Abstract
In the current review, compositional data on fucoidans extracted from more than hundred different species were surveyed through the available literature. The analysis of crude extracts, purified extracts or carefully isolated fractions is included in tabular form, discriminating the seaweed source by its taxonomical order (and sometimes the family). This survey was able to encounter some similarities between the different species, as well as some differences. Fractions which were obtained through anion-exchange chromatography or cationic detergent precipitation showed the best separation patterns: the fractions with low charge correspond mostly to highly heterogeneous fucoidans, containing (besides fucose) other monosaccharides like xylose, galactose, mannose, rhamnose, and glucuronic acid, and contain low-sulfate/high uronic acid proportions, whereas those with higher total charge usually contain mainly fucose, accompanied with variable proportions of galactose, are highly sulfated and show almost no uronic acids. The latter fractions are usually the most biologically active. Fractions containing intermediate proportions of both polysaccharides appear at middle ionic strengths. This pattern is common for all the orders of brown seaweeds, and most differences appear from the seaweed source (habitat, season), and from the diverse extraction, purification, and analytitcal methods. The Dictyotales appear to be the most atypical order, as usually large proportions of mannose and uronic acids appear, and thus they obscure the differences between the fractions with different charge. Within the family Alariaceae (order Laminariales), the presence of sulfated galactofucans with high galactose content (almost equal to that of fucose) is especially noteworthy.
Introduction: Aim of the Review
Fucoidans are sulfated polysaccharides present in the cell walls of the Phaeophyceae (brown seaweeds) composed usually by fucose (Fuc) as the main monosaccharide, but accompanied by very variable amounts of other monosaccharides like galactose (Gal), xylose (Xyl), mannose (Man), rhamnose (Rha), and/or glucuronic acid (GlcA). The scientific literature on different aspects of fucoidans is steadily growing, mostly due to the diverse biological activities found for samples from many different species of seaweeds. This bioactivity (antiviral, anticoagulant, antitumoral, antioxidant, among others) has been reviewed extensively (Cosenza et al., 2017; Senthilkumar et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2019). Many studies attempted to explore the structural details of fucoidans, but it was very difficult to find a common trait in the different fucoidans so far analyzed (Bilan and Usov, 2008; Kopplin et al., 2018). This marks a big difference with red seaweed sulfated galactans, showing an unchallenged disaccharidic repeating structure modified by the position of sulfation, the series of the α-galactose units and its possible presence as a 3,6-anhydro ether (Usov, 2011). For these galactans, it has been found that the taxonomic order (or sometimes the family) to which the seaweed yielding the galactan belongs has a strong influence on the characteristics of these galactans, i.e., chemotaxonomy appears to be in effect (Miller, 1997; Stortz and Cerezo, 2000). For instance, within the brown seaweeds, it has been postulated that the fucoidans from the Laminariales tend to have just α-3-linked Fuc units, whereas those of the Fucales show more proportions of a α-(1,3)-α-(1,4) alternating structure (Deniaud-Bouët et al., 2014), as a chemotaxonomical trait related to structure. A previous review by Ale et al. (2011) has tried to establish some relationship with taxonomy, with the focus set on extraction methods, qualitative compositional data, and structural features. In this review, compositional data on fucoidans originated in different taxonomic groups of the Phaeophyceae will be presented. Two hypotheses are put into consideration: (a) that there is a relationship between some of these compositional features and the taxonomic classification, and (b) that various other factors produce the differences in composition.
Taxonomy of the Phaeophyceae
The taxonomy of brown algae (Heterokonta, Ochrophyta, Phaeophyceae) had many controversies throughout the history (Silberfeld et al., 2014). Order delineation in the Phaeophyceae has traditionally been based on the type of life cycle, reproductive aspects, mode of growth, and filamentous vs. parenchymatous construction of the thallus (Rousseau and de Reviers, 1999a, b). However, with the advent of molecular systematics, new insights were brought, thoroughly reshaping the evolutionary concepts of brown algae. Rousseau and de Reviers (1999b) and de Reviers et al. (2007) have provided a detailed evolution of classificatory concepts within the Phaeophyceae. Several changes in the classification at the ordinal level have been set between the Oltmanns (1922), comprising 8 orders to the present times classification, encompassing 18 orders (Silberfeld et al., 2014; Figure 1). Major changes were produced after the DNA sequencing of brown seaweeds started in 1993 (Draisma et al., 2003; de Reviers et al., 2007). Different molecular markers can be used, but phylogenetic studies of Phaeophyceae have mostly utilized the rDNA sequences, which include four subunits (18S, 5.8S, 26S, and 5S), containing regions which are highly conserved as well as others highly variable. Most information arose from studies on the 18S subunit of rDNA, although those studies had limited results for more recent Phaeophycean lineages (Tan and Druehl, 1996). In this way, Rousseau et al. (2001) utilized the 26S sequence, which altogether with a larger taxonomic sampling, solved some of the earlier divergences. Thus, a phylogenetic tree was constructed (Draisma et al., 2001, 2003). It has been concluded that morphological characters, many times useful to understand the ecology of brown seaweeds, have no value at all for phylogeny. Different degrees of organization, diffuse or apical growth, or life stages have appeared and disappeared repeatedly in the history of the different taxonomic groups.
