Advertisement

Biological activity of carbonic nano-structures—comparison via enzymatic bioassay

  • Anna S. SachkovaEmail author
  • Ekaterina S. Kovel
  • Grigoriy N. Churilov
  • Devard I. Stom
  • Nadezhda S. Kudryasheva
Humic Substances and Nature-like Technologies
  • 93 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of the work is to compare the biological activity of carbonic nano-structures of natural and artificial origination, namely, humic substances (HS) and fullerenols.

Materials and methods

The representative of the fullerenol group, С60Оy(OH)x where у + x = 20–22, was chosen. Enzyme-based luminescent bioassay was applied to evaluate toxicity and antioxidant properties of HS and fullerenol (F); chemiluminescent luminol method was used to study a content of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in the solutions. Toxicity of the bioactive compounds was evaluated using effective concentrations ЕС50; detoxification coefficients DOxT were applied to study and compare antioxidant activity of the compounds. Antioxidant activity and ranges of active concentrations of the bioactive compounds were determined in model solutions of organic and inorganic oxidizers—1,4-benzoquinone and potassium ferricianide.

Results and discussion

Values of ЕС50 revealed higher toxicity of HS than F (0.005 and 0.108 g L−1, respectively); detoxifying concentrations of F were found to be lower. Antioxidant ability of HS was demonstrated to be time-dependent; the 50-min preliminary incubation in oxidizer solutions was suggested as optimal for the detoxification procedure. On the contrary, F’ antioxidant effect demonstrated independency on time. Antioxidant effect of HS did not depend on amphiphilic characteristics of the media (values of DOxT were 1.3 in the solutions of organic and inorganic oxidizers), while this of F was found to depend: it was maximal (DOxT = 2.0) in solutions of organic oxidizer, 1,4-benzoquinone.

Conclusions

Both HS and F demonstrated toxicity and low-concentration antioxidant ability; however, quantitative characteristics of their effects were different. The differences were explained with HS polyfunctionality, higher ability to decrease ROS content, non-rigidity, and diffusion restrictions in their solutions. Antioxidant effect of the bioactive compounds was presumably attributed to catalytic redox activity of their π-fragments. The paper demonstrates a high potential of luminescent enzymatic bioassay to study biological activity of nano-structures of natural and artificial origination.

Keywords

Antioxidant activity Bioactive compounds Fullerenol Humic substances Toxicity Reactive oxygen species 

Abbreviations

HS

Humic substances

F

Fullerenol С60Оy(OH)x, where у + x = 20–22

NADH

Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide disodium salt reduced

FMN

Flavinmononucleotide

OxT

Oxidative toxicity

ROS

Reactive oxygen species

Notes

Funding information

This work was supported by the state budget allocated to the fundamental research at the Russian Academy of Sciences, project 0356-2017-0017; PRAN-32, Program: “Nanostructures: physics, chemistry, biology, technological basis.” Study of ROS involvement to antioxidant activity of humic substances was supported by the Russian Science Foundation, grant 16-14-10115.

