Next Article in Journal
Evaluation of Relative Permittivity and Loss Factor of 3D Printing Materials for Use in RF Electronic Applications
Next Article in Special Issue
Providing Antimicrobial Properties to Cardboard Food Packaging by Coating with ZnO, TiO2, and SiO2—Water-Based Varnish Nanocomposites
Previous Article in Journal
Pinch Analysis for Heat Integration of Pulverized Coke Chemical Looping Gasification Coupled with Coke-Oven Gas to Methanol and Ammonia
Previous Article in Special Issue
From Sweet Corn By-Products to Carotenoid-Rich Encapsulates for Food Applications
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Processes
Volume 10
Issue 9
10.3390/pr10091880
processes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Protective Effect of Ultrasound-Processed Amazonian Sapota-do-Solimões (Quararibea cordata) Juice on Artemia salina Nauplii

by
Rhonyele Maciel da Silva
1,
Thaiz Batista Azevedo Rangel Miguel
2,
Emilio de Castro Miguel
3,
Pedro Henrique Campelo
4,
Fabiano A. N. Fernandes
1 and
Sueli Rodrigues
2,*
1
Chemical Engineering Department, Federal University of Ceará, Campus do Pici Bloco 709, Fortaleza CEP 60440-900, Brazil
2
Food Engineering Department, Federal University of Ceará, Campus do Pici Bloco 851, Fortaleza CEP 60440-900, Brazil
3
Department of Metallurgical Engineering and Materials Science, Federal University of Ceará, Campus do Pici Bloco 729, Fortaleza CEP 60440-900, Brazil
4
Department of Food Technology, Federal University of Viçosa, Viçosa CEP 36570-900, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Processes 2022, 10(9), 1880; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10091880
Submission received: 25 August 2022 / Revised: 12 September 2022 / Accepted: 13 September 2022 / Published: 16 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Trends in Food and Food Byproducts Processing)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Juice processing by non-thermal technology has been extensively studied, aiming at microbial inactivation and quality improvement. However, the knowledge about the possible toxic effects that those technologies can produce in foodstuffs due to the production of reactive oxygen species is still unknown. In this study, sapota-do-Solimões juice processed by ultrasound (2, 6, and 10 min) was evaluated by a toxicity test and protective effect through stress biomarkers (catalase, superoxide dismutase, and lipid peroxidation) using Artemia salina nauplii. The non-thermal processed juice was nontoxic to A. salina. However, the juice fibers imparted some damage to the animal’s body. The ultrasound-processed juice (2 and 6 min) decreased the A. salina mortality to 30% compared to the control assay with H2O2 where mortality was 80% after 48 h of exposure. However, after 72 h of exposure, the A. salina was entirely degraded by H2O2-induced toxicity. Furthermore, the catalase and superoxide dismutase presented the highest activity after A. salina was exposed to the unprocessed juice. Thus, sapota-do-Solimões juice processed by the ultrasound could promote a protective effect on A. salina, revealing this technology’s potential to enhance juice features without toxicity.

1. Introduction

Non-thermal technologies have evolved, especially to promote food quality avoiding the adverse effects of thermal technologies [1,2]. Among non-thermal technologies, ultrasound uses a short processing time and automated equipment that uses less energy and decreases labor costs, improving food quality [3].
The ultrasound produces sound waves that generate the alternate compression and rarefaction of the particles in the medium and the consequent collapse of the bubbles, causing cavitation [4]. Ultrasound frequencies promote physical and chemical phenomena such as vibration, agitation, cavitation, acoustic flow, pressure, shock waves, shear forces, micro-jetting, compression, and sparseness, as well as generating free radicals (hydroxyl and hydrogen) [5,6]. Among the effects on the foodstuffs, this process can break cell walls, promotes decomposition of water molecules, and produces free radicals with strong oxidative properties (singlet oxygen, hydrogen, and hydroxyl) [3]. This technology has been applied to modulate different juice features, including sugar concentration, bioactive compounds, color, consistency, and turbidity, as well as enzyme and microbial stability [1,7,8,9,10].
Applying ultrasound on the juice of sapota-do-Solimões (Quararibea cordata Vischer) could be an excellent opportunity to improve the juice features. Sapota-do-Solimões is an exotic fruit that has been highlighted in its properties to develop different foodstuffs, i.e., jelly, functional juices, wine, and ice cream [11,12]. The main characteristic of this fruit is its intense orange color due to carotenoids and the fibrous pulp that enhances its potentiality as a matrix for different food processes [13]. However, few studies highlight the potentiality of this fruit in respect of its components, such as minerals (Mg, P, and Fe), and fatty acids (oleic acid, linoleic acid, and α-linolenic acid) [12,14]. Moreover, the effective scavenger against RNS (reactive nitrogen species) and ROS (reactive oxygen species) were demonstrated by phenolic compound (epicatechin) and carotenoids (zeaxanthin, lutein, and β-carotene) [15]. Recently, the first study that applied non-thermal technologies to sapota-do-Solimões juice demonstrated that cold plasma could enhance juice quality by increasing its antioxidant power, sugar, and amino acid content [16].
Nevertheless, studying the possible toxicity of non-thermal technologies using in vivo organisms is extremely relevant, since it brings knowledge about the safety of these evolving alternatives for thermal treatments. Thus, biological systems are used as preliminary toxicity studies for acute toxicity tests. Artemia salina is a popular model organism for toxicological tests due to its short life cycle, ease of culture, and purchase of its cysts. Moreover, many different parameters can be selected for toxicological evaluation, including hatching, mortality, swimming, morphology, and biomarkers [17]. A. salina has been applied in foodstuffs such as pomegranate juice, tangerine (Citrus reticulata), and grape pomace (Vitis vinifera L.) [18,19,20]. The toxicity was shown for A. salina only at the highest tested concentration (40 mg·mL−1) for the extract of grape juice from the cultivars Sagrantino [21]. With respect to non-thermal technologies, coconut (Cocos nucifera L.) water treated with ozone presented 6.5% lethality at the maximum tested concentration (1000 μg·mL−1) after 2 and 6 min of ozone exposure, whereas the cold plasma and ultrasound did not promote toxicity to the A. salina [22].
In addition to the toxicity assay, the protective effect is also important to evaluate if the juice components mitigate damage against stressors. Therefore, many studies suggested that H2O2 can induce oxidative stress by producing free radicals (hydroxyl, superoxide, peroxyl, hydroperoxide, singlet oxygen) and altering the levels of components in the antioxidant defense system, such as antioxidant defense enzymes [catalase (CAT), superoxide dismutase (SOD)] and oxidative stress biomarker [lipid peroxidation (LPO)] [18,22,23,24]. SOD and CAT are the main defense enzymes for protecting against free radicals [25]. SOD catalyzes the degradation of highly toxic ROS (O2•−) to less toxic H2O2 and O2, whereas CAT decreases organism damage by using H2O2 converting into H2O and O2 [26].
Moreover, lipid peroxidation occurs in response to the chain reactions intermediate by free radicals that lead to oxidative degradation of polyunsaturated fats, mainly targeting an organism’s cell membranes [27]. The increase in antioxidant enzyme activities and LPO due to the increased oxidative stress to protect the organism from damage was shown in different studies [17,27]. However, the decrease is also possible due to the inhibition and degradation process [28,29].
Therefore, the present study aims to investigate the toxic and protective effects of sapota-do-Solimões juice unprocessed and processed by ultrasound on A. salina nauplii.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Raw Material

Sapota dos Solimões fruits were collected at Federal University of Amazon (Manaus, Brazil). The fruits were washed and manually peeled, the seeds were removed, and the juice was produced using a domestic blender by mixing the fruit pulp and water. The juice soil content was adjusted to 2 °Brix. The juice brix was measured using a Brix refractometer at 25 °C. The juice was stored frozen (−20 °C) [11].

