Theobromine enhances absorption of cacao polyphenol in rats

Figures & data

Table 1. Composition of cocoa powder.

Composition	% (w/w)
Moisture	3.5
Ash	4.2
Fiber	16.0
Fat	11.0
Protein	23.6
Epicatechin^a	1.82
Procyanidin B2^a	0.45
Procyanidin C1^a	0.20
Total polyphenol^b	10.57
Theobromine^c	2.59
Caffeine^c	0.33

^a Polyphenol composition was quantified by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry, as previously reported.²²⁾ The amount of procyanidins given as epicatechin equivalents.

^b Total polyphenol content was determined according to the Folin–Ciocalteu colorimetric method.²³⁾

^c TB and caffeine were quantified by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry as previously reported.²⁴⁾

Fig. 1. Time course changes (A, C, E) and AUC (B, D, F) of plasma EC and 3ʹOME after ingestion of EC (A–D) and cocoa powder (E, F).

Notes: Values are expressed as means with standard error of the mean (n = 6). For time-course data, *p < 0.05 compared with corresponding control values, (Student’s test). For AUC data, means without a common letter differ, p < 0.05 (Tukey’s test).

Fig. 2. Effects of TB on TEER in Caco-2 cell monolayers.

Notes: The open circles, open triangles, and solid circles represent control, 100 μM TB, and 3 mM lauric acid groups, respectively. Values are expressed as means with standard error of the mean (n = 6). *p < 0.05 compared with corresponding control values, (Dunnett’s test).

Hammerstone JF, Lazarus SA, Mitchell AE, Rucker R, Schmitz HH. Identification of procyanidins in cocoa (Theobroma cacao) and chocolate using high-performance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. J. Agric. Food. Chem. 1999;47:490–496.10.1021/jf980760h

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ortega N, Romero MP, Macià A, Reguant J, Anglès N, Morelló JR, Motilva MJ. Obtention and characterization of phenolic extracts from different cocoa sources. J. Agric. Food. Chem. 2008;56:9621–9627.10.1021/jf8014415

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Craig WJ, Nguyen TT. Caffeine and theobromine levels in cocoa and carob products. J. Food Sci. 1984;49:302–303.10.1111/jfds.1984.49.issue-1

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar