Challenges on Determination of Malondialdehyde in Plant Samples

Abstract

Malondialdehyde is a marker of lipid peroxidation and redox signaling and is used in many researches in the field of plant and biomedical investigations, possibly due to its simple measurement procedure. However, there are some challenges with its measurements which have been discussed in this communication along with possible solutions.

Keywords

Malondialdehyde, Oxidative stress, Signaling, Biomarker, Lipid peroxidation

Introduction

Malondialdehyde (MDA) is used as a marker of lipid peroxidation and redox signaling in the field of plant physiology and is one of the commonly used biomarkers of oxidative stress in biomedical and animal studies [1-3]. Beside some pitfalls of MDA determination, it is interesting that the number of publications retrieved from Scopus using key words of "malondialdehyde" and "plant*" was increased from 9000 [4] to 13696 records (search date; 8^th Aug 2020, Scopus database) with the numbers of 1304, 1574 and 1094 for years 2018, 2019 and 2020, respectively. The corresponding numbers of articles for key word of "malondialdehyde" are 4643, 5254 and 4028, in which 1525, 1579 and 1137 of the articles categorized in the subject area of "medicine", respectively for years 2018, 2019 and 2020. These figures reveal that MDA has an important position in the plant and/or biomedical investigations. The involvement of oxidative stress in many physiological and/or pathophysiological phenomena is a well-accepted subject in both plant and biomedical areas. However, the selection of a reliable biomarker for oxidative stress is still a challenging subject. The characteristics of an ideal biomarker were summarized in a recent paper [5] which most of them are not fulfilled by MDA. The main challenges of using MDA along with possible solutions were highlighted in this communication.

Challenges

MDA is a highly reactive substance produced from different reactions in the biological fluids [6]. Different analytical methods have been used for quantification of MDA in biomedical [6] and plant [4] samples. The methods, their advantages and disadvantages were reviewed in recent works [4,6] in which most of studies employed the spectrophotometric assay after derivatization. MDA is usually quantified using a simple spectrophotometric, spectrofluorometricand/or enzyme linked immunosorbent assay after derivatization with thiobarbitoric acid (TBA) at a high temperature (90-100 ℃) and in acidic solutions [7-9]. Derivatization at ~ 100 ℃ increases the possibility of MDA evaporation since its boiling point is 108 ℃ [8] and this could be a reason for low repeatability of analytical data and using reflux improves of the analytical results [10]. It has been shown that MDA human plasma levels span from 320 nM to 53797 nM for healthy people which is very wide range for normal values [6]. There are so many factors affecting the outcome of MDA measurement using TBA derivatization and spectroscopy of the adduct. The high temperature and low pH conditions are responsible for a part of poor reproducibility and repeatability of MDA assays which are critically reviewed in a previous report [6], a number of possible reasons for poor validation data of MDA measurements along with some possible solutions were also provided. On the other hand, TBA reacts with a number of aldehydes produced during lipid peroxidation which increases the complexity of MDA assays. In addition to aldehydes, TBA possesses cross-reactions with other biomolecules such as L-arginine, L-histidine, L-tyrosine, L-cystein, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, propanal, sucrose, methylamine, aniline, 4-hexylresorcinol, N-methylpyrrole, indole, 4-aminoacetophenone, ethyl p-aminobenzoate, 4,4-sulfonyldianiline, p-nitroaniline, azulene, histamine, melatonin, serotonin, spermidine, amino sugars, collagen, water soluble proteins and glycogen [6].

There is a very similar situation in the biomedical and plant studies regarding the reliability of MDA as a valid biomarker. During last couple of years, a number of communications were published in various biomedical and analytical journals dealing with the shortcomings of MDA and its assay methods in such investigations [4-6,11-16]. In these communications, attempts were made to gather and represent scientific evidences on the non-reliability of the reported MDA data in various biological samples investigated on different diseases and the corresponding control groups. One could find lots of variations in control groups even using a single analytical method [13]. The problems with MDA assay were simply ignored by the research groups as stated by Wade and van Rij [12]. Most of shortcomings of MDA and its assay methods in plant samples are the same as those in biomedical areas and correctly addressed in a recent communication by Morales and Munné-Bosch [4].