2.2. Ultrasound Processing of Sapota-do-Solimões Juice

The ultrasound processing was carried out using a probe ultrasound (Ultronique QR500, Indaiatuba, SP-Brazil). The maximum potency of 500 W and frequency of 19 kHz was applied. A 13 mm titanium probe was immersed 15 mm below the liquid surface (potency density of 373 W/cm2). For each experiment, 150 mL of sapota-do-Solimões juice was placed in a glass jacketed beaker (250 mL, D = 7.0 cm, h = 9.5 cm). The juice was subjected to ultrasonic irradiation for 2 min (UL2), 6 min (UL6), and 10 min (UL10) [30]. The processing was thermostated to keep the temperature around 25 °C, but the internal heat generated by the process did not surpass 32 °C.

2.3. Sapota-do-Solimões Juice Lyophilization

The sapota-do-Solimões juice at °Brix 2 (150 mL) was distributed in Petri dishes and lyophilized for 24 h. The lyophilized juice was triturated, and a dried orange powder (2 g) was obtained and kept at −4 °C. The juice brix was measured using a Brix refractometer at 25 °C.

2.4. Protective Effects of Sapota-do-Solimões Juice against Hydrogen Peroxide-Induced Toxicity in Artemia salina Nauplii

The toxicity of sapota-do-Solimões juice (unprocessed and ultrasound processed samples) was evaluated by the A. salina lethality assay. Commercial dried cysts of brine shrimp were hatched in seawater (35 g/L, pH 8) with aeration for 48 h. The lyophilized juice was dissolved in seawater and transferred to 24-well plates to obtain concentrations of 10, 100, and 1000 µg·mL−1 in 2 mL of seawater with 10 nauplii in each well. In positive control, the wells were filled with 1 mL of seawater, 1 mL of potassium dichromate (0.5 M), and 10 nauplii. The wells were filled with 2 mL of seawater and 10 nauplii in the negative control. After 24 h incubation at 25 °C, the number of viable nauplii was counted. The unprocessed and processed samples did not affect the viability of A. salina within the range of 1–1000 µg·mL−1. Thus, the same experiment was performed, but the nauplii were exposed for 1 h to hydrogen peroxide (255 mM). After that, the sapota-do-Solimões juices were added to the wells to observe the protective effect. Negative control (seawater) and two positive controls were evaluated. One was filled with 1 mL of seawater, 1 mL of potassium dichromate (0.5 M), and 10 nauplii, and the other was filled with 1 mL of seawater, 1 mL hydrogen peroxide (255 mM), and 10 nauplii. The 24-well plates were incubated under constant light at 25 °C, and the viability of A. salina was studied at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h [18]. The percentage of survival was calculated Equation (1).
% A rtemia   m o r t a l i t y = d e a d n a p l i i t o t a l o f n a u p l i i × 100

2.5. Determination of Antioxidant Enzymes on Artemia salina Nauplii after Protective Effect Test

2.5.1. Extract Preparation of Artemia salina Nauplii after Protective Effect Test

The A. salina, after the assay of protective effect (item 2.3), was washed with distilled water (3-fold), and the extract (2:1, w/v) was prepared by adding about 1.5 g of A. salina in 0.75 mL of 0.2 M potassium phosphate buffer (pH 6.5). The mixture was stirred with glass beads and then centrifuged (9000× g, 4 °C, 20 min) to separate the extract (supernatant).

2.5.2. Protein Determination of Artemia salina Nauplii after Protective Effect Test

The protein content was determined using the Coomassie Blue G-250 dye based on the previously described method [31]. The reaction was carried out by adding 20 μL of the sample extract (diluted 50-fold) to 180 μL of Bradford reagent. After 10 min, an ELISA reader measured the absorbance at a wavelength of 595 nm. The standard curve for protein was built using bovine serum albumin (5–50 μg/100 μL).

2.5.3. Catalase Activity (CAT) of Artemia salina Nauplii after Protective Effect Test

CAT activity was measured at 240 nm for 4 min. The reaction mixture containing 1 mL of 200 mM/2 mM Tris-HCl–EDTA (pH 8.5) and H2O2 (20 mM) reacted with 50 μL of nauplii extract. Change in absorbance per min (ΔA240) was then calculated and used in the estimation of enzyme activity (extinction coefficient 39.4 L·M−1·cm−1) [26,32].

2.5.4. Superoxide Dismutase Activity (SOD) of Artemia salina Nauplii after Protective Effect Test

The SOD activity was calculated according to a previous study with modification [29]. The assay was performed in a 96-well plate by the addition of the following reagents: 100 μL of 0.1 M of Na2CO3 buffer (pH 10.2), 20 μL of 10 mM EDTA, 20 μL of 240 μM of NBT, 20 μL of 1 mM hydroxylamine hydrochloride, 20 μL of 0.3% of Triton X-100, and 20 μL of the nauplii extract. The blank was kept in the dark. Meanwhile, the sample reaction mixture was exposed to light for 20 min. The plate was read at 560 nm using an ELISA reader. The SOD activity was calculated according to Kono [33].

2.6. Determination of Lipoperoxidation (LPO) of Artemia salina Nauplii after Protective Effect Test

The lipoperoxidation was measured by the modified method using cumene hydroperoxide (CHP) equivalents [34,35]. An extract was prepared by adding A. salina to cold methanol (1:9, w/v). The A. salina was homogenized after stirring with glass beads and then centrifuged (9000× g, 4 °C, 20 min). Finally, the supernatant was used as an extract. The analysis was carried out by adding 15 μL of the sample extract, 90 μL FeSO4 1 mM, 35 μL H2SO4 0.25 M, 35 μL xylenol orange 1 mM, and 175 μL of water to 96-well microplates. After 1 h, the absorption was measured at 580 nm in an ELISA reader. Then, 10 μL of CHP 175 μM was added to the wells, and after 15 min, the plate was read again. Lipoperoxidation was expressed as CHP equivalents in μmol/g of A. salina.

2.7. Morphological Analysis under Light Microscopy of Artemia salina Nauplii

To evaluate the morphological characteristic of the A. salina after 48 h of toxicity assay and 72 h of the protective effect assay were washed in seawater and mounted on a glass slide. Thus, the morphological changes were analyzed under a light microscope (Primo Star-Zeiss) equipped with Zen Lite software [22].

