Advertisement

Glycyrrhetic acid monoglucuronide: sweetness concentration–response and molecular mechanism as a naturally high-potency sweetener

  • Yongan Yang
  • Yuangang Wei
  • Xiaonan Guo
  • Pengfei Qi
  • Hailiang Zhu
  • Wenjian TangEmail author
Article
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

Glycyrrhetic acid monoglucuronide (GAM) is obtained from the natural sweetener glycyrrhizin through enzymolysis. Its sweetness concentration–response (C–R) behavior in room-temperature in water was determined using two-alternative forced choice discrimination tests. The C–R equation of resultant hyperbolic curve relating sucrose equivalent (SE, %) to GAM concentration ([GAM], mg/L) was SE = 19.6 × [GAM]/(194.8 + [GAM]). From the C–R function, Pw (2) of GAM, relative to a 2% (w/v) sucrose reference, is more than 900, which has much higher potency than its precursor glycyrrhizin. Molecular modeling showed that GAM is finely bound into protein 1EWK through conventional hydrogen bonds, π-Alkyl interactions and Van der Waals bonds, which exhibited better protein inclusion than Glycyrrhizin. Thus, GAM could be developed as a new zero-calorie, naturally high-potency sweetener.

Keywords

Glycyrrhetic acid Sweetener Sensory evaluation High-potency Molecular modeling 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province under Grant [BK20160570].