Potential Solutions

Some improvements could be achieved by using more suited derivatization reagents [17]. As noticed above, MDA is a highly reactive compound and reacts with lots of existing materials in the biological fluids [6] resulting in many derivatized compounds with similar spectroscopic characteristics. Employing separation techniques (such as chromatography) provide more reliable data for MDA since other derivatives could be separated in the chromatographic column [18,19]. However, the problems associated with high reactivity and chemical stability of MDA along with the variations observed in derivatization step will be remained unresolved [5]. Employing analysis of MDA without derivatization step, as an example with GC-MS, is recommended if the valid data could be obtained [19]. It should be noted that the accuracy and precision of chromatographic methods [17,20] are also relatively out of accepted range recommended by Food and Drug Administration guidelines [21]. Concerning these sets of analytical methods, there are still some concerns on the stability of MDA in mid-term and long-term storage of the samples. Considering technical troubles with derivatization and quantification of MDA, we focused on development of electrochemical sensors for real time analysis of MDA in some biological samples [22-25] and further studies are still ongoing in our and others research groups [26-29]. In the electrochemical methods, no derivatization is required, however one should consider low repeatability of these methods and variations on the electrodes prepared in different batches which limits their practical applications.

Conclusion

Quantification of MDA is still a challenging subject in the field of bioanalysis and further efforts are in demand to provide a fully acceptable and validated analytical method. In addition to the recommendations of Morales and Munné-Bosch, it is recommended that before using an analytical method for determination of any analyte of interest in a given sample, a full validation (or at least partial validation) tests on the quality control samples are critically required. These tests could be found from Food and Drug Administration or International Council on Harmonization guidelines which are readily available from internet. These validation tests are especially recommended for MDA since it is a highly reactive analyte. It is obvious that, ignoring this simple fact will result in some misleading data, waste of time and resources.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References