2.8. Morphological Analysis under Scanning Electron Microscopy of Artemia salina Nauplii

For SEM morphological analysis, samples of A. salina were collected as described in item 2.6 for light microscopy and fixed in a solution containing glutaraldehyde 2.5%, formaldehyde 4.0% in sodium cacodylate buffer 0.1 mol·L−1 (pH 7.2, 25 °C, 24 h). Then, the material was rinsed in sodium cacodylate buffer 0.1 mol·L−1, pH 7.2, three times for 45 min each and post-fixed (1 h, 25 °C) with 1.0% osmium tetroxide in sodium cacodylate buffer 0.1 mol·L−1, pH 7.2. Subsequently, the samples dehydrated with acetone increased series for 45 min each step. Finally, the dehydrated samples were critically point dried (Q150T ES), placed in stubs, and sputtered with 20 nm gold. Observation and documentation were performed in the scanning electron microscope (Quanta FEG 450 FEI) [22].

2.9. Statistic

The results were analyzed and reported as means and standard deviations. When appropriate, the variables were submitted to a one-way ANOVA analysis followed by Tukey’s multiple comparisons test with a significance level of 5% (p ≤ 0.05) using the STATISTICA program (Statsoft v 13.0).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Toxicity Assay of Ultrasound Processed Sapota-do-Solimões Juice

After 24 h and 48 h of interaction, no toxic effect of unprocessed or ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice was observed in A. salina, even at the higher sample concentration (1000 μg·mL−1). The positive control (K2Cr2O7 0.5 M) was lethal for the organisms presenting a 100% death rate of A. salina after 48 h of the assay as shown in Table S1 (Supplementary Material). At the same time, negative control (seawater) did not present lethality against A. salina. Food toxicity seems to depend on processing and the food matrix. Ozone-processed coconut water presented low toxicity to A. salina nauplii, resulting in the death of 6.5% of the individuals at a coconut water concentration of 1000 μg·mL−1. In contrast, coconut water processed by cold plasma and ultrasound presented lower toxicity than the ozone sample, causing the death of 3.0% of the individuals at 10 and 100 μg·mL−1, respectively [22]. Pomegranate juice did not affect the viability of A. salina nauplii within the range of 1–1000 µg·mL−1 [18]. Grape pomace flour (Vitis vinifera L.) was considered nontoxic since all A. salina remained alive after the toxicity assay [19], whereas the extract of grape juice (Vitis vinifera) from the cultivar Sagrantino promoted a 100% of lethality effect for A. salina at the highest tested concentration (40 mg·mL−1) [21].

3.2. Morphological Analysis of Artemia salina Nauplii after Toxicity Assay

3.2.1. Morphological Analysis of Artemia salina Nauplii after Toxicity Assay under an Optical Microscope

The intake and internalization of unprocessed and ultrasound processed (UL2, UL6, and UL10) juices can be observed in A. salina gut (Figure 1). A darker gut area is notable at highest concentration (1000 µg·mL−1) for unprocessed sample. On the other hand, the ultrasound processed juice UL10 showed the same darker area for the three different concentrations (10, 100, and 1000 µg·mL−1). This result indicates that ultrasound processing for longer times (10 min) favored the intake of juice particles. This is because the ultrasound decreases the pulp particle size [7], and, as a non-selective filter feeder, A. salina can ingest particles of a suitable size (<50 microns).
On the other hand, Schiavo et al. 2018 [36] demonstrated the particle size effect on A. salina feeding using zinc oxide nanoparticles that quickly aggregated in the A. salina digestive system, causing a feed hindrance for the organisms due to insufficient food intake. Moreover, silver nanoparticles at the 12 nM concentration accumulated in the entire gut region of the A. salina causing high toxicity and degrading the animal’s tissue, whereas the control presented mouth area and the gut region clear [37]. Contrary to nanoparticles, the fruit pulp can be metabolized by A. salina, and the size reduction does not impart any toxic effect.

3.2.2. Morphological Analysis of A. salina Nauplii after Toxicity Assay under an Electronic Scanning Microscope

As expected, A. salina exposed to seawater (negative control) did not present morphological changes such as damage to the appendages and antennae and no particle ingestion (Figure 2A). The antennas, gut, and appendages of the A. salina in the seawater are well preserved (Figure 2B–D). Conversely, A. salina exposed to K2Cr2O7 0.5 M (positive control) showed particle accumulation in the animal’s body characterized by a darker image and a dense digestive area. Morphological changes in A. salina, such as surface wrinkling and severe damage to the gut and appendages, are evident in Figure 2F–H.
Optical microscopy (Figure 1) does not allow us to see any morphological changes in A. salina, as allowed by scanning electron microscopy (Figure 2). The exposure of A. salina to unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões juice (1000 µg/mL) resulted in a wrinkled surface in the abdomen (Figure 2J). Compared to the negative control, the abdomen exhibited slight deformation and loss of body integrity (Figure 2J–L). The sapota-do-Solimões juice is rich in fibers, mostly pectin, which may promote an environment with particles of different sizes [13]. The feed assimilation process is particularly susceptible to stressing action causing harsh damage, including reduced animal body length. For instance, the exposure of A. salina to zinc oxide nanoparticles caused malnutrition due to nanoparticle agglomeration in the gut, presenting a wrinkled abdomen area [36]. The increase in the concentration of silver nanoparticles ultimately damages A. salina gut due to its high toxicity causing cell apoptosis and destroying the animal tissue [37].
The A. salina (Figure 2M,Q,U) exposed to ultrasound-processed juice presented a larger abdomen than the A. salina exposed to unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões juice (Figure 2I). This might be due to the decrease in particle size of sapota-do-Solimões juice caused by the ultrasound process favoring the A. salina feed [38]. Moreover, A. salina exposed to the ultrasound processed juices UL2, UL6, and UL10 (1000 µg/mL) presented a wrinkled surface characterized by folding in the abdomen area, dense body, and total gut area (Figure 2M,Q,U).
After being exposed to the juice sample UL2, the A. salina under scanning electron microscopy presented a wrinkled abdomen, and the appendages showed slight damage (Figure 2N–P). Regarding UL6 (Figure 2R–T) and UL10 (Figure 2V–X) juices samples. A. salina also presented morphological changes in the anus area with holes and a loss of integrity. A. salina is susceptible to environmental stressors causing morphological changes in its body. Damages to the A. salina body was described for previous food samples. Coconut water processed by cold plasma and ozone promoted a loss of body integrity and deformations in the animal abdomen. Without morphological changes, the ultrasound process was less harmful to A. salina [22]. Irreversible lipid membrane damage was induced by the attachment of oxidized multi-walled carbon nanotubes on A. salina, such as holes in the labrum, abdomen, and notum, leading the surface to wither [39].

