| Literature DB >> 36132744 |
Ying Xiao1,2, Fangfang Zhang2, Haojie Xu2, Changming Yang2, Xiaoqiu Song2, Yiming Zhou2, Xiaoli Zhou2, Xiaodan Liu1, Junli Miao3.
Abstract
The effects of cinnamaldehyde microcapsules on the concentration of cinnamaldehyde and its metabolites in plasma, urine, and feces, the antioxidant capacity, and the intestinal flora in male C57/BL6 mice were evaluated by oral administration for 7 weeks. Microencapsulation significantly increased the contents of cinnamaldehyde, cinnamyl alcohol, and methyl cinnamate in plasma and decreased those in urine and feces excretion (p < 0.05). In addition, microencapsulated cinnamaldehyde improved antioxidant capacity in liver, duodenum, and colon. Furthermore, 16S rRNA gene sequencing data suggested that microencapsulated cinnamaldehyde significantly improved the gut microbial richness and diversity, increased the abundance of Bacteroides, Bacteroidetes/Firmicutes, unclassified_f_Lachnospiraceae, Lactobacillus, and Blautia genera, and decreased in Ruminococcaceae_UCG-014, Faecalibaculum, norank_f_Muribaculaceae, and Gordonibacter genera, which was accompanied by the increased contents of butyric acid in feces. Therefore, microencapsulated cinnamaldehyde may increase its bioavailability and regulate the balance of intestinal flora.Entities:
Keywords: 16s rRNA high-throughput sequencing; Antioxidant; Bioavailability; Cinnamaldehyde; Microcapsules; Short-chain fatty acids
Year: 2022 PMID: 36132744 PMCID: PMC9483564 DOI: 10.1016/j.fochx.2022.100441
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Food Chem X ISSN: 2590-1575
The body weight and the plasma AST, ALT, TBA and inflammatory cytokines levels including TNF-α and IL-6 in mice among CON, CIN and MIC groups.
| Group | Weight (g) | AST (U/mgprot) | ALT (U/mgprot) | IL-6 (ng/L) | TNF-α (ng/L) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial | Final | |||||
| CON | 22.4 ± 1.0a | 25.3 ± 1.2a | 40.69 ± 9.58a | 22.83 ± 4.60a | 215.42 ± 69.38a | 51.08 ± 14.21a |
| CIN | 22.2 ± 1.2a | 24.2 ± 1.7a | 41.04 ± 4.92a | 21.30 ± 5.61a | 391.44 ± 125.28b | 53.61 ± 10.10a |
| MIC | 22.2 ± 0.9a | 24.4 ± 1.2a | 43.37 ± 8.44a | 21.55 ± 4.81a | 157.01 ± 51.57a | 55.61 ± 12.08a |
Note: AST: aspartate aminotransferase; ALT: alanine aminotransferase; IL-6: interleukin-6; TNF-α: tumor necrosis factor-α. Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 8). Values with different superscript letters (a and b) were significantly differ at p < 0.05.
The antioxidant status in mice among CON, CIN and MIC groups.
| Group | Liver | Duodenum | Colon | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAT (U/mg prot) | CON | 9.56 ± 2.69a | 571.12 ± 46.91c | 264.14 ± 22.71a |
| CIN | 14.48 ± 4.33ab | 309.30 ± 65.76b | 304.92 ± 42.22b | |
| MIC | 14.82 ± 4.81b | 164.21 ± 48.73a | 327.87 ± 17.70b | |
| CON | 938.13 ± 53.65a | 520.33 ± 53.34c | 107.57 ± 33.96b | |
| CIN | 915.56 ± 74.71a | 320.38 ± 50.99b | 44.13 ± 18.46a | |
| MIC | 887.15 ± 72.05a | 192.47 ± 19.31a | 32.87 ± 6.75a | |
| CON | 0.93 ± 0.11a | 5.15 ± 0.74c | 1.20 ± 0.49a | |
| CIN | 0.94 ± 0.08a | 3.43 ± 0.33b | 1.31 ± 0.18a | |
| MIC | 1.26 ± 0.22b | 2.04 ± 0.35a | 1.37 ± 0.42a | |
| GSH (nmol/mg prot) | CON | 16.51 ± 4.77a | 226.97 ± 43.96c | 66.91 ± 21.68a |
| CIN | 41.80 ± 8.10b | 161.46 ± 15.79b | 92.07 ± 15.51b | |
| MIC | 50.82 ± 6.38c | 82.75 ± 10.32a | 128.83 ± 20.67c | |
| MDA (nmol/mg prot) | CON | 1.77 ± 0.27b | 2.46 ± 0.48c | 1.31 ± 0.30a |
| CIN | 1.26 ± 0.30a | 1.44 ± 0.24b | 1.28 ± 0.40a | |
| MIC | 1.21 ± 0.53a | 0.50 ± 0.16a | 1.22 ± 0.25a |
Note: CAT: catalase; T-SOD: total superoxide dismutase; T-AOC: total antioxidant capacity; GSH: reduced glutathione; MDA: malondialdehyde. Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 8). Values with different superscript letters (a, b and c) were significantly differ at p < 0.05.
Fig. 1The concentration of cinnamaldehyde and its metabolites in plasma, urine and feces. Plasma concentrations of cinnamaldehyde (A), cinnamyl alcohol (D) and methyl cinnamate (G) in mice orally administered with cinnamaldehyde and cinnamaldehyde microcapsules for 2 h. Fecal cumulative excretion of cinnamaldehyde (B) and its metabolites cinnamyl alcohol (E) and methyl cinnamate (H) in mice. Urinary cumulative excretion of cinnamaldehyde (C) and its metabolites cinnamyl alcohol (F) and methyl cinnamate (I) in mice. Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 8). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ***p < 0.001. respectively.
Fig. 2The analysis of the microbial community's alpha index diversity using the Student's t-test for the Sobs, Chao, Shannon, and Simpson indices (D). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ***p < 0.001. respectively. the OTU level PCoA analysis of the gut microbiota in groups (E) (n = 8).
Fig. 3Wilcoxon rank-sum test bar plot and analysis of the gut microbiota composition. The phylum-level distributions of the gut microbiota community components (A). The bar plot displays the variations in relative abundance of the various phyla of gut microbiota in different colors. Using the LEfSe analysis, a taxonomic cladogram from family to genus was created. (B) The bar plot displays the changes in Bacteroidetes/Firmicutes (B/F) ratios in the three groups.(C)Different colored nodes reflect species with considerably high relative abundance in the relevant groups, whereas yellow nodes show species with no significantly varied relative abundance across groups (p > 0.05). The different colors represent various groups. The letters designate the names of taxons that vary significantly across groupings. The top 15 gut microbiota with noticeably varied genus-level abundances of CON and CIN (D)and CIN and MIC (E) *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ***p < 0.001.
The contents of short chain fatty acids (SCFAs) including propionic acid, butyric acid, acetic acid and total acid in feces among CON, CIN and MIC groups.
| Group | SCFAs (μmol/g) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acetic acid | Propionic acid | Butyric acid | Total acid | |
| CON | 16.00 ± 1.14a | 6.00 ± 0.41ab | 7.01 ± 0.64b | 29.13 ± 1.47b |
| CIN | 15.41 ± 0.61a | 5.78 ± 0.21a | 6.23 ± 0.57a | 27.47 ± 0.83a |
| MIC | 16.49 ± 1.05a | 6.50 ± 0.66b | 7.84 ± 0.52c | 32.18 ± 1.42b |
Note: Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 8). Values with different superscript letters (a, b and c) were significantly differ at p < 0.05.