Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Coenzima Q10 YOGOURT
Coenzima Q10 YOGOURT
Original article
In vitro bioaccessibility of coenzyme Q10 in enriched yoghurts
Summary In this study, the aim was to determine the bioaccessibilities of coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) in yoghurt samples
produced using enriched skim milk with different coenzyme Q10 preparations. First, emulsified coenzyme
Q10, c-cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex and nanoparticle coenzyme Q10 were prepared with the
reference coenzyme Q10 standard. These coenzyme Q10 preparations were added into the milk to produce
coenzyme Q10 enriched yoghurt samples. Nanoparticle coenzyme Q10 was obtained as in spherical shape
with 176.00 ± 50.62 nm diameter. Coenzyme Q10 bioaccessibility was found as 50.59 ± 1.88% in control
yoghurt. The yoghurt enriched nanoparticle coenzyme Q10 had the highest coenzyme Q10 bioaccessibility
(73.81 ± 1.61%) among the produced yoghurts (P < 0.01). Coenzyme Q10 bioaccessibilities were also
found as 63.75 ± 0.91% and 46.83 ± 1.27% in yoghurts enriched with emulsified coenzyme Q10, and
c-cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex, respectively.
Keywords Bioaccessibility, coenzyme Q10, enrichment, nanoparticle coenzyme Q10, c-cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex.
doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.2012.03061.x
2012 The Authors. International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012 Institute of Food Science and Technology
2 Bioaccessibility of coenzyme Q10 P. Ercan and S. N. El
secretions from the pancreas and bile in the small The aim of this study was to prepare emulsified
intestine (Žmitek et al., 2008). Coenzyme Q10, which is coenzyme Q10, c-cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex
taken up by intestinal mucous cells, is incorporated into and nanoparticle coenzyme Q10 preparations with the
chylomicrons after intestinal absorption, transported via goal of increasing the coenzyme Q10 bioaccessibility. In
the lymphatic system to the circulation, and incorpo- addition, the study aimed to produce enriched coenzyme
rated into very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and Q10 yoghurts with adding these preparations and to
low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the liver and then compare the bioaccessibility of coenzyme Q10 in the
concentrated in the tissues (Kagan & Quinn, 2001; enriched yoghurts.
Mason, 2005). The long side chain of the 10-isoprenoid
units in the molecule and high molecular weight of
Material and methods
coenzyme Q10 (863 Da) make it poorly water soluble.
So, coenzyme Q10 is very poorly absorbed in the
Materials
gastrointestinal tract (Ankola et al., 2007; Žmitek et al.,
2008; Hu et al., 2011). The FDA has defined bioavail- Skim milk and sunflower oil were purchased at different
ability as the rate and extent to which the active times from three hypermarkets in Izmir, Turkey.
substances or therapeutic moieties contained in a drug Yoghurt culture (Lactobacillus bulgaricus, Streptococcus
are absorbed and become available at the site of action. thermophilus DSM Delvo-Yog CY-121) was kindly
This definition also applies to active substances present supplied from Ege University Agriculture Faculty Milk
in foods. Another term that is commonly used is Technology Department, Turkey.
bioaccessibility, which is defined as the fraction of an
ingested nutrient that is released from food matrix and is
Chemicals
available for absorption in the gut after digestion
(typically based on in vitro procedures) (Prada & Coenzyme Q10 standard (analytic-C9538), lipase
Aguilera, 2007; Žmitek et al., 2008; Ercan & El, 2011). (L3126), bile extract (B8631), pepsin (P700), pancreatine
In the past few years, there has been an extensive (P8096), c-cyclodextrin (C4892), poly DL-lactide-co-
effort to improve the oral bioavailability of coenzyme glycolide (PLGA) (P2191) and didodecyldimethylam-
Q10 and various formulations for improvement of the monium bromide (DMAB) 98% (359025) were pur-
oral bioavailability of coenzyme Q10 have been inves- chased from Sigma. Commercial coenzyme Q10
tigated, including molecular complexes, emulsions and standard (MOLEM78392972) was purchased from
liposomal systems (Thanatuksorn et al., 2009). The need Molecula. 2-propanol (HPLC-8175) was purchased
for more information on the bioavailability of coenzyme from LabScan. Tween 20 (S4393684) was purchased
Q10 is strongly stressed. McClements (2010) stated that from Merck. Monoglyceride (Rikemol type PUS 90%)
a bioactive lipophilic component like coenzyme Q10 was supplied from Yilmaz Chemistry, Turkey. All
might be incorporated within a beverage or food that reagents were analytical grade.
