4.6 Article

Optimization of Degradation Conditions with PRG, a Polysaccharide from Phellinus ribis, by RSM and the Neuroprotective Activity in PC12 Cells Damaged by Aβ25-35

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 24, 期 16, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules24163010

关键词

polysaccharide; Phellinus ribis; degradation; neuroprotevtive activity; amyloid-beta; mitochondrial membrane permeability; cytochrome C

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81973218]
  2. Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation [ZR2019MH082]
  3. Science and Technology Project of Universities in Shandong Province [J16LM08]
  4. Scientific Foundation of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine [2018zk15]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the previous work, we found PRG, a polysaccharide from Phellinus ribis, exhibited neurotrophic activity. To obtain an active structural unit with lower molecular weight, PRG was degraded to prepare the degraded PRG (DPRG) using ascorbic acid and H2O2. The aim of the paper was to obtain DPRG by optimizing the degradation conditions using response surface methodology (RSM) and to study its protective effects of PC12 cells induced by A beta(25-35). The optimum conditions were as follows; the concentration of H2O2-Vc was 17 mM and degradation temperature was 50 degrees C; when degradation time was 1.6 h, the experimental response value of PC12 cell viability was 83.4 +/- 0.15%, which was in accordance with the predicted value (83.5%). We also studied the protective effects of DPRG against the A beta(25-35)-induced neurotoxicity and explored the underlying mechanism. The results showed that treatment with DPRG could attenuate PC12 cells death. The mechanism was relative to the inhibition of cell apoptosis by increasing the MMP level and decreasing the protein expression of cytochrome C (Cytc) in PC12 cells. In conclusion, DPRG with lower molecular weight was obtained successfully. It possessed neuroprotective properties and might be a candidate for neurodegenerative disease treatment.

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

4.6
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