1
|
Zheng Q, Xie J, Xiao J, Cao Y, Liu X. Unraveling the underlying mechanism of interactions between astaxanthin geometrical isomers and bovine serum albumin. SPECTROCHIMICA ACTA. PART A, MOLECULAR AND BIOMOLECULAR SPECTROSCOPY 2024; 308:123731. [PMID: 38064963 DOI: 10.1016/j.saa.2023.123731] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2023] [Revised: 11/30/2023] [Accepted: 12/01/2023] [Indexed: 01/13/2024]
Abstract
The health benefits of astaxanthin (AST) are related to its geometric isomers. Generally, functional activity is realized by the interactions between active substances and transporters. Hereto, bovine serum albumin (BSA), as a model-binding protein and transporter, is able to recognize and transport isomers of active substances through binding with them. However, differences in the binding mechanism of isomers to BSA may affect the functional activities of isomers through the "binding-transport-activity" chain reaction. Thus, this study sought to elucidate the interactions between AST geometrical isomers and BSA using multi-spectroscopy, surface plasmon resonance and molecular docking. The results showed that Z-AST displayed more interacting amino acid residues and lower thermodynamic parameters than all-E-AST. Meanwhile, the order of binding affinity to BSA was 13Z-AST (1.56 × 10-7 M) > 9Z-AST (2.70 × 10-7 M) > all-E-AST (4.01 × 10-7 M), indicating that Z-AST possessed stronger binding ability to BSA. Moreover, AST isomers were located at the junction between subdomains ⅡA and ⅢA of BSA, and showed the same interaction forces (hydrogen bond and van der Waals force) as well as kinetic processes (slow combination, slow dissociation). These interaction parameters provide valuable insights into their pharmacokinetics in vivo, and it was of great significance to explain the potential differences among AST isomers in functional activities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qinsheng Zheng
- Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nutraceuticals and Functional Foods, College of Food Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, Guangdong, China; Guangdong Laboratory for Lingnan Modern Agriculture, Guangzhou 510642, China
| | - Junting Xie
- Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nutraceuticals and Functional Foods, College of Food Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, Guangdong, China; Guangdong Laboratory for Lingnan Modern Agriculture, Guangzhou 510642, China
| | - Jie Xiao
- Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nutraceuticals and Functional Foods, College of Food Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, Guangdong, China; Guangdong Laboratory for Lingnan Modern Agriculture, Guangzhou 510642, China
| | - Yong Cao
- Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nutraceuticals and Functional Foods, College of Food Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, Guangdong, China; Guangdong Laboratory for Lingnan Modern Agriculture, Guangzhou 510642, China
| | - Xiaojuan Liu
- Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nutraceuticals and Functional Foods, College of Food Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, Guangdong, China; Guangdong Laboratory for Lingnan Modern Agriculture, Guangzhou 510642, China.
| |
Collapse
|