could easily be consumed by drinking or eating because
this increases their palatability, desirability and bioac-
Coenzyme Q10 analysis
tivity. Itagaki et al. (2010) investigated the effect of
grapefruit juice on the transport of coenzyme Q10 by Extraction
Caco-2 cells. According to this study, the combined Extraction of samples was performed using a solvent
administration of coenzyme Q10 and grapefruit juice extraction method according to Mattila & Kumpulainen
could enhance coenzyme Q10 absorption, because (2001). Sample (7 g for control yoghurt and 1 g for
grapefruit juice is reported to inhibit the function of enriched yoghurts) was taken into an extraction tube.
P-glycoprotein that efflux transport of coenzyme Q10 is Eight millilitres of ethanol was added into the sample
mediated by P-glycoprotein in Caco-2 cells. Pravst et al. followed by homogenisation with an IKA Ultra-turrax
(2009) studied the stability of coenzyme Q10 in some T25 homogenizer(IKA-Werke GmbH & Co. KG,
fortified products that were enriched by water-soluble Staufen, Germany) (87.12 g, 5 min). After that, 20 mL
inclusion complex of coenzyme Q10 and b-cyclodextrin n-hexane [high-performance liquid chromatograph
(Q10Vital); milk, kefir, curd and fruit syrup have been (HPLC) grade] was added into a tube and mixed
investigated and the coenzyme Q10 level in studied vigorously. The tube was centrifuged to separate the
products was determined to be stable. In addition, no layers (6600 g, 5 min). Hexane layer was saved and the
changes in sensorial, microbiological, physical and lower layer was re-extracted twice with 5 mL ethanol
chemical properties were observed. However, to date, and 20 mL n-hexane. The combined n-hexane layer was
no published information exists in comparison with the evaporated at 30–40 C. Extracted enriched yoghurts
bioaccessibility of coenzyme Q10 between enriched were dissolved in 5 mL 2-propanol, and extracted
foods with different coenzyme Q10 preparations. control yoghurt was dissolved in 2 mL 2-propanol.
International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012 2012 The Authors
International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012 Institute of Food Science and Technology
Bioaccessibility of coenzyme Q10 P. Ercan and S. N. El 3
Then, all the extracts were stored at )40 C until HPLC 120 min. Tubes were placed in an ice bath, and aliquots
analysis. of the sample were placed in tubes, sealed and centri-
fuged at 10000 · g at 4 C for 35 min. The supernatants
Determination from centrifugation were filtered and stored at )40 C
Analysis was performed using a method according to under nitrogen until coenzyme Q10 analysis. Coenzyme
Mattila & Kumpulainen (2001). The analytical HPLC Q10 bioaccessibility was calculated as percentage of
system consisted of a Hewlett-Packard (HP) 1050 HPLC coenzyme Q10 content of in vitro digested sample (S)
equipped with a Waters 486 UV detector and a Vydac and coenzyme Q10 content of sample (C) ratio.
201TP54 C18 column (5 lm, 25 cm · 4.6 mm). The
mobile phase consisted of methanol, 2-propanol and Bioaccessibility (% ) ¼ S=C 100
ethanol (70:15:15, all HPLC grade); the flow rate was
0.8 mL min)1, and 0.2 AUFS. The HPLC analysis was S = Coenzyme Q10 content of in vitro digested
performed at room temperature. The wavelength used sample (lg CoQ10).
for identification and quantification of the coenzyme C = Coenzyme Q10 content of sample (before in
Q10 was 275 nm. For preparing the mobile phase, vitro digestion) (lg CoQ10).
