Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Digestion and colonic fermentation of raw and cooked Opuntia ficus-indica
cladodes impacts bioaccessibility and bioactivity
Elsy De Santiagoa, Chris I. R. Gillb, Ilaria Carafac, Kieran M. Touhyc, María-Paz
De Peñaa* and Concepción Cida
a Universidad de Navarra, Facultad de Farmacia y Nutrición, Departamento de Ciencias
de la Alimentación y Fisiología, C/ Irunlarrea 1, E-31008 Pamplona, Spain.
IdiSNA, Navarra Institute for Health Research. Pamplona, Spain.
b Nutrition Innovation Centre for Food and Health, Centre for Molecular Biosciences,
University of Ulster, Cromore Road, Coleraine, Northern Ireland, BT52 1SA, United
Kingdom.
c Nutrition & Nutrigenomics Unit, Department of Food Quality and Nutrition, Research
and Innovation Centre, Fondazione Edmund Mach (FEM), Via E. Mach 1, 38010, San
Michele all’Adige, Trento, Italy.
*Corresponding author: María-Paz de Peña. Tel: +34 948 425600 (806580); Fax: +34
948 425740. E-mail address: [email protected]
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
ABSTRACT
The bioactivity of (poly)phenols from a food are interplay between the cooking methods
applied and its interaction with the gastrointestinal tract. (Poly)phenolic profile and
biological activity of raw and cooked cactus (Opuntia ficus-indica Mill.) cladodes
following in vitro digestion and colonic fermentation were evaluated. Twenty-seven
(poly)phenols were identified and quantified by HPLC-ESI-MS, with piscidic acid the
most abundant. Throughout the colonic fermentation, flavonoids showed more
degradation than phenolic acids, remained eucomic acid the most relevant after 24 h.
The catabolite 3-(4-hydroxyphenyl)propionic acid was generated after 24 h of
fermentation incubation. Cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and cell cycle analyses were
performed in HT29 cells. Cactus colonic fermentates showed higher cell viability
(80%) compared to the control fermentation with no cactus, and significantly (p<0.05)
reduced H2O2-induced DNA damage in HT29 cells. Results suggest that, although
phenolic compounds were degraded during the colonic fermentation, the biological
activity is retained in colon cells.
KEYWORDS: Opuntia ficus-indica, Polyphenols, Gut microbiota, Antioxidant
activity, DNA damage, cytotoxicity.
2
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Introduction
Cactus (Opuntia ficus-indica Mill.) is an American native plant, which farming is
slowly extending throughout the World. In Mexico cactus cladodes, known as “nopales”
or “nopalitos”, are highly consumed (6.4 kg per capita per year) 1 after cooking in
different styles (i.e., boiling, griddling, frying and microwaving). It is being recognized
as a great source of (poly)phenols, predominating flavonoids as isorhamnetin,
kaempferol and quercetin derivatives, as well as phenolic acids like piscidic and
eucomic acids 2–4, especially in young cladodes, which are the preferred ones for human
consumption and that have higher amount of (poly)phenolic compounds and
consequently higher antioxidant activity than the old ones 5,6.
The dietary intake of (poly)phenolic compounds has been studied for decades because
of their beneficial and protective effects on different chronic diseases such as cancer,
diabetes and cardiovascular disease due to their antioxidant properties to reduce
inflammation caused by oxidative stress 7. Previously, it has been demonstrated that
after consumption, digestive conditions and enzymes affect (poly)phenols
bioaccessibility of cactus cladodes, degrading or retaining more flavonoids (37-63%
bioaccessibility) than phenolic acids (56-87% bioaccessibility) even both compounds
still remaining after the gastrointestinal digestion process, especially when cactus
cladodes were cooked 8. Then, bioaccessible compounds can be absorbed through the
stomach and small intestine, or most of them could reach the colon and be extensively
catabolised by the human gut microbiota 9.
(Poly)phenols biotransformations can occur in the colon, in which the enzymes of the
gut microbiota act to breakdown complex polyphenolic structures by hydrolysis,
dehydroxylation, deconjugation, demethylation, ring cleavage and decarboxylation
reactions. Some studies have shown the influence of colonic human microbiota on the
3
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
phenolic profile and catabolites produced in some vegetables as pepper 10, and cardoon
11 as well as in coffee 12 and lingonberries 13 .
Otherwise, the remaining polyphenols which reach the colon could modulate metabolic
pathways related to the gut microbiota and cell processes, as inflammation, immunity,
cell proliferation and oxidative stress 14. Recently, studies have reported the biological
and antioxidant activity of (poly)phenols from raspberries after colonic fermentation on
HT29 human colon cells reducing DNA damage 15. Furthermore, extracts from O. ficus-
indica juices of cactus pear fruits have also demonstrated antiproliferative effects on
HT29 cells 16, even intestinal digestion and gut microbiota action were not considered.
In light of the scientific evidence about the influence of gut microbiota on
(poly)phenolic compounds, and subsequently their biological activity, as well as the
increasing interest on cactus cladodes potential bioactivity, the aim of the current study
was to know how the human colonic microbiota affects the dietary (poly)phenolic
compounds of raw and cooked cactus (O. ficus-indica) cladodes, and consequently the
biological activity of nopal on HT29 colorectal cancer cells in a realistic approach (after
gastrointestinal digestion and gut microbiota action).
Material and methods
Chemical and reagents
O. ficus-indica cactus cladodes (“nopales”) for human consumption were purchased
from BioArchen company located in Murcia, Spain (August 2015). Olive and soybean
oils were obtained from local markets. Methanol, acetone, acetonitrile (HPLC grade)
and formic acid (HPLC grade) were purchased from Panreac (Barcelona, Spain).
Potassium chloride and sodium chloride were obtained from Merck (Darmstadt,
Germany). Human saliva α-amylase (852 U/mg protein), pepsin (674 U/mg), pancreatin
4
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
(4xUPS), bile salts (for digestion), sodium hydrogen carbonate, potassium phosphate
monobasic, magnesium sulfate monohydrate as well as the pure standards used for
quantification of phenolic compounds (isorhamnetin, kaempferol and ferulic acid), were
purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Steinheim, Germany).
Chemicals for the batch culture nutrient medium for the in vitro fermentation as bile
salts, yeast extract, buffered peptone water, sodium chloride, Tween 80, hemin, vitamin
K, L-cystein hydrochloride monohydrate, resazurin redox indicator, sodium hydrogen
carbonate, potassium phosphate monobasic, magnesium sulfate monohydrate, potassium
hydrogen phosphate, calcium chloride hexahydrate were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich
(St. Louis, MO, USA) and Applichem (Darmstadt, Germany).
Dulbecco's Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM), fetal bovine serum (FBS) and penicillin
streptomycin (Pen Strep) were obtained from Gibco Life Technologies Ltd (Paisley,
Scotland, UK). MTT (3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide)
was acquired from Promega (Madison, USA). All other chemicals for tissue culture and
biological activity assays were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich Company Ltd (Dorset,
England, UK) unless otherwise specified.
Samples preparation
Cactus cladodes were washed and the thorns were manually removed. Then, they were
cut into small pieces and divided into six portions (300 g for each one). One portion was
used as raw sample and the other five were processed by the different cooking methods
(boiling, microwaving, griddling and frying in olive or in soybean oil) as shown in
Table 1. Afterwards, each raw and cooked sample was lyophilized in a freeze dryer
Cryodos-80 (Telstar, Terrasa, Spain) and stored at -18 C.