FIGURE 1
Silberfeld et al. (2014) have introduced a thorough phylogenetic analysis based on a dataset generated previously (Silberfeld et al., 2011), including seven markers, for a total of 6804 nucleotides, determined for 91 Phaeophycean taxa, including minor orders for which there were very few studies. In this way, the shape of phylogenetic trees changed sharply the previous knowledge (Silberfeld et al., 2011; Charrier et al., 2012). Figure 1 depicts the outcome of the tree for the 18 orders determined by Silberfeld et al. (2014), grouped in four subclasses (Discosporangiophycidae and Ishigeophycidae, including one order each, Dictyotophycidae, including four orders, and Fucophycidae, including the remaining 12 orders).
Polysaccharides From the Phaeophyceae: The Fucoidans
Most macroalgae exhibit polysaccharides as their most abundant constituents. Taking into account their function, they can be classified into two main groups: storage and structural polysaccharides. The formers are polymers such as starch/glycogen or laminaran considered as food reserve materials, whereas the latters are structural elements of the cell walls, intercellular tissues and mucilaginous matrix. Sulfated polysaccharides are a group of anionic structural polysaccharides, useful for the seaweed in the marine environment to avoid desiccation. Their gross composition is characteristic of each algal group (galactans in red seaweeds, fucoidans in brown seaweeds, rhamnoglucuronans, and arabinogalactans in green seaweeds, van den Hoek et al., 1996), whereas more or less subtle differences appear often depending on the order, family, genus and species, as well as sometimes on the season, geographic location, or reproductive stage (Mackie and Preston, 1974). Other roles of the polysaccharides might include participations in cell-cell communication (Deniaud-Bouët et al., 2014), and in cell division processes (Skriptsova, 2015).
In macroalgae, the cell walls comprise a fibrillar skeleton immersed in an amorphous matrix. In the case of the Phaeophyceae, the fibrillar skeleton is mainly made up of cellulose [a linear β-(1→4)-glucan], and the surrounding matrix is composed predominantly by alginic acid or its salts, together with a system of sulfated polysaccharides (the fucoidans; Mackie and Preston, 1974). In this way, the cell wall is composed of two different layers: the inner layer consisting of a skeleton of microfibrils providing rigidity to the cell wall, and the outermost layer, which is usually observed as a poorly crystalline matrix in which the set of microfibrils is embedded. There is also evidence that the matrix does not penetrate the fibers, but remains attached to this layer through hydrogen bonds (Davis et al., 2003). It has been suggested that fucoidans might play a key role in cell wall architecture, cross-linking cellulose and alginates (Kloareg et al., 1986). Besides this function, as occurs with other sulfated polysaccharides, the fucoidans help to protect the plant from desiccation. When the fronds are in contact with sea water the sulfate hemiester groups are strongly associated with magnesium ions, which are highly hydrated and thus retain water in the fronds (Percival, 1979). In a more modern model for the Fucales (Deniaud-Bouët et al., 2014, 2017; Torode et al., 2016), it has been proposed that two networks are assembled in the cell wall; the first one contains the fucoidans interlocking a cellulose (or other β-glucans) network, and the second one contains alginate crosslinked by polyphenols. The rigidity is controlled by the alginate structure and its calcium cross-linking capabilities, whereas the fucoidans participate mostly in adaptation to the osmotic stress.
