Next Article in Journal
Sport Activity and Clinical Outcomes after Hip Arthroscopy with Acetabular Microfractures at a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up: A Matched-Pair Controlled Study
Next Article in Special Issue
Study on Cytotoxic and Genotoxic Potential of Bulgarian Rosa damascena Mill. and Rosa alba L. Hydrosols—In Vivo and In Vitro
Previous Article in Journal
Epidemiology and Management of Cerebral Venous Thrombosis during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Previous Article in Special Issue
Anti-Coronavirus Efficiency and Redox-Modulating Capacity of Polyphenol-Rich Extracts from Traditional Bulgarian Medicinal Plants
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Life
Volume 12
Issue 8
10.3390/life12081106
life-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

Snail Mucus Protective Effect on Ethanol-Induced Gastric Ulcers in Mice

by
Lubomir Petrov
1,
Mihail Kachaunov
1,
Albena Alexandrova
1,2,*,
Elina Tsvetanova
2,
Almira Georgieva
2,
Aleksander Dolashki
3,
Lyudmila Velkova
3 and
Pavlina Dolashka
3
1
National Sports Academy “Vassil Levski”, 23, Acad. Stefan Mladenov Str., Studentski Grad, 1700 Sofia, Bulgaria
2
Laboratory of Free Radical Processes, Institute of Neurobiology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 23, Acad. Georgi Bonchev Str., 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria
3
Institute of Organic Chemistry with Centre of Phytochemistry, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 9, Acad. Georgi Bonchev Str., 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Life 2022, 12(8), 1106; https://doi.org/10.3390/life12081106
Submission received: 11 June 2022 / Revised: 16 July 2022 / Accepted: 20 July 2022 / Published: 22 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Role of Renewable Resources for Ecology and Human Health)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Nowadays, an increased interest in natural compounds with preventive or therapeutic potential for various diseases has been observed. Given the involvement of oxidative stress in the pathogenesis of gastric ulcer (GU) and the wide range of bioactive compounds isolated from snails, this study aimed to investigate the protective effect of Cornu aspersum (Müller, 1774) mucus on ethanol-induced GUs. Male albino mice were divided into Control, Ethanol, Mucus + Ethanol and Mucus + Omeprazole treated groups. The GUs were induced by administration of 96% ethanol (10 mL/kg, per os). One hour before ulcer induction, the mice of Mucus + Ethanol group were pretreated with mucus (20 mg/kg, per os), and the mice of Mucus + Omeprazole group were pretreated with omeprazole (20 mg/kg, per os). Ethanol administration caused grave lesions of gastric mucosa and a significant decrease of glutathione (GSH) and superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase, and glutathione reductase (GR) activities. In the animals with mucus or omeprazole pre-administration compared to the Ethanol group, the following were observed: only a small number of hemorrhagic fields, significantly reduced GU index with calculated 73% protection by mucus and 78% protection by omeprazole, and significant recovery of mucosal GSH and SOD and GR activities. In addition, the mucus inhibited Helicobacter pylori growth. Thus, the protective effect of C. aspersum mucus on both gastric mucosa and gastric antioxidant potential in ethanol-induced GU model suggests that it may serve as a good tool for prevention of this disease.

1. Introduction

Digestive system diseases, such as functional gastrointestinal disorders, gastritis, and peptic ulcers, are ubiquitous worldwide. Although not life threatening in general, these pathological conditions can significantly impair the quality of affected people’s life and have a broad negative socioeconomic effect [1]. Moreover, it has been found that gastric ulcer patients are at higher risk of developing gastric cancer [2,3].
Gastric ulcer (GU) disease affects about 10% of the population [1,4]. Several classes of drugs are used in GU treatment: proton pump inhibitors, M1-receptor blockers, and H2-receptor antagonists. However, many side effects are associated with these drugs, such as arrhythmia, hematopoietic changes, erectile dysfunction, and gynecomastia [5]. Therefore, new drugs with less side effects than those currently used are needed.
The regenerative capacity of snail mucus against their own shell and skin injuries attracted human attention, and it has been traditionally used therapeutically against gastrointestinal ulcers since ancient Greece [6,7]. Nowadays, studies have demonstrated the protective effect of mucus from the giant African snail in different models of gastric ulcers: induced by indomethacin, histamine, and prolonged exposure of the experimental mice to cold [8,9]. The results show a pronounced beneficial effect, likely due to the cytoprotective and antispasmodic action of the mucus.
Acute gastric ulcers result most frequently from H. pylori infection, alcohol consumption, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs intake, as well as from psychological and physical stress. All of these stressors may induce oxidative stress that is able to initiate and aggravate gastric disorders [10,11]. Oxidative stress (OS) is a condition that is characterized by an imbalance between pro-oxidant processes induced by reactive oxygen species (ROS) and the capacity of the antioxidant protection of organisms to prevent their excess production or overcome the consequences of their action. Much data has shown that increased ROS formation is not only a trigger of inflammation, but the inflammation itself provokes ROS production in gastric disorders [12,13]. In addition, peptic ulcers and other phenotypes of gastrointestinal diseases (e.g., gastroparesis) are known to be related to antioxidant property dysfunction [10].
It has been found that mucus, isolated from the common garden snail C. aspersum (synonym Helix aspersa), comprises various substances with different bioactive properties with antioxidant potential [14,15,16]. Therefore, given the involvement of OS in the pathogenesis of GU, as well as the wide range of bioactive compounds that underlies the broad pharmacological activities of C. aspersum mucus, this study aimed to investigate the possible protective effect of C. aspersum mucus on ethanol-induced GUs in mice and elucidate its efficacy mechanism in terms of OS measures.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Snail Mucus Collection

Crude mucus was collected from C. aspersum snails grown in Bulgarian eco-farms using patented technology [17,18] without causing suffering in any snail. In brief, the snails were placed in a special device, where electrical stimulation with low voltage caused snails to release mucus without compromising their biological function. After treatment, the snails were returned to the farm. The obtained fresh extract was homogenized and subjected to centrifugation to remove coarse impurities. The purification of supernatant included several steps of filtration, using filters with smaller pore sizes for each subsequent filtration [17,18,19]. The 2 mucus fractions with molecular weights below 10 and below 20 kDa were obtained by using ultrafiltration membranes, at 4 °C, as follows: discs from Ultracel® Regenerated Cellulose with pore sizes from 10 kDa NMW, (EMD Millipore Corporation, Billerica, MA, USA) and polyethersulfone membrane with pore sizes from 20 kDa (Microdyn Nadir™ from STERLITECH Corporation, Auburn, AL, USA) [18]. Samples were filtered through a syringe filter (Millipore, Millex-HV, 0.22 µm pore size, hydrophilic PVDF membrane) for removing microorganisms. The purified mucus extracts were stored at 4 °C, as previously reported by Trapella et al., 2018 [16]. Thus, to obtain mucus extract and two peptide fractions, non-invasive techniques—a series of centrifugation and filtrations, as well as ultrafiltration, which ensure the production of intact peptides and proteins—were used.