In vitro gastrointestinal digestion and colonic fermentation
5
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
A simulated digestion model was performed according to Minekus et al. (2014) 17 and
Monente et al. (2015) 18 adapted to our laboratory. Three steps were carried out to
simulate the oral (with -amylase), gastric (with pepsin at pH 3) and small intestine
(with pancreatin and bile salts at pH 7) conditions. Details of the in vitro gastrointestinal
process are described in De Santiago et al. (2018) 8. Each cactus sample was digested in
duplicate and then the two repetitions were mixed and homogenized. After intestinal
digestion, samples were lyophilized in a freeze dryer Cryodos-80 (Telstar), and stored at
-18 C until in vitro fermentation process.
The digesta raw and cooked cactus cladodes were subjected to an in vitro fermentation
with human faecal samples to simulate the condition present in the colon following the
method described by Koutsos et al. (2017) 19 and briefly described below.
The composition for 1 L of growth medium was 2 g of peptone, 2 g of yeast extract, 0.1
g of NaCl, 0.04 g of K2HPO4, 0.04 g of KH2PO4, 0.01 g of MgSO4 x 7H2O, 0.04 g of
CaCl2 x 6H2O, 2 g of NaHCO3, 2 mL of Tween 80, 0.05 g of hemin dissolved in 1 mL
of 4 M NaOH, 10 mL of vitamin K, 0.5 g of L-cysteine HCl, 0.5 g of bile salts and 4
mL of resazurin solution (0.025%, w/v) as an anaerobic indicator. The growth medium
was sterilized at 121 °C for 15 min in glass vessels (280 mL) before sample preparation.
The fermentation process of digesta raw and cooked cactus as well as the control (with
no cactus cladodes) was developed using anaerobic, stirred, pH (5.3-5.7) and
temperature controlled faecal batch cultures. Glass water-jacketed vessels were
sterilized and filled aseptically with 67.5 mL of pre-sterilized basal nutrient medium.
The medium was then gassed overnight with nitrogen (>99% purity) to maintain
anaerobic conditions. The following day and before the inoculation, each vessel was
dosed with 0.75 g of digesta cactus, for a final concentration of 1% (w/v). Three
6
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
independent experiments were performed with fresh human faecal samples collected in
an anaerobic jar from three healthy faecal donors who were free of any known
metabolic and gastrointestinal diseases, were not taking probiotic or prebiotic
supplements, followed a polyphenol-free diet for 2 days and had not taken antibiotics 3
months before faecal collection. Faecal slurry was prepared by homogenizing the faeces
in pre-reduced phosphate buffered saline (PBS). The temperature was set to 37 °C using
a circulating water-bath and the vessels were inoculated with 7.5 mL faecal slurry (10%
w/v of fresh human faeces) for a period of 24 h, during which samples were collected at
4 time points (0, 5, 10 and 24 h). Samples were centrifuged at 13,500 rpm at 4 °C for 5
min and stored at −80 °C for further analysis.
Identification and quantification of (poly)phenolic compounds by HPLC-ESI-MS
(Poly)phenolic compounds from fermented, raw and cooked, cactus cladodes were
extracted following the method described in Juániz et al. (2017) 11. Briefly, 0.1 mL of
methanol/acidified water (0.1% formic acid) (80:20 v/v) was added to 0.1 mL of
fermented samples, vortexed and centrifuged at 14,000 rpm for 10 min. Then,
supernatants were transferred to vials to carry out HPLC-ESI-MS analysis, which was
performed using an HPLC unit model 1200 (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA,
USA) equipped with a Triple Quadrupole Linear Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer 3200 Q-
TRAP (AB Sciex, Framingham, MA, USA). The column used was a CORTECS® C18
(3x75 mm, 2.7 µm) from Waters (Milford, MA, USA).
For HPLC separation, mobile phase A was 0.1% (v/v) formic acid in water and mobile
phase B was acetonitrile. Separations were carried out with an injection volume of 4 μL,
column oven temperature of 30 C and elution flow rate of 0.35 mL/min. The mobile
phases comprised a program of 0–1.20 min, 5% B; 1.20–8.80 min, 5–11.4% B; 8.80-10
min, 11.4–11% B; 10–30 min, 11-30% B; 30-32 min, 30-100% B and then return to 5%
7
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
B in 2 min and maintained isocratic until the end of the analysis (38 min) to re-
equilibrate the column. Mass analyses were performed in negative ionization mode,
with the turbo heater maintained at 500 °C and Ion Spray voltage set at -3500. Nitrogen
was used as nebulizing, turbo heater and curtain gas and was set at the pressure of 40,
50 and 35 psi, respectively. Chromatograms were acquired using Analyst software 1.6.3
(AB Sciex, Framingham, MA, USA).
For the identification of the phenolic compounds, a preliminary analysis was carried out
in a full scan from 100 to 1000 m/z, and a consecutively selective product ion mode
analysis with specific m/z. Identification was achieved by multiple reaction monitoring
(MRM). Two transitions were studied for each phenolic compound. The first transition,
corresponding to the most abundant fragment, was used as quantifier ion, and the
second as qualifier ion. Details of the (poly)phenols identification are shown in the
Supporting Information Table S1 (Supplementary Material).
Phenolic acids were expressed as ferulic acid equivalents, whereas isorhamnetin and
kaempferol derivatives were quantified with their respective aglycones using calibration
curves. Results were expressed as milligrams of each compound per millilitre of batch
culture (µg /mL).
Biological activity assays
Tissue culture
Biological activity of fermented cactus cladodes was performed using HT29 human
colorectal adenocarcinoma cells acquired from the European Collection of Cell Cultures
(ECACC). Cells were grown in tissue culture flasks and maintained in DMEM
supplemented with FBS (10%) and Pen Strep (1%). They were incubated at 37 °C with
5% CO2 and sub-cultured every 2 days by the addition of trypsin (0.25% trypsin-EDTA)
8
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
for 10 min at 37 °C and centrifuged at 1200 rpm for 3 min. After that, the supernatant
was decanted and cells were re-suspended in the appropriate medium.
Colonic fermented samples were centrifuged at 13,500 rpm at 4 °C for 5 min and the
supernatant was first filtered by 0.45 m and then by 0.22 m filters, before incubation
with HT29 cells. Twenty-four hours was selected as the exposure time for all in vitro
studies with fermented samples, as it is generally considered to reflect the average
colonic transit time.
Cytotoxicity assay
Raw and cooked cactus cladodes colonic fermentates were diluted in DMEM at 10%
and 20% (v/v) to evaluate cytotoxicity by the MTT colorimetric assay, following the
method described by McDougall et al. (2017) 15. First, HT29 cells were seeded in 96
multi-well plates (Costar, Cambridge, MA, USA) at a concentration of 1.5 x 104 cells
per well. After 2 days of incubation at 37 °C, media was replaced with fermented raw
and cooked cactus samples at 10% and 20% (v/v) and then incubated for 24 h. The
wells were washed and refreshed with media. Thereafter, 15 L of MTT (5 mg/ mL)
were added to each well. After 4 h at 37 °C, lysis was carried out with 100 L of
solubilizing solution (2-isopropanol with triton X-100 (10% v/v)) and measured using a
plate reader (Alpha, SLT Rainbow Thermo, Antrim, UK) at a wavelength of 570 nm,
reference 650nm. Each sample was measured in octuple and results are presented as
percentage cell viability compared to untreated cells. The experiment was repeated
independently three times.