150 mL of 2-propanol and 150 mL of ethanol were
added to 700 mL methanol. The mobile phase was Methods for coenzyme Q10 preparations
filtered with blue ribbon filter paper and degassed for
10 min. Coenzyme Q10 standard stock solutions were Three different methods for improvement of the bioac-
prepared by dissolving 10 mg coenzyme Q10 in 100 mL cessibility of CoQ10 were investigated, preparing an
of ethanol. Working standard solutions (five levels of emulsified CoQ10, c-cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 com-
concentration: 2.5, 10, 20, 40, 55 lg mL)1) were in the plex and nanoparticle coenzyme Q10 products.
range 2.5–55 lg mL)1. The working standard solutions
were filtered with 0.2 lm PTFE membrane filters prior Emulsified coenzyme Q10
to the HPLC analysis and injected to HPLC. The Emulsified coenzyme Q10 was prepared according to
analysis was done in triplicate for each standard. Thanatuksorn et al. (2009) with some modifications.
Calibration curves were constructed by plotting peak Sunflower oil, 8 g ⁄ 100 g w ⁄ w skim milk aqueous solu-
areas versus concentrations of coenzyme Q10, and tion and monoglyceride were used for emulsified coen-
regression equations were calculated. The sample zyme Q10 form. Sixty milligram coenzyme Q10 was
extracts were filtered with 0.2 lm PTFE membrane dissolved in 0.56 g sunflower oil. Skim milk aqueous
filters prior to the HPLC analysis and injected to HPLC. solution (1.46 g) and monoglyceride (170 mg) were
Coenzyme Q10 contents of samples were calculated added to the mixture. Then, 7.75 g water was added
using calibration curves. y = 4.5247x + 27.328, and the mixture was homogenised at 64.01 g for 20 min
R2 = 0.9985, y = peak area (mAU · s), x=concentra- (IKA Ultra-turrax T25) and then stored at )40 C.
tion of coenzyme Q10 (lg).
c-Cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex
c-Cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex was prepared
In vitro digestion according to the patent of Moldenhauer & Jan (2005).
Samples were subjected to simulated gastric and small Two hundred milligrams of c-cyclodextrin were dis-
intestinal digestion according to Bhagavan et al. (2007). solved in 4.5 mL of water at 70 C. Forty milligram of
Sample was diluted with 20 mL 120 mm NaCl before coenzyme Q10 in 0.5 mL of diethyl ether were added to
adjusting pH to 3.0 with 1N HCl. Porcine pepsin was the solution, and then homogenisation was carried out
added to the samples, and final concentration was in an IKA Ultra-turrax T25 at 711.2 g for 30 s. The
adjusted to 2 mg mL)1. The volume was adjusted to mixture was cooled on a magnetic stirrer at room
40 mL with NaCl. Nitrogen was sprayed to the samples. temperature within 30 min and then dried in a drying
Then, the samples were immediately sealed and incu- oven at 55 C. The material was dissolved in 4 mL water
bated in a shaking water bath at 37 C, 90 r.p.m. for and stored at )40 C.