3.3. Protective Effect of Unprocessed and Ultrasound-Processed Sapota-do-Solimões Juice against H2O2 Induced Toxicity on Artemia salina

The A. salina in seawater (Figure 3A) was not affected since after 72 h of exposure only 10% of the animals died. In contact with K2Cr7O2 (0.5 M), the A. salina was affected in the first 24 h with 100% mortality. In contrast, A. salina, when exposed to the stress inducer, H2O2 (127.45 M), increased the mortality rate to 80% after 48 h of exposure. The mortality rate rises to 100% after 72 h. As expected, seawater did not present damage to the animal body (Figure 3B,E), while K2Cr7O2 (0.5 M) promoted a particle accumulation in the A. salina body (Figure 3C,F). The H2O2 (127.45 M) completely degraded the A. salina body (Figure 3D,G). Toxic compounds can cause sub-lethal effects to A. salina impairing food uptake, motility, and multiple molting. That was shown after prolonged exposure of A. salina to polystyrene, which affects the survival due to aggregates adhering to the external surface and appendages [40].
Figure 4A shows that the unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões juice decreased the toxicity induced by H2O2 (127.45 M) to A. salina mortality by 40% (10 µg·mL−1) and 35% (1000 µg·mL−1) compared with the (Figure 3A) after 48 h of exposure. After 72 h, none of the A. salina survived. The improvement of A. salina survival can be explained by different compounds present in the juice, including antioxidant compounds that mitigated the action of free radicals [15]. For instance, short-chain fatty acids increased the survival of A. salina infected by the pathogenic Vibrio campbellii strain [41]. After 72 h of the protective effect assay (Figure 4B–D), the A. salina presented damage in the entire body with a deterioration aspect in the three different concentrations (10–1000 µg·mL−1). Figure 4E shows the complete degradation (wrinkled body, and loss of body parts) caused by H2O2 (127.45 M) in the A. salina. After exposure to a higher concentration (160 mg·L−1) of zinc oxide nanoparticles, A. salina suffered deformations of the eyeball, shrinking of the body and intestinal gut, and degradation of the outer shell, antenna, and head. The authors suggested that, besides the concentration and time of exposure, the higher salinity of seawater decreased the electrostatic repulsion between the nanoparticles improving their aggregation in A. salina [42].
In Figure 5A, the sapota-do-Solimões juice UL2 decreased the A. salina mortality to 30% with the highest concentration (1000 µg·mL−1) compared with the H2O2 (127.45 M) (Figure 3A) after 48 h of exposure. However, after 72 h, the mortality increased to 90%. The sapota-do-Solimões pulp has epicatechin as the major polyphenol compound. Cell breakdown can improve this content after the ultrasound process [9,14]. Therefore, polyphenols exerted a protective effect reducing cytotoxicity and against oxidative stress [43].
Furthermore, the protective effect can also be related to the production of important molecules in response to stress conditions. For instance, A. salina, when exposed to a non-lethal heat shock, enhanced the synthesis of heat shock proteins, which are known to improve the tolerance to a stress environment [44]. The A. salina presented the same deteriorated aspect as the control H2O2 (127.45 M) (Figure 3A) with a wrinkled body and completely deformed appendages (Figure 5E). The deformation of the swimming setae was observed in A. salina treated with copper oxide, which was related to the reduction of the normal swimming behavior [45].
In Figure 6A, the sapota-do-Solimões juice UL6 decreased the A. salina mortality to 37% with the highest concentration (1000 µg·mL−1) compared with the H2O2 (127.45 M) (Figure 3A) after 48 h of exposure. It increased to 90% after 72 h. The A. salina (Figure 6B–D) after 72 h presented a deformed body with a loss of abdomen and eye integrity. Nauplius’s eye deformation was also reported in a study with bisphenol, which might affect the pathway of eye development in arthropods by disrupting endocrine-mediated processes inhibiting ecdysteroid biosynthesis [46].
In Figure 7A, the sapota-do-Solimões juice UL10 had the highest mortality rate, 53% at 1000 µg·mL−1, compared with UL2 and UL6 and unprocessed juices after 48 h of exposure. In contrast, after 72 h the mortality rate was also 90%. The components of the food matrix can enhance the protective effect. For example, ultrasound-processed coconut water presented a remarkable protective effect against H2O2 with a mortality rate of 60% after 72 h of exposure [22]. After 72 h of the protective effect assay (Figure 7B–D), the deterioration of the A. salina body was observed with a difference in the body density of the highest concentrations (100–1000 µg·mL−1). Figure 7E shows that A. salina (1000 µg·mL−1) after 72 h presented a loss in body integrity. The morphological development of A. salina decreased when the concentration of tributyltin chloride (antifouling substance) increased. The abnormalities are head width, abdominal width, tail width, and swimming setae, resulting in an imbalanced and irregular swimming pattern [47].

3.4. Evaluation of the Stress Biomarkers on Artemia salina after Protective Effect Assay of Sapota-do-Solimões Juice

3.4.1. Protein Concentration of Artemia salina after Protective Effect Assay of Sapota-do-Solimões Juice

The protein content in Figure 8 was higher for the H2O2 (positive control). The unprocessed juice had different protein content from processed juices (p ≤ 0.05). The environmental conditions can induce the synthesis of stress proteins. For instance, in vivo study concluded that PHB (poly-ß-hydroxybutyrate) induced the production of heat shock protein (Hsp) 70 in V. campbellii challenged A. salina [48]. Moreover, the production of these proteins can enhance the protective effect against adverse environmental conditions as shown after exposure to a non-lethal heat shock at 37 °C improved tolerance to lethal levels of pH, salinity, and ammonia stress [44].

3.4.2. Catalase Activity on Artemia salina Nauplii after Protective Effect Assay of Sapota-do-Solimões Juice

Figure 9 shows that CAT activity was higher in the positive control with only H2O2. In contrast, a gradual decay was observed for the increment of ultrasound process time (from 0 to 10 min) being statistically different (p ≤ 0.05). Meanwhile, the unprocessed juice had similar CAT activity (p ≤ 0.05) compared to the H2O2 (positive control). Thus, in some way, the ultrasound process promotes changes in the juice composition that did not impart any change in CAT activity compared with seawater (negative control). This is probably due to the decrease in particle size during the homogenization process caused by ultrasound, where the juice fibers are broken down due to mechanical waves [38]. In this regard, the formation of micron and submicron-sized agglomerates zinc oxide nanoparticles could produce toxic effects in A. salina caused by a feed hindrance for the organisms [37].
Moreover, increasing the concentration of zinc oxide and titanium dioxide nanoparticles enhanced CAT activity in A. salina [42]. Under stress, antioxidant defense mechanisms such as SOD and CAT can be activated to protect the cells from oxidative damage. These enzymes work together to form the first defensive steps, thus, H2O2 radicals produced by SOD can be used by CAT, decreasing cell damage [29]. Nonetheless, the overproduction of ROS can decrease the CAT activity in marine organisms. A. salina treated with copper oxide decreased the CAT activity due to the interaction of dissolved Cu2+ ions with H2O2, leading to the production of hydroxyl radicals through the Fenton and Haber Weiss pathway, impairing CAT’s inactivation [45].