Genotoxicity assay (Comet assay)
The effect of colonically fermented raw and cooked cactus on colonocyte DNA damage
was determined using the Comet assay according to the method described by
9
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
McDougall et al. (2017) 15. HT29 cells were pre-incubated with the samples for 24 h.
The anti-genotoxic effect was assessed by treating pre-incubated HT29 cells with
hydrogen peroxide (75 M H2O2), or with PBS as their respective control. Briefly, the
cells were reconstituted in 85 μL of 0.85% low melting point agarose in PBS and
maintained in a water bath at 37 °C. This suspension was mixed with 1% normal
agarose to previously prepared gels on frosted slides and coverslips were added. The
slides were subjected to lysis buffer (2.5 M NaCl, 100 mM Na2EDTA, 10 mM TRIS)
for 1 h at 4 °C and placed in electrophoresis buffer for 20 min at 25 V 300 mA.
Subsequently, slides were washed (3 × 5 min) in neutralisation buffer (0.4 M TRIS HCl,
pH = 7.5) at 4 °C. All slides were stained with ethidium bromide (20 μL of 20 μg/mL)
prior to scoring. Images were analysed at 400 × magnification using a Nikon eclipse
600 epifluorescence microscope. The percentage (%) tail DNA was recorded using
Komet 5.0 image analysis software (Kinetic Imaging Ltd, Liverpool, UK). For each
slide, 50 cells were scored and the mean was calculated. Results are presented as mean
percentage (%) tail DNA. The experiment was repeated independently 3 times and
positive (H2O2) and negative controls (PBS) were included in all experiments, as well as
cells without fermented treatment.
Cell cycle analysis
Cell cycle analysis of fermented raw and cooked cactus was determined using
propidium iodide staining and measured using flow cytometry (Ormerod, 2000 20) in
order to analyse the DNA content to provide an indication of the number of cells in the
phases of the cell cycle and if the concentration selected of fermented cactus cladodes
have an effect on them. Briefly, HT29 cells were seeded at a density of 1 x 106 cells per
mL for 24 h before treatment with each fermented extract at 10%. After fermentate
treatment exposure, the suspension was centrifuged at 1,200 rpm for 5 min, the
10
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
supernatant discarded and the pellet re-suspended in 1 mL of ice cold PBS. Then, the
suspension was centrifuged at 4,000 rpm for 5 min, the supernatant was discarded and
the cells were re-suspended in 1 mL of ice cold ethanol/PBS (90:10) and incubated at -
20 C overnight. After incubation, cells were washed twice with ice cold PBS and the
staining buffer (100 L/mL of RNase A, 10 L/mL of propidium iodide, 0.1% NP40
and 50 L/mL tri sodium citrate in PBS) was added. The cells were then incubated at 37
°C, 5% CO2 for 30 min and the fluorescence emission spectra of propidium iodide was
collected at 585 nm, using Beckman-Coulter Gallios flow cytometer (Brea, CA).
Subsequently these emission spectra were analysed for DNA content using Gallios
Acquisition Software. The experiment was performed as triplicate independent
experiments and results are presented as a percentage (%) of cell count.
Statistical analysis
The mean of each data set was used for statistical analysis. The Shapiro-Wilk test was
used to test for normality. Analysis of variance was applied to test for significant
differences between means using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA, Dunnett T
and T3 tests). A Bonferroni test was applied as a posteriori test for significant
differences among fermentation time points. Significance was accepted at p < 0.05.
Analysis was carried out using SPSS (version 20 for Windows).
Results and discussion
Colonic catabolism of (poly)phenolic compounds
The (poly)phenolic composition of fermentates over time is reported in Table 2.
Twenty-seven (poly)phenolic compounds were identified and quantified in baseline (0
h) of fermented cactus cladodes, being phenolic acids the most abundant in all samples,
accounted for 78-88% of the total content. Piscidic acid (Fig. 1a) was the main
11
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
compound (52-65% total (poly)phenolic compounds), followed by eucomic acid (Fig.
1b) (15-36% total (poly)phenolic compounds). Griddled cactus cladodes presented the
highest amount of piscidic acid, and microwaved samples had higher amount of
eucomic acid than the rest of cooking treatments. Flavonoids were also present in cactus
cladodes colonic fermentates, being kaempferol derivatives (6-13% total) and
isorhamnetin derivatives (4-7% total) mainly in their glycoside forms. Griddled cactus
cladodes presented the highest amount of kaempferol derivatives whilst microwaved
samples contributed with the highest isorhamnetin derivatives content at the beginning
of colonic fermentation (0 h). These (poly)phenolic profiles are consistent with those of
previous studies in O. ficus-indica cactus cladodes without gastrointestinal digestion,
even quercetin derivatives were also quantified 2-4,8. Enzymes and digestive conditions
higher degraded or retained flavonoids than phenolic acids, but 4-7%, 22-30% and 15-
23% of the total (poly)phenolic content for kaempferol, isorhamnetin and quercetin
derivatives remained bioaccessible after gastrointestinal digestion, respectively 8.
Nevertheless, in the present study quercetin derivatives were not detected at any time
point of the fermentation, may be due to the rapid metabolism of quercetin glycosides at
the starting of colonic fermentation. Actually, it has been previously demonstrated a fast
degradation within the first 15 min after colonic fermentation in quercetin derivatives
from raw and cooked pepper 10 as well as in apples 19. Similarly, isorhamnetin
derivatives were faster metabolized by gut microbiota since the beginning of colonic
fermentation than kaempferol ones, accounting for 5-8% and 6-14% of the total
(poly)phenolic compounds, respectively.
Changes in the amount of (poly)phenols throughout the faecal fermentations were
observed. Even though a degradation of the compounds was shown, some (poly)phenols
were still present after 24 h of faecal fermentation. Both kaempferol and isorhamnetin
12
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
derivatives were rapidly catabolised by human microbiota, showing low amounts, traces
or even no detected at the end of the 24 h of colonic fermentation (Fig. 2a). In
particular, minor flavonoids were completely degraded in most of the samples after 24 h
of colonic fermentation, except in griddled and microwaved, in which remained
available or in traces.
Since the first step of the faecal incubation, the hydrolysis of flavonoid glycosides and
the consequent formation of aglycones took place, especially from the isorhamnetin
derivatives. The highest amount of isorhamnetin was detected in microwaved samples
after 10 h of faecal incubation but then it decreased. Kaempferol derivatives were also
degraded after 24 h fermentation, but their respective aglycone was not detected due to
the low amount of its native (poly)phenols. Some increases in flavonoids during the
fermentation were also observed, may be due to the release from the food matrix.
Particularly, methoxy kaempferol hexoside I increased after 5 and 10 h of incubation in
all samples, except in both fried samples. Moreover, although at the end of the 24 h
fermentation it decreased, the final amount was higher than in the beginning in raw,
microwaved and griddled cactus cladodes.
Regarding phenolic acids, eucomic acid was the most stable during the 24 h of faecal
incubation (Fig. 2b). Although it was degraded, it still remained in high amounts in all
samples, especially in microwaved and griddled ones (Table 2). Conversely, piscidic
acid increased after 5 h of incubation in all samples; but was almost completely
degraded after 24 h. However, the degradation was lower in griddled samples. Likewise,
feruloylglucose I and II were rapidly degraded after 24 h of faecal fermentation, but
remained in traces in griddled and microwaved cactus cladodes.
