Figures & data
Figure 1. Elution profile of SWP on the G-15. The column was eluted with distilled water at a flow rate of 1.2 mL/min.
![Figure 1. Elution profile of SWP on the G-15. The column was eluted with distilled water at a flow rate of 1.2 mL/min.](/cms/asset/0041992f-08f0-4890-a6b7-d43e5d7ff691/ljfp_a_1807565_f0001_oc.jpg)
Figure 2. FT-IR spectrum of SWP-I and SWP-II. SWP-I and SWP-II were mixed with KBr powder, ground thoroughly and then pressed into a 1 mm pellet for FT-IR measurement.
![Figure 2. FT-IR spectrum of SWP-I and SWP-II. SWP-I and SWP-II were mixed with KBr powder, ground thoroughly and then pressed into a 1 mm pellet for FT-IR measurement.](/cms/asset/e48fb1a0-7570-4a0e-b082-b580a5d5e65b/ljfp_a_1807565_f0002_oc.jpg)
Figure 3. UV light absorption spectrum of SWP-I and SWP-II between 190 nm and 400 nm on a UV spectrophotometer.
![Figure 3. UV light absorption spectrum of SWP-I and SWP-II between 190 nm and 400 nm on a UV spectrophotometer.](/cms/asset/84e29ddb-92f5-46dc-8b33-9627d3bcbb43/ljfp_a_1807565_f0003_oc.jpg)
Table 1. Amino acid composition of SWP-I and SWP-II (g/100 g).
Figure 5. (A) DPPH•, (B) HO•, (C) O2-• scavenging activity, and (D) Fe2+ chelating ability of SWP-I and SWP-II. Data are presented as mean ± SEM n = 3.
![Figure 5. (A) DPPH•, (B) HO•, (C) O2-• scavenging activity, and (D) Fe2+ chelating ability of SWP-I and SWP-II. Data are presented as mean ± SEM n = 3.](/cms/asset/b91731a9-816b-4f1d-908f-1295b0ceebe0/ljfp_a_1807565_f0005_oc.jpg)
Figure 7. Effects of SWP-I and SWP-II on cell viability. Data are shown as mean± SEM, n = 4. ** p < .01 versus the blank group, ## p < .01 versus the control group.
![Figure 7. Effects of SWP-I and SWP-II on cell viability. Data are shown as mean± SEM, n = 4. ** p < .01 versus the blank group, ## p < .01 versus the control group.](/cms/asset/190ad162-0f75-4aac-ae25-7580a1a76fd4/ljfp_a_1807565_f0007_oc.jpg)
Figure 8. Effects of SWP-I and SWP-II on H2O2-induced ROS generation of 2BS cells. (a) Fluorescence intensities of DCF due to oxidation of DCFH by cellular ROS were detected (Ex = 485 nm, Em = 535 nm). Data are shown as mean± SEM, n = 4. ** p < .01 versus the blank group, ## p < .01 versus the control group. (b) Representative fluorescence images illustrating the increasing fluorescence intensity of DCF produced by ROS in H2O2-treated cells and ROS scavenging abilities of the two fractions.
![Figure 8. Effects of SWP-I and SWP-II on H2O2-induced ROS generation of 2BS cells. (a) Fluorescence intensities of DCF due to oxidation of DCFH by cellular ROS were detected (Ex = 485 nm, Em = 535 nm). Data are shown as mean± SEM, n = 4. ** p < .01 versus the blank group, ## p < .01 versus the control group. (b) Representative fluorescence images illustrating the increasing fluorescence intensity of DCF produced by ROS in H2O2-treated cells and ROS scavenging abilities of the two fractions.](/cms/asset/926a0dd8-9a6f-46fa-bd8f-8eb2f3e40e27/ljfp_a_1807565_f0008_oc.jpg)
Figure 9. Inhibitory effects of SWP-I and SWP-II on oxidative stress-induced premature senescence in 2BS cells. (a) The ratios of SA-β-gal positive cells were assessed using a paired T-test. Data are shown as mean± SEM, n = 4. ** p < .01 versus the blank group, ## p < .01 versus the control group. (b) Morphological changes of 2BS cells after staining with SA-β- Gal were observed by optical microscopy. Magnification: 100 ×.
![Figure 9. Inhibitory effects of SWP-I and SWP-II on oxidative stress-induced premature senescence in 2BS cells. (a) The ratios of SA-β-gal positive cells were assessed using a paired T-test. Data are shown as mean± SEM, n = 4. ** p < .01 versus the blank group, ## p < .01 versus the control group. (b) Morphological changes of 2BS cells after staining with SA-β- Gal were observed by optical microscopy. Magnification: 100 ×.](/cms/asset/226dffca-94d1-4945-aa17-2b6a150a0f16/ljfp_a_1807565_f0009_oc.jpg)
Figure 10. Protective effects of SWP-I and SWP-II on H2O2-induced cell apoptosis. (a) Cell apoptosis rates of 2BS were assessed by annexin V and PI double staining and flow cytometry. Data are shown as mean± SEM, n = 4. ** p < .01 versus the blank group, ## p < .01 versus the control group. (b) Scatter diagram of cell apoptosis by flow cytometry.
![Figure 10. Protective effects of SWP-I and SWP-II on H2O2-induced cell apoptosis. (a) Cell apoptosis rates of 2BS were assessed by annexin V and PI double staining and flow cytometry. Data are shown as mean± SEM, n = 4. ** p < .01 versus the blank group, ## p < .01 versus the control group. (b) Scatter diagram of cell apoptosis by flow cytometry.](/cms/asset/d0a6068d-174f-4e0b-ab85-cc5c4cbe2084/ljfp_a_1807565_f0010_oc.jpg)