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…

Pesticide removal in wine with a physical treatment by molecular sieving

All along the winemaking process, conditioning and aging, wine is susceptible to be contaminated by different molecules. Contaminations can have various origins, related to wine microorganisms or as a result of an exogenous contamination. The aforementioned contamination of the wine can be caused by the migration of molecules from the materials in contact with the wine or by a contamination from exogenous molecules present in the air. Regardless of the source of the contamination, mainly two types of consequences can be observed.

Characterization of non-Saccharomyces yeast and its interaction with Saccharomyces cerevisiae with investigation of fermentation kinetics and aromatic composition

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.20.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

Effect of supplementation with inactive yeast during alcoholic fermentation in base wine for sparkling

INTRODUCTION: Foam stability of sparkling wines is significantly favored by the presence of surface active agents such as proteins and polysaccharides [1]. For that reason, the renowned sparkling wines are aged after the second fermentation in contact with the lees for several months (even years). Thereby wines are enriched in these macromolecules due to yeast autolysis. Since this practice is slow and costly, winemakers are seeking for alternative procedures to increase their concentration in base wines. In that sense, the supplementation with inactive yeast during alcoholic fermentation has been proposed [2]. The aim of this study was to determine whether this new strategy is really useful for enriching base wines in macromolecules and for improving foam properties of the base wines.

Effect of nanofiltration on the chemical composition and wine quality

In Enology the conventional processes of filtration for clarification and stabilization are giving place to alternative membrane processes, including nanofiltration (NF). Furthermore, the increased alcohol content in wines recorded in recent years became an important issue for all the main wine producing countries. Among techniques available to the wine industry to reduce the ethanol content, NF is certainly one of the newest. This study is focused on the evaluation of NF influence on wine physical-chemical composition, including mineral content, which in accordance to our best knowledge is a novelty.

On the losses of dissolved CO2 during champagne aging

A misconception lingers in the minds of some wine consumers that Champagne wines don’t age. It’s largely a myth, certainly as far as the best cuvees are concerned. Actually, during the so-called autolysis period of time (in the closed bottle, after the “prise de mousse”), complex chemical reactions take place when the wine remains in contact with the dead yeast cells, which progressively bring complex and very much sought-after aromas to champagne. Nevertheless, despite their remarkable impermeability to liquid and air, caps or natural cork stoppers used to cork the bottles are not 100% hermetic with regard to gas transfers. Gas species therefore very slowly diffuse through the cap or cork stopper, along their respective inverse partial pressure. After the “prise de mousse”, because the partial pressure of CO2 in the bottleneck reaches up to 6 bars (at 12 °C), gaseous CO2 progressively diffuse from the bottle to the ambient air
(where the partial pressure of gaseous CO2 is only of order of 0,0004 bar).