| Literature DB >> 35533432 |
Jiayuan Liu1, Gongshuai Song1, Yawen Yuan1, Like Zhou1, Danli Wang1, Tinglan Yuan1, Ling Li1, Guanghua He1, Qingyu Yang2, Gongnian Xiao1, Jinyan Gong3.
Abstract
It is essential to understand the ultrasound-induced changes in assembly of proteins and polyphenols into non covalent nanocomplex. β-Lactoglobulin (LG) and chlorogenic acid (CA) with various biological activities can be combined to form food-grade nanocomplexes. This study systematically explored the role of high-intensity ultrasound pretreatment on the binding mechanisms of LG and CA, and the potential biological function for embedding curcumin (Cur). The scanning electron microscopy (SEM) revealed that ultrasound treatment could destroy the structure of LG, and the particle size of the protein was reduced to<50 nm. The change in secondary structure of the protein by ultrasound treatment could be revealed by the fourier transform infrared (FTIR) and fluorescence spectra. Besides, it was found that LG and CA were combined to form a complex under the hydrophobic interaction, and CA was bound in the internal cavity of LG with a relatively extended conformation. The result demonstrated that the ratio of Cur embedded in the ultrasonic sample could be effectively increased by 7% - 10%, the particle size in the emulsion was smaller, and the dispersion was more stable. This work contributes to the development of protein-polyphenol functional emulsion systems with the ability to deliver Cur.Entities:
Keywords: Chlorogenic acid; Curcumin; Ultrasound; β- Lactoglobulin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35533432 PMCID: PMC9092509 DOI: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2022.106025
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ultrason Sonochem ISSN: 1350-4177 Impact factor: 9.336
CA binding equivalent and amino acid residue content.
| sample | CA | Thiol group | Free amino group | Tryptophan group |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LG | — | 46.32 ± 0.21d | 387.34 ± 1.52d | 47.99 ± 0.57d |
| LG after ultrasound | — | 56.52 ± 0.13b | 395.8 ± 1.8b | 56.86 ± 0.65b |
| LG-CA | 55.47 ± 6.68a | 40.68 ± 0.11a | 283.03 ± 0.79c | 43.06 ± 0.28c |
| LG-CA after ultrasound | 76.84 ± 3.16b | 48.16 ± 0.44c | 103.52 ± 1.14a | 47.46 ± 0.75a |
Note: different letters in superscript within the same row indicate significant differences among sample tests (p < 0.05).
Fig. 1Fluorescence quenching of protein after binding with CA figure a. LG after ultrasound b. LG c. LG-CA complex d. complex under ultrasound condition.
Fig. 2Molecular docking of CA to LG: binding site of CA to LG (A); Three-dimensional display of protein amino acid residues within 4 Å distance of CA molecule (B); Two-dimensional display of protein amino acid residues within the 4 Å range of CA molecules (C).
Thermal properties of control protein and LG- CA complex before and after ultrasound.
| sample | CA | Control LG | LG after ultrasound | LG-CA | LG-CA after ultrasound |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ts(℃) | 88.8 | 97.2 | 81.1 | 131.1 | 84.7 |
| ΔH(mJ/mg protein) | 6.614 | 206.8 | 233.1 | 199.2 | 208.9 |
Antioxidant activity of LG and LG-CA complex before and after ultrasound.
| sample | Control LG | LG after ultrasound | LG-CA | LG-CA after ultrasound |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DPPH scavenging activity | 54.98 ± 0.01d | 78.14 ± 0.01c | 124.18 ± 0.04a | 132.45 ± 0.02b |
| ABTS + scavenging activity | 121.80 ± 0.01d | 127.03 ± 0.05c | 149.16 ± 0.06b | 161.51 ± 0.02a |
| Reducing power | 22.67 ± 0.04b | 30 ± 0.02d | 14.33 ± 0.03a | 28.33 ± 0.08c |
Note: different letters in superscript within the same row indicate significant differences among sample tests (p < 0.05).
Fig. 3LG and CA Fourier infrared chromatography.
Secondary structure content of different samples.
| samples | α-Helix(%) | β-Sheet(%) | β-Turn(%) | Unordered(%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LG | 11.3 | 39.9 | 21.8 | 27 |
| LG after ultrasound | 10.7 | 32.4 | 21.7 | 35.2 |
| LG-CA | 11.9 | 39.4 | 22.2 | 26.5 |
| LG-CA after ultrasound | 12.1 | 27.5 | 22.3 | 38 |
Fig. 41H NMR spectra of different samples.(a. LG, b. LG-CA noncovalent complex, c. LG after ultrasound, d. LG-CA after ultrasound).
Fig. 5Scanning electron microscopy of samples before and after ultrasound.(A. LG, B. LG after ultrasound, C. LG-CA noncovalent complex, D. LG-CA after ultrasound).
Surface hydrophobicity index of different samples.
| sample | Control LG | LG after ultrasound | LG-CA | LG-CA after ultrasound |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | 3257.6 | 2996.1 | 2760.2 | 2733.0 |
Fig. 6(A) The embedding rate of Cur in different components, (B) The turbidity of the system with Cur embedded in different samples.
The mean particle diameter and PdI of emulsions stabilized by control protein and protein-CA complexes.
| sample | Size (nm) | PDI | Potential (mV) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cur | 274.9 ± 14e | 0.52 ± 0.3e | −28.4 ± 0.34e |
| LG | 73.07 ± 8c | 0.42 ± 0.11b | –33.5 ± 0.8c |
| LG after ultrasound | 32.49 ± 12a | 0.27 ± 0.09a | −37.1 ± 0.5b |
| LG-CA | 62.65 ± 5b | 0.31 ± 0.19c | −46.6 ± 0.2a |
| LG-CA after ultrasound | 55.2 ± 17d | 0.21 ± 0.04d | −56 ± 0.16d |
Note: different letters in superscript within the same row indicate significant differences among sample tests (p < 0.05).
Fig. 7Fluorescence intensity of different samples embedded with Cur a. LG after ultrasound b. LG c. LG-CA complex d. complex under ultrasound condition.
Antioxidant activity of control protein and protein-CA complex embedded with Cur.
| sample | Cur | Control LG | LG after ultrasound | LG-CA | LG-CA after ultrasound |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DPPH scavenging activity | 21.68 ± 0.03a | 59.28 ± 0.02c | 103.41 ± 0.01d | 132.7 ± 0.03b | 146.88 ± 0.04e |
| ABTS+ scavenging activity | 93.14 ± 0.02b | 139 ± 0.01d | 148.66 ± 0.04c | 147.62 ± 0.01e | 158.66 ± 0.04a |
| Reducing power | 24.94 ± 0.01a | 29.18 ± 0.02e | 31.4 ± 0.02b | 30.2 ± 0.05d | 38.76 ± 0.04c |
Note: different letters in superscript within the same row indicate significant differences among sample tests (p < 0.05).