4.7 Article

Comparative analysis of in vitro antioxidant capacities of mycosporine-like amino acids (MAAs)

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.algal.2018.07.007

关键词

Mycosporine-like amino acids; Antioxidant; Pro-oxidant; Seaweed

资金

  1. CNPq (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) [140073/2013-2]
  2. FAPESP (Sao Paulo Research Foundation) [2013/07543-0, Biota/FAPESP 2013/50731-1]
  3. CEPLAC (Executive Commission of the Cocoa Farming Plan)
  4. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [13/07543-0] Funding Source: FAPESP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The most common Mycosporine-like Amino Acids (MAAs) in red algae (asterina-330, shinorine, palythine, palythinol, and porphyra-334) were evaluated regarding their in vitro antioxidant capacities, comparing them with synthetic (BHT and Trolox) and natural (ascorbic acid, gallic acid, p-cumaric acid, quercetin, and rutin) antioxidants. Folin-Ciocalteu, ABTS center dot(+), and FRAP assays have the same reaction mechanism of electron transfer and usually show a positive correlation. However, the antioxidant capacities for the MAAs were discrepant between these assays. While porphyra-334, shinorine, and palythine were as active as, or more active than synthetic phenolic antioxidants (Trolox and BHT) in Folin-Ciocalteu assay, the antioxidant potentials of MAAs were lower than those of the standard compounds in ABTS center dot(+) and FRAP assays. The pH-dependent antioxidant power was hypothesized as an explanation for this distinct behavior and was evaluated through ABTS center dot(+) assay. Alkaline pH allows antioxidant capacities similar to Trolox in ABTS center dot(+) assay, supporting our hypothesis. Comparing to standard compounds, MAAs showed low activity using ORAC assay and were pro-oxidant in beta-carotene/linoleic acid assay. Therefore, imino-MAAs present relevant in vitro antioxidant capacity under specific pH conditions in assays based on electron transfer.

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

4.7
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