3.4.3. Superoxide Dismutase Activity on Artemia salina Nauplii after Protective Effect Assay of Sapota-do-Solimões Juice

In Figure 10, the SOD activity for the unprocessed juice was the highest compared with the controls and ultrasound-processed samples. For magnetic O-carboxymethyl chitosan-loaded silver nanoparticles in A. salina, the higher SOD activity was a response against oxidative stress caused by superoxide, where SOD catalyzes the degradation of highly toxic ROS (O2•−) to less toxic H2O2 and O2 [26]. Meanwhile, pristine titanium dioxide nanoparticles decreased SOD activity compared with the control [29]. Lower SOD activity implies the failure of the antioxidant system to scavenge the excessive ROS leading to inhibition or degradation of SOD [24,29]. In this regard, the particles or components in the unprocessed juice caused oxidative stress for A. salina, which is demonstrated by high catalase and SOD activity.

3.4.4. Lipid Peroxidation Level on Artemia salina Nauplii after Protective Effect Assay of Sapota-do-Solimões Juice

In Figure 11, the LPO shows a lower level for peroxide hydrogen and unprocessed juice. LPO is an important indicator of oxidative stress in aquatic organisms since oxidative stress can cause an increase in the lipoperoxidation process [24]. The exposure of the A. salina to acid (pH 6.8) seawater increased the level of lipid peroxidation [27]. LPO increased when exposed to Cd and Hg, while it did not change for Zn. This effect was explained by the metallothionein synthesis, an important antioxidant that contributes to the reduction of reactive oxygen species. Thus, this defense mechanism against lipid peroxidation can be inhibited by Cd and Hg, or induced by Zn [28].

4. Conclusions

The sapota-do-Solimões juice processed by ultrasound did not promote a toxicity effect on A. salina. Conversely, the juice particles promote morphological changes in the animal’s body, including wrinkled surfaces and holes. The ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL2 and UL6) had the lowest mortality rate by around 40% after 48 h of protective effect assay showing that juice components were able to decrease the mortality against H2O2 toxicity. Regarding the stress biomarkers, the antioxidant enzymes CAT and SOD had the highest activity in the unprocessed juice, whereas LPO had similar results for the different processes. Further studies on different toxicity models might complement this study.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/pr10091880/s1, Table S1: Acute toxicity of unprocessed and ultrasound processed sapota-do-Solimoes juice.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: R.M.d.S., T.B.A.R.M., E.d.C.M., P.H.C., F.A.N.F. and S.R.; methodology, R.M.d.S., T.B.A.R.M., E.d.C.M. and S.R., validation, R.M.d.S., T.B.A.R.M. and E.d.C.M.; formal analysis, R.M.d.S., T.B.A.R.M., E.d.C.M. and S.R.; investigation, R.M.d.S., T.B.A.R.M., E.d.C.M., P.H.C., F.A.N.F. and S.R.; resources, P.H.C., F.A.N.F. and S.R.; data curation, R.M.d.S., T.B.A.R.M., E.d.C.M. and S.R.; writing—original draft preparation, R.M.d.S., T.B.A.R.M. and E.d.C.M.; writing—review and editing, R.M.d.S., T.B.A.R.M., E.d.C.M., F.A.N.F. and S.R.; visualization, R.M.d.S., T.B.A.R.M., E.d.C.M., P.H.C., F.A.N.F. and S.R.; supervision, F.A.N.F. and S.R.; project administration, F.A.N.F. and S.R.; funding acquisition, F.A.N.F. and S.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—(CAPES)—Finance Code 001. F.U.N.C.A.P. and CNPq. The National Institute of Science and Technology for Tropical Fruit—INCT-FT also supported this study through its financial support and scholarship. Thaiz Miguel is supported by CNPq (grant 350023/2020-4) and Central Analítica UFC/CT-INFRA-FINEP/Pro-Equipamentos-CAPES/CNPq-SisNano-MCTI2019 (Grant 442577/2019-2) funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request.