More than one century ago, Kylin has isolated for the first time (from different seaweed species of the genera Fucus, Laminaria, and Ascophyllum) a group of sulfated polysaccharides with a high Fuc content and called them “fucoidin” (Kylin, 1913). Originally the name fucoidin (later changed to the more systematic fucoidan) was coined for the polysaccharides from those species, but this term was rapidly extended to any fucose-rich polysaccharides, including not only those becoming from brown seaweeds, but also to those present in echinoderms (Olatunji, 2020). As noted above, fucoidans are sulfated polysaccharides present mainly in the intercellular tissue of mucilaginous matrix of the cell walls of brown algae (Deniaud-Bouët et al., 2017).
Fucoidans comprise a family of diverse molecules containing, in addition to Fuc, varying proportions of Gal, Man, Xyl and GlcA (Figure 2). Acetate esters have also been found, especially in modern studies (see below). In the early studies extensive purification was carried out in an effort to isolate a “fucan” containing only Fuc residues, assuming that the remaining monosaccharides were originated in other, contaminating polysaccharides. Nevertheless, even in the allegedly pure samples, small proportions of Gal, Xyl, and/or uronic acid persisted (Percival, 1979). Later, only in a few species a pure fucan was isolated after purification (see below). Thus, most of the samples so far isolated are heterofucans (Deniaud-Bouët et al., 2014).
FIGURE 2
Fucoidans From Different Species of Phaeophyceae
In this section, the main chemical characteristics of fucoidans extracted from different species of brown seaweeds reported so far to the best of our knowledge (with compositional data provided) will be described in tabular form. They will be shown separately for each of the different orders (Figure 1). When numerous species of an order were studied, separations in families or genera are also displayed. It is worth noting that depending on the way that the analyses were expressed in the original papers, the uronic acids in the following tables were indicated as a percentage of the total sample (in most cases) or as part of the molar ratio of all the monosaccharides. Thus, these molar ratios might or might not include the uronic acid components. The main monosaccharidic units appearing in fucoidans are shown in Figure 2. When the authors have isolated a large number of fractions, only those more abundant or representative are listed in the tables. The reported presence of acetyl groups is indicated qualitatively with the “Ac” acronym. It should be noted that the geographic location and season of harvest of the seaweed can also have significant effects on the composition of the extracted fucoidans (e.g., Zvyagintseva et al., 2003). The extraction and fractionation procedures are schematically displayed, neglecting defatting and depigmenting steps, as well as usual procedures like dialysis or single alcohol precipitations. The methods used for monosaccharide and sulfate quantitation are also shown.
Fucales
As expected, samples of fucoidans from this is order were the most studied. Samples from five different families of the Fucales have been studied. Two species from the Fucaceae, i.e., Fucus vesiculosus and Ascophyllum nodosum appear in the earlier studies by Kylin (1913). The polysaccharides from these species were studied extensively by different research groups (see below). However, the family with more species studied was the Sargassaceae. Considering only the genus Sargassum, studies on the fucoidans from 26 different species were found in the current survey.
The extraction of fucoidans from Fucus vesiculosus was originated in the early Kylin studies, when Fuc was characterized after hydrolysis as phenyl-L-fucosazone; pentoses in the hydrolyzate were also reported (Kylin, 1913). Different products from this species were extensively studied (Table 1). Originally, the presence of Xyl was ascribed to a contaminating xylan that accompanied the fucoidan (Percival and McDowell, 1967). As a matter of fact, they reported the isolation of a xylan, although uronic acid residues were found in the xylan fraction and, furthermore, the authors were not able to separate any fraction composed just by Fuc residues. The studies by Nishino et al. (1994a) on a commercial sample from this seaweed were highly comprehensive: they were able to separate 13 different fractions and analyze them thoroughly, showing structures ranging from typical fucans (containing mainly Fuc and sulfate, and free of uronic acids) to heteropolysaccharides with low sulfate content and high content of uronic acids. In a minor fraction, they were able to find an appreciable amount of glucosamine (11.5%). In an interesting study using microwave extraction of this seaweed, Rodríguez-Jasso et al. (2011) showed that depending on the pressure and extraction time, fucoidans with different ratios Fuc/Gal were obtained (ranging from 100% Fuc to a 1:1 ratio), plus variable proportions of Xyl and sulfation degrees. Another species from the same genus that has been studied is Fucus evanescens. Zvyagintseva et al. (1999) separated the polysaccharides using a chromatography system on a hydrophobic resin. It is interesting to note that in a subsequent work Zvyagintseva et al. (2003) analyzed specimens of three different seaweeds (F. evanescens, Laminaria cichorioides, and Saccharina japonica) collected at different places, at various stages of development and at different seasons, and found some notable differences, particularly for the F. evanescens equivalent fractions obtained in different geographic locations (ratio Fuc/sulfate between 1 and 2.1; Fuc proportion from 56 to 80%; molecular masses from 14–40 to 150–500 kDa).
