4.7 Article

Preparation of chondroitin sulfates with different molecular weights from bovine nasal cartilage and their antioxidant activities

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.10.192

关键词

Chondroitin sulfate; Oxidative degradation; Monosaccharide composition; Antioxidant activity

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2018YFD0901101]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation [31670808, 31870798]
  3. Natural Science Basis Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China [2019JQ-721]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biological functions of chondroitin sulfate, including anti-oxidation and anti-inflammation, are associated with its molecular weight. This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between antioxidant activity and molecular weights of chondroitin sulfate derived frombovine nasal cartilage (BCS). BCS extracted by compound enzymatic method was further purified via DEAE-cellulose column separation to obtain BCS-II (129.4 kDa), which was further degraded by H2O2-Vc to obtain four subfractions: BCS-II-1 (92.7 kDa), BCS-II-2 (54.1 kDa), BCS-II-3 (26.3 kDa), and BCS-II-4 (19.7 kDa). Changes in the physicochemical properties of BCS-II before and after degradation were compared via FT-IR, NMR and monosaccharide composition analysis. Finally, antioxidant activities of BCS-II and its subfractions BCS-II-1-4 were compared. Our results showed that the H2O2-Vc system did not disrupt the primary functional group of BCS-II, with no significant change in sulfate content between BCSII and its degraded fractions; however, uronic acid levels increased in degraded fractions when compared with BCS-II. In vitro, BCS-II-4 displayed the lowest molecular weight and had the strongest antioxidant activity. Therefore, the antioxidant activity of chondroitin sulfate in vitro is robustly associated with its molecular weight, and low-molecular-weight chondroitin sulfate can be used as an antioxidant in the food and pharmaceutical industries and other sectors. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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