Acknowledgments

Authors acknowledge the Analytical Center of the Federal University of Ceará for the microscopy analysis.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Alves Filho, E.G.; Sousa, V.M.; Rodrigues, S.; de Brito, E.S.; Fernandes, F.A.N. Green Ultrasound-Assisted Extraction of Chlorogenic Acids from Sweet Potato Peels and Sonochemical Hydrolysis of Caffeoylquinic Acids Derivatives. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2020, 63, 104911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Jiménez-Sánchez, C.; Lozano-Sánchez, J.; Segura-Carretero, A.; Fernández-Gutiérrez, A. Alternatives to Conventional Thermal Treatments in Fruit-Juice Processing. Part 2: Effect on Composition, Phytochemical Content, and Physicochemical, Rheological, and Organoleptic Properties of Fruit Juices. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2017, 57, 637–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Chen, F.; Zhang, M.; Yang, C. hui Application of Ultrasound Technology in Processing of Ready-to-Eat Fresh Food: A Review. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2020, 63, 104953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhang, W.; Yu, Y.; Xie, F.; Gu, X.; Wu, J.; Wang, Z. High Pressure Homogenization versus Ultrasound Treatment of Tomato Juice: Effects on Stability and in Vitro Bioaccessibility of Carotenoids. LWT 2019, 116, 108597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Chacha, J.S.; Zhang, L.; Ofoedu, C.E.; Suleiman, R.A.; Dotto, J.M.; Roobab, U.; Agunbiade, A.O.; Duguma, H.T.; Mkojera, B.T.; Hossaini, S.M.; et al. Revisiting Non-Thermal Food Processing and Preservation Methods—Action Mechanisms, Pros and Cons: A Technological Update (2016–2021). Foods 2021, 10, 1430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Sanches, M.A.R.; Colombo Silva, P.M.O.; Barretto, T.L.; Darros-Barbosa, R.; da Silva-Barretto, A.C.; Telis-Romero, J. Technological and Diffusion Properties in the Wet Salting of Beef Assisted by Ultrasound. LWT 2021, 149, 112036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Campoli, S.S.; Rojas, M.L.; do Amaral, J.E.P.G.; Canniatti-Brazaca, S.G.; Augusto, P.E.D. Ultrasound Processing of Guava Juice: Effect on Structure, Physical Properties and Lycopene in Vitro Accessibility. Food Chem. 2018, 268, 594–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Alves Filho, E.G.; Silva, L.M.A.; de Brito, E.S.; Wurlitzer, N.J.; Fernandes, F.A.N.; Rabelo, M.C.; Fonteles, T.V.; Rodrigues, S. Evaluation of Thermal and Non-Thermal Processing Effect on Non-Prebiotic and Prebiotic Acerola Juices Using 1H QNMR and GC–MS Coupled to Chemometrics. Food Chem. 2018, 265, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. de Linhares, M.F.D.; Alves Filho, E.G.; Silva, L.M.A.; Fonteles, T.V.; Wurlitzer, N.J.; de Brito, E.S.; Fernandes, F.A.N.; Rodrigues, S. Thermal and Non-Thermal Processing Effect on Açai Juice Composition. Food Res. Int. 2020, 136, 109506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yıkmış, S.; Erdal, B.; Bozgeyik, E.; Levent, O.; Yinanç, A. Evaluation of Purple Onion Waste from the Perspective of Sustainability in Gastronomy: Ultrasound-Treated Vinegar. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2022, 29, 100574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Maciel da Silva, R.; Henrique Campelo, P.; Rodrigues, S. In Vitro Viability of L. Casei B-442 and Fructooligosaccharides Integrity in Amazonian Sapota-Do-Solimões Functional Juice. Food Res. Int. 2022, 154, 111036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Monteiro, S.S.; Ribeiro, S.R.; Soquetta, M.B.; Pires, F.J.; Wagner, R.; da Rosa, C.S. Evaluation of the Chemical, Sensory and Volatile Composition of Sapota-Do-Solimões Pulp at Different Ripening Stages. Food Res. Int. 2018, 109, 159–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Monteiro, S.S.; Karnopp, G.; Michelon, N.; Arantes, A.C.N.R.; Monego, M.A.; Kipper, D.K.; Soquetta, M.B.; Wagner, R.; da Rosa, C.S. Influence of Preservation by Heat and Cold on the Physicochemical and Microbiological Characteristics, Bioactive Compounds of Pulp from Sapota-Do-Solimões (Quararibea Cordata). CyTA J. Food 2018, 16, 85–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Berto, A.; da Silva, A.F.; Visentainer, J.V.; Matsushita, M.; de Souza, N.E. Proximate Compositions, Mineral Contents and Fatty Acid Compositions of Native Amazonian Fruits. Food Res. Int. 2015, 77, 441–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Berto, A.; Ribeiro, A.B.; de Souza, N.E.; Fernandes, E.; Chisté, R.C. Bioactive Compounds and Scavenging Capacity of Pulp, Peel and Seed Extracts of the Amazonian Fruit Quararibea Cordata against ROS and RNS. Food Res. Int. 2015, 77, 236–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Silva, R.M.; Filho, E.G.A.; Campelo, P.H.; Silva, F.E.F.; Zampieri, D.S.; Gramosa, N.V.; Fernandes, F.A.N.; Rodrigues, S. NMR Spectroscopy and Chemometrics to Evaluate the Effect of Different Non-Thermal Plasma Processing on Sapota-Do-Solimões (Quararibea Cordata Vischer) Juice Quality and Composition. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2022, 15, 875–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zhu, B.; Zhu, S.; Li, J.; Hui, X.; Wang, G.X. The Developmental Toxicity, Bioaccumulation and Distribution of Oxidized Single Walled Carbon Nanotubes in Artemia Salina. Toxicol. Res. 2018, 7, 897–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Les, F.; Prieto, J.M.; Arbonés-Mainar, J.M.; Valero, M.S.; López, V. Bioactive Properties of Commercialised Pomegranate (Punica Granatum) Juice: Antioxidant, Antiproliferative and Enzyme Inhibiting Activities. Food Funct. 2015, 6, 2049–2057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Sousa, E.C.; Uchôa-Thomaz, A.M.A.; Carioca, J.O.B.; de Morais, S.M.; de Lima, A.; Martins, C.G.; Alexandrino, C.D.; Ferreira, P.A.T.; Rodrigues, A.L.M.; Rodrigues, S.P.; et al. Chemical Composition and Bioactive Compounds of Grape Pomace (Vitis vinifera L.), Benitaka Variety, Grown in the Semiarid Region of Northeast Brazil. Food Sci. Technol. 2014, 34, 135–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Nam Pung, S. Effect of Ozone Microbubbles and Ultrasonic Irradiation on Pesticide Detoxification in Tangerine Cv. Int. Food Res. J. 2017, 24, 1135–1139. [Google Scholar]
  21. Angelini, P.; Flores, G.A.; Piccirilli, A.; Venanzoni, R.; Acquaviva, A.; Di Simone, S.C.; Libero, M.L.; Tirillini, B.; Zengin, G.; Chiavaroli, A.; et al. Polyphenolic Composition and Antimicrobial Activity of Extracts Obtained from Grape Processing By-Products: Between Green Biotechnology and Nutraceutical. Process Biochem. 2022, 118, 84–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Miguel, T.B.A.R.; Porto, E.C.M.; de Paiva Pinheiro, S.K.; de Castro Miguel, E.; Fernandes, F.A.N.; Rodrigues, S. Protective Effect of Natural and Processed Coconut Water by Non-Thermal Technologies Against Oxidative Stress in Brine Shrimp (Artemia salina). Food Bioprocess Technol. 2021, 14, 702–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Tsai, F.-H.; Lien, J.-C.; Lin, L.-W.; Chen, H.-Y.; Ching, H.; Wu, C.-R. Protective Effect of Broussonetia Papyrifera against Hydrogen Peroxide-Induced Oxidative Stress in SH-SY5Y Cells. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2009, 73, 90080–90081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Nataraj, B.; Maharajan, K.; Hemalatha, D.; Rangasamy, B.; Arul, N.; Ramesh, M. Comparative Toxicity of UV-Filter Octyl Methoxycinnamate and Its Photoproducts on Zebrafish Development. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 718, 134546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Martins, N.; Barros, L.; Ferreira, I.C.F.R. In Vivo Antioxidant Activity of Phenolic Compounds: Facts and Gaps. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 48, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Demarchi, C.A.; da Silva, L.M.; Niedźwiecka, A.; Ślawska-Waniewska, A.; Lewińska, S.; Dal Magro, J.; Fossá Calisto, J.F.; Martello, R.; Rodrigues, C.A. Nanoecotoxicology Study of the Response of Magnetic O-Carboxymethylchitosan Loaded Silver Nanoparticles on Artemia Salina. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2020, 74, 103298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Thangal, S.H.; Nivetha, M.; Muttharasi, C.; Anandhan, K.; Muralisankar, T. Effects of Acidified Seawater on Biological and Physiological Responses of Artemia Franciscana. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2021, 169, 112476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ñañez Pacheco, G.K.; Sanabio Maldonado, N.S.; Pastrana Alta, R.Y.; Aguilar Vitorino, H. Short Exposure of Artemia salina to Group-12 Metals: Comparing Hatchability, Mortality, Lipid Peroxidation, and Swimming Speed. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2021, 213, 112052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Thiagarajan, V.; Seenivasan, N.; Jenkins, D.; Chandrasekaran, N.; Mukherjee, A. Combined Effects of Nano-TiO2 and Hexavalent Chromium towards Marine Crustacean Artemia Salina. Aquat. Toxicol. 