Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Anti/prooxidant activity of wine polyphenols in reactions of adrenaline auto-oxidation

Anti/prooxidant activity of wine polyphenols in reactions of adrenaline auto-oxidation

Abstract

Adrenaline (epinephrine) belongs to catecholamine class. It is a neurotransmitter and both a hormone which is released by the sympathetic nervous system and adrenal medulla in response to a range of stresses in order to regulate blood pressure, cardiac stimulation, relaxation of smooth muscles and other physiological processes. Adrenaline exhibits an effective antioxidant capacity (1). However, adrenalin is capable to auto-oxidation and in this case it generates toxic reactive oxygen intermediates and adrenochrome. Under in vitro conditions, auto-oxidation of adrenaline occurs in an alkaline medium (2). The capacity of inhibition of adrenaline auto-oxidation for 38 wine polyphenols, ascorbic acid and Trolox was studied. Stock solutions of compounds in ethanol were prepared. Reaction mixtures containing 20 μL of sample, 20 µL of adrenaline solution (1mM, dissolve in distilled water) and 300 µl carbonate buffer (0.2 M, pH 10.55) were incubated at 36.6°C during 10 min. The absorbance of the resulting solution was measured at 347 nm using a BGM FLUOstar Omega plate reader. Absorbencies of samples in carbonate buffer (blank sample) and adrenaline in carbonate buffer under the same conditions were determined. Adrenaline auto-oxidation inhibition capacity (in %) was calculated as [(A-AE)/A] × 100, where A – absorbance of adrenalin in carbonate buffer, AE – difference between absorbance of the reaction mixture and absorbance of blank sample. In case when A < AE it was considered that the sample has pro-oxidant capacity. Various phenolic acids reacted quite differently. Chlorogenic acid had only a pro-oxidant action in the reactions of adrenalin auto-oxidation. Gallic acid showed the most antioxidant capacity (55.1%, in molar ratio 1:0.5, adrenaline/compound) among other tested phenolic acids. Ascorbic acid and Trolox inhibited the auto-oxidation of adrenaline to 51.4% and 8.99% respectively. Epigallocatechin and kaempferol have the most of inhibitory capacity (78.7% and 75.1%, respectively, at a molar ratio 1:0.5, adrenaline/compound) among other flavonoids aglycons. Adrenaline auto-oxidation inhibition capacity increased in the glycosylation of flavonoids. For example, the antioxidant activity of quercetin was 11.7% and rutin was 42.8%. with a molar ratio 1:1 for both. The results have shown that the antioxidant capacity decreased and prooxydant activity increased when reducing the number of hydroxy groups and increasing the amount of methyl groups in the structure of polyphenol.

References 1. Gülçin, İ. (2009) Antioxidant activity of L-adrenaline: A structure–activity insight. Chemico-Biological Interactions, 179, P. 71–80. 2. Sirota, T. V. (2011) A Novel Approach to Study the Reaction of Adrenaline Autooxidation: a Possibility for Polarographic Determination of Superoxide Dismutase Activity and Antioxidant Properties of Various Preparations. Biochemistry (Moscow) Suppl. Series B. Vol. 5 (3), P. 253–259.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Natallia Kolbas*, Michael Jourdes, Pierre-Louis Teissedre

*UMR 1219 OEnologie

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Metabolomics comparison of non-Saccharomyces yeasts in Sauvignon blanc and Shiraz

Saccharomyces cerevisiae (SC) is the main driver of alcoholic fermentation however, in wine, non-Saccharomyces species can have a powerful effect on aroma and flavor formation. This study aimed to compare untargeted volatile compound profiles from SPME-GC×GC-TOF-MS of Sauvignon blanc and Shiraz wine inoculated with six different non-Saccharomyces yeasts followed by SC. Torulaspora delbrueckii (TD), Lachancea thermotolerans (LT), Pichia kluyveri (PK) and Metschnikowia pulcherrima (MP) were commercial starter strains, while Candida zemplinina (CZ) and Kazachstania aerobia (KA), were isolated from wine grape environments. Each fermentation produced a distinct chemical profile that was unique for both grape musts. The SC-monoculture and CZ-SC sequential fermentations were the most distinctly different in the Sauvignon blanc while the LT-SC sequential fermentations were the most different from the control in the Shiraz fermentations.

Directed Evolution of Oenococcus oeni: optimising yeast-bacteria interactions for improved malolactic fermentation

Malolactic fermentation (MLF) is a secondary step in the vinification process and it follows alcoholic fermentation (AF) which is predominantly carried out by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. These two processes result in the degradation of metabolites to produce secondary metabolites which also contribute to the final wine flavour and quality. AF results in the production of ethanol and carbon dioxide from sugars and MLF stems from the degradation of L-malic acid (a dicarboxylic acid) to L-lactic acid (a monocarboxylic acid). The latter process results in a smoother texture as the acidity of the wine is reduced by the process, it also adds to the flavour complexity of the wine.

A multivariate approach using attenuated total reflectance mid-infrared spectroscopy to measure the surface mannoproteins and β-glucans of yeast cell walls during wine fermentations

Yeast cells possess a cell wall comprising primarily glycoproteins, mannans, and glucan polymers. Several yeast phenotypes relevant for fermentation, wine processing, and wine quality are correlated with cell wall properties. To investigate the effect of wine fermentation on cell wall composition, a study was performed using mid-infrared (MIR) spectroscopy coupled with multivariate methods (i.e., PCA and OPLS-DA). A total of 40 yeast strains were evaluated, including Saccharomyces strains (laboratory and industrial) and non-Saccharomyces species. Cells were fermented in both synthetic MS300 and Chardonnay grape must to stationery phase, processed, and scanned in the MIR spectrum.

Impact of varying ethanol and carbonation levels on the odor threshold of 1,1,6-trimethyl-1,2-dihydronaphtalene (petrol off-flavor) and role of berry size and Riesling clones

1,1,6-trimethyl-1,2-dihydronaphtelene (TDN) evokes the odor of “petrol” in wine, especially in the variety Riesling. Increasing UV-radiation due to climate change intensifies formation of carotenoids in the berry skins and an increase of TDN-precursors1. Exploring new viticultural and oenological strategies to limit TDN formation in the future requires precise knowledge of TDN thresholds in different matrices. Thresholds reported in the literature vary substantially between 2 µg/L up to 20 µg/L2,3,4 due to the use of different methods. As Riesling grapes are used for very different wine styles such as dry, sweet or sparkling wines, it is essential to study the impact of varying ethanol and carbonation levels.

Characterization of commercial enological tannins and its effect on human saliva diffusion

Commercial oenological tannins (TECs) are widely used in the wine industry. TECs are rich in condensed tannins, hydrolyzable tannins or a mixture of both. Wine grapes are a important source of proanthocyanidins or condensed tannins while oak wood possess a high concentration of hydrolyzable tannins (Obreque-Slier et al., 2009). TECs contribute with the antioxidant capacity of wine, catalyze oxide-reduction reactions and participate in the removal of sulfur compounds and metals.