60 min. The gastric phase was terminated by adding 1N
sodium bicarbonate to increase the pH to 6. Porcine Nanoparticle coenzyme Q10
pancreatin, lipase and bile extract were added. Final Nanoparticle coenzyme Q10 was performed using an
concentrations of porcine pancreatin, lipase and bile emulsion–diffusion–evaporation technique according to
extract should be 0.4, 0.2 and 2.4 mg mL)1, respectively. Ankola et al. (2007) with some modifications. Four
The pH was adjusted to 6.9 with 1N NaOH and volume hundred milligram of PLGA (50:50) was dissolved in
increased to 50 mL. Nitrogen was sprayed to the 16 mL of ethyl acetate at room temperature and stirred
samples. Then, the samples were immediately sealed for 2 h. The organic phase was emulsified with 40 mL of
and incubated in a shaking water bath at 37 C for an aqueous phase containing stabiliser (1% w ⁄ v
2012 The Authors International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012
International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012 Institute of Food Science and Technology
4 Bioaccessibility of coenzyme Q10 P. Ercan and S. N. El
DMAB). The resulting o ⁄ w emulsion was stirred at ticle coenzyme Q10 were added into the milk in three
room temperature for 1 h and then homogenised with different cups for each preparation. The mixtures of
IKA Ultra-turrax T25 homogenizer at 1600.2 g for milk and preparations were stirred using magnetic
5 min and with Bandelin Sonopuls ultrasonic homoge- stirrer for 10 min. Then, 3% cultures were poured into
nizer (Bandelin GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin, Germany) at each mixture and stirred. These mixtures were hold at
50% amplitude for 2 min. To this emulsion, 240 mL 42 C for about 2.5–3 h until the pH of yoghurts
water was added with constant stirring and nanopre- reached to 4.7. After incubation, yoghurt samples were
cipitation resulted. Stirring was continued at hold at room temperature for half an hour and then
1000 r.p.m., 40 C for evaporation of ethyl acetate. cooled at refrigeration to finish the fermentation pro-
Nanoparticles were isolated using a centrifuge at cess. Yoghurt samples were stored at )40 C until
10000 g at 10–15 C and washed three times with analyses. Coenzyme Q10 loss during yoghurt production
deionised water. Nanoparticles were dissolved in 6 mL, was calculated by this formula:
1% Tween 20 solution and stored at )40 C. Loss (% ) ¼ ðP YÞ=P 100
Measurement of nanoparticle size
P = Coenzyme Q10 content of the preparation added
Scanning electron microscope (SEM – Phillips XL-30S into the milk.
FEG, Izmir Institute of Technology, Center for Mate-
Y = Coenzyme Q10 content after yoghurt produc-
rials Research, Izmir, Turkey) was used to image and
tion.
determine the shape of the nanoparticles. The particle
sizes of the nanoparticles were measured by Olympus Statistical analysis
Soft Imaging Solutions measure IT 5.1- Measurement
Software (Olympus Soft Imaging Solutions GmbH, All experiments were performed in triplicate and paral-
Münster, Germany). lel. Six values for each sample were averaged (n = 6).
SPSS (version 13; SPSS Institute Inc., Chicago, IL,
Efficiency of coenzyme Q10 preparations USA) was used for all statistical analysis. The paired
Entrapment efficiency is the percentage of ratio of samples t-test procedure was used to compare the means
coenzyme Q10 initially taken for loading to that actually of two variables for a single group. When more than one
incorporated into the emulsion structure, nanoparticles different group was compared, analysis of variance
and c-cyclodextrin complex. It was determined for the (anova) and Tukey’s test were performed for investi-
free coenzyme using HPLC. The percentage of efficiency gating statistically significant differences. A P value of
in the coenzyme Q10 preparations was calculated. <0.01 was considered to be significant.
Efficiency (% ) ¼ A=B 100
Results and discussion
A = Coenzyme Q10 content in the preparation.
B = Coenzyme Q10 added amount into the prepara- Coenzyme Q10 preparations
tion.