13
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
Eucomic acid were more stable under colonic conditions probably due to the resistance
to gastrointestinal and colonic microflora enzymes, as well as the release from the cell
walls by the microbiota action 21. However, ferulic acid derivatives were rapidly
degraded in all samples may be due to the catabolism related to microbial feruloyl
esterases which are present in the colonic inoculum and degraded the compounds 22.
After 24 h colonic fermentation, the catabolite 3-(4-hydroxyphenyl)propionic acid was
found in trace amounts maybe produced via demethoxylation from ferulic acid
derivatives 12, as well as via dehydroxylation of 3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)propionic acid
derived from ferulic acid and the ring fission of quercetin, isorhamnetin and kaempferol
derivatives 10,11,23.
Metabolic products depend on (poly)phenolic compounds present and the
interindividual variation in the gut microbial composition and enzymatic capacities
leading to different catabolite profile 12. However, in the present study 3-(3,4-
dihydroxyphenyl)propionic acid was present in all the volunteers, even in traces.
Further investigation is needed to evaluate the absorption of bioactive compounds from
cactus cladodes taking into account the gastrointestinal digestion and microbiota
conditions.
Biological activity in colon cells
The biological activity of cactus cladodes submitted to the most common culinary
techniques (boiling, griddling and frying) in human colorectal cells was evaluated after
gastrointestinal digestion and the action of gut microbiota in HT29 cells to simulate
physiological conditions. Raw samples and control (with no cactus) fermentates were
used as positive and negative controls.
14
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
No cytotoxic activity was observed in HT29 cells treated with fermented raw and
cooked cactus cladodes at 10% and 20% (v/v) after 24 h of incubation, compared to
untreated cells (Fig. 3). Likewise, no significant differences (p<0.05) were observed
among cooking treatments. Nevertheless, cell viability was significant lower (p<0.05) in
control fermentation (with no cactus cladodes) at 20% (v/v) than in untreated cells and
did not present a cell viability higher than 80%, like most of the other treated cells with
cactus at 20% (v/v), suggesting a potential cytotoxicity due to a high concentration.
Therefore, a 10% (v/v) concentration was used for the comet and cell cycle assays. Up
to our knowledge, cytoxicity of cactus cladodes after colonic fermentation has not been
previously evaluated. Similarly, Serra et al. (2013) 16 reported no cytotoxic activity of
O. ficus-indica fruit juices in a Caco-2 human colon cell model.
The effect of cactus cladodes colonic fermentates against DNA damage induced by
oxidation in colonocytes was assessed by the comet assay (Fig. 4). The percentage of
DNA in the tail induced by H2O2 was significantly (p<0.05) reduced by raw and cooked
cactus cladodes colonic fermentates (34-38%) in comparison with the control
fermentate (with no cactus cladodes) (45%). The reduction in the H2O2-induced DNA
damage of fermented cactus cladodes may be attributed to the (poly)phenolic
compounds which still remained after colonic fermentation, including eucomic acids.
Similarly, studies in digested blackcurrant 24 and elderberry 25 have observed a reduction
in H2O2-induced DNA damage in NCM460 (non-tumorigenic colon cell line) and in
Caco-2 cells. Other studies have evaluated the bioactivity of Opuntia ficus-indica
cladodes, showing a protection against oxidative stress biomarkers and apoptosis in cell
cultures associated with flavonoids such as isorhmanetin and kaempferol 26 as well as
phenolic acids including eucomic and piscidic acids 27. However, the role of
fermentation on the bioactivity of the extracts was not considered. A similar
15
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
consideration to this study was those reported with colonic fermented raspberry,
strawberry and blackcurrant which exerted a significant (p<0.05) reduction of H2O2-
induced DNA damage in HT29 cell line 28,29, demonstrating that antioxidant activity,
and specifically potential antigenotoxic activity of (poly)phenols is retained after
colonic fermentation.
Finally, the effect of cactus cladodes colonic fermentates on the HT29 cell cycle was
evaluated (Fig. 5) in order to know whether they affect the DNA content in every phase
of the cell cycle and consequently HT29 cells proliferation. No significant effect
(p<0.05) was observed in each stage of the HT29 cell cycle after 24 h of incubation with
colonic fermented cactus cladodes. No significant differences (p<0.05) were also
observed among fermented samples. Results are consistent with Coates et al. (2007)
who reported not significant changes in cell cycle proliferation of HT29 cells pre-treated
with colonic fermented berries. In contrast, extracts from O. ficus-indica fruit juice
induced a cell cycle arrested in the G1 phase in HT29 cells 16, attributing this effect to
the betalains.
In summary, results of the in vitro colonic fermentation of raw and cooked cactus
cladodes showed that flavonoids tended to be degraded more than phenolic acids, but
they are still available after 24 h of colonic incubation, including eucomic acid. Results
also suggest that remained (poly)phenols after the action of colonic microbiota still have
antioxidant and genoprotective properties which can exert into the intestinal cells.
Therefore, the current study provides a basis for further investigations about the cactus
cladodes bioactive components potentially available to be absorbed, and to exert their
beneficial effects in colon and other target organs after ingestion and to understand their
mechanism of action in vivo.
Acknowledgment
16
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
We thank Keith Thomas for his kind help.
Supporting Information
Mass spectrometric characteristics of (poly)phenolic compounds identified in this study
(Table S1).
Mass chromatograms of phenolic profile after colonic fermentation at 0 h in full scan
mode of a) control fermentation (sample with no cactus cladodes), b) griddled cactus
cladodes (Figure S1).
Mass chromatograms of phenolic profile after colonic fermentation at 0 h in Multiple
Reaction Monitoring (MRM) mode of a) control fermentation (sample with no cactus
cladodes), b) griddled cactus cladodes (Figure S2).
References
(1) FAO. Crop Ecology, Cultivation and Uses of Cactus Pear; Rome, 2017.
(2) Astello-García, M. G.; Cervantes, I.; Nair, V.; Santos-Díaz, M. del S.; Reyes-
Agüero, A.; Guéraud, F.; Negre-Salvayre, A.; Rossignol, M.; Cisneros-Zevallos,
L.; Barba de la Rosa, A. P. Chemical Composition and Phenolic Compounds
Profile of Cladodes from Opuntia Spp. Cultivars with Different Domestication
Gradient. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2015, 43, 119–130.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2015.04.016.
(3) De Santiago, E.; Domínguez-Fernández, M.; Cid, C.; De Peña, M. P. Impact of
Cooking Process on Nutritional Composition and Antioxidants of Cactus
Cladodes (Opuntia Ficus-Indica). Food Chem. 2018, 240, 1055–1062.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.08.039.
17
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
(4) Mena, P.; Tassotti, M.; Andreu, L.; Nuncio-Jáuregui, N.; Legua, P.; Del Rio, D.;
Hernández, F. Phytochemical Characterization of Different Prickly Pear (Opuntia
Ficus-Indica (L.) Mill.) Cultivars and Botanical Parts: UHPLC-ESI-MSn
Metabolomics Profiles and Their Chemometric Analysis. Food Res. Int. 2018,
108, 301–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2018.03.062.