2.2. SDS-PAGE Electrophoresis

The native fresh extract from mucus was analyzed by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) using 5% stacking gel and 12.5% resolving gel according to the Laemmli method [20]. About 20 μg of the sample was loaded on the gel. Protein standard mixture ranging from 10 kDa to 250 kDa (Precision Plus Protein™ Standard All Blue, Bio-Rad Laboratories, Munich, Germany) was used as a molecular marker. Coomassie Brilliant Blue G-250 staining was used for the visualization.

2.3. MALDI-TOF-MS

The isolated mucus extract was lyophilized and analyzed by MALDI-TOF-TOF mass spectrometry on an AutoflexTM III High-Performance MALDI-TOF & TOF/TOF System (Bruker Daltonics, Bremen, Germany), which uses a 200 Hz frequency-tripled Nd–YAG laser operating at a wavelength of 355 nm. Analysis was carried out after mixing 2.0 μL of the sample with 2.0 μL of matrix solution (7 mg/mL of 3,5-dimethoxy-4-hydroxycinnamic acid (Sinapinic acid)) in 50% CAN containing 0.1% TFA), but only 1.0 μL of the mixture was spotted on a stainless steel 192-well target plate. The samples were allowed to dry at room temperature before being analyzed. A total of 3500 shots were acquired in the MS mode, and collision energy of 4200 was applied. All spectra were obtained using the positive-ion mode. Standard stainless-steel targets obtained from the manufacturer were employed for all analyses. The spectra in this study were calibrated using instrumental calibration based on the parameters determined from the analysis of standard proteins and peptides.

2.4. Antibacterial Activity of Mucus Extracts against H. pylori

The susceptibility of H. pylori to mucus extracts was determined by the agar well diffusion method [21]. Three fractions isolated from C. aspersum mucus: Fraction 1—native mucus extract (0.5 mg/mL), Fraction 2—mucus containing components with molecular weight (MW) < 20 kDa (0.48 mg/mL), and Fraction 3—mucus containing components MW < 10 kDa (0.45 mg/mL) have been analyzed. The samples were qualitatively tested according to the growth inhibition assay.
Sterile molten Mueller–Hinton agar at 45 °C, supplemented with 5% defibrinated horse blood, was prepared and mixed with three concentrations (0.25, 0.75, and 1.0 mL per 20 mL agar) of native mucus extract. The mixture was aseptically poured into Petri dishes and allowed to set. A sterile cork-borer with a diameter of 3 mm was used to make equidistant wells in the agar. A hundred microliters (100 µL) of a fresh overnight culture of H. pylori was poured into the wells. The prepared samples were incubated in a microaerophilic incubator at 37 ± 1 °C for 24–48 h. The plates were observed for inhibition, and the diameter zones of inhibition were measured to the nearest millimeter. All tests were carried out in three repetitions to ensure accuracy

2.5. Animals

A total of 30 male albino mice, weighing 25–35 g (10 weeks of age), were randomly divided into 4 groups of 10 animals each: Control (untreated mice), Ethanol treated (mice with ethanol-induced gastric ulcers), Mucus + Ethanol treated (mice pretreated with snail mucus and ethanol-induced gastric ulcers), and Omeprazole + Ethanol treated (mice pretreated with omeprazole and ethanol-induced gastric ulcers). Each group was kept in a separate cage in a controlled temperature room (24 ± 2 °C) with a 12 h light/dark cycle. The animals had free access to food and water. The mice were maintained and used in accordance with the guidelines of the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (US National Institute of Health) and the rules of the Ethics Committee of the Institute of Neurobiology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (registration FWA 00003059 by the US Department of Health and Human Services).

2.6. Ulcer Damages

Twenty-four hours prior to the experiment, the feeding of mice was withdrawn; however, the animals had free access to water. One hour before ulcer induction, the mice of the Mucus + Ethanol group were pretreated with snail mucus (20 mg/kg, per os), and the mice of the Omeprazole + Ethanol group were pretreated with omeprazole (20 mg/kg, per os). Gastric ulcers were induced by the administration of 96% ethanol (10 mL/kg, per os) in Ethanol, Mucus + Ethanol, and Omeprazole + Ethanol groups. One hour later, mice from all four groups were euthanized by cervical dislocation under pentobarbital (40 mg/kg, intraperitoneal injection) anesthesia. The stomachs were excised, opened over the greater curvature, and rinsed with saline solution (0.9%). Pictures of stoma mucous were taken using a digital camera; the ulcers were quantified, and the gastric damage area (mm2) was determined using the image analysis program Image J [22].

2.7. Gastric Ulcer Index

The Gastric Ulcer Index (GUI) for each mouse was calculated according to Ganguly [23]: GUI = (TAGU (mm2) × 100)/(TGA (mm2)), where TAGU is the total area of gastric ulcers, and TGA is the total gastric area of each mouse. To calculate the protection percentage (PP) [24], the following formula was used: PP = (GUI control − GUI treated)/(GUI control) × 100.

2.8. Tissue Preparation

A small portion of each stomach was cut and homogenized in cold potassium phosphate buffer (0.05 M, pH 7.4). The homogenate was centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 10 min. A part of the obtained supernatant was used to determine the lipid peroxidation (LPO) level and glutathione (GSH) concentrations. The other part was additionally centrifuged at 12,000 rpm for 20 min, and the supernatant was used for measurement of the activities of the antioxidant enzymes superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), and glutathione reductase (GR).

