24 h followed by administration of tert-butyl hydroperoxide for 30 min. Prevention with co-administration assay: cells were treated with samples for 24 h followed by co-administration of tert-butyl hydroperoxide and sample for 30 min. Bars represent mean values while error bars indicate standard error of the mean (SEM). * Indicates statistical differences between mean values of the samples (Tukey test, p < 0.05) when compared to the positive control (C+).
Figure 5Effect of 0.5% TGS yogurt bioaccessible compounds on NO production in RAW264.7 macrophages. Positive control (C+): cells treated with LPS (1 µg/mL). Prevention assay: cells treated with samples during 24 h followed by administration of LPS during 24 h. Prevention with co-administration assay: cells treated with samples during 24 h followed by co-administration of LPS and sample during 24 h. Bars represent mean values while error bars indicate standard error of the mean (SEM). * Indicate statistical differences between mean values (Tukey test, p < 0.05) when compared to the control (C+).