(5) Andreu, L.; Nuncio-Jáuregui, N.; Carbonell-Barrachina, Á. A.; Legua, P.;
Hernández, F. Antioxidant Properties and Chemical Characterization of Spanish
Opuntia Ficus-Indica Mill. Cladodes and Fruits. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2018, 98 (4),
1566–1573. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.8628.
(6) Figueroa-Pérez, M. G.; Pérez-Ramírez, I. F.; Paredes-López, O.; Mondragón-
Jacobo, C.; Reynoso-Camacho, R. Phytochemical Composition and in Vitro
Analysis of Nopal (O. Ficus-Indica) Cladodes at Different Stages of Maturity.
Int. J. Food Prop. 2018, 21 (1), 1728–1742.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2016.1206126.
(7) Crascì, L.; Lauro, M. R.; Puglisi, G.; Panico, A. Natural Antioxidant Polyphenols
on Inflammation Management: Anti-Glycation Activity vs Metalloproteinases
Inhibition. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2018, 58 (6), 893–904.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2016.1229657.
(8) De Santiago, E.; Pereira-Caro, G.; Moreno-Rojas, J.-M.; Cid, C.; De Peña, M.-P.
Digestibility of (Poly)Phenols and Antioxidant Activity in Raw and Cooked
Cactus Cladodes (Opuntia Ficus-Indica). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2018, 66, 5832–
5844. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.8b01167.
(9) Williamson, G.; Clifford, M. N. Role of the Small Intestine, Colon and
Microbiota in Determining the Metabolic Fate of Polyphenols. Biochem.
18
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
Pharmacol. 2017, 139, 24–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcp.2017.03.012.
(10) Juániz, I.; Ludwig, I. A.; Bresciani, L.; Dall’Asta, M.; Mena, P.; Del Rio, D.;
Cid, C.; de Peña, M. P. Catabolism of Raw and Cooked Green Pepper (Capsicum
Annuum) (Poly)Phenolic Compounds after Simulated Gastrointestinal Digestion
and Faecal Fermentation. J. Funct. Foods 2016, 27, 201–213.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2016.09.006.
(11) Juániz, I.; Ludwig, I. A.; Bresciani, L.; Dall’Asta, M.; Mena, P.; Del Rio, D.;
Cid, C.; de Peña, M.-P. Bioaccessibility of (Poly)Phenolic Compounds of Raw
and Cooked Cardoon (Cynara Cardunculus L.) after Simulated Gastrointestinal
Digestion and Fermentation by Human Colonic Microbiota. J. Funct. Foods
2017, 32, 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2017.02.033.
(12) Ludwig, I. A.; de Peña, M. P.; Cid, C.; Crozier, A. Catabolism of Coffee
Chlorogenic Acids by Human Colonic Microbiota. BioFactors 2013, 39 (6), 623–
632. https://doi.org/10.1002/biof.1124.
(13) Brown, E. M.; Nitecki, S.; Pereira-Caro, G.; McDougall, G. J.; Stewart, D.;
Rowland, I.; Crozier, A.; Gill, C. I. R. Comparison of in Vivo and in Vitro
Digestion on Polyphenol Composition in Lingonberries: Potential Impact on
Colonic Health. BioFactors 2014, 40 (6), 611–623.
https://doi.org/10.1002/biof.1173.
(14) Espín, J. C.; González-Sarrías, A.; Tomás-Barberán, F. A. The Gut Microbiota: A
Key Factor in the Therapeutic Effects of (Poly)Phenols. Biochem. Pharmacol.
2017, 139, 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcp.2017.04.033.
(15) McDougall, G. J.; Allwood, J. W.; Pereira-Caro, G.; Brown, E. M.; Verrall, S.;
19
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
Stewart, D.; Latimer, C.; McMullan, G.; Lawther, R.; O’Connor, G.; et al. Novel
Colon-Available Triterpenoids Identified in Raspberry Fruits Exhibit
Antigenotoxic Activities in Vitro. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2017, 61 (2), 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1002/mnfr.201600327.
(16) Serra, A. T.; Poejo, J.; Matias, A. A.; Bronze, M. R.; Duarte, C. M. M.
Evaluation of Opuntia Spp. Derived Products as Antiproliferative Agents in
Human Colon Cancer Cell Line (HT29). Food Res. Int. 2013, 54 (1), 892–901.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2013.08.043.
(17) Minekus, M.; Alminger, M.; Alvito, P.; Ballance, S.; Bohn, T.; Bourlieu, C.;
Carrì, F.; Boutrou, R.; Corredig, F. M.; Dupont, D.; et al. A Standardised Static
in Vitro Digestion Method Suitable for Food – an International Consensus. Food
Funct. 2014, 5 (5), 1113–1124. https://doi.org/10.1039/c3fo60702j.
(18) Monente, C.; Ludwig, I. A.; Stalmach, A.; de Peña, M. P.; Cid, C.; Crozier, A. In
Vitro Studies on the Stability in the Proximal Gastrointestinal Tract and
Bioaccessibility in Caco-2 Cells of Chlorogenic Acids from Spent Coffee
Grounds. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 2015, 66 (6), 657–664.
https://doi.org/10.3109/09637486.2015.1064874.
(19) Koutsos, A.; Lima, M.; Conterno, L.; Gasperotti, M.; Bianchi, M.; Fava, F.;
Vrhovsek, U.; Lovegrove, J. A.; Tuohy, K. M. Effects of Commercial Apple
Varieties on Human Gut Microbiota Composition and Metabolic Output Using
an in Vitro Colonic Model. Nutrients 2017, 9 (6), 1–23.
https://doi.org/10.3390/nu9060533.
(20) Ormerod, M. G. Flow Cytometry - A Practical Approach, 3rd editio.; Oxford
University Press, Oxford, UK., 2000.
20
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
(21) Heleno, S. A.; Martins, A.; Queiroz, M. J. R. P.; Ferreira, I. C. F. R. Bioactivity
of Phenolic Acids: Metabolites versus Parent Compounds: A Review. Food
Chem. 2015, 173, 501–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.10.057.
(22) Manach, C.; Scalbert, A.; Morand, C.; Rémésy, C.; Jiménez, L. Polyphenols:
Food Sources and Bioavailability. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2004, 79, 727–747.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05488.
(23) Kay, C. D.; Pereira-Caro, G.; Ludwig, I. A.; Clifford, M. N.; Crozier, A.
Anthocyanins and Flavanones Are More Bioavailable than Previously Perceived:
A Review of Recent Evidence. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 8 (1), 155–
180. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-food-030216-025636.
(24) Olejnik, A.; Kowalska, K.; Olkowicz, M.; Juzwa, W.; Dembczyński, R.;
Schmidt, M. A Gastrointestinally Digested Ribes Nigrum L. Fruit Extract Inhibits
Inflammatory Response in a Co-Culture Model of Intestinal Caco-2 Cells and
RAW264.7 Macrophages. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2016, 64 (41), 7710–7721.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.6b02776.
(25) Olejnik, A.; Olkowicz, M.; Kowalska, K.; Rychlik, J.; Dembczyński, R.; Myszka,
K.; Juzwa, W.; Białas, W.; Moyer, M. P. Gastrointestinal Digested Sambucus
Nigra L. Fruit Extract Protects in Vitro Cultured Human Colon Cells against
Oxidative Stress. Food Chem. 2016, 197, 648–657.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.11.017.
