| Literature DB >> 36235582 |
Zhujun Wang1, Hui Du2, Wanqian Peng2, Shilin Yang2, Yulin Feng2, Hui Ouyang2, Weifeng Zhu3, Ronghua Liu1.
Abstract
Diabetes is called a "wasting and thirsting disorder" in Chinese traditional medicine because there is a depletion of vital substances in the body independent of the intake of food or water and an inability to reintroduce fluids through drinking. Pueraria lobata (Willd.) Ohwi (GG) and Pueraria thomsonii Benth. (FG) are traditional Chinese herbal medicines used in the treatment of wasting-thirst that reduce blood glucose levels. Flavonoids are the main pharmacodynamic components of GG and FG, and they are also the most studied components at present, but polysaccharides are also active components of GG and FG, which, however, are less studied. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effect of Pueraria polysaccharides (GG and FG polysaccharides) on type 2 diabetes (T2D), as well as their related mechanisms of action in terms of both intestinal flora and metabolomics. The C57BL/KsJ-db/db mouse model, a well-established model of obesity-induced T2D, was used in this study. The metabolomic analysis showed that Pueraria polysaccharides improved the metabolic profile of diabetic mice and significantly regulated metabolites and metabolic pathways. Both GG and FG polysaccharides regulated insulin resistance in mice by regulating PPAR signaling pathway so as to treat T2D. Additionally, Pueraria polysaccharides regulated the structure of gut microbiota and improved the diabetes-related metabolic pathway. Therefore, this study discovered the antidiabetic effects and potential mechanisms of Pueraria polysaccharides through multiple pathways involving gut microbiota and metabolites, providing a theoretical basis for further studies on their effects in the treatment of T2D.Entities:
Keywords: Pueraria polysaccharides; efficacy; intestinal flora; mechanism of action; metabolomics; type 2 diabetes
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36235582 PMCID: PMC9570604 DOI: 10.3390/nu14193926
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 6.706
Figure 1(A) Effect of Pueraria polysaccharide on body weight of db/db mice (n = 10; ** p < 0.01 compared with the model group). (B) Effect of Pueraria polysaccharide on the water intake of db/db mice (n = 10; ** p < 0.01 compared with the model group). (C) Effect of Pueraria polysaccharide on food intake of db/db mice (n = 10; ** p < 0.01 compared with the model group). (D) Effect of Pueraria polysaccharide on fasting blood glucose in db/db mice (n = 10; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01 compared with the model group).
Figure 2Effects of Pueraria polysaccharide on the glucose tolerance of db/db mice (n = 10; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01 compared with the model group). (A) Effect of Pueraria polysaccharide on blood glucose value in db/db mice; (B) Effect of Pueraria polysaccharide on AUC in db/db mice.
Figure 3Effect of Pueraria polysaccharide on the insulin tolerance of db/db mice (n = 10; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01 compared with the model group). (A) Effect of Pueraria polysaccharide on blood glucose value in db/db mice; (B) Effect of Pueraria polysaccharide on AUC in db/db mice.
Effects of Pueraria polysaccharides on the biochemical values of db/db.
| Group | Control | Model | Met | FG | GG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| INS (ng/mL) | 0.96 ± 0.13 * | 2.19 ± 0.16 | 3.82 ± 0.61 ** | 2.56 ± 0.30 | 3.27 ± 0.22 * |
| HOMA-IR (ng/mL × mmol/L) | 0.27 ± 0.10 * | 3.29 ± 0.60 | 2.74 ± 0.78 | 2.63 ± 0.76 | 2.64 ± 1.20 |
| ADP (μg/L) | 187.52 ± 2.84 ** | 138.65 ± 2.26 | 174.46 ± 2.71 ** | 163.76 ± 1.85 ** | 163.88 ± 2.00 ** |
| LEP (pg/mL) | 860.45 ± 14.48 ** | 1184.66 ± 10.96 | 935.61 ± 14.41 ** | 1006.35 ± 11.18 ** | 1031 ± 8.01 ** |
| GLP-1 (pmol/L) | 5.77 ± 0.05 ** | 3.89 ± 0.07 | 5.32 ± 0.07 ** | 4.75 ± 0.05 ** | 4.95 ± 0.05 ** |
| FFA (μmol/L) | 782.73 ± 14.57 ** | 1001.58 ± 10.66 | 865.76 ± 8.19 ** | 898.70 ± 9.87 ** | 886.20 ± 11.54 ** |
| IL-6 (pg/mL) | 143.86 ± 2.32 ** | 194.81 ± 0.99 | 157.28 ± 2.02 ** | 169.20 ± 1.88 ** | 166.03 ± 1.42 ** |
| TNF-α (ng/L) | 795.71 ± 12.63 ** | 1036.50 ± 10.05 | 885.73 ± 10.05 ** | 920.54 ± 12.49** | 904.75 ± 13.16 ** |
| Liver index (%) | 0.042 ± 0.005 ** | 0.051 ± 0.004 | 0.051 ± 0.003 | 0.049 ± 0.003 | 0.046 ± 0.008 * |
| Fatty tissue index (g/g) | 0.03 ± 0.005 ** | 0.10 ± 0.013 | 0.08 ± 0.014 ** | 0.09 ± 0.015 * | 0.08 ± 0.007 ** |
n = 10; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0. 01 compared with the model group). Abbreviations: INS—insulin; HOMA-IR—homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance; ADP—adiponectin; LEP—leptin; GLP-1—glucagon-like peptide 1; FFA—free fatty acid; IL-6—interleukin-6; TNF-α—tumor necrosis factor.