2020, 225, 105541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Noguera, N.H.; Lima, D.C.; Filho, E.G.A.; Fonteles, T.V.; Rodrigues, S. Influence of Different Non-Thermal Processing on Guava, Orange, and Tangerine Juices and the Food Matrix Effects. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2021, 14, 1662–1672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Bradford, M. A Rapid and Sensitive Method for the Quantitation of Microgram Quantities of Protein Utilizing the Principle of Protein-Dye Binding. Anal. Biochem. 1976, 72, 248–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Aebi, H. [13] Catalase in Vitro. Methods Enzymol. 1984, 105, 121–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kono, Y. Generation of Superoxide Radical during Autoxidation of Hydroxylamine and an Assay for Superoxide Dismutase. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1978, 186, 189–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hermes-Lima, M.; Willmore, W.G.; Storey, K.B. Quantification of Lipid Peroxidation in Tissue Extracts Based on Fe(III)Xylenol Orange Complex Formation. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 1995, 19, 271–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Vitorino, H.A.; Mantovanelli, L.; Zanotto, F.P.; Espósito, B.P. Iron Metallodrugs: Stability, Redox Activity and Toxicity against Artemia Salina. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0121997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Schiavo, S.; Oliviero, M.; Li, J.; Manzo, S. Testing ZnO Nanoparticle Ecotoxicity: Linking Time Variable Exposure to Effects on Different Marine Model Organisms. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 4871–4880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Arulvasu, C.; Jennifer, S.M.; Prabhu, D.; Chandhirasekar, D. Toxicity Effect of Silver Nanoparticles in Brine Shrimp Artemia. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 256919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Silva, L.S.L.F.R.; da Gomes, A.S.; Castro, D.R.G.; Souza, F.d.C.d.A.; Mar, J.M.; Silva, L.S.L.F.R.; Sanches, E.A.; Bezerra, J.d.A.; Bakry, A.M.; Campelo, P.H. Ultrasound-assisted Homogenization and Gum Arabic Combined to Physicochemical Quality of Cupuaçu Juice. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2019, 43, e14072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Zhu, S.; Luo, F.; Tu, X.; Chen, W.C.; Zhu, B.; Wang, G.X. Developmental Toxicity of Oxidized Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes on Artemia Salina Cysts and Larvae: Uptake, Accumulation, Excretion and Toxic Responses. Environ. Pollut. 2017, 229, 679–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Bergami, E.; Bocci, E.; Vannuccini, M.L.; Monopoli, M.; Salvati, A.; Dawson, K.A.; Corsi, I. Nano-Sized Polystyrene Affects Feeding, Behavior and Physiology of Brine Shrimp Artemia Franciscana Larvae. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2016, 123, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Defoirdt, T.; Halet, D.; Sorgeloos, P.; Bossier, P.; Verstraete, W. Short-Chain Fatty Acids Protect Gnotobiotic Artemia Franciscana from Pathogenic Vibrio Campbellii. Aquaculture 2006, 261, 804–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Bhuvaneshwari, M.; Sagar, B.; Doshi, S.; Chandrasekaran, N.; Mukherjee, A. Comparative Study on Toxicity of ZnO and TiO2 Nanoparticles on Artemia Salina: Effect of Pre-UV-A and Visible Light Irradiation. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 5633–5646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Oh, J.Y.; Ryu, B.M.; Yang, H.W.; Kim, E.A.; Lee, J.S.; Jeon, Y.J. Protective Effects of Ecklonia Cava Extract on the Toxicity and Oxidative Stress Induced by Hair Dye in In-Vitro and in-Vivo Models. J. Oceanol. Limnol. 2019, 37, 909–917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Taib Mimi Iryani, M.; Lv, A.; Sun, J.; Anirudhan, A.; Pau Tan, M.; Danish-Daniel, M.; Lian Wong, L.; Baruah, K.; Sorgeloos, P.; Sifzizul Tengku Muhammad, T.; et al. Effects of Heat Shock Protein 70 Knockdown on the Tolerance of the Brine Shrimp Artemia Franciscana to Aquaculture-Related Stressors: Implications for Aquatic Animal Health and Production Liqing. Aquaculture 2021, 550, 737872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Madhav, M.R.; David, S.E.M.; Kumar, R.S.S.; Swathy, J.S.; Bhuvaneshwari, M.; Mukherjee, A.; Chandrasekaran, N. Toxicity and Accumulation of Copper Oxide (CuO) Nanoparticles in Different Life Stages of Artemia Salina. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2017, 52, 227–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ekonomou, G.; Lolas, A.; Castritsi-Catharios, J.; Neofitou, C.; Zouganelis, G.D.; Tsiropoulos, N.; Exadactylos, A. Mortality and Effect on Growth of Artemia Franciscana Exposed to Two Common Organic Pollutants. Water 2019, 11, 1614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Najla, M.; AbuShaala, N.; Syaizwan, Z.; Ismail, A.; Noor, M.; Azmai, A.; Mohamat-Yusuff, F. Selected Morphological Changes in Nauplii of Brine Shrimp (Artemia salina) after Tributyltin Chloride (TBTCL) Exposure. World Appl. Sci. J. 2015, 33, 1334–1340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Baruah, K.; Huy, T.T.; Norouzitallab, P.; Niu, Y.; Gupta, S.K.; De Schryver, P.; Bossier, P. Probing the Protective Mechanism of Poly-β-Hydroxybutyrate against Vibriosis by Using Gnotobiotic Artemia Franciscana and Vibrio Campbellii as Host-Pathogen Model. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 9427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Processes 10 01880 g001 550
Figure 1. Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 48 h of exposure under optical microscopy after toxicity test of unprocessed (juice) and ultrasound processed (2/6/10 min) sapota-do-Solimões using Artemia salina nauplii. Unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões 10 µg·mL−1 (A), 100 µg·mL−1 (B), and 1000 µg·mL−1 (C). Ultrasound processed for 2 min sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL2) 10 µg·mL−1 (D), 100 µg·mL−1 (E), 1000 µg·mL−1 (F). Ultrasound processed for 6 min sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL6) 10 µg·mL−1 (G), 100 µg·mL−1 (H), 1000 µg·mL−1 (I). Ultrasound processed for 10 min sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL10) 10 µg·mL−1 (J), 100 µg·mL−1 (K), 1000 µg·mL−1 (L). Bars, 200 µm.
Figure 1. Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 48 h of exposure under optical microscopy after toxicity test of unprocessed (juice) and ultrasound processed (2/6/10 min) sapota-do-Solimões using Artemia salina nauplii. Unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões 10 µg·mL−1 (A), 100 µg·mL−1 (B), and 1000 µg·mL−1 (C). Ultrasound processed for 2 min sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL2) 10 µg·mL−1 (D), 100 µg·mL−1 (E), 1000 µg·mL−1 (F). Ultrasound processed for 6 min sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL6) 10 µg·mL−1 (G), 100 µg·mL−1 (H), 1000 µg·mL−1 (I). Ultrasound processed for 10 min sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL10) 10 µg·mL−1 (J), 100 µg·mL−1 (K), 1000 µg·mL−1 (L). Bars, 200 µm.
Processes 10 01880 g001
Processes 10 01880 g002 550
Figure 2. Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 48 h of exposure under optical and scanning electron microscopy after toxicity test of unprocessed and ultrasound processed (2/6/10 min) sapota-do-Solimões juice using Artemia salina nauplii. Bars, 200 µm.
Figure 2. Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 48 h of exposure under optical and scanning electron microscopy after toxicity test of unprocessed and ultrasound processed (2/6/10 min) sapota-do-Solimões juice using Artemia salina nauplii. Bars, 200 µm.
Processes 10 01880 g002
Processes 10 01880 g003 550
Figure 3. Control samples during protective effect in the 24/48/72 h interval against H2O2 in Artemia salina nauplii (A). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of exposure under optical microscopy seawater (B), K2Cr2O7 (C), and H2O2 (D). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii by scanning electron microscopy seawater (E), K2Cr2O7 (F), and H2O2 (G). Bars, 200 µm.
Figure 3. Control samples during protective effect in the 24/48/72 h interval against H2O2 in Artemia salina nauplii (A). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of exposure under optical microscopy seawater (B), K2Cr2O7 (C), and H2O2 (D). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii by scanning electron microscopy seawater (E), K2Cr2O7 (F), and H2O2 (G). Bars, 200 µm.
Processes 10 01880 g003
Processes 10 01880 g004 550