(26) Filannino, P.; Cavoski, I.; Thlien, N.; Vincentini, O.; De Angelis, M.; Silano, M.;
Gobbetti, M.; Dicagno, R. Lactic Acid Fermentation of Cactus Cladodes
(Opuntia Ficus-Indica L.) Generates Flavonoid Derivatives with Antioxidant and
Anti-Inflammatory Properties. PLoS One 2016, 11 (3), 1–22.
21
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152575.
(27) Petruk, G.; Di Lorenzo, F.; Imbimbo, P.; Silipo, A.; Bonina, A.; Rizza, L.;
Piccoli, R.; Monti, D. M.; Lanzetta, R. Protective Effect of Opuntia Ficus-Indica
L. Cladodes against UVA-Induced Oxidative Stress in Normal Human
Keratinocytes. Bioorganic Med. Chem. Lett. 2017, 27 (24), 5485–5489.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bmcl.2017.10.043.
(28) Brown, E. M.; McDougall, G. J.; Stewart, D.; Pereira-Caro, G.; González-Barrio,
R.; Allsopp, P.; Magee, P.; Crozier, A.; Rowland, I.; Gill, C. I. R. Persistence of
Anticancer Activity in Berry Extracts after Simulated Gastrointestinal Digestion
and Colonic Fermentation. PLoS One 2012, 7 (11), 3–12.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0049740.
(29) Coates, E. M.; Popa, G.; Gill, C. I.; McCann, M. J.; McDougall, G. J.; Stewart,
D.; Rowland, I. Colon-Available Raspberry Polyphenols Exhibit Anti-Cancer
Effects on in Vitro Models of Colon Cancer. J. Carcinog. 2007, 6 (4), 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-3163-6-4.
Funding
This research was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness
(AGL2014-52636-P). E.D.S. expresses their gratitude to the Association of Friends of
the University of Navarra and La Caixa Banking Foundation for the grants received.
22
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
Figure captions
Figure 1. Structures of phenolic acids, a) Piscidic acid. b) Eucomic acid.
Figure 2. Degradation of (poly)phenolic compounds of griddled cactus cladodes during
24 h colonic fermentation. a) Total kaempferol derivatives, total isorhamnetin
derivatives and isorhamnetin aglycone. b) Total phenolic acids, piscidic acid and
eucomic acid. Different letters indicate significant differences (p<0.05) during each
time point of the colonic fermentation.
Figure 3. The cytotoxic effect of 20% (v/v) and 10% (v/v) fermented cactus cladodes on
HT29 cells. Data are presented as means of 3 independent experiments +/- SD
compared to the untreated cells as a control. One-way ANOVA and Post Hoc test
Dunnett’s T *p<0.05.
Figure 4. Antigenotoxic activity of fermented cactus cladodes 10% (v/v) on DNA
damage in HT29 cells challenged with 75 μM H2O2. Data are presented as means of 3
independent experiments +/- SD compared to the control fermentation. One-way
ANOVA and Post Hoc test Dunnett’s T *p<0.05.
Figure 5. Effects of fermented cactus cladodes 10% (v/v) on HT29 cell cycle. Data are
presented as means of 3 independent experiments +/- SD compared to the untreated
cells as a control.
23
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
Tables
Table 1. Cooking Conditions Applied to Cactus Cladodes.
Cooking technique
Time Temperature Amount of water or oil
Equipment
Boiling 10 min 100 °C 600 mL Stainless steel pot
Microwaving 5 min - - Silicone case (Lékué, Barcelona, Spain) and microwave oven (Whirlpool, Michigan, USA) at 900W
Griddling 5 min & 5 min 150 °C & 110 °C - Non-stick griddle (Jata Electro, Vizcaya, Spain)
Frying in olive/ soybean oil
10 min & 5 min 100 °C & 90 °C 30 mL Non-stick frying pan
24
540541
542543
544545
Table 2. Native (Poly)phenolic Compounds and Catabolites Produced During Colonic Fermentation of Raw and Cooked Cactus Cladodes. Results are Expressed as Mean ± Standard Deviation (µg (Poly)phenolic Compound/mL) (n=3).
CompoundsRaw Boiled Microwaved Griddled Fried in olive oil Fried in soybean oil
µg /mL µg /mL µg /mL µg /mL µg /mL µg /mL
Phenolic acidsPiscidic acid
0 h5 h10 h24 h
250.59 ± 76.17265.01 ± 33.27249.05 ± 86.67
0.46 ± 0.15
140.53 ± 24.75159.95 ± 23.06140.77 ± 73.26
0.12 ± 0.05
333.09 ± 32.90422.39 ± 21.15431.91 ± 11.54
1.47 ± 0.56
355.75 ± 11.86384.77 ± 17.70302.27 ± 93.99
32.31 ± 6.42
182.60 ± 8.31205.54 ± 12.26137.83 ± 85.08
0.16 ± 0.09
177.79 ± 46.77212.97 ± 96.91147.98 ± 98.80
0.45 ± 0.12
Feruloylglucose I
0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.95 ± 0.510.15 ± 0.200.01 ± 0.00
nd
0.54 ± 0.300.07 ± 0.03
ndnd
1.17 ± 0.290.76 ± 0.030.03 ± 0.01
tr
0.84 ± 0.130.28 ± 0.200.60 ± 0.23
tr
0.41 ± 0.180.06 ±0.09
trtr
0.54 ± 0.29trtrtr
Feruloylglucose II0 h5 h10 h24 h
1.14 ± 0.430.48 ± 0.570.01 ± 0.00
nd
0.70 ± 0.270.28 ± 0.36
trnd
1.12 ±0.191.06 ± 0.410.24 ± 0.29
tr