The highest efficiency percentage was found in the c-
cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex (85.08 ± 0.32%)
Production of enriched yoghurt products with coenzyme
(P < 0.01) (Table 1). Moldenhauer & Jan (2005)
Q10 preparations
reported that the formulation with c-cyclodextrin was
Milk analyses stable to air and light. Therefore, coenzyme Q10 was not
Skim milk was used in the yoghurt production, and dry affected from the light during the preparation of c-
matter, fat and protein contents were determined cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex.
according to AOAC (1995). Because the preparation time of emulsified coenzyme
Q10 was shorter than the preparation time of nanopar-
Yoghurt products
Crane (2001) reported that to increase the concentration Table 1 Efficiency of coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) preparations
significantly requires in a day at least 100 mg coenzyme
Q10 that can increase the level in blood to around CoQ10 preparations % Efficiency
2 lg mL)1 or more. Taking into consideration this data,
it was planned that portion yoghurt (250 g) was Emulsified CoQ10 73.01 ± 0.16b
Cyclodextrin CoQ10 85.08 ± 0.32a
enriched with 100 mg coenzyme Q10. The skim milk
Nanoparticle CoQ10 67.40 ± 0.24c
was boiled at 80 C for 5 min, and then, the milk was
cooled to room temperature. After heat treatment, Data represent mean ± SD (n = 6).
3.33 g of emulsified coenzyme Q10, 2 mL of c-cyclo- Different superscript letters are indications of significant differences
dextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex and 2 mL of nanopar- (P < 0.01).
International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012 2012 The Authors
International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012 Institute of Food Science and Technology
Bioaccessibility of coenzyme Q10 P. Ercan and S. N. El 5
ticle coenzyme Q10, the efficiency of emulsified coen- particles prepared by emulsification–solvent diffusion
zyme Q10 (73.01 ± 0.16%) was found higher than the method had 189–225 nm in spherical shape.
efficiency of nanoparticle coenzyme Q10
(67.40 ± 0.24%) (P < 0.01) (Table 1). Hariharan et al.
Milk analyses
(2006) reported that 15% estradiol loaded PLGA
nanoparticles prepared by emulsion–diffusion–evapora- The skim milk used in the production of enriched
tion method had 68.20% efficiency. Ankola et al. (2007) yoghurts had 8.85 ± 0.01% dry matter content,
studied the effect of initial coenzyme Q10 loading on 0.1 ± 0.00% fat, 8.75 ± 0.01% nonfat solids and
entrapment efficiency. They reported that the efficiency 3.43 ± 0.08% protein. Protein content of milk should
of nanoparticles was 61–83% because of the 5–75% be at least 3% and fat content of milk should be <0.5
initial coenzyme Q10 load. according to Turkish Food Codex Communiqué on
Fermented Milk Products (2009).
Particle size of nanoparticle coenzyme Q10
Bioaccesibilities of coenzyme Q10 in the enriched yoghurts
Fifteen per cent of coenzyme Q10 loaded PLGA
nanoparticles prepared by emulsion–diffusion–evapora- Coenzyme Q10 contents of control and enriched
tion method was obtained as in spherical shape with yoghurts with emulsified coenzyme Q10, c-cyclodex-
176.00 ± 50.62 nm diameter. SEM image of coenzyme trin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex and nanoparticle coenzyme
Q10 nanoparticles is given in Fig. S1. The size distribu- Q10 are given in Table 2. Coenzyme Q10 content of
tion of coenzyme Q10 nanoparticles is presented in control yoghurt was found as 1.85 ± 0.13 lg g)1. This
Fig. S2. ‘Nano-sized’ coenzyme Q10 means coenzyme result was in agreement with previous studies. In the
Q10 that has an average effective particle size of less literature, coenzyme Q10 content was found as
than about 1000 nanometers (nm) (Parkhideh, 2008). 2.4 lg g)1 by Mattila & Kumpulainen (2001),
Ankola et al. (2007) obtained nanoparticles that had 0.26 lg g)1 by Kubo et al. (2008), 1.2 lg g)1 by Weber
107.3–131.6 nm particle size because of the amount of et al. (1997). Coenzyme Q10 contents were found as
coenzyme Q10 by emulsion–diffusion–evaporation tech- 248.75 ± 3.50, 300.99 ± 3.81 and 228.43 ± 3.78 lg g)1
nique. Nehilla et al. (2008) reported that coenzyme Q10 in yoghurt enriched with emulsified coenzyme Q10,
nanoparticles obtained using 150 mg PLGA had spher- cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex and nanoparticle
ical morphology and average 174 nm diameters. Bala coenzyme Q10, respectively. In the production of
et al. (2005) found that the particle size of 15% ellagic yoghurt, coenzyme Q10 preparations were added into
acid loading PLGA nanoparticles prepared by the the milk at the stage of inoculation of yoghurt culture.