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Baker P, Friel S, Schram A, Labonte R. Trade and investment liberalization, food systems change and highly processed food consumption: a natural experiment contrasting the soft-drink markets of Peru and Bolivia. Global Health. 12: 24 (2016)Google Scholar
  2. Beidler LM. A theory of taste stimulation. J. Gen. Physiol. 38(2): 133–139 (1954)Google Scholar
  3. Belloir C, Neiers F, Briand L. Sweeteners and sweetness enhancers. Curr. Opin. Clin. Nutr. Metab. Care. 20: 279–285 (2017)Google Scholar
  4. Cui M, Jiang P, Maillet E, Max M, Margolskee RF, Osman R. The heterodimeric sweet taste receptor has multiple potential ligand binding sites. Curr. Pharm. Des. 12: 4591–4600 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. Drewnowski A, Rehm CD. The use of low-calorie sweeteners is associated with self-reported prior intent to lose weight in a representative sample of US adults. Nutr. Diabetes. 6: e202 (2016)Google Scholar
  6. DuBois GE, Walters DE, Schiffman SS, Warwick ZS, Booth BJ, Pecore SD, Gibes K, Carr BT, Brands LM. Concentration-response relationships of sweeteners. pp. 261–276. In: ACS Symposium Series: Sweeteners. Discovery, Molecular Design and Chemoreception. Walters DE, Orthoefer FT, DuBois GE (ed). Am Chem Soc., Washington, DC. (1991)Google Scholar
  7. DuBois GE. Sweeteners and sweetness modulators: requirements for commercial viability. pp. 444–462. In: Sweetness and Sweeteners: Biology, Chemistry and Psychophysics. Weerasinghe DK, DuBois GE (ed). Am Chem Soc., Washington, DC. (2008)Google Scholar
  8. DuBois GE, Prakash I. Non-caloric sweeteners, sweetness modulators, and sweetener enhancers. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 3: 353–380 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. DuBois GE. Molecular mechanism of sweetness sensation. Physiol. Behav. 164: 453–463 (2016)Google Scholar
  10. Espinoza MI, Vincken JP, Sanders M, Castro C, Stieger M, Agosin E. Identification, quantification, and sensory characterization of steviol glycosides from differently processed Stevia rebaudiana commercial extracts. J. Agric. Food Chem. 62: 11797–11804 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. Fiore C, Eisenhut M, Ragazzi E, Zanchin G, Armanini D. A history of the therapeutic use of liquorice in Europe. J. Ethnopharmacol. 99: 317–324 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. Fowler SPG. Low-calorie sweetener use and energy balance: results from experimental studies in animals, and large-scale prospective studies in humans. Physiol. Behav. 164: 517–523 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. Fry JC, Yurttas N, Biermann KL, Lindley MG, Goulson MJ. The sweetness concentration-response of R,R-monatin, a naturally occurring high-potency sweetener. J. Food Sci. 77: S362–S364 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. Goryakin Y, Monsivais P, Suhrcke M. Soft drink prices, sales, body mass index and diabetes: evidence from a panel of low-, middle- and high-income countries. Food Policy. 73:88–94 (2017)Google Scholar
  15. Kim DH, Hong SH, Kim BT, Bae EA, Park HY, Han MJ. Biotransformation of glycyrrhizin by human intestinal bacteria and its relation to biological activities. Arch. Pharm. Res. 23: 172–177 (2000)Google Scholar
  16. Kim M, Lee G, Lim HS, Yun SS, Hwang M, Hong JH, Kwon H. Safety assessment of 16 sweeteners for the Korean population using dietary intake monitoring and poundage method. Food Addit. Contam. Part A Chem. Anal. Control Expo. Risk Assess. 34(9): 1500–1509 (2017)Google Scholar
  17. Kunishima N, Shimada Y, Tsuji Y, Sato T, Yamamoto M, Kumasaka T, Nakanishi S, Jingami H, Morikawa K. Structural basis of glutamate recognition by a dimeric metabotropic glutamate receptor. Nature. 407: 971–977 (2000)Google Scholar
  18. Li B, Yang YA, Chen LZ, Chen SC, Zhang J, Tang WJ. 18α-Glycyrrhetinic acid monoglucuronide as an anti-inflammatory agent through suppression of the NF-κB and MAPK signaling pathway. MedChemComm. 8: 1498–1504 (2017)Google Scholar
  19. Mooradian AD, Smith M, Tokuda M. The role of artificial and natural sweeteners in reducing the consumption of table sugar: a narrative review. Clin. Nutr. ESPEN. 18: 1–8 (2017)Google Scholar
  20. Muto T, Tsuchiya D, Morikawa K, Jingami H. Structures of the extracellular regions of the group II/III metabotropic glutamate receptors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 104: 3759–3764 (2007)Google Scholar
  21. O’Brien NL. Alternative Sweeteners, 4th ed. Marcel Dekker, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  22. Park HY, Park SH, Yoon HK, Han MJ, Kim DH. Anti-allergic activity of 18β-glycyrrhetinic acid-3-O-β-D-glucuronide. Arch. Pharm. Res. 27: 57–60 (2004)Google Scholar
  23. Piernas C, Mendez MA, Ng SW, Gordon-Larsen P, Popkin BM. Low-calorie- and calorie-sweetened beverages: diet quality, food intake, and purchase patterns of US household consumers. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 99: 567–577 (2014)Google Scholar
  24. Popkin BM, Hawkes C. Sweetening of the global diet, particularly beverages: patterns, trends, and policy responses. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 4: 174–186 (2016)Google Scholar
  25. Reynolds TH 4th, Soriano RA, Obadi OA, Murkland S, Possidente B. Long term rebaudioside A treatment does not alter circadian activity rhythms, adiposity, or insulin action in male mice. PLoS ONE. 12: e0177138 (2017)Google Scholar
  26. Roberts A. The safety and regulatory process for low calorie sweeteners in the United States. Physiol. Behav. 164: 439–444 (2016)Google Scholar
  27. Sanematsu K, Kusakabe Y, Shigemura N, Hirokawa T, Nakamura S, Imoto T, Ninomiya Y. Molecular mechanisms for sweet-suppressing effect of gymnemic acids. J. Biol. Chem. 289(37): 25711–25720 (2014)Google Scholar
  28. Tang WJ, Yang YA, He X, Shi JB, Liu XH. Synthesis and discovery of 18α-GAMG as anticancer agent in vitro and in vivo via down expression of protein p65. Sci. Rep. 4: 7106 (2014)Google Scholar
  29. Temussi P. The sweet taste receptor: a single receptor with multiple sites and modes of interaction. Adv. Food Nutr. Res. 53: 199–239 (2007)Google Scholar
  30. Wölwer-Rieck U, Tomberg W, Wawrzun A. Investigations on the stability of stevioside and rebaudioside a in soft drinks. J. Agric. Food Chem. 58: 12216–12220 (2010)Google Scholar
  31. Wu G, Robertson DH, Brooks CL 3rd, Vieth M. Detailed analysis of grid-based molecular docking: a case study of CDOCKER-A CHARMm-based MD docking algorithm. J. Comput. Chem. 24: 1549–1562 (2003)Google Scholar
  32. Yang YA, Tang WJ, Zhang X, Yuan JW, Liu XH, Zhu HL. Synthesis, molecular docking and biological evaluation of Glycyrrhizin analogs as anticancer agents targeting EGFR. Molecules. 19: 6368–6381 (2014)Google Scholar
  33. Yang YS, Yang B, Zou Y, Li G, Zhu HL. Design, biological evaluation and 3D QSAR studies of novel dioxin-containing triaryl pyrazoline derivatives as potential B-Raf inhibitors. Bioorg. Med. Chem. 24: 3052–3061 (2016)Google Scholar
  34. Zhang F, Klebansky B, Fine RM, Liu H, Xu H, Servant G, Zoller M, Tachdjian C, Li X. Molecular mechanism of the sweet taste enhancers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 107(10): 4752–4757 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean Society of Food Science and Technology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yongan Yang
    • 1
  • Yuangang Wei
    • 1
  • Xiaonan Guo
    • 1
  • Pengfei Qi
    • 2
  • Hailiang Zhu
    • 2
  • Wenjian Tang
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Elion-Nature Biological Technology Co., LtdNanjingChina
  2. 2.State Key Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, School of Life SciencesNanjing UniversityNanjingChina
  3. 3.School of PharmacyAnhui Medical UniversityHefeiChina

Personalised recommendations