Figure 4H&E staining of the liver tissue of db/db mice (400× magnification).
Figure 5Metabolic profile analysis of the serum of the T2D model in db/db mice ((A). NEG, PCA; (B). POS, PCA; (C). NEG, OPLS-DA; (D). POS, OPLS-DA).
Figure 6PRT analysis of the T2D model in db/db mice ((A). NEG, PRT; (B). POS, PRT).
Identification of differential metabolites in mouse serum between normal group and model group.
| NO | Retention Time | Name | Formula | Experimental | Ion Mode | Mass Error | MS/MS | Levels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 17.79 | PA (16:0/18:1(11Z)) | C37H71O8P | 674.4886 | M+H | 0.82 | 661.477 | ↑ |
| P2 | 15.95 | Alpha-linolenic acid | C18H30O2 | 278.2245 | M+H | −4.56 | 191.1780, 125.0972 | ↑ |
| P3 | 12.23 | LysoPE (0:0/20:3(11Z,14Z,17Z)) | C25H46NO7P | 503.3011 | M+H | −0.10 | 461.2635 | ↑ |
| P4 | 8.89 | 4-Oxoretinol | C20H28O2 | 300.2089 | M+H | −0.16 | 185.1337, 129.0705, 119.0866, 105.0700 | ↑ |
| P5 | 8.88 | Perindoprilat | C17H28N2O5 | 340.1998 | M+H | 4.09 | ↑ | |
| P6 | 8.83 | LysoPC (20:3(5Z,8Z,11Z)/0:0) | C28H52NO7P | 545.3481 | M+H | −0.23 | 546.3555, 528.3448, 469.2714, 363.2890 | ↑ |
| P7 | 7.60 | LysoPC (20:4(5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z)/0:0) | C28H50NO7P | 543.3324 | 2M+H | 0.93 | 526.3298 | ↑ |
| P8 | 6.24 | LysoPC (20:5(5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z,17Z)/0:0) | C28H48NO7P | 541.3168 | M+H | −0.36 | 542.3251, 524.3132, 184.0733, 166.0626, 104.1067, 86.0962 | ↑ |
| P9 | 6.09 | LysoPE (0:0/20:5(5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z,17Z)) | C25H42NO7P | 499.2698 | M+H | −0.70 | 481.2322 | ↑ |
| P10 | 5.89 | Fosinopril | C30H46NO7P | 563.3011 | M+H | −4.11 | 564.3066 | ↑ |
| P11 | 0.81 | Imidazoleacetic acid ribotide | C10H15N2O9P | 338.0515 | M+H | −1.60 | 124.9995 | ↑ |
| P12 | 10.91 | 12-HETE | C20H32O3 | 320.4663 | M-H2O-H, M-H | 0.11 | 319.2277, 301.2175, 257.2285, 179.1076 | ↑ |
| P13 | 10.69 | Medroxyprogesterone | C22H32O3 | 344.4877 | M-H2O-H, M-H | −4.14 | 343.2291, 303.2329 | ↑ |
| P14 | 9.00 | Leukotriene A4 | C20H30O3 | 318.4504 | M-H2O-H, M-H | 1.63 | 317.2131 | ↑ |
| P15 | 7.59 | LysoPE (0:0/20:4(5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z)) | C25H44NO7P | 501.5931 | M-H, 2M-H | −0.20 | 500.2783, 303.2329, 259.2431, 214.0484, 205.1959, 196.0376, 140.0117 | ↑ |
| P16 | 15.91 | Retinyl ester | C20H30O2 | 302.451 | M-H | −0.05 | 301.2174, 257.2295, 203.1808 | ↑ |
| P17 | 16.87 | Tetrahydrodeoxycorticosterone | C21H34O3 | 334.4929 | M-H2O-H | 0.39 | 315.2328, 149.0970 | ↑ |
| P18 | 16.86 | Hypogeic acid | C16H30O2 | 254.4082 | M-H | −0.62 | 253.2171 | ↑ |
| P19 | 16.27 | 13-HODE | C18H32O3 | 296.4449 | M-H2O-H | −0.02 | 277.2172 | ↑ |
| P20 | 16.66 | PE (22:6(4Z,7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z,19Z)/18:0) | C45H78NO8P | 792.0765 | M-H | 4.23 | 790.5402, 480.3099, 462.2997, 419.2538, 283.2625 | ↑ |
| P21 | 16.53 | PC (22:6(4Z,7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z,19Z)/TXB2) | C50H82NO12P | 920.175 | M-H | 1.64 | 885.5507, 883.5359, 857.5224, 581.3108, 327.2328 | ↑ |
| P22 | 13.38 | Deoxycorticosterone | C21H30O3 | 330.4611 | M-H2O-H | −0.18 | 311.2014, 149.0969 | ↑ |
| P23 | 14.92 | LysoPI (18:0/0:0) | C27H53O12P | 600.6763 | M-H | 2.48 | 599.3208, 315.0488, 297.2800, 241.0117 | ↑ |
| P24 | 13.52 | LysoPI (0:0/18:0) | C27H53O12P | 600.6763 | M-H | 1.88 | 599.321 | ↑ |
| P25 | 17.71 | Carbocyclic thromboxane A2 | C22H36O3 | 348.2664 | M-H2O-H | 0.00 | 329.2480, 277.1810, 259.1692, 191.1813 | ↑ |
| P26 | 17.35 | Arachidonic acid | C20H32O2 | 304.2402 | M-H | 0.28 | 303.2328, 259.2430, 205.1961 | ↑ |
| P27 | 17.06 | PA (14:0/22:4(7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z)) | C39H69O8P | 696.947 | M-H2O-H | 0.59 | 677.4551, 438.2284, 347.2013, 345.1841, 191.1804 | ↑ |
| P28 | 17.60 | 16-Dehydroprogesterone | C21H28O2 | 312.2089 | M-H | 0.11 | 311.2021, 149.0971 | ↑ |
| P29 | 17.59 | PA (14:1(9Z)/PGF1alpha) | C37H67O11P | 718.442 | M-H | −3.74 | 717.4325, 279.2330 | ↑ |
| P30 | 17.58 | DG (15:0/20:5(5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z,17Z)/0:0) | C38H64O5 | 600.4753 | M-H2O-H | −2.59 | 581.4550, 301.2173, 279.2331, 241.2172 | ↑ |
| P31 | 17.49 | PGP (a-13:0/a-25:0) | C44H88O13P2 | 886.57 | M-H2O-H | 1.50 | 867.5537, 774.5740, 756.5626 | ↑ |
| P32 | 7.34 | LysoPE (24:6(6Z,9Z,12Z,15Z,18Z,21Z)/0:0) | C29H48NO7P | 553.6677 | M-H | 0.74 | 552.3095, 283.2451, 229.1961, 152.9956 | ↑ |
| P33 | 7.33 | LysoPE (22:4(7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z)/0:0) | C27H48NO7P | 529.6463 | M-H | 0.96 | 528.3100, 259.2430, 229.1964, 205.1963, 152.9955 | ↑ |
| P34 | 7.18 | PC (17:2(9Z,12Z)/0:0) | C25H48NO7P | 505.633 | M-H | 0.03 | 504.3096, 279.2331, 224.0690 | ↑ |
| P35 | 7.17 | LysoPE (20:4(5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z)/0:0) | C25H44NO7P | 501.5931 | M-H | 0.59 | 500.2784, 214.0485, 152.9958 | ↑ |
| P36 | 7.67 | PC (2:0/6 keto-PGF1alpha) | C30H54NO12P | 651.731 | M-H2O-H | −3.81 | 632.3188, 500.2043, 224.0690 | ↑ |
| P37 | 0.83 | N-Acetyltaurine | C4H9NO4S | 167.18 | M-H | −1.11 | 166.0176, 124.0071, 79.9575 | ↑ |
| P38 | 6.33 | LysoPE (22:5(4Z,7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z)/0:0) | C27H46NO7P | 527.6304 | M-H | 0.93 | 526.2940, 327.2333, 257.2274, 203.1803, 152.9958 | ↑ |
| P39 | 2.79 | Tauroursocholic acid | C26H45NO7S | 515.703 | M-H | 1.17 | 514.2848 | ↑ |
| P40 | 2.54 | Vanilpyruvic acid | C10H10O5 | 210.1834 | M-H | −1.39 | 209.0453, 165.0556, 121.0292 | ↑ |
| P41 | 11.94 | LysoPC (17:0/0:0) | C25H52NO7P | 509.6566 | M-H | 0.23 | 508.3407, 419.2569, 283.2644, 224.0692 | ↑ |
| P42 | 11.60 | LysoPE (18:0/0:0) | C23H48NO7P | 481.6035 | M-H | 1.21 | 480.3100, 307.2635, 295.2645, 283.2635 | ↑ |
| P43 | 10.64 | Deoxycholyltyrosine | C33H49NO6 | 555.756 | M-H | −3.47 | 494.3261, 492.3465 | ↑ |
| P44 | 12.73 | LysoPE (20:0/0:0) | C25H52NO7P | 509.6566 | M-H | −0.10 | 508.3408, 152.9956 | ↑ |
| P45 | 12.36 | LysoPE (0:0/18:0) | C23H48NO7P | 481.6035 | M-H | 0.36 | 480.3099, 307.2628, 214.0480, 196.0377, 140.0112 | ↑ |
| P46 | 11.95 | Stearic acid | C18H36O2 | 284.4772 | M-H | 0.04 | 283.2645 | ↑ |
| P47 | 8.44 | LysoPI (20:4(5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z)/0:0) | C29H49O12P | 620.6659 | M-H | 0.30 | 619.2889, 439.2256, 315.0487, 303.2328, 259.2430, 241.0115 | ↑ |
| P48 | 1.26 | Uric acid | C5H4N4O3 | 168.1103 | M-H | −1.80 | 167.0208, 166.0132, 124.0146 | ↑ |
| P49 | 17.93 | PS (20:0/PGJ2) | C46H80NO12P | 869.5418 | M+H | −0.55 | 870.5510, 747.4920, 95.0852 | ↓ |
| P50 | 17.88 | PGP (18:0/PGF1alpha) | C44H84O16P2 | 930.5234 | M+H | −2.18 | 931.5286 | ↓ |
| P51 | 14.82 | LysoPE (0:0/22:0) | C27H56NO7P | 537.3794 | M+H | −0.85 | ↓ | |
| P52 | 13.51 | LysoPC (22:4(7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z)/0:0) | C30H54NO7P | 571.3637 | M+H | −4.14 | 572.3691, 513.2946, 104.1067 | ↓ |
| P53 | 11.39 | LysoPE (0:0/22:1(13Z)) | C27H54NO7P | 535.3637 | M+H | −0.35 | ↓ | |
| P54 | 10.74 | LysoPC (20:2(11Z,14Z)/0:0) | C28H54NO7P | 547.3637 | M+H | −0.85 | 530.3605, 441.2401, 166.0631, 104.1068, 86.0962, 60.0807 | ↓ |
| P55 | 6.62 | LysoPE (0:0/18:1(11Z)) | C23H46NO7P | 479.5876 | M-H | 0.79 | 478.2942 | ↓ |
| P56 | 7.97 | LysoPE (0:0/22:4(7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z)) | C27H48NO7P | 529.3168 | M+H | −4.81 | 472.2565 | ↓ |
| P57 | 7.45 | Dodecanoylcarnitine | C19H37NO4 | 344.2795 | M+H | 1.55 | ↓ | |
| P58 | 6.69 | LysoPC (16:1(9Z)/0:0) | C24H48NO7P | 493.3168 | M+H | −0.78 | 312.2635, 311.2581 | ↓ |
| P59 | 16.32 | PC (20:2(11Z,14Z)/TXB2) | C48H86NO12P | 900.185 | M-H | −1.37 | 854.5928, 790.5403, 305.2480 | ↓ |
| P60 | 15.59 | N-Oleoyl phenylalanine | C27H43NO3 | 429.645 | 2M-H | −0.74 | ↓ | |
| P61 | 13.67 | LysoPE (22:1(13Z)/0:0) | C27H54NO7P | 535.6939 | M-H | 1.16 | 534.3574, 391.2117, 152.9957 | ↓ |
| P62 | 17.16 | PE-NMe2 (18:0/20:4(8Z,11Z,14Z,17Z)) | C45H82NO8P | 796.124 | M-H2O-H | −0.44 | 776.5612, 766.5397, 740.5261, 508.3412, 490.3309, 303.2328, 283.2624, 259.2429 | ↓ |
| P63 | 17.66 | PS (18:1(11Z)/6 keto-PGF1alpha) | C44H78NO14P | 875.5159 | M-H | 0.95 | ↓ | |
| P64 | 10.23 | Chenodeox–cholyltyrosine | C33H49NO6 | 555.756 | M-H | −2.91 | 506.3260, 494.3263 | ↓ |
| P65 | 8.76 | LysoPC (15:0/0:0) | C23H48NO7P | 481.6035 | M-H | −0.47 | 480.3093, 255.2332, 224.0693 | ↓ |
| P66 | 9.79 | LysoPE (20:1(11Z)/0:0) | C25H50NO7P | 507.6408 | M-H | −0.29 | 506.3250, 152.9956 | ↓ |
| P67 | 9.17 | PC (PGF2alpha/2:0) | C30H54NO11P | 635.732 | M-H | −2.44 | ↓ |
Abbreviations: “↑”—Compared with the normal group, the relative content of compounds in the model group was up-regulated; “↓”—Compared with the normal group, the relative content of compounds in the model group was down-regulated.