method of emulsion–diffusion–evaporation was Fir et al. (2006) reported that when coenzyme Q10
423.3 ± 56.6 nm. Esmaeili et al. (2008a) found that standard was added into the milk prior to fermentation,
10% estradiol loaded PLGA nanoparticle prepared by a micro-organisms consumed more than one-third of
emulsion–diffusion method were 150–200 nm in size coenzyme Q10 during the fermentation process. There-
with a maximum standard deviation of about 20 nm. fore, in our study, coenzyme Q10 contents were
Hariharan et al. (2006) reported that the particle size of decreased during yoghurt fermentation. Coenzyme
15% estradiol loaded PLGA nanoparticles prepared by Q10 losses in the production of yoghurts are given in
emulsion–diffusion–evaporation method was 150.8 nm Table 2. Coenzyme Q10 losses were found as
in spherical shape. Esmaeili et al. (2007) found that the 14.83 ± 1.35%, 11.56 ± 1.21% and 15.27 ± 1.50%
particle size of PLGA nanoparticles prepared by emul- in yoghurt samples enriched with emulsified coenzyme
sification–diffusion method was 200–260 ± 10–24 nm. Q10, c-cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex and nano-
Esmaeili et al. (2008b) determined that PLGA nano- particle coenzyme Q10, respectively.
Table 2 Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) losses in the production of yoghurts, CoQ10 contents and bioaccessibilities of enriched yoghurts
CoQ10 loss in the CoQ10 content CoQ10 content after Bioaccessibility (%)
production (lg CoQ10 per g) in vitro digestion
Samples of yoghurt (%) (lg CoQ10 per g)
2012 The Authors International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012
International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012 Institute of Food Science and Technology
6 Bioaccessibility of coenzyme Q10 P. Ercan and S. N. El
The simulated gastric ⁄ small intestinal digestion mod- (P < 0.01). Bioefficiency of the added bioactive sub-
els are being extensively used at present because they are stances in food matrices depends strongly on the
rapid, safe and do not have the ethical restrictions of in structural and chemical composition of the respective
vivo methods. In vitro methods either simulate the matrix and chosen encapsulation system. The release of
digestion and absorption processes (for bioavailability) the active molecules from the matrix during digestion
or only the digestion process (for bioaccessibility), and and their absorption into blood stream are a function of
the response measured is the concentration of a nutrient micro or nano structure of the food and the encapsu-
and other dietary bioactive compound in some kind of lation systems developed by the food and ingredient
final extract. The digestion process is simulated under industry for delivery of bioactives and micronutrients
controlled conditions using commercial digestive (Ubbink & Krüger, 2006; Prada & Aguilera, 2007;
enzymes while the final absorption process is commonly Palzer, 2009). The intestine has special mechanism to
assessed using the coupled simulated gastric ⁄ small absorb particles, and there may be a size-exclusion
intestinal digestion with Caco-2 cells cultures. The phenomenon in the gastrointestinal absorption of par-
amount of a nutrient present in the extract after Caco- ticles, with 100 nm particles showing a higher uptake
2 cell step is assumed as the final amount bioavailable (10- to 250-fold higher) than larger particles (500 -
(Prada & Aguilera, 2007). In our study, bioaccesibilities nm–10 lm) (Hu et al., 2011). Swarnakar et al. (2011)
of coenzyme Q10 in enriched yoghurts were calculated investigated the development and characterisation of
with the coenzyme Q10 contents of yoghurts after in coenzyme Q10 loaded PLGA nanoparticles (size <
vitro digestion. The bioaccessibility percentages are 100 nm) by a scalable emulsion–diffusion evaporation
given in Table 2. Coenzyme Q10 bioaccessibilities were method and coenzyme Q10 nanoparticles showed
found as 50.59 ± 1.88% and 63.75 ± 0.91% in control improved oral bioavailability (4.28 times) as compared
yoghurt and enriched with emulsified coenzyme Q10 to free coenzyme Q10. Ankola et al. (2007) reported that
preparation, respectively. Most of the previous studies the intestinal uptake of coenzyme Q10 as the developed
have focused exclusively on the improvement of oral nanoparticle formulation was found to be 79%, sug-
bioavailability. Thanatuksorn et al. (2009) reported that gesting that solubility and permeability related problems
practical interest in development of coenzyme Q10 of coenzyme Q10 were overcome by nanoparticle
products was generated not only by improvement of formulation.