References

  1. Abbas M, Adil M, Ehtisham-ul-Haque S, Munir B, Yameen M, Ghaffar A, Shar GA, Tahir MA, Iqbal M (2018) Vibrio fischeri bioluminescence inhibition assay for ecotoxicity assessment: a review. Sci Total Environ 626:1295–1309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexandrova M, Rozhko T, Vydryakova G, Kudryasheva N (2011) Effect of americium-241 on luminous bacteria. Role of peroxides. J Environ Radioact 102(4):407–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anesio AM, Granéli W, Aiken GR, Kieber DJ, Mopper K (2005) Effect of humic substance photodegradation on bacterial growth and respiration in lake water. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(10):6267–6275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Calabrese EJ (2014) Hormesis: a fundamental concept in biology. Microb Cell 1:145–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Calabrese EJ (2015) Hormesis: principles and applications. Homeopathy 104(2):69–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Churilov GN, Kratschmer W, Osipova IV, Glushenko GA, Vnukova NG, Kolonenko AL, Dudnik AI (2013) Synthesis of fullerenes in a high-frequency arc plasma under elevated helium pressure. Carbon 62:389–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fedorova E, Kudryasheva N, Kuznetsov A, Mogil’naya O, Stom D (2007) Bioluminescent monitoring of detoxification processes: activity of humic substances in quinone solutions. J Photochem Photobiol B 88(2–3):131–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Foley S, Crowley C, Smaihi M, Bonfils C, Erlanger BF, Seta P, Larroque C (2002) Cellular localization of a water-soluble fullerene derivative. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 294:116–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Giachin G, Nepravishta R, Mandaliti W, Melino S, Margon A, Scaini D, Mazzei P, Piccolo A, Legname G, Paci M, Leita L (2017) The mechanisms of humic substances self-assembly with biological molecules: the case study of the prion protein. PLoS One 12(11):e0188308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Girotti S, Ferri EN, Fumo MG, Maiolini E (2008) Monitoring of environmental pollutants by bioluminescent bacteria. Anal Chim Acta 608:2–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goncharova EA, Isakova VG, Tomashevich EV, Churilov GN (2009) Obtaining of water-soluble polyhydroxylated fullerenols with iron nanoparticles as catalyzers. Vestnik of SibGAU 22:90–93 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  12. Grebowski J, Krokosz A, Puchala M (2013) Fullerenol C60(OH)36 could associate to band 3 protein of human erythrocyte membranes. Biochim Biophys Acta Biomembr 1828:2007–2014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Iavicoli I, Leso V, Fontana L, Calabrese EJ (2018) Nanoparticle exposure and hormetic dose–responses: an update. Int J Mol Sci 19(3):805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Isakova VG, Goncharova EA, Bayukov OA, Churilov GN (2011) Hydroxylation of fullerenes modified with iron nanoparticles. Russ J Appl Chem 84:1165–1169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Juan L, Zhang M, Sun B, Xing G, Yan S, HaiLi G, Ya C, Ge Y, Zhao Y (2012) Separation and purification of fullerenols for improved biocompatibility. Carbon 50:460–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kratasyuk VA, Esimbekova EN (2015) Applications of luminous bacteria enzymes in toxicology. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen 18:952–959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kudryasheva NS, Tarasova AS (2015) Pollutant toxicity and detoxification by humic substances: mechanisms and quantitative assessment via luminescent biomonitoring. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 22:155–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kudryasheva N, Vetrova E, Kuznetsov A, Kratasyuk V, Stom D (2002) Bioluminescent assays: effects of quinones and phenols. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 53:221–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kudryasheva NS, Kovel ES, Sachkova AS, Vorobeva AA, Isakova VG, Churilov GN (2017) Bioluminescent enzymatic assay as a tool for studying antioxidant activity and toxicity of bioactive compounds. J Photochem Photobiol 93(2):536–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kuznetsov AM, Rodicheva EK, Shilova EV (1996) Bioassay based on lyophilized bacteria. Biotekhnologiya 9:57–61 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  21. Levinsky B (2000) All about humates. In: Korf-Poligraf, Irkutsk, pp 70Google Scholar
  22. Lipczynska-Kochany E (2018) Humic substances, their microbial interactions and effects on biological transformations of organic pollutants in water and soil: a review. Chemosphere 202:420–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nemtseva EV, Kudryasheva NS (2007) The mechanism of electronic excitation in bacterial bioluminescent reaction. Uspekhi khimii 76:101–112 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  24. Orlov DS (1997) Humic substances in the biosphere. Soros Educ J 2:56–63 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  25. Perelomov LV, Sarkar B, Sizova OI, Chilachava KB, Shvikin AY, Perelomova IV, Atroshchenko YM (2018) Zinc and lead detoxifying abilities of humic substances relevant to environmental bacterial species. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 151:178–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Perminova I, Grechishcheva N, Kovalevskii D, Kudryavtsev A, Petrosyan V, Matorin D (2001) Quantification and prediction of the detoxifying properties of humic substances related to their chemical binding to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Environ Sci Technol 35:3841–3848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Petrov D, Tunega D, Gerzabek MH, Oostenbrink C (2017) Molecular dynamics simulations of the standard leonardite humic acid: microscopic analysis of the structure and dynamics. Environ Sci Technol 51(10):5414–5424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Piccolo A (2001) The supramolecular structure of humic substances. Soil Sci 166:810–832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Remmel NN, Titova NM, Kratasyuk VA (2003) Oxidative stress monitoring in biological samples by bioluminescent method. Bull Exp Biol Med 136:209–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Richard C, Guyot G, Trubetskaya O, Trubetskoj O, Grigatti M, Cavan L (2009) Fluorescence analysis of humic-like substances extracted from composts: influence of composting time and fractionation. Environ Chem Lett 7:61–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sachkova AS, Kovel ES, Churilov GN, Guseynov OA, Bondar AA, Dubinina IA, Kudryasheva NS (2017) On mechanism of antioxidant effect of fullerenols. Biochem Biophys Rep 9:1–8Google Scholar
  32. Tarasova AS, Stom DI, Kudryasheva NS (2011) Effect of humic substances on toxicity of inorganic oxidizer. Bioluminescent monitoring. Environ Toxic Chem 30(5):1013–1017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tarasova AS, Kislan SL, Fedorova ES, Kuznetsov AM, Mogilnaya OA, Stom DI, Kudryasheva NS (2012) Bioluminescence as a tool for studying detoxification processes in metal salt solutions involving humic substances. J Photochem Photobiol B 117:164–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tarasova AS, Stom DI, Kudryasheva NS (2015) Antioxidant activity of humic substances via bioluminescent monitoring in vitro. Environ Monit Assess 187:89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Trubetskoj OA, Trubetskaya OE, Richard C (2009) Photochemical activity and fluorescence of electrophoretic fractions of aquatic humic matter. Water Resour 36:518–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Vanýsek P (1983) Standard electrochemical potentials, CRC. Handb Chem Phys 64:156–163Google Scholar
  37. Vetrova EV, Kudryasheva NS, Kratasyuk VA (2007) Chow compounds influence on the NAD(P)H:FMN-oxidoreductase-luciferase bioluminescent system. J Photochem Photobiol Sci 6:35–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zheng Y, Hou L, Liu M, Newell SE, Yin G, Yu C, Zhang H, Li X, Gao D, Gao J, Wang R, Liu C (2017) Effects of silver nanoparticles on nitrification and associated nitrous oxide production in aquatic environments. Sci Adv 3:e1603229CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Research Tomsk Polytechnic UniversityTomskRussia
  2. 2.Institute of Biophysics FRC KSC SB RASKrasnoyarskRussia
  3. 3.Siberian Federal UniversityKrasnoyarskRussia
  4. 4.Institute of Physics FRC KSC SB RASKrasnoyarskRussia
  5. 5.Irkutsk National Research Technical UniversityIrkutskRussia

Personalised recommendations