提取方法决定了豆制品在体外的抗氧化能力及醌还原酶的诱导作用。
Extraction methods determine the antioxidant capacity and induction of quinone reductase by soy products in vitro.
作者信息
Bolling Bradley W, Blumberg Jeffrey B, Chen C-Y Oliver
机构信息
Antioxidants Research Laboratory, Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging, Tufts University, Boston, MA 02111.
出版信息
Food Chem. 2009 Sep 1;116(1):351-355. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.01.087.
Gastrointestinal (GI) mimic and organic solvent extracts of whole soybean powder (WSP), soy protein concentrate (SPC), and soy protein isolate (SPI) as well as soy isoflavone concentrate (SIC) were analyzed for total phenols; quinone reductase (QR) induction in hepa1c1c7 cells; antioxidant scavenging of DPPH, HOCl, ONOO(-), and O(2) (-.); and total antioxidant capacity via FRAP and ORAC assays. GI extracts of all the soy products had higher concentrations of total phenols than from acidified methanol (MeOH) but lower antioxidant potency. The MeOH extract of SPC was most potent in quenching HOCl and ONOO(-) and increasing FRAP and ORAC, but did not induce QR. Despite weak antioxidant activity, hexane (HX) extracts induced QR more than GI and MeOH extracts with WSP > SPC > SPI > IC. Soy extracts were ineffective scavengers of DPPH and O(2) (-.). Thus, extraction methods markedly affect the antioxidant profile and QR induction capacity of soy products.
对全脂大豆粉（WSP）、大豆浓缩蛋白（SPC）、大豆分离蛋白（SPI）以及大豆异黄酮浓缩物（SIC）的胃肠道（GI）模拟物和有机溶剂提取物进行了总酚含量分析；检测了其在hepa1c1c7细胞中对醌还原酶（QR）的诱导作用；测定了其对DPPH、HOCl、ONOO⁻和O₂⁻的抗氧化清除能力；并通过铁离子还原抗氧化能力（FRAP）和氧自由基吸收能力（ORAC）分析评估了其总抗氧化能力。所有大豆制品的GI提取物中总酚浓度均高于酸化甲醇（MeOH）提取物，但抗氧化能力较低。SPC的MeOH提取物在淬灭HOCl和ONOO⁻以及提高FRAP和ORAC方面最为有效，但未诱导QR。尽管抗氧化活性较弱，但己烷（HX）提取物诱导QR的能力比GI和MeOH提取物更强，顺序为WSP > SPC > SPI > IC。大豆提取物对DPPH和O₂⁻的清除效果不佳。因此，提取方法显著影响大豆制品的抗氧化特性和QR诱导能力。
Zotero 插件