2.9. Biochemical Analyzes

The OS biomarkers were measured spectrophotometrically using commercially available kits: Lipid Peroxidation (MDA) Assay Kit MAK085, Glutathione Assay Kit CS0260, SOD Assay Kit-WST 19160, Catalase Assay Kit CAT100, and Glutathione Reductase Cellular Activity Assay CRSA (Sigma-Aldrich Co., LLC., St. Louis, MO, USA). The manufacturer’s working instructions were strictly followed.

2.10. Statistics

Descriptive statistics, the Shapiro–Wilks test of normality and One-Way ANOVA with Tukey post hoc test were applied using the statistical program GraphPad Prism 7.0. In text, all data are presented as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) and in the figures as the mean ± standard error of measurement (SEM).

3. Results

3.1. Composition of C. aspersum Mucus

The analysis by 12.5% SDS-PAGE showed that the mucus is a complex mixture of substances with different molecular weights. Several protein bands in the range of 25–35 kDa, 38–40 kDa, 45–50 kDa; 80–90 kDa, and above 250 kDa were detected by SDS-PAGE (Figure 1A). Moreover, by MALDI-MS analysis in the region of 20–80 kDa, the exact molecular masses of mucus proteins were determined (Figure 1B). In the region above 100 kDa, proteins might correspond to glycoproteins and mucins. More details on the C. aspersum mucus composition based on our earlier studies [15,18,19,25,26,27] are presented in Table 1. A number of new peptides have been isolated from the mucus, and their amino acid sequences were determined by de novo sequencing and by MALDI-TOF-MS/MS analyses; some of them are presented in Table 1. Most of the peptides with MW < 3 kDa were characterized by an amphipathic structure, had a positive net charge, pI < 7.0, and displayed generally hydrophobic surfaces (GRAVY > 0) (Table 1).

3.2. In Vitro Susceptibility of H. pylori to Native Mucus Extract

The antibacterial efficacy of mucus extracts from garden snail C. aspersum against bacterial strain H. pylori was identified by agar dilution. The growth of the bacterial strain was monitored at 24 and 48 h after treatment with 0.25 mL, 0.75 mL, and 1.0 mL from Fraction 1—native mucus extract, Fraction 2 with MW < 20 kDa, and Fraction 3 with MW < 10 kDa.
The obtained results showed that both fractions, Fraction 2 and Fraction 3, did not affect the growth of H. pylori. As shown in Figure 2, only native mucus extract inhibited bacterial growth at 24 and 48 h. H. pylori growth was observed in the control sample without extract after 24 h (Figure 2A) and reached its maximum size at 48 h of incubation, with a spot diameter of 10.5 mm (Figure 2B).
Testing of Fraction 1 with the lowest concentration (0.25 mL per 20 mL agar) showed significant inhibition of bacterial growth at 24 h (Figure 2C) as opposed to 48 h (Figure 2D). Despite the observed bacterial growth at 48 h, the growth zone decreased from 10.5 mm in diameter to 8.0 mm compared to the control. Antibacterial tests performed with higher concentrations, 0.75 mL and 1.0 mL per 20 mL agar of the natural mucus extract, showed inhibition of bacterial growth at both 24 (Figure 2E,G, respectively) and 48 (Figure 2F,H, respectively) h. Application of Fraction 1 with the highest concentration resulted in the most significant anti-H. pylori effect.
Since the application of native mucus extract resulted in the most significant anti-H. pylori effect, the in vivo studies were performed only with it.

3.3. Effect of C. aspersum Mucus on Ethanol-Induced Gastric Ulcers

As shown in Figure 3, the animals that had received ethanol (10 mL/kg; 96%) had grave lesions with large hemorrhagic necrosis of the gastric mucosa. In the animals with pre-administration of snail mucus (20 mg/kg) or omeprazole (20 mg/kg), only a small number of hemorrhagic fields were observed.
The attenuation of the hemorrhagic mucosal lesions in the snail-mucus-pretreated mice was notable in comparison with the Ethanol group. Figure 4 shows that GUI was significantly reduced in the mice pretreated with snail mucus compared to the Ethanol group (4.7% vs. 17.3%, respectively) (p < 0.001). The protection percentage (PP) was calculated to be 73%. The effect of snail mucus was similar to those of omeprazole in which PP was calculated to be 78%.

3.4. Effect of C. aspersum Mucus on Oxidative Stress Parameters

The level of MDA (as an LPO index), the concentration of the GSH, and the activity of antioxidant enzymes (SOD, CAT, and GR) in gastric tissue were evaluated (Figure 5). Gastric MDA was significantly higher in the Ethanol group versus the Control, and the pretreatment with snail mucus led to a decreased MDA concentration. Significant depletion of the GSH concentration in the Ethanol group was observed, and the administration of snail mucus led to the prevention of a decrease in its amount. The activities of the antioxidant enzymes SOD, CAT, and GR in the Ethanol group significantly decreased compared to the Control group. The pretreatment of mice with snail mucus significantly protected SOD and GR activity in relation to the Ethanol group, and CAT activity was slightly (insignificantly) raised. The effect of snail mucus pretreatment was similar to those of omeprazole in terms of all tested parameters of the oxidative status of stomach homogenate of mice with ethanol-induced ulcers.

4. Discussion

The ethanol-induced GU animal model is a classical method used for screening compounds that possess anti-ulcer activity. The effect of ethanol on gastric mucosa is multifactorial and complicated. Ethanol exfoliates gastric cells and eventually provokes bleeding. The macroscopic observations in this study showed clearly visible bloody lesions after ethanol treatment. These cause disruption of the mucosal barrier integrity and an increase in the mucosal permeability. This model proves that a strong inflammatory response is associated with augmented neutrophil infiltration and myeloperoxidase activation [28], modulation of the NO signaling pathways [29], and perturbation of inflammatory/anti-inflammatory cytokine balance [30]. All these events trigger excess ROS production and cause oxidative damage with cellular deleterious effects [31,32]. The results obtained in this study are in agreement with the published data for increased levels of LPO, reduced GSH concentration, and decreased antioxidant enzymes’ activities after ethanol administration [33,34]. In this study, the pretreatment of mice with snail mucus led to a notable gastric lesion reduction along with significant preservation of antioxidant potential, probably due to the suppression of OS development after ulcer induction. The effects of snail mucus were comparable to pretreatment with omeprazole, a proton pump inhibitor, used as a positive control in this study. Omeprazole is a widely used drug for GU treatment and has been applied in numerous studies to provide a gastro-protective effect [35,36]. It has been demonstrated that omeprazole has a dual action in gastrointestinal protection by providing potent antioxidant properties in addition to its major role as an acid-suppression agent [37].
Snail mucus is a complex, evolutionary determined multi-component mixture that includes substances that determine its antioxidant properties. The antioxidant activity could be due to amino acid composition and sequence, the steric structure of the peptides and proteins, glycation of the proteins, and the presence of enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidants in snail mucus. The peptide and protein bands detected by SDS-PAGE in this research are in accordance with previously obtained results [18,38,39]. In the MW < 10 kD fraction isolated from the mucus of C. aspersum, the amino acid sequences of peptides (Table 1) clearly demonstrate the predominant presence of amino acid residues, such as glycine, proline, leucine, valine, tryptophan, aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and arginine, refs. [40,41] some of which are associated with antioxidant activity [15].
A key factor in the ability of the peptide to trap radicals is considered to be the high proportion of hydrophobic amino acids compared to hydrophilic amino acids [41]. Research has shown that some peptide features, namely, low molecular mass, the presence of antioxidant amino acids such as tyrosine, phenylalanine, proline, alanine, histidine, and leucine; hydrophobicity amino acids (histidine, tryptophan, phenylalanine, proline, lysine, leucine, and valine); indole/imidazole/pyrrolidine ring; along with the steric structure at the C- and N-termini, play an important role for peptide antioxidant properties [41]. Thus, the presence of peptide structures 3, 7, 9, 12, 13, 17, 18, 21, and 22 in the applied snail mucus can be related to its antioxidant activity. Some of these peptides contain three Pro residues (Table 1). Several publications have shown that the higher proline content in substances of plant [41] and animal [42] origin is associated with higher antioxidant activity. Peptide antioxidant activity is determined not only by amino acid composition, but also by amino acid sequences and interactions between amino acids in polypeptide chains, the steric structure at the C- and N-termini, and molecular mass. The higher content of hydrophobic amino acids in peptides determines their good radical scavenging effect in comparison to those with a higher content of hydrophilic amino acids. Low peptide molecular mass also contributes to a significant antioxidant effect [43]. It was suggested that the amphiphilic nature of peptides enhances the radical-scavenging activities of peptides by increasing their solubility and in this way facilitating the interaction and proton exchanges with radical species. A large portion of the amino acids in snail mucus proteins are glycated. In the region above 100 kDa, proteins might correspond to mucins and glycoproteins [44]. The healthy stomach lining produces protective mucins, and it can be assumed that the mucins contained in the snail mucus complement their effect. Furthermore, it is possible that snail mucus coats the gastric mucosa, building an extra layer that protects against ethanol exposure. Concerning glycoproteins, it has been reported that they have antioxidant properties [45,46,47]. Several studies [45,46] have shown that the addition of purified glycoproteins prevents DNA damage provoked by hydroxyl radicals. However, it is not clarified which part of the glycoproteins—glycan or protein—is responsible for this activity. It has been suggested that there are differences in the radical scavenging ability of glycoproteins that might be attributed to the glycan part or protein part [47].
Antioxidant enzymes such as SOD and CAT, as well as the non-enzymatic antioxidant GSH, detected in the C. aspersum mucus [15,18] probably contribute most to its antioxidant potential. SOD and CAT constitute the first line of defense against ROS [48]. The GSH is an essential part of the antioxidant system, able to directly neutralize ROS such as superoxide radicals, lipid peroxyl and hydroxyl radicals, peroxynitrite, and hydrogen peroxide [49]. GSH is involved in the reduction of other antioxidants in the cell such as vitamin C and indirectly vitamin E [50]. In addition, GSH is a mandatory cofactor of glutathione peroxidases (which reduce H2O2 and organic peroxides) and glutathione transferases (which reduce organic peroxides) [51]. Oxidized peroxiredoxin that directly reduces peroxides and peroxynitrites is also reduced by GSH [49]. Precise kinetic measurements have shown that peroxiredoxin reduces more than 90% of peroxides in cells [52], surpassing catalase and glutathione peroxidase in this function.
The antioxidant properties of snail mucus are only part of its overall beneficial effect on GUs. The identified in snail mucus hyaluronic acid, chondroitin sulfate, hyaluronan, dermatan sulfate, heparin, and heparin sulfate [53] promote dermal regeneration and epidermal proliferation. The presence of components such as collagen, elastin, glycolic acid, and allantoin as well as the mucopolysaccharide components are associated with the protective effect of snail mucus on the gastric mucosa [53]. Allantoin, collagen, elastin, and glycolic acid that promote collagen synthesis are also found in snail mucus [53]. The collagen and elastin contained in the mucus have a structure close to those in human derma and are in a similar ratio. Therefore, these compounds probably also contribute to the good gastro-protective effect of the snail mucus established in this research.
In addition, in this study, we found that the native mucus extract applied in the highest concentration tested manifested a significant anti-H. pylori effect that effectively inhibited bacterial growth at 24 and 48 h, whereas both fractions with MW 10 and MW 20 kDa were not effective. Therefore, the presence of low molecular weight metabolites, peptides, and glycopeptides with antimicrobial activity and antioxidant properties do not sufficiently inhibit the growth of H. pylori. This fact leads us to the hypothesis that anti-H. pyloric activity is due to the synergy between different components found in the mucus such as secondary metabolites, peptides, proteins, and glycoproteins with antimicrobial activity and the specific ratio between them. Trapella et al. [16] also suggested that snail mucus’s potential as a therapeutic agent in wound repair was attributable to the synergistic activity of several molecules. In mucus, such as we have used in the present paper, the primary structures of novel antimicrobial peptides with molecular weights mainly between 1–3 kDa were identified by tandem mass spectrometry (Table 1), and their antibacterial activity was demonstrated [18,26]. The C. aspersum mucus contains both cationic and anionic and neutral peptides, but cationic are dominant. That is considered a prerequisite for observed mucus antimicrobial activity—destruction of biological membranes and/or direct cell lysis [18,26]. The antimicrobial activity was predicted based on the identified primary structures using iAMPpred software (online prediction server available at http://cabgrid.res.in:8080/amppred, accessed on 10 June 2022). The presented results (Table 1) showed that some peptides (№ 2, 11, 16, 17, 19, 20, 23–25, and 27 from Table 1) could be predicted to have antimicrobial activity. Most of these peptides have high levels of glycine (Gly) and leucine (Leu) residues as well as one or two proline (Pro) residues and belong to a new class of Gly/Leu-rich antimicrobial peptides [18,27,40]. It is known that cationic antimicrobial peptides kill microbes via mechanisms that predominantly involve interactions between the peptide’s positively charged residues and anionic components of the target cell’s membranes. Moreover, some of the positively charged peptides may penetrate into the cell to bind intracellular molecules that are crucial to the life of the cell [26]. Recently, different peptide and protein fractions from the C. aspersum mucus demonstrated antimicrobial and antioxidant activity as well as regenerative properties [18,19,36]. Dolashki et al. [18] found some bioactive components with MW 10–30 kDa exhibited predominant antibacterial activity against B. laterosporus and E. coli, and the fraction with MW > 20 kDa manifested a promising antibacterial effect against C. perfringens. H. aspersa mucus was also effective against three laboratory strains of P. aeruginosa [39].