1.33 ± 0.250.77 ± 0.430.60 ± 0.23
tr
0.77± 0.17trndnd
0.81 ± 0.240.16 ± 0.21
ndnd
Eucomic acid0 h5 h10 h24 h
178.06 ± 51.20163.38 ± 43.33105.72 ± 16.6671.50 ± 30.68
33.01 ± 17.8456.99 ± 27.8958.21 ± 25.3942.98 ± 2.31
161.75 ± 12.80184.41 ± 19.23208.89 ± 11.54154.08 ± 2.88
100.91 ± 15.31105.63 ± 30.81118.23 ± 25.6081.09 ± 18.66
54.86 ± 3.9657.13 ± 13.2052.14 ± 16.0735.29 ± 12.68
64.91 ± 10.1655.89 ± 15.6353.66 ± 10.4936.31 ± 19.81
TOTAL PHENOLIC ACIDS0 h5 h10 h24 h
430.75 ± 126.65429.01 ± 130.27354.92 ± 117.91
71.96 ± 50.23
174.78 ± 66.34217.29 ± 75.34198.98 ± 58.3743.10 ± 30.31
497.12 ± 158.46608.63 ± 199.85641.07 ± 206.10155.55 ± 107.92
458.83 ± 167.45491.44 ± 181.50421.18 ± 142.59113.40 ± 34.50
238.64 ± 85.86259.72 ± 104.41189.97 ± 60.5935.45 ± 24.84
244.05 ± 83.53269.02 ± 110.35201.64 ± 66.6936.77 ± 25.36
Isorhamnetin derivatesIsorhamnetin
0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.11 ± 0.141.37 ± 0.860.84 ± 0.690.73 ± 0.93
0.18 ± 0.211.30 ± 0.861.38 ± 0.580.68 ± 0.55
0.28 ± 0.420.78 ± 0.804.74 ± 2.012.89 ± 2.49
0.22 ± 0.351.17 ± 0.641.85 ± 1.501.63 ± 0.26
0.20 ± 0.280.75 ± 0.351.58 ± 1.681.77 ± 1.24
0.15 ± 0.260.75 ± 0.561.08 ± 0.340.49 ± 0.46
Isorhamnetin hexose rhamnose hexoside I
0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.02 ± 0.00trtrnd
trtrndnd
0.02 ± 0.010.03 ± 0.000.01 ± 0.00
tr
0.02 ± 0.000.01 ± 0.00
trtr
0.01 ± 0.00trtrtr
0.01 ± 0.00trtrnd
25
546547548
Isorhamnetin hexose rhamnose hexoside II0 h5 h10 h24 h
trtrtrnd
trtrndnd
trtrtrnd
trtrtrnd
trtrtrnd
trtrtrnd
Isorhamnetin hexose rhamnose hexoside III0 h5 h10 h24 h
trtrtrnd
trtrtrnd
0.01 ± 0.00trtrnd
0.01 ± 0.00trtrnd
trtrtrnd
trtrtrnd
Isorhamnetin di-hexoside I0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.15 ± 0.090.14 ± 0.120.09 ± 0.110.06 ± 0.08
0.12 ± 0.060.13 ± 0.040.07 ± 0.070.01 ± 0.02
0.24 ± 0.0250.35 ± 0.020.27 ± 0.070.15 ± 0.12
0.22 ± 0.020.22 ± 0.070.14 ± 0.100.01 ± 0.01
0.12 ± 0.010.10 ± 0.060.06 ± 0.050.04 ± 0.05
0.13 ± 0.050.15 ± 0.010.14 ± 0.01
ndIsorhamnetin di-hexoside II
0 h5 h10 h24 h
trtrtrnd
trtrtrnd
0.01 ± 0.00trtrnd
0.01 ± 0.00trtrnd
trtrtrnd
trtrtrnd
Isorhamnetin rutinoside rhamnoside0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.17 ± 0.100.09 ± 0.110.08 ± 0.07
tr
0.10 ± 0.03trtrnd
0.25 ± 0.110.35 ± 0.000.25 ± 0.070.07 ± 0.05
0.24 ± 0.080.20 ± 0.080.10 ± 0.07
tr
0.14 ± 0.050.10 ± 0.03
trtr
0.13 ± 0.070.08 ± 0.070.06 ± 0.05
ndIsorhamnetin rutinoside rhamnoside II
0 h5 h10 h24
0.18 ± 0.110.14 ± 0.120.09 ± 0.110.02 ± 0.03
0.12 ± 0.040.12 ± 0.09
trtr
0.23 ± 0.100.38 ± 0.010.34 ± 0.010.20 ± 0.11
0.22 ± 0.070.23 ± 0.090.19 ± 0.090.04 ± 0.06
0.12 ± 0.030.08 ± 0.070.03 ± 0.03
tr
0.13 ± 0.090.15 ± 0.000.15 ± 0.00
ndIsorhamnetin hexose pentoside
0 h5 h10 h24 h
2.36 ± 1.831.73 ± 1.571.25 ± 1.480.30 ± 0.48
2.29 ± 1.401.63 ± 1.850.85 ± 1.16
tr
4.63 ± 2.128.08 ± 1.226.54 ± 1.712.71 ± 0.22
4.39 ± 1.883.92 ± 1.761.69 ± 0.270.94 ± 0.77
2.57 ± 1.191.95 ± 1.600.49 ± 0.63
tr
2.77 ± 2.063.40 ± 1.262.84 ± 1.13
trIsorhamnetin rutinoside I
0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.71 ± 0.520.82 ± 0.760.86 ± 1.180.30 ± 0.48
0.83 ± 0.650.72 ± 0.200.53 ± 0.01
tr
0.58 ± 0.131.39 ± 0.562.02 ± 1.122.11 ± 0.01
0.60 ± 0.171.06 ± 0.521.17 ±1.011.03 ± 0.83
0.42 ± 0.140.80 ± 0.360.59 ± 0.530.22 ± 0.23
0.42 ± 0.150.66 ± 0.670.91 ± 0.780.02 ± 0.03
Isorhamnetin rutinoside II0 h5 h10 h24 h
19.12 ± 9.096.15 ± 5.721.76 ± 1.050.07 ± 0.01
12.00 ± 6.721.97 ± 0.950.20 ± 0.07
tr
34.58 ± 7.5630.61 ± 8.67
12.80 ± 10.270.51 ± 0.51
30.53 ± 9.7524.51 ± 11.1610.65 ± 4.062.02 ± 1.41
13.26 ± 3.408.36 ± 2.980.79 ± 0.28
tr
17.02 ± 5.317.57 ± 3.533.42 ± 3.13
trUnknown isorhamnetin derivative
0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.75 ± 0.530.33 ± 0.420.22 ± 0.13
nd
0.41 ± 0.260.20 ± 0.27
trnd
1.00 ± 0.581.37 ± 0.151.07 ± 0.220.24 ± 0.17
0.89 ± 0.490.71 ± 0.360.31 ± 0.150.16 ± 0.08
0.54 ± 0.320.40 ± 0.030.05 ± 0.03
tr
0.56 ± 0.440.49 ± 0.300.35 ± 0.20
ndTOTAL ISORHAMNETIN DERIVATES
0 h 23.57 ± 6.23 16.04 ± 3.90 41.81 ± 10.29 37.33 ± 9.09 17.36 ± 4.32 21.32 ± 5.56
26
5 h10 h24 h
10.78 ± 2.045.19 ± 0.631.49 ± 0.26
6.06 ± 0.773.03 ± 0.530.70 ± 0.48
43.34 ± 9.9928.03 ± 4.298.87 ± 1.24
32.02 ± 7.9516.11 ± 3.405.84 ± 0.80
12.53 ± 2.683.61 ± 0.552.03 ± 0.95
13.25 ± 2.628.97 ± 1.310.52 ± 0.33
Kaempferol derivatesKaempferol hexoside dirhamnoside I
0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.24 ± 0.160.16 ± 0.210.17 ± 0.18
nd
0.18 ± 0.090.16 ± 0.21
trnd
0.40 ± 0.210.65 ± 0.060.58 ± 0.080.32 ± 0.18
0.32 ± 0.140.30 ± 0.150.17 ± 0.130.12 ± 0.16
0.20 ± 0.070.23 ± 0.050.05 ± 0.04
tr