oral bioavailability but also by reduction in production
costs. They concluded that emulsions with fats and Conclusion
emulsifiers used commonly in the food industry were
one of most suitable approaches to improving bioavail- Coenzyme Q10 has become an increasingly popular
ability. Žmitek et al. (2008) determined bioaccessibility dietary supplement in recent years. Numerous CoQ10
of coenzyme Q10 preparation in soybean oil, where products are available on the market in the form of
increased coenzyme Q10 of about 60 per cent. Ozaki chewable, soft gelatin or capsule. However, the bio-
et al. (2010) stated that when the volunteers took the availability of CoQ10 in these products is very low
coenzyme Q10 as bulk powder, no peak was observed in because pure CoQ10 is insoluble in water. On the other
the plasma concentration, and they also reported that hand, CoQ10 added to foods with emulsion, complex or
emulsification of coenzyme Q10 that they prepared nanoparticle was more soluble during simulated gastric
using gum arabic compared with the coenzyme Q10 and small intestine phases of digestion. Results from the
bulk powder significantly increased bioavailability in present study indicated that coenzyme Q10 enriched
both rats and humans and the emulsified coenzyme Q10 foods could be used as important sources of coenzyme
was highly stable under various conditions like heat and Q10. As a new product approach that had a high
high humidity. Another successful approach was to use nutritional value was formed, the yoghurts were
the cyclodextrin complex inclusion to facilitate absorp- enriched with different coenzyme Q10 preparations.
tion from the gastrointestinal tract and to improve This study demonstrates that coenzyme Q10 could be
bioaccessibility. Moldenhauer & Jan (2005) have a US released from the matrix of enriched yoghurts. The
Patent 6861447 on a method for producing a coenzyme highest coenzyme Q10 bioaccessibility was found in
Q10 ⁄ c-cyclodextrin complex. They reported that a yoghurt enriched with nanoparticle coenzyme Q10.
formulation with c-cyclodextrin is stable to air and light These enriched yoghurts can increase the daily intake
and increases the solubility in water as well as the of coenzyme Q10. A possible extension of this research
bioaccessibility. In this study, bioaccessibility of yoghurt would involve further collection of fundamental data to
enriched with c-cyclodextrin ⁄ coenzyme Q10 complex produce bioavailable CoQ10 products (e.g. nanoemul-
was determined as 46.83 ± 1.27%. sion). Also, the coupled simulated gastric ⁄ small intesti-
The yoghurt sample enriched with nanoparticle coen- nal digestion with Caco-2 cell model can be studied for
zyme Q10 had the highest coenzyme Q10 bioaccessibility determining the bioavailability ⁄ bioaccessibility of
(73.81 ± 1.61%) among the yoghurt products CoQ10.
International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012 2012 The Authors
International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012 Institute of Food Science and Technology
Bioaccessibility of coenzyme Q10 P. Ercan and S. N. El 7
2012 The Authors International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012
International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012 Institute of Food Science and Technology