4.5 Article

Isolation and characterization of anticomplementary beta-glucans from the shoots of bamboo Phyllostachys edulis

期刊

PLANTA MEDICA
卷 69, 期 1, 页码 56-62

出版社

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-37038

关键词

Phyllostachys edulis shoots; Poaceae; anticomplementary activity; C3; water-soluble beta-glucan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bamboo, Phyllostachys edulis produces well known edible shoots in Asia. Immunostimulating anticomplementary (complement activating) substances have been recognized as a characteristic biological response modifier (BRM). In the present study, we isolated and characterized three anticomplementary beta-glucans (BS-BGA, BS-BGB, and BS-BGC) from bamboo shoots. Hot-water extraction, DEAE-Toyopearl 650M-column chromatography, amylase digestion and concanavalin A adsorption, and Sephacryl S-100 HR column chromatography were applied to isolate the beta-glucans. The average molecular masses of the beta-glucans were estimated to be from 14,500 to 85,300 Da by HPSEC-MALLS-RI. All three beta-glucans (0.1 - 1.0 mg/mL) activated the complement system via the alternative pathway, and could cleave human complement C3 under Ca2+-free gelatin veronal buffered saline. Among them, the largest molecule, BS-BGA was the most potent complement activator. Methylation analysis and NMR spectroscopy were used to achieve their structural characterization. They are all water-soluble and composed mainly of backbone structures of beta-(1-->3)-glucan with beta-(1-->4)-linked side chains varying in degree of branching. BS-BGA consisted of a higher proportion of 3-linked glucopyranosyl residues and a lower degree of branching than BS-BGB and BS-BGC. In particular, BS-BGA contained a small amount of O-acetyl groups at C-6 of the 3-linked glucopyranosyl residues. These data demonstrate that the structural characteristics including molecular size, degree of branching, and O-acetyl substitution are involved, at least in part, in their different anticomplementary activities.

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

4.5
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