4.6 Article

Antioxidant Activity Evaluation of Dietary Flavonoid Hyperoside Using Saccharomyces Cerevisiae as a Model

Journal

MOLECULES
Volume 24, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules24040788

Keywords

hyperoside; oxidative damage; lipid peroxidation; intracellular ROS; Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31571832, 31772019, 81803548]
  2. Tianjin Innovative Research Team Grant [TD13-5087]
  3. Tianjin Natural Science Grant [16JCQNJC14600, 16JCZDJC34000]
  4. Key Program of Tianjin Municipal Health Bureau [2013-GG-05]
  5. Open Project of Tianjin Key Laboratory of Food Biotechnology and Talent Grant of TJCU [R170106]
  6. College Student Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training [201710069071]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Oxidative stress leads to various diseases, including diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, neurodegenerative diseases, and even cancer. The dietary flavonol glycoside, hyperoside (quercetin-3-O-galactoside), exerts health benefits by preventing oxidative damage. To further understand its antioxidative defence mechanisms, we systemically investigated the regulation of hyperoside on oxidative damage induced by hydrogen peroxide, carbon tetrachloride, and cadmium in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Hyperoside significantly increased cell viability, decreased lipid peroxidation, and lowered intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels in the wild-type strain (WT) and mutants gtt1 and gtt2. However, the strain with ctt1 showed variable cell viability and intracellular ROS-scavenging ability in response to the hyperoside treatment upon the stimulation of H2O2 and CCl4. In addition, hyperoside did not confer viability tolerance or intercellular ROS in CdSO4-induced stress to strains of sod1 and gsh1. The results suggest that the antioxidative reactions of hyperoside in S. cerevisiae depend on the intercellular ROS detoxification system.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available