1. Janero DR (1990) Malondialdehyde and thiobarbitoric acid-reactivity as diagnostic indices of lipid peroxidation and peroxidative tissue injury. Free Radical Biology and Medicine 9: 515-540.
2. Farmer EE, Mueller MJ (2013) ROS-mediated lipid peroxidation and RES-activated signaling. Annual Review of Plant Biology 64: 429-450.
3. Mano J, Kanameda S, Kuramitsu R, et al. (2019) Detoxification of reactive carbonyl species by glutathione transferase tau isozymes. Frontiors in Plant Science 10: 487.
4. Morales M, Munné Bosch S (2019) Malondialdehyde: Facts and artifacts. Plant Physiology 180: 1246-1250.
5. Khoubnasabjafari M, Soleymani J, Jouyban A (2018) Avoid using spectrophotometric determination of malondialdehyde as a biomarker of oxidative stress. Biomarkers in Medicine 12: 551-554.
6. Khoubnasabjafari M, Ansarin K, Jouyban A (2016) Critical review of malondialdehyde analysis in biological samples. Current Pharmaceutical Analysis 12: 4-17.
7. Heath RL, Packer L (1968) Photoperoxidation in isolated chloroplasts i. kinetics and stoichiometry of fatty acid peroxidation. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics 125: 189-198.
8. Draper HH, Hadley M (1990) Malondialdehyde determination as index of lipid peroxidation. Methods in Enzymology 186: 421-431.
9. Davey MW, Stals E, Panis B, et al. (2005) High-throughput determination of malondialdehyde in plant tissues. Analytical Biochemistry 347: 201-207.
10. Azizi S, Khoubnasabjafari M, Shahrisa A, et al. (2017) Effects of analytical procedures on the repeatability of malondialdehyde determinations in biological samples. Pharmaceutical Sciences 23: 193-197.
11. Hackett C, Linley Adams M, Lloyd B, et al. (1988) Plasma malondialdehyde: A poor measure of in vivo lipid peroxidation. Clinical Chemistry 34: 208.
12. Wade CR, van Rij AM (1989) Plasma malondialdehyde, lipid peroxides, and the thiobarbituric acid reaction. Clinical Chemistry 35: 336.
13. Khoubnasabjafari M, Ansarin K, Jouyban A (2015) Reliability of malondialdehyde as a biomarker of oxidative stress in psychological disorders. Bioimpacts 5: 123-127.
14. Khoubnasabjafari M, Ansarin K, Jouyban A (2017) Comments on "An investigation into the serum thioredoxin, superoxide dismutase, malondialdehyde, and advanced oxidation protein products in patients with breast cancer". Annals of Surgical Oncology 24: 573-576.
15. Guleken Z, Kuruca SE, Ünübol B, et al. (2020) Biochemical assay and spectroscopic analysis of oxidative/antioxidative parameters in the blood and serum of substance use disorders patients. A methodological comparison study. Spectrochimicaacta. Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy 240: 118625.
16. Guleken Z, Ozbeyli D, Acikel Elmas M, et al. (2017) The effect of estrogen receptor agonists on pancreaticobiliary duct ligation induced experimental acute pancreatitis. Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology 68: 847-858.
17. Tsikas D (2017) Assessment of lipid peroxidation by measuring malondialdehyde (MDA) and relatives in biological samples: Analytical and biological challenges. Analytical Biochemistry 524: 13-30.
18. Hannan PA, Khan JA, Iqbal Z, et al. (2015) Simultaneous determination of endogenous antioxidants and malondialdehyde by RP-HPLC coupled with electrochemical detector in serum samples. Journal of Liquid Chromatography and Related Techniques 38: 1052-1060.
19. Shestivska V, Antonowicz SS, Dryahina K, et al. (2015) Direct detection and quantification of malondialdehydevapour in humid air using selected ion flow tube mass spectrometry supported by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry 29: 1069-1079.
20. Tsikas D, Rothmann S, Schneider JY, et al. (2016) Development, validation and biomedical applications of stable-isotope dilution GC-MS and GC-MS/MS techniques for circulating malondialdehyde (MDA) after pentafluorobenzyl bromide derivatization: MDA as a biomarker of oxidative stress and its relation to 15(S)-8-iso-prostaglandin F2a and nitric oxide (NO). Journal of Chromatography 1019: 95-111.
21. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (2018) Bioanalytical Method Validation Guidance for Industry. Food and Drug Administration.
22. Hasanzadeh M, Zamani Kalajahi M, Shadjou N, et al. (2015) Electrodeposition of taurine on a gold electrode for electrooxidation of malondialdehyde in human serum and exhaled breath condensate. Surface Engineering 31: 194-201.
23. Hasanzadeh M, Mokhtari F, Shadjou N, et al. (2017) Poly arginine-graphene quantum dots as a biocompatible and non-toxic nanocomposite: Layer-by-layer electrochemical preparation, characterization and non-invasive malondialdehyde sensory application in exhaled breath condensate. Material Science and Engineering 75: 247-258.
24. Hasanzadeh M, Mokhtari F, Jouyban Gharamaleki V, et al. (2018) Electrochemical monitoring of malondialdehyde biomarker in biological samples via electropolymerized amino acid/chitosan nanocomposite. Journal of Molecular Recognition 31: e2717.
25. Jafari M, Solhi E, Tagi S, et al. (2019) Non-invasive quantification of malondialdehyde biomarker in human exhaled breath condensate using self-assembled organic-inorganic nanohybrid: A new platform for early diagnosis of lung disease. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis 164: 249-257.
26. Ma L, Liu G (2017) Simultaneous analysis of malondialdehyde, 4-hydroxy-2-hexenal, and 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal in vegetable oil by reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 65: 11320-11328.
27. Li X, Shen Y, Wu G, et al. (2018) Determination of key active components in different edible oils affecting lipid accumulation and reactive oxygen species production in HepG2 Cells. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 66: 11943-11956.
28. Bertolín JR, Joy M, Blanco M (2019) Malondialdehyde determination in raw and processed meat products by UPLC-DAD and UPLC-FLD. Food Chemistry 298: 125009.
29. Fashi A, Cheraghi M, Badiee H, et al. (2020) An analytical strategy based on the combination of ultrasound assisted flat membrane liquid phase microextraction and a smartphone reader for trace determination of malondialdehyde. Talanta 209: 120618.