| Literature DB >> 35453388 |
Chuan Wei1, Xiaoling Chen1, Daiwen Chen1, Bing Yu1, Ping Zheng1, Jun He1, Hong Chen2, Hui Yan1, Yuheng Luo1, Zhiqing Huang1.
Abstract
Oxidative stress is one of the main factors affecting animal health and reducing performance. The small intestine is the primary site of free-radical attacks. Dihydromyricetin (DHM) is a flavonoid compound with antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and other biological activities, which is mainly extracted from Rattan tea. However, the effects of DHM on the intestinal antioxidant function of growing-finishing pigs and related mechanisms remain unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of dietary DHM supplementation on the intestinal antioxidant capacity of growing-finishing pigs and its mechanism. Our results show that dietary 0.03% DHM increased the activities of the total antioxidant capacity (T-AOC), catalase (CAT), and glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px), decreased malondialdehyde (MDA) level, and upregulated protein expressions of HO-1, NQO1, nuclear Nrf2, and phospho-ERK (p-ERK) in the jejunum of growing-finishing pigs. Again, we found that 20 μmol/mL and 40 μmol/mL DHM treatment significantly upregulated the protein expression of HO-1 and promoted the nuclear translocation of Nrf2 and ERK phosphorylation in IPCE-J2 cells. ERK inhibitor PD98059 eliminated the DHM-induced upregulation of p-ERK, nuclear Nrf2, and HO-1. Our findings provided the first evidence that DHM enhanced the intestinal antioxidant capacity of growing-finishing pigs by activating the ERK/Nrf2/HO-1 signaling pathway.Entities:
Keywords: ERK; IPEC-J2 cells; antioxidant; dihydromyricetin
Year: 2022 PMID: 35453388 PMCID: PMC9028153 DOI: 10.3390/antiox11040704
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antioxidants (Basel) ISSN: 2076-3921
Effects of dietary DHM supplementation on antioxidant indicators in jejunum mucosal of growing-finishing pigs.
| Items | Control | DHM 0.01% | DHM 0.03% | DHM 0.05% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T-AOC (U/mg prot) | 0.37 ± 0.02 a | 0.53 ± 0.04 b | 0.74 ± 0.06 c | 0.70 ± 0.04 c |
| CAT (U/mg prot) | 24.56 ± 0.34 a | 36.42 ± 2.78 b | 33.70 ± 1.59 b | 34.15 ± 0.26 b |
| T-SOD (U/mg prot) | 9.02 ± 0.24 a | 14.09 ± 0.98 b | 10.91 ± 0.62 a | 10.55 ± 0.37 a |
| GSH-Px (U/mg prot) | 151.08 ± 7.31 a | 170.77 ± 8.58 a | 274.53 ± 19.64 b | 133.48 ± 6.52 a |
| MDA (nmol/mg prot) | 0.74 ± 0.05 a | 0.79 ± 0.01 a | 0.49 ± 0.06 b | 0.66 ± 0.03 a |
T-AOC: total antioxidant capacity; CAT: catalase; T-SOD: total superoxide dismutase; GSH-Px: glutathione peroxidase; MDA: malondialdehyde. Data are expressed as the mean ± SE (n = 6). Values within a row with different lowercase letters differ significantly at p < 0.05.
Figure 1Effects of dietary DHM supplementation on antioxidant protein expression in the jejunum mucosa of growing-finishing pigs. (A) The protein level of NQO1. (B) The protein level of HO-1. (C) The protein levels of nuclear Nrf2. Data are expressed as the mean ± SE. Values with different superscript letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 2Effect of DHM on the protein expression of HO-1, NQO1, and nuclear Nrf2 in IPEC-J2 cells. IPEC-J2 cells were treated with DHM (0, 10, 20, 40 μmol/mL) for 36 h. (A) The protein levels of HO-1 and NQO1. (B) The protein level of nuclear Nrf2. Data are expressed as the mean ± SE. Values with different superscript letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 3Effect of DHM on the protein expression of p-ERK. (A) The protein level of p-ERK in jejunum mucosa of growing-finishing pigs. (B) The protein level of p-ERK in IPEC-J2 cells. The protein expression of p-ERK was normalized to ERK. Data are expressed as the mean ± SE. Values with different superscript letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 4Effect of ERK inhibitor PD98059 on antioxidant-related protein expressions in IPEC-J2 cells. The IPEC-J2 cells were treated with DHM (20 μmol/mL) and PD98059 (10 μmol/mL) for 36 h. (A) The protein level of p-ERK. (B) The protein level of nuclear Nrf2. (C) The protein level of HO-1. Data are expressed as the mean ± SE. Values with different superscript letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).