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, the positive effect of C. aspersum mucus we found in this model of gastric injury is probably the result of the complex action of many factors, including the protection by molecules with antioxidant properties, substances that ensure tissue regeneration, and compounds with antimicrobial effects which may contribute to the beneficial effect of snail mucus in gastric ulcers and make it an appropriate substance for the prevention of stomach diseases. Obviously, further studies using different injury-inducing models are needed to reveal the particular mechanisms and compounds responsible for the snail mucus’s healthy effects.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.P. and A.A.; methodology, L.V., P.D. and L.P.; formal analysis, L.P. and M.K.; investigation, L.P., M.K., A.A., E.T., A.G., A.D. and L.V.; resources, P.D. and A.D.; data curation, L.P. and L.V.; writing—original draft preparation, A.A. and L.P.; writing—review and editing, A.A. and P.D.; visualization, L.P.; supervision, A.A.; funding acquisition, P.D. and A.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Bulgarian Ministry of Education and Science (Grant D01-217/30.11.2018) under the National Research Programme “Innovative Low-Toxic Bioactive Systems for Precision Medicine (BioActiveMed)” approved by DCM#658/14.09.2018.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The experiments were performed according to the “Principles of Laboratory Animal Care” (NIH publication No. 85-23, revised 1985) and the rules of the Ethics Committee of the Institute of Neurobiology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (registration FWA 00003059 by the US Department of Health and Human Services.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article. Row data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Wen, Z.; Li, X.; Lu, Q.; Brunson, J.; Zhao, M.; Tan, J.; Wan, C.; Lei, P. Health related quality of life in patients with chronic gastritis and peptic ulcer and factors with impact: A longitudinal study. BMC Gastroenterol. 2014, 14, 149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Hansson, L.E.; Nyren, O.; Hsing, A.W.; Bergstrom, R.; Josefsson, S.; Chow, W.H.; Fraumeni, J.F., Jr.; Adami, H.O. The risk of stomach cancer in patients with gastric or duodenal ulcer disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 1996, 335, 242–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Thomopoulos, K.C.; Melachrinou, M.P.; Mimidis, K.P.; Katsakoulis, E.C.; Margaritis, V.G.; Vagianos, C.E.; Nikolopoulou, V.N. Gastric ulcers and risk for cancer. Is follow-up necessary for all gastric ulcers? Int. J. Clin. Pract. 2004, 58, 675–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Xie, X.; Ren, K.; Zhou, Z.; Dang, C.; Zhang, H. The global, regional and national burden of peptic ulcer disease from 1990 to 2019: A population-based study. BMC Gastroenterol. 2022, 22, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Schubert, M.L. Physiologic, pathophysiologic, and pharmacologic regulation of gastric acid secretion. Curr. Opin. Gastroenterol. 2017, 33, 430–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bonnemain, B. Helix and drugs: Snails for Western health care from antiquity to the present. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2005, 2, 25–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Quave, C.L.; Pieroni, A.; Bennett, B.C. Dermatological remedies in the traditional pharmacopoeia of Vulture-Alto Bradano, inland southern Italy. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 2008, 4, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  8. Adikwu, M.U.; Okolie, C.O.; Agbok, A.A. The effect of snail mucin on the ulcer healing rate of clarithromycin. J. Pharm. Res. 2009, 8, 6–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Nwodo, N.J.; Okonta, J.M.; Attama, A.A. Antiulcer potencial of phylum mollusca (tropical snail) slime. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Med. 2009, 2, 23–28. [Google Scholar]
  10. Suzuki, H.; Nishizawa, T.; Tsugawa, H.; Mogami, S.; Hibi, T. Roles of oxidative stress in stomach disorders. J. Clin. Biochem. Nutr. 2012, 50, 35–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Tandon, R.; Khanna, H.D.; Dorababu, M.; Goel, R.K. Oxidative stress and antioxidants status in peptic ulcer and gastric carcinoma. Indian J. Physiol. Pharm. 2004, 48, 115–118. [Google Scholar]
  12. Jasna, D.; Dražen, S. Oxidative stress pathway driven by inflammation in gastric mucosa. In Gastritis and Gastric Cancer—New Insights in Gastroprotection, Diagnosis and Treatments; Tonino, P., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2011; Available online: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/19868 (accessed on 10 June 2022).
  13. Gloire, G.; Legrand-Poels, S.; Piette, J. NF-kappaB activation by reactive oxygen species: Fifteen years later. Biochem. Pharm. 2006, 72, 1493–1505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Dolashka, P.; Dolashki, A.; Velkova, L.; Stevanovic, S.; Molin, L.; Traldi, P.; Velikova, R.; Voelter, W. Bioactive compounds isolated from garden snails. J. BioSci. Biotechnol. 2015, SE/Online, 147–155. [Google Scholar]
  15. Kostadinova, N.; Voynikov, Y.; Dolashki, A.; Krumova, E.; Abrashev, R.; Kowalewski, D.; Stevanovic, S.; Velkova, L.; Velikova, R.; Dolashka, P. Antioxidative screening of fractions from the mucus of garden snail Cornu aspersum. Bulg. Chem. Commun. 2018, 50, 176–183. [Google Scholar]
  16. Trapella, C.; Rizzo, R.; Gallo, S.; Alogna, A.; Bortolotti, D.; Casciano, F.; Zauli, G.; Secchiero, P.; Voltan, R. HelixComplex snail mucus exhibits pro-survival, proliferative and pro-migration effects on mammalian fibroblasts. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 17665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Dolashka, P. Device for Collecting Garden Snail Extract. BG Utility Model 2097. 2015. Available online: https://portal.bpo.bg/bpo_online/-/bpo/utility-model-detail (accessed on 10 June 2022).
  18. Dolashki, A.; Velkova, L.; Daskalova, E.; Zheleva, N.; Topalova, Y.; Atanasov, V.; Voelter, W.; Dolashka, P. Antimicrobial activities of different fractions from mucus of the garden snail Cornu aspersum. Biomedicines 2020, 8, 315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Vassilev, N.G.; Simova, S.D.; Dangalov, M.; Velkova, L.; Atanasov, V.; Dolashki, A.; Dolashka, P. An (1)H NMR- and MS-based study of metabolites profiling of garden snail Helix aspersa mucus. Metabolites 2020, 10, 360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Laemmli, U.K. Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature 1970, 227, 680–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lawal, T.O.; Igbokwe, C.O.; Adeniyi, B.A. Antimicrobial activities andthe bactericidal kinetics of Allium ascalonicum Linn. (wholeplant) against standard and clinical strains of Helicobacter pylori: Support for ethnomedical use. J. Nat. Sci. Res. 2014, 4, 48–56. [Google Scholar]
  22. Khan, H.A. Computer-assisted visualization and quantitation of experimental gastric lesions in rats. J. Pharm. Toxicol. Methods 2004, 49, 89–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ganguly, A.K. A method for quantitative assessment of experimentally produced ulcers in the stomach of albino rats. Experientia 1969, 25, 1224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Adinortey, M.B.; Ansah, C.; Galyuon, I.; Nyarko, A. In vivo models used for evaluation of potential antigastroduodenal ulcer agents. Ulcers 2013, 2013, 796405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Belouhova, M.; Daskalova, E.; Yotinov, I.; Topalova, Y.; Velkova, L.; Dolashki, A.; Dolashka, P. Microbial diversity of garden snail mucus. MicrobiologyOpen 2022, 11, e1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Topalova, Y.; Belouhova, M.; Velkova, L.; Dolashki, A.; Zheleva, N.; Daskalova, E.; Kaynarov, D.; Voelter, W.; Dolashka, P. Effect and Mechanisms of Antibacterial Peptide Fraction from Mucus of C. aspersum against Escherichia coli NBIMCC 8785. Biomedicines 2022, 10, 672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Velkova, L.; Nissimova, A.; Dolashki, A.; Daskalova, E.; Dolashka, P.; Topalova, Y. Glycine-rich peptides from Cornu aspersum snail with antibacterial activity. Bulg. Chem. Commun. 2018, 50, 169–175. [Google Scholar]
  28. Tepperman, B.L.; Besco, J.M.; Kiernan, J.A.; Soper, B.D. Relationship between myeloperoxidase activity and the ontogenic response of rat gastric mucosa to ethanol. Can. J. Physiol. Pharm. 1991, 69, 1882–1888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Whittle, B.J.R.; Lopez-Belmonte, J. Gastric Mucosal Damage and Protection: Involvement of Novel Endothelium-Derived Mediators; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Du, Y.; Zhao, W.; Lu, L.; Zheng, J.; Hu, X.; Yu, Z.; Zhu, L. Study on the antiulcer effects of Veronicastrum axillare on gastric ulcer in rats induced by ethanol based on tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and endothelin-1 (ET-1). Asian Pac. J. Trop. Biomed. 2013, 3, 925–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Arda-Pirincci, P.; Bolkent, S.; Yanardag, R. The role of zinc sulfate and metallothionein in protection against ethanol-induced gastric damage in rats. Dig. Dis. Sci. 2006, 51, 2353–2360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Pan, J.S.; He, S.Z.; Xu, H.Z.; Zhan, X.J.; Yang, X.N.; Xiao, H.M.; Shi, H.X.; Ren, J.L. Oxidative stress disturbs energy metabolism of mitochondria in ethanol-induced gastric mucosa injury. World J. Gastroenterol. 2008, 14, 5857–5867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Almasaudi, S.B.; El-Shitany, N.A.; Abbas, A.T.; Abdel-dayem, U.A.; Ali, S.S.; Al Jaouni, S.K.; Harakeh, S. Antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and antiulcer potential of manuka honey against gastric ulcer in rats. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2016, 2016, 3643824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Cuevas, V.M.; Calzado, Y.R.; Guerra, Y.P.; Yera, A.O.; Despaigne, S.J.; Ferreiro, R.M.; Quintana, D.C. Effects of grape seed extract, vitamin C, and vitamin E on ethanol- and aspirin-induced ulcers. Adv. Pharm. Sci. 2011, 2011, 740687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Strand, D.S.; Kim, D.; Peura, D.A. 25 Years of Proton Pump Inhibitors: A Comprehensive Review. Gut Liver 2017, 11, 27–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Li, W.S.; Lin, S.C.; Chu, C.H.; Chang, Y.K.; Zhang, X.; Lin, C.C.; Tung, Y.T. The Gastroprotective effect of naringenin against ethanol-induced gastric ulcers in mice through inhibiting oxidative and inflammatory responses. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 11985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Abed, M.N.; Alassaf, F.A.; Jasim, M.H.M.; Alfahad, M.; Qazzaz, M.E. Comparison of antioxidant effects of the proton pump-inhibiting drugs Omeprazole, Esomeprazole, Lansoprazole, Pantoprazole, and Rabeprazole. Pharmacology 2020, 105, 645–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Pitt, S.J.; Graham, M.A.; Dedi, C.G.; Taylor-Harris, P.M.; Gunn, A. Antimicrobial properties of mucus from the brown garden snail Helix aspersa. Br. J. Biomed. Sci. 2015, 72, 174–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Pitt, S.J.; Hawthorne, J.A.; Garcia-Maya, M.; Alexandrovich, A.; Symonds, R.C.; Gunn, A. Identification and characterisation of anti—Pseudomonas aeruginosa proteins in mucus of the brown garden snail, Cornu aspersum. Br. J. Biomed. Sci. 2019, 76, 129–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Dolashki, A.; Nissimova, A.; Daskalova, E.; Velkova, L.; Topalova, Y.; Hristova, P.; Traldi, P.; Voelter, W.; Dolashka, P. Structure and antibacterial activity of isolated peptides from the mucus of garden snail Cornu aspersum. Bulg. Chem. Commun. 2018, 50, 195–200. [Google Scholar]
  41. Karagozler, A.A.; Erdag, B.; Emek, Y.C.; Uygun, D.A. Antioxidant activity and proline content of leaf extracts from Dorystoechas hastata. Food Chem. 2008, 111, 400–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Saidi, S.; Deratani, A.; Belleville, M.P.; Amar, R.B. Antioxidant properties of peptide fractions from tuna dark muscle protein by-product hydrolysate produced by membrane fractionation process. Food Res. Int. 2014, 65, 329–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Zou, T.B.; He, T.P.; Li, H.B.; Tang, H.W.; Xia, E.Q. The Structure-Activity Relationship of the Antioxidant Peptides from Natural Proteins. Molecules 2016, 21, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Gabriel, U.I.; Mirela, S.; Ionel, J. Quantification of mucoproteins (glycoproteins) from snails mucus, Helix aspersa and Helix pomatia. J. Agroaliment. Process. Technol. 2011, 17, 410–413. [Google Scholar]
  45. Kim, E.Y.; Kim, Y.R.; Nam, T.J.; Kong, I.S. Antioxidant and DNA protection activities of a glycoprotein isolated from a seaweed, Saccharina japonica. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2012, 47, 1020–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Rafiquzzaman, S.M.; Kim, E.Y.; Kim, Y.R.; Nam, T.J.; Kong, I.S. Antioxidant activity of glycoprotein purified from Undaria pinnatifida measured by an in vitro digestion model. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2013, 62, 265–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Senthilkumar, D.; Jayanthi, S. Antioxidant activities of purified glycoprotein extracted from Codium decorticatum. J. Appl. Pharm. Sci. 2015, 5, 101–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Ighodaro, O.M.; Akinloye, O.A. First line defence antioxidants-superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT) and glutathione peroxidase (GPX): Their fundamental role in the entire antioxidant defence grid. Alex. J. Med. 2018, 54, 287–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Forman, H.J.; Zhang, H.; Rinna, A. Glutathione: Overview of its protective roles, measurement, and biosynthesis. Mol. Asp. Med. 2009, 30, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Meister, A. Glutathione, ascorbate, and cellular protection. Cancer Res. 1994, 54, 1969s–1975s. [Google Scholar]
  51. Brigelius-Flohe, R.; Maiorino, M. Glutathione peroxidases. Biochim. Biophys. Acta BBA Gen. Subj. 2013, 1830, 3289–3303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Adimora, N.J.; Jones, D.P.; Kemp, M.L. A model of redox kinetics implicates the thiol proteome in cellular hydrogen peroxide responses. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2010, 13, 731–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Cilia, G.; Fratini, F. Antimicrobial properties of terrestrial snail and slug mucus. J. Complement. Integr. Med. 2018, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Life 12 01106 g001 550
Figure 1. (A) 12.5% SDS–PAGE with Coomassie Brilliant Blue G-250 staining of: 1, crud extract of C. aspersum mucus; and 2, standard protein marker (Protein Prestained Standards, Biorad); (B) MALDI-TOF-MS spectrum of C. aspersum mucus, recorded between 20–80 kDa.
Figure 1. (A) 12.5% SDS–PAGE with Coomassie Brilliant Blue G-250 staining of: 1, crud extract of C. aspersum mucus; and 2, standard protein marker (Protein Prestained Standards, Biorad); (B) MALDI-TOF-MS spectrum of C. aspersum mucus, recorded between 20–80 kDa.
Life 12 01106 g001
Life 12 01106 g002 550
Figure 2. The antibacterial effect on the growth of the bacterial strain H. pylori of Fraction 1 in concentrations: (A) Control—without extract after 24 h incubation; (B) Control—without extract after 48 h incubation; (C) 0.25 mL Fraction 1 after 24 h incubation; (D) 0.25 mL Fraction 1 after 48 h of incubation; (E) 0.75 mL Fraction 1 after 24 h incubation; (F) 0.75 mL Fraction 1 after 48 h of incubation; (G) 1.0 mL Fraction 1 after 24 h incubation; (H) 1.0 mL Fraction 1 after 48 h of incubation.
Figure 2. The antibacterial effect on the growth of the bacterial strain H. pylori of Fraction 1 in concentrations: (A) Control—without extract after 24 h incubation; (B) Control—without extract after 48 h incubation; (C) 0.25 mL Fraction 1 after 24 h incubation; (D) 0.25 mL Fraction 1 after 48 h of incubation; (E) 0.75 mL Fraction 1 after 24 h incubation; (F) 0.75 mL Fraction 1 after 48 h of incubation; (G) 1.0 mL Fraction 1 after 24 h incubation; (H) 1.0 mL Fraction 1 after 48 h of incubation.
Life 12 01106 g002
Life 12 01106 g003 550
Figure 3. Effect of snail mucus and omeprazole on the macroscopic morphology in mice with ethanol-induced gastric ulcers.
Figure 3. Effect of snail mucus and omeprazole on the macroscopic morphology in mice with ethanol-induced gastric ulcers.
Life 12 01106 g003
Life 12 01106 g004 550
Figure 4. Average Gastric Ulcer Index (GUI) in the four experimental groups: Control, Ethanol (Eth), Mucus + Ethanol (Mucus + Eth), and Omeprazole + Ethanol (Omp + Eth); ***—significance p < 0.001 vs. Ethanol group, ##—significance p < 0.01 vs. Control group.
Figure 4. Average Gastric Ulcer Index (GUI) in the four experimental groups: Control, Ethanol (Eth), Mucus + Ethanol (Mucus + Eth), and Omeprazole + Ethanol (Omp + Eth); ***—significance p < 0.001 vs. Ethanol group, ##—significance p < 0.01 vs. Control group.
Life 12 01106 g004
Life 12 01106 g005 550
Figure 5. Lipid peroxidation level (A); GSH concentration (B); and antioxidant enzymes activity of SOD (C); CAT (D); and GR (E); in stomach homogenate from the four experimental groups: Control, Ethanol, Mucus + Ethanol (Mucus + Eth) and Omeprazole + Ethanol (Omp + Eth); *—significance p < 0.05 vs. Ethanol group; ** significance—p < 0.01 vs. Ethanol group; ***—significance p < 0.001 vs. Ethanol group, #—p < 0.05 vs. Control group.
Figure 5. Lipid peroxidation level (A); GSH concentration (B); and antioxidant enzymes activity of SOD (C); CAT (D); and GR (E); in stomach homogenate from the four experimental groups: Control, Ethanol, Mucus + Ethanol (Mucus + Eth) and Omeprazole + Ethanol (Omp + Eth); *—significance p < 0.05 vs. Ethanol group; ** significance—p < 0.01 vs. Ethanol group; ***—significance p < 0.001 vs. Ethanol group, #—p < 0.05 vs. Control group.
Life 12 01106 g005
Table
Table 1. Characterization of peptides in the mucus of the garden snail, C. aspersum, determined by de novo MALDI-MS/MS sequencing (GRAVY—grand average of hydropathicity index; pI—Isoelectric point).
Table 1. Characterization of peptides in the mucus of the garden snail, C. aspersum, determined by de novo MALDI-MS/MS sequencing (GRAVY—grand average of hydropathicity index; pI—Isoelectric point).
NoAmino Acid Sequence of PeptidesExper. Mass [M + H]+ DaCalcul. Monois. Mass. DapI *GRAVY *Net Charge *Predicted Activity
Antibac.
(%)		Antiviral.
(%)		Antifungal.
(%)
1 aγ-ECG (glutathione)308.058307.083.27−0.47−1/063.054.045.0
2 aLGHDVH677.32676.335.97−0.383−1/084.07661.0
3 a,bLLMGPEV758.41757.404.00+1.171−1/033.030.012.0
4 bQSGKSPGFGL977.50976.508.75−0.5200/+164.08.926.0
5 aLFSNQLFN982.50981.495.52−0.680/053.038.043.0
6 cLLFSGGQFNG1039.521038.515.52+0.4200/074.028.059.0
7 dDLTLNGLSPK1057.581056.585.84−0.300−1/+112.117.019.0
8 dMPDGALLGGGGD1059.711058.473.56+0.058−2/050.052.032.0
9 bLPDSWEPGGGG1071.561070.473.67−0.882−2/07.721.06.0
10 eLGDLNAEFAAG1077.671076.513.67+0.409−2/027.046.030.0
11 aLGLGNGGAGGGLVGG1155.611154.605.52+0.6870/086.050.861.0
12 bYNGFRPGDCY1191.491190.485.83−1.120−1/+143.032.055.0
13 eAGVGAGGANPSTYVG1277.911276.605.57+0.2600/025.07.511.0
14 eGAACNLEDGSCLGV1308.811307.553.67+0.564−2/058.058.053.0
15 dNLVGGSGGGGRGGANPLG1496.731495.759.75- 0.2170/+166.033.748.2
16 dGLLGGGGGAGGGGLVGGLLNG1609.941608.865.52+0.7760/+190.053.665.0
17 dMGGLLGGVNGGGKGGGGPGAP1666.831665.838.50+0.0050/+178.652.061.5
18 eASKGCGPGSCPPGDTVAGVG1716.821715.765.86+0.005−1/+125.012.023.0
19 fLFGGHQGGGLVGGLWRK1738.991737.9411.0−0.0240/+275.641.078.5
20 eACSLLLGGGGVGGGKGGGGHAG1739.021737.868.27+0.4090/+183.049.067.0
21 dMLLNAKWAPHSTGPPNA1804.911803.918.52−0.4000/+18.511.06.9
22 eACLTPVDHFFAGMPCGGGP1877.141875.815.08+0.542−1/032.043.020.0
23 eNGLFGGLGGGGHGGGGKGPGEGGG1909.901908.886.75−0.487−1/+190.067.080.0
24 eLLLLMLGGGLVGGLLGGGGKGGG1966.241965.148.75+1.2090/+192.057.076.0
25 ePFLLGVGGLLGGSVGGGGGGGGAPL2023.142022.095.96+0.9120/069.032.038.0
26 eGMVVKHCSAPLDSFAEFAGA2036.932035.955.32+0.565−2/+142.020.026.0
27 dLPFLGLVGGLLGGSVGGGGGGGGPAL2136.202135.175.52+1.0230/069.132.038.2
28 dDVESLPVGGLGGGGGGAGGGGLVGGNLGGGAG2479.202478.213.67+0.353−2/055.042.030.0
* Peptides’ physicochemical characteristics (isoelectric points (pI), grand average of hydropathicity (GRAVY), and net charge) were determined using the ExPASy ProtParam tool [24]. a Vassilev et al., 2020 [19]; b Kostadinova et al., 2018 [15]; c Beluhova et al., 2022 [25]; d Dolashki et al., 2020 [18]; e Topalova et al., 2022 [26]; f Velkova et al., 2018 [27].
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Petrov, L.; Kachaunov, M.; Alexandrova, A.; Tsvetanova, E.; Georgieva, A.; Dolashki, A.; Velkova, L.; Dolashka, P. Snail Mucus Protective Effect on Ethanol-Induced Gastric Ulcers in Mice. Life 2022, 12, 1106. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12081106

AMA Style

Petrov L, Kachaunov M, Alexandrova A, Tsvetanova E, Georgieva A, Dolashki A, Velkova L, Dolashka P. Snail Mucus Protective Effect on Ethanol-Induced Gastric Ulcers in Mice. Life. 2022; 12(8):1106. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12081106

Chicago/Turabian Style

Petrov, Lubomir, Mihail Kachaunov, Albena Alexandrova, Elina Tsvetanova, Almira Georgieva, Aleksander Dolashki, Lyudmila Velkova, and Pavlina Dolashka. 2022. "Snail Mucus Protective Effect on Ethanol-Induced Gastric Ulcers in Mice" Life 12, no. 8: 1106. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12081106

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