Figure 4. Protective effect of unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões in the 24/48/72 h interval against H2O2 using Artemia salina nauplii (A). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of exposure under optical microscopy unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões 10 µg·mL−1 (B), unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões 100 µg·mL−1 (C), unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões 1000 µg·mL−1 (D). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii by scanning electron microscopy unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões 1000 µg·mL−1 (E). Bars, 200 µm.
Figure 4. Protective effect of unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões in the 24/48/72 h interval against H2O2 using Artemia salina nauplii (A). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of exposure under optical microscopy unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões 10 µg·mL−1 (B), unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões 100 µg·mL−1 (C), unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões 1000 µg·mL−1 (D). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii by scanning electron microscopy unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões 1000 µg·mL−1 (E). Bars, 200 µm.
Processes 10 01880 g004
Processes 10 01880 g005 550
Figure 5. Protective effect of ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL2) in the 24/48/72 h interval against H2O2 using Artemia salina nauplii (A). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of exposure under optical microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 2 min (UL2) 10 µg·mL−1 (B), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 2 min (UL2) 100 µg·mL−1 (C), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 2 min (UL2) 1000 µg·mL−1 (D). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii by scanning electron microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 2 min (UL2) 1000 µg·mL−1 (E). Bars, 200 µm.
Figure 5. Protective effect of ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL2) in the 24/48/72 h interval against H2O2 using Artemia salina nauplii (A). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of exposure under optical microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 2 min (UL2) 10 µg·mL−1 (B), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 2 min (UL2) 100 µg·mL−1 (C), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 2 min (UL2) 1000 µg·mL−1 (D). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii by scanning electron microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 2 min (UL2) 1000 µg·mL−1 (E). Bars, 200 µm.
Processes 10 01880 g005
Processes 10 01880 g006 550
Figure 6. Protective effect of ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL6) in the 24/48/72 h interval against H2O2 using Artemia salina nauplii (A). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of exposure under optical microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 6 min (UL6) 10 µg·mL−1 (B), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 6 min (UL6) 100 µg·mL−1 (C), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 6 min (UL6) 1000 µg·mL−1 (D). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii by scanning electron microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 6 min (UL6) 1000 µg·mL−1 (E). Bars, 200 µm.
Figure 6. Protective effect of ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL6) in the 24/48/72 h interval against H2O2 using Artemia salina nauplii (A). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of exposure under optical microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 6 min (UL6) 10 µg·mL−1 (B), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 6 min (UL6) 100 µg·mL−1 (C), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 6 min (UL6) 1000 µg·mL−1 (D). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii by scanning electron microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 6 min (UL6) 1000 µg·mL−1 (E). Bars, 200 µm.
Processes 10 01880 g006
Processes 10 01880 g007 550
Figure 7. Protective effect of ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL10) in the 24/48/72 h interval against H2O2 using Artemia salina nauplii (A). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of exposure under optical microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 10 min (UL10) 10 µg·mL−1 (B), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 10 min (UL2) 100 µg·mL−1 (C), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 10 min (UL10) 1000 µg·mL−1 (D). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii by scanning electron microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 10 min (UL10) 1000 µg·mL−1 (E). Bars, 200 µm.
Figure 7. Protective effect of ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice (UL10) in the 24/48/72 h interval against H2O2 using Artemia salina nauplii (A). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of exposure under optical microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 10 min (UL10) 10 µg·mL−1 (B), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 10 min (UL2) 100 µg·mL−1 (C), ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 10 min (UL10) 1000 µg·mL−1 (D). Morphological changes in the Artemia salina nauplii by scanning electron microscopy ultrasound-processed sapota-do-Solimões juice 10 min (UL10) 1000 µg·mL−1 (E). Bars, 200 µm.
Processes 10 01880 g007
Processes 10 01880 g008 550
Figure 8. The protein content of unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões juice and processed by ultrasound (1000 μg·mL−1) on Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of H2O2 exposure. The different letters indicate statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 8. The protein content of unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões juice and processed by ultrasound (1000 μg·mL−1) on Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of H2O2 exposure. The different letters indicate statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.05).
Processes 10 01880 g008
Processes 10 01880 g009 550
Figure 9. Catalase (CAT) activity of unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões juice and processed by ultrasound (1000 μg·mL−1) on Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of H2O2 exposure. The different letters indicate statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 9. Catalase (CAT) activity of unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões juice and processed by ultrasound (1000 μg·mL−1) on Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of H2O2 exposure. The different letters indicate statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.05).
Processes 10 01880 g009
Processes 10 01880 g010 550
Figure 10. Superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity in response to 72 h of H2O2 exposure of Artemia salina nauplii on unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões juice and processed by ultrasound (0 to 10 min). The different letters indicate statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 10. Superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity in response to 72 h of H2O2 exposure of Artemia salina nauplii on unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões juice and processed by ultrasound (0 to 10 min). The different letters indicate statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.05).
Processes 10 01880 g010
Processes 10 01880 g011 550
Figure 11. Lipid peroxidation (LPO) of unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões juice and processed by ultrasound (1000 μg·mL−1) on Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of H2O2 exposure. The different letters indicate statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 11. Lipid peroxidation (LPO) of unprocessed sapota-do-Solimões juice and processed by ultrasound (1000 μg·mL−1) on Artemia salina nauplii after 72 h of H2O2 exposure. The different letters indicate statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.05).
Processes 10 01880 g011
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

da Silva, R.M.; Miguel, T.B.A.R.; de Castro Miguel, E.; Campelo, P.H.; Fernandes, F.A.N.; Rodrigues, S. Protective Effect of Ultrasound-Processed Amazonian Sapota-do-Solimões (Quararibea cordata) Juice on Artemia salina Nauplii. Processes 2022, 10, 1880. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10091880

AMA Style

da Silva RM, Miguel TBAR, de Castro Miguel E, Campelo PH, Fernandes FAN, Rodrigues S. Protective Effect of Ultrasound-Processed Amazonian Sapota-do-Solimões (Quararibea cordata) Juice on Artemia salina Nauplii. Processes. 2022; 10(9):1880. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10091880

Chicago/Turabian Style

da Silva, Rhonyele Maciel, Thaiz Batista Azevedo Rangel Miguel, Emilio de Castro Miguel, Pedro Henrique Campelo, Fabiano A. N. Fernandes, and Sueli Rodrigues. 2022. "Protective Effect of Ultrasound-Processed Amazonian Sapota-do-Solimões (Quararibea cordata) Juice on Artemia salina Nauplii" Processes 10, no. 9: 1880. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10091880

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop