Chemical Characteristics and Bioactivities of Chestnut Flower Polysaccharides: Insights Into the Impact of Extraction Methods

IF 3.2 2区 农林科学 Q2 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Lijuan Sun, Xinyi Yan, Kui Niu, Bin Du, Zuoqing Yu, Yuedong Yang, Fei Peng
{"title":"Chemical Characteristics and Bioactivities of Chestnut Flower Polysaccharides: Insights Into the Impact of Extraction Methods","authors":"Lijuan Sun,&nbsp;Xinyi Yan,&nbsp;Kui Niu,&nbsp;Bin Du,&nbsp;Zuoqing Yu,&nbsp;Yuedong Yang,&nbsp;Fei Peng","doi":"10.1111/1750-3841.70340","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> ABSTRACT</h3>\n \n <p>This study systematically evaluated and compared the effects of six extraction methods, namely hot water extraction (HWE), ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE), microwave-assisted extraction (MAE), acid-assisted extraction (CAE), alkali-assisted extraction (AAE), and enzyme-assisted extraction (EAE), on the structural characteristics, in vitro biological activities, and cytotoxicity of polysaccharides from chestnut flowers (CFPs). The results show that CFPs extracted by different extraction methods have significant differences in terms of chemical composition, monosaccharide spectrum, molecular weight distribution, and surface morphology. However, their similar infrared spectra, crystal structures and thermal stabilities indicate that despite the different degrees of degradation, the main structure of CFPs remains basically intact in different extraction methods. It is worth noting that the CFPs produced by HWE have the strongest antioxidant activity (98.5 ± 0.48%, evaluated by the DPPH free radical scavenging assay), while the CFPs produced by EAE have the highest hypoglycemic activity (94.3 ± 0.4%, evaluated by the α-glucosylase inhibition assay). Furthermore, the CFPs of all extraction methods showed biocompatibility. Under the condition of conforming to physiological relevance, the selected cell concentrations all promoted the proliferation of RAW264.7 mouse macrophages, indicating their lack of cytotoxicity. These findings provide a theoretical basis for the selection of CFPs extraction methods with targeted biological activity. Specifically, HWE is recommended for the production of CFPs rich in antioxidants, while EAE is the best choice for preparing CFPs with hypoglycemic properties. This study also lays a foundation for further research on the in vivo biological activity of CFPs.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":193,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Food Science","volume":"90 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Food Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1750-3841.70340","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT

This study systematically evaluated and compared the effects of six extraction methods, namely hot water extraction (HWE), ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE), microwave-assisted extraction (MAE), acid-assisted extraction (CAE), alkali-assisted extraction (AAE), and enzyme-assisted extraction (EAE), on the structural characteristics, in vitro biological activities, and cytotoxicity of polysaccharides from chestnut flowers (CFPs). The results show that CFPs extracted by different extraction methods have significant differences in terms of chemical composition, monosaccharide spectrum, molecular weight distribution, and surface morphology. However, their similar infrared spectra, crystal structures and thermal stabilities indicate that despite the different degrees of degradation, the main structure of CFPs remains basically intact in different extraction methods. It is worth noting that the CFPs produced by HWE have the strongest antioxidant activity (98.5 ± 0.48%, evaluated by the DPPH free radical scavenging assay), while the CFPs produced by EAE have the highest hypoglycemic activity (94.3 ± 0.4%, evaluated by the α-glucosylase inhibition assay). Furthermore, the CFPs of all extraction methods showed biocompatibility. Under the condition of conforming to physiological relevance, the selected cell concentrations all promoted the proliferation of RAW264.7 mouse macrophages, indicating their lack of cytotoxicity. These findings provide a theoretical basis for the selection of CFPs extraction methods with targeted biological activity. Specifically, HWE is recommended for the production of CFPs rich in antioxidants, while EAE is the best choice for preparing CFPs with hypoglycemic properties. This study also lays a foundation for further research on the in vivo biological activity of CFPs.

板栗花多糖的化学特性和生物活性:提取方法的影响
摘要:本研究系统评价和比较了热水提取(HWE)、超声辅助提取(UAE)、微波辅助提取(MAE)、酸辅助提取(CAE)、碱辅助提取(AAE)和酶辅助提取(EAE) 6种提取方法对板栗花多糖(CFPs)结构特征、体外生物活性和细胞毒性的影响。结果表明,不同提取方法提取的CFPs在化学成分、单糖谱、分子量分布和表面形貌等方面存在显著差异。然而,它们相似的红外光谱、晶体结构和热稳定性表明,尽管不同的提取方法降解程度不同,但CFPs的主要结构基本保持不变。值得注意的是,HWE产生的CFPs具有最强的抗氧化活性(DPPH自由基清除试验评价为98.5±0.48%),而EAE产生的CFPs具有最高的降血糖活性(α-葡萄糖酶抑制试验评价为94.3±0.4%)。此外,各提取方法的CFPs均具有良好的生物相容性。在符合生理相关性的条件下,所选细胞浓度均能促进RAW264.7小鼠巨噬细胞的增殖,说明其不具有细胞毒性。这些发现为选择具有靶向生物活性的CFPs提取方法提供了理论依据。具体来说,HWE被推荐用于生产富含抗氧化剂的CFPs,而EAE是制备具有降糖性能的CFPs的最佳选择。本研究也为进一步研究CFPs的体内生物活性奠定了基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Food Science
Journal of Food Science 工程技术-食品科技
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
2.60%
发文量
412
审稿时长
3.1 months
期刊介绍: The goal of the Journal of Food Science is to offer scientists, researchers, and other food professionals the opportunity to share knowledge of scientific advancements in the myriad disciplines affecting their work, through a respected peer-reviewed publication. The Journal of Food Science serves as an international forum for vital research and developments in food science. The range of topics covered in the journal include: -Concise Reviews and Hypotheses in Food Science -New Horizons in Food Research -Integrated Food Science -Food Chemistry -Food Engineering, Materials Science, and Nanotechnology -Food Microbiology and Safety -Sensory and Consumer Sciences -Health, Nutrition, and Food -Toxicology and Chemical Food Safety The Journal of Food Science publishes peer-reviewed articles that cover all aspects of food science, including safety and nutrition. Reviews should be 15 to 50 typewritten pages (including tables, figures, and references), should provide in-depth coverage of a narrowly defined topic, and should embody careful evaluation (weaknesses, strengths, explanation of discrepancies in results among similar studies) of all pertinent studies, so that insightful interpretations and conclusions can be presented. Hypothesis papers are especially appropriate in pioneering areas of research or important areas that are afflicted by scientific controversy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信