4.0 Article

The Comparison of Black Currant Juice and Vitamin E for the Prevention of Oxidative Stress

出版社

VERLAG HANS HUBER
DOI: 10.1024/0300-9831/a000001

关键词

oxidative stress; PUFAs; black currant juice; vitamin E; comet assay; malondialdehyde

资金

  1. Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology
  2. Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food of the Republic of Slovenia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Black currant is known as a fruit with a very strong in vitro antioxidative capacity, but its in vivo antioxidant efficacy has not yet been characterized. The aim of the experiment was to determine the potency of black currant juice in comparison to vitamin E, for decreasing oxidative stress. Oxidative stress was induced by high intake of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) in pigs as a model for humans. Twenty-four growing pigs were divided into four groups. All groups received isocaloric daily rations composed of an equal amount of basal diet that was supplemented with starch (CONT), linseed oil (OIL), linseed oil and black currant juice (OIL+BCJ), or linseed oil and vitamin E (OIL+VIT E). The experiment confirmed that the high proportion of PUFAs in the OIL group increased oxidative stress. In comparison with the OIL group, vitamin E supplementation significantly lowered plasma malondiadehyde (MDA) and the 24-hour urine MDA excretion rate, and reduced the degree of DNA damage in leukocytes to the level of the CONT group. The black currant juice intake failed to significantly decrease plasma MDA and 24-hour urine MDA excretion rate, but did reduce the degree of DNA damage in leukocytes to the level of the CONT group, as well as increase plasma beta+gamma-tocopherol concentrations. Although black currant juice did not reduce the formation of MDA, it efficiently prevented DNA damage induced by the high intake of PUFAs. It could be concluded that under these experimental conditions vitamin E was more efficient as an antioxidant that black currant juice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据