0.20 ± 0.120.23 ± 0.000.05 ± 0.04
nd
Kaempferol hexoside dirhamnoside II
0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.14 ± 0.100.07 ± 0.070.05 ± 0.07
tr
0.09 ± 0.05trtrnd
0.17 ± 0.110.29 ± 0.020.20 ± 0.010.04 ± 0.05
0.15 ± 0.070.13 ± 0.080.06 ± 0.050.04 ± 0.05
0.10 ± 0.050.06 ± 0.040.13 ± 0.22
nd
0.10 ± 0.060.09 ± 0.010.05 ± 0.04
ndKaempferol hexose pentoside
0 h5 h10 h24 h
1.28 ± 0.880.69 ± 0.710.35 ± 0.410.08 ± 0.14
0.83 ± 0.490.51 ± 0.670.26 ± 0.360.01 ± 0.02
1.91 ± 1.082.63 ± 0.122.06 ± 0.050.93 ± 0.18
1.38 ± 0.661.09 ± 0.500.55 ± 0.360.12 ± 0.16
0.77 ± 0.360.50 ± 0.440.20 ± 0.20
tr
0.88 ± 0.671.02 ± 0.340.68 ± 0.26
trKaempferol rutinoside I
0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.10 ± 0.070.18 ± 0.070.21 ± 0.21
tr
0.07 ± 0.060.19 ± 0.010.16 ± 0.14
nd
0.11 ± 0.060.20 ± 0.110.33 ± 0.240.58 ± 0.01
0.09 ± 0.040.14 ± 0.080.15 ± 0.140.07 ± 0.10
0.07 ± 0.050.10 ± 0.060.06 ± 0.070.08 ± 0.11
0.08 ± 0.040.11 ± 0.090.16 ± 0.09
trKaempferol rutinoside II
0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.06 ± 0.030.13 ± 0.10
0.11 ± 0.166tr
0.07 ± 0.020.16 ± 0.080.02 ± 0.00
nd
0.05 ± 0.000.23 ± 0.130.23 ± 0.180.08 ± 0.08
0.06 ± 0.030.13 ± 0.080.15 ± 0.160.08 ± 0.11
0.10 ± 0.050.06 ± 0.040.13 ± 0.22
tr
0.06 ± 0.040.16 ± 0.080.28 ± 0.08
trKaempferol rutinoside III
0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.17 ± 0.050.28 ± 0.300.02 ± 0.02
nd
0.20 ± 0.140.04 ± 0.03
ndnd
2.58 ± 3.692.51 ± 2.820.19 ± 0.240.01 ± 0.02
1.53 ± 1.801.91 ± 2.510.35 ± 0.140.08 ± 0.07
0.64 ± 0.910.14 ± 0.120.04 ± 0.05
nd
1.28 ± 1.931.43 ± 1.990.63 ± 0.90
nd
Kaempferol rutinoside IV
0 h5 h10 h24 h
4.20 ± 4.021.10 ± 1.360.53 ± 0.240.01 ± 0.01
2.58 ± 2.67trtrnd
8.18 ± 6.6214.04 ± 2.492.44 ± 3.270.11 ± 0.14
6.34 ± 5.215.55 ± 4.311.45 ± 0.850.34 ± 0.57
1.78 ± 1.461.23 ± 0.260.17 ± 0.08
nd
3.25 ± 2.902.08 ± 1.130.96 ± 1.13
trKaempferol glucoside I
0 h5 h10 h24 h
0.22 ± 0.230.14 ± 0.200.08 ± 0.130.06 ± 0.09
0.21 ± 0.170.19 ± 0.270.14 ± 0.20
nd
0.27 ± 0.240.46 ± 0.430.54 ± 0.500.38 ± 0.21
0.26 ± 0.140.32 ± 0.180.32 ± 0.180.19 ± 0.06
0.11 ± 0.080.15 ± 0.100.07 ± 0.090.05 ± 0.03
0.10 ± 0.080.19 ± 0.15
0.11 ± 0.012nd
Kaempferol glucoside II0 h 0.10 ± 0.10 0.10 ± 0.09 0.22 ± 0.19 0.23 ± 0.02 0.06 ± 0.04 0.07 ± 0.09
27
5 h10 h24 h
0.05 ± 0.060.04 ± 0.06
nd
trtrnd
0.15 ± 0.200.01 ± 0.01
tr
0.22 ± 0.090.12 ± 0.070.02 ± 0.03
0.05 ± 0.06trnd
0.02 ± 0.010.04 ± 0.05
nd
Methoxy kaempferol hexoside I
0 h5 h10 h24 h
11.71 ± 7.3614.89 ± 21.4718.08 ± 27.2913.84 ± 21.34
15.45 ± 12.4018.79 ± 25.6215.47 ± 19.71
0.51 ± 0.08
22.13 ± 16.0735.27 ± 25.5443.48 ± 35.1636.44 ± 15.75
24.01 ± 17.0832.53 ± 16.6531.11 ± 27.4830.42 ± 15.00
10.04 ± 7.484.03 ± 2.032.09 ± 0.531.37 ± 0.58
4.99 ± 1.363.61 ± 2.402.35 ± 0.821.51 ± 0.94
Methoxy kaempferol hexoside II
0 h5 h10 h24 h
12.41 ± 10.604.08 ± 5.520.29 ± 0.260.02 ± 0.03
12.30 ± 9.941.71 ± 2.390.50 ± 0.70
tr
25.96 ± 26.4421.44 ± 28.51
0.60 ± 0.070.26 ± 0.37
28.14 ± 23.5225.31 ± 19.4810.93 ± 12.62
0.16 ± 0.12
8.81 ± 6.116.29 ± 6.701.20 ± 0.96
tr
7.56 ± 10.301.97 ± 2.340.33 ± 0.290.03 ± 0.04
TOTAL KAEMPFEROL DERIVATES0 h5 h10 h24 h
30.63 ± 4.7521.77 ± 4.4419.92 ± 5.4014.01 ± 5.63
32.08 ± 5.5121.75 ± 6.5216.55 ± 6.230.53 ± 0.35
61.98 ± 9.4477.89 ± 11.6850.66 ± 12.9239.16 ± 10.91
62.51 ± 10.2867.64 ± 11.4945.35 ± 9.5031.63 ± 9.14
22.67 ± 3.6912.87 ± 2.064.04 ± 0.691.51 ± 0.66
18.56 ± 2.5310.92 ± 1.175.83 ± 0.671.55 ± 0.87
3-(4-hydroxyphenyl)propionic acid0 h5 h10 h24 h
ndndndtr
ndndndtr
ndndndtr
ndndndtr
ndndndtr
ndndndtr
TOTAL (POLY)PHENOLIC COMPOUNDS0 h5 h10 h24 h
484.95 ± 60.93461.56 ± 63.22380.03 ± 55.2987.46 ± 18.51
222.90 ± 28.98245.10 ± 38.03218.55 ± 40.5944.32 ± 17.44
600.91 ± 70.90729.85 ± 91.64719.75 ± 95.72203.58 ± 34.00
558.67 ± 71.30591.10 ± 79.95482.64 ± 64.89150.86 ± 19.76
278.67 ± 38.15285.13 ± 43.11197.61 ± 32.2638.99 ± 11.63
283.94 ± 37.80293.19 ± 46.12216.44 ± 33.6038.83 ± 13.58
nd = not detectedtr = traces
28
549550
551
Figure 3
Untreate
d
Control fe
rmentati
on 20%
Raw ca
ctus 2
0%
Boiled ca
ctus 2
0%
Griddled ca
ctus 2
0%
Fried Oliv
e cactu
s 20%
Untreate
d
Control fe
rmentati
on 10%
Raw ca
ctus 1
0%
Boiled ca
ctus 1
0%
Griddled ca
ctus 1
0%
Fried Oliv
e cactu
s 10%
0102030405060708090
100
*
ns nsns
ns ns ns ns ns ns
Cell
viab
ility
(%)
31
570571
572573574575
Figure 5
Sub G0 G0/G1 S-Phase G2/M0
10
20
30
40
50
60 Untreated
Control fermentation 10%
Raw cactus 10%
Boiled cactus 10%
Griddled cactus 10%
Fried olive oil cactus 10%
Cell
coun
t (%
)
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns = not significant
33
585586
587588589590591