Figure 7Heat map analysis of differential metabolites in T2D db/db mice. (Control 1–10 represents Table 1. Model represents the model group).
Figure 8Overview of the metabolic pathway analysis. 1. Arachidonic acid metabolism; 2. Alpha-linolenic acid metabolism; 3. Glycerophospholipid metabolism; 4. Retinol metabolism; 5. Steroid hormone biosynthesis; 6. Glycerolipid metabolism; 7. Biosynthesis of unsaturated fatty acids.
Figure 9Metabolic profile in the serum of the T2D db/db mice treated with GG polysaccharide ((A). NEG, PCA; (B). POS, PCA; (C). NEG, PLS-DA; (D). POS, PLS-DA).
Figure 10Metabolic profile in the serum samples of T2D db/db mice treated with FG polysaccharide ((A). NEG, PCA; (B). POS, PCA; (C). NEG, PLS-DA; (D). POS, PLS-DA).
Figure 11(A) Heat map analysis of differential metabolites in the serum after GG polysaccharide treatment. (B) Heat map analysis of differential metabolites in the serum after FG polysaccharide treatment.
Figure 12Correlation analysis of metabolites and biochemical indices affected by Pueraria polysaccharide intervention ((A): GG; (B): FG; red represents a positive correlation, blue represents a negative correlation, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001).
Alpha diversity index analysis.
| Sample | Control | Model | FG | GG |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chao 1 | 456.22 ± 16.934 | 442.16 ± 30.687 | 448.97 ± 19.631 | 457.52 ± 53.739 |
| Ace | 447.01 ± 12.98 | 439.96 ± 30.287 | 439.38 ± 17.572 | 453.51 ± 61.46 |
| Shannon | 4.4543 ± 0.13655 | 4.4905 ± 0.090045 | 4.6394 ± 0.094192 ** | 4.595 ± 0.098015 * |
| Simpson | 0.02326 ± 0.0049968 | 0.021155 ± 0.0021977 | 0.017352 ± 0.0030513 ** | 0.018555 ± 0.0026981 * |
| Coverage | 0.99875 ± 0.00011005 | 0.99878 ± 0.00019433 | 0.99883 ± 0.00013631 | 0.99873 ± 0.00048036 |
n = 10; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01 compared with the model group.
Figure 13Changes in the relative abundance of cecal microflora at the phylum level in db/db mice (n = 10). (A) community barplot analysis on Phylum level; (B) community heatmap analysis on Phylum level.
Figure 14(A) PCoA analysis of the cecal microflora in db/db mice based on the weighted-unifrac distance (n = 10); (B) the distribution of different groups of samples on the PC1 axis.
Figure 15LEfSe linear discriminant analysis of the cecal microflora in db/db mice ((A). normal group vs. model group; (B). model group vs. FG group; (C). model group vs. GG group).
Figure 16Effects of Pueraria polysaccharide on the cecal microflora in db/db mice ((A). FG; (B). GG).
Figure 17KEGG pathway level 1 box diagram (n = 10; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01 compared with the model group).
Figure 18Heat map of KEGG pathway level 3 functional abundance (n = 10).
Figure 19Correlation analysis between the cecal microflora and metabolites affected by Pueraria polysaccharide intervention ((A): GG; (B): FG; red represents a positive correlation, blue represents a negative correlation, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001).
Figure 20Effects of GG polysaccharide and FG polysaccharide on liver protein expression in db/db mice ((A). LKB1; (B). P-AMPK/AMPK; (C). P-TSC2/TSC2; (D). P-mTOR/mTOR; (E). PPAR gamma. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01 compared with the model group).