TABLE 1
| Species | Extraction | Purification/ | Acronym | Monosaccharide composition (moles %) | Sulfate | UA (%) | References | |||||||||
| Fractionationa | Methodb | Fuc | Xyl | Gal | Man | Glc | Rha | GlcA | Others | Methodc | % | |||||
| Fucus vesiculosus | HCl pH 2 | Ethanol ppt | F1 | GC | 50 | 15 | 4 | 17 | 14 | Pb | 4 | 22 | Medcalf and Larsen (1977a) | |||
| HCl pH 2 | Ethanol ppt | F2 | GC | 70 | 7 | 8 | 4 | 11 | Pb | 25 | 6 | “ | ||||
| HCl 0.01M+CaCl2 1% | GC | 79 | 10 | 6 | 3 | 2 | Tit | 31 | 14 | Mabeau and Kloareg (1987) | ||||||
| pH 7.5+CaCl2 1% | EtOH+TCA 10% | FF | GC | 84 | 2 | 13 | 1 | Tit | 26 | 4 | Mabeau et al. (1990) | |||||
| Triton 0.5%, pH 7.5+CaCl2 1% | EtOH+TCA 10% | TF | GC | 60 | 10 | 14 | 10 | 6 | Tit | 14 | 9 | “ | ||||
| HCl 0.01M+CaCl2 1% | HT | GC | 87 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 2 | Tit | 39 | 17 | “ | |||||
| Na2CO3 3% | HCl 0.01M ppt | OHF | GC | 78 | 11 | 5 | 3 | 3 | Tit | 30 | 9 | “ | ||||
| SigmaTM | GC | 92 | 4 | 3 | 2 | DP | 23 | 8 | Nishino et al. (1994a) | |||||||
| SigmaTM | SEC+AEC | I1.8 | GC | 90 | 3 | 5 | 2 | DP | 32 | 3 | “ | |||||
| SigmaTM | SEC+AEC | II1.35 | GC | 94 | 1 | 5 | tr. | DP | 33 | – | “ | |||||
| SigmaTM | SEC+AEC | II2 | GC | 94 | 1 | 5 | DP | 36 | – | “ | ||||||
| SigmaTM | SEC+AEC | III11.5 | GC | 93 | 2 | 5 | DP | 34 | – | “ | ||||||
| H2O, r.t. | F1 | GC | 55 | 11 | 9 | 25 | DP | 6 | 39 | Rupérez et al. (2002) | ||||||
| HCl 0.1M | F3 | GC | 89 | 6 | 5 | DP | 11 | 9 | “ | |||||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA | GC | 67 | 6 | 13 | 8 | 6 | DP | 24 | 10 | Cumashi et al. (2007) | |||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | GC | 59 | 13 | 10 | 3 | 14 | EA | 18 | 7 | Bittkau et al. (2020) | ||||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA | HPLC | 83 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 1 | DP | 25 | 1 | Zhang et al. (2015) | |||||
| Fucus ceranoides | HCl 0.01M+CaCl2 1% | GC | 80 | 10 | 7 | 4 | Tit | 31 | 12 | Mabeau and Kloareg (1987) | ||||||
| Fucus distichus | CaCl2 2% hot | PQA + AEC | F1 | GC | 84 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 1 | DP | 24 | – | Bilan et al. (2004) | |||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA + AEC | F3 | GC | 83 | 9 | 4 | 2 | 1 | DP | 24 | – | “ | ||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA + AEC | F4 | GC | 96 | 2 | 2 | Ac | DP | 35 | – | “ | |||||
| Fucus evanescens | HCl 0.4% r.t. | HC | F-1 | HPLC | 90 | 3 | 1 | 6 | DP | ∼12 | ND | Zvyagintseva et al. (1999) | ||||
| HCl 0.4% r.t +H2O hot | HC | F-2 | HPLC | 91 | 7 | 1 | DP | ∼25 | ND | “ | ||||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA + AEC | F3 | GC | 67 | 16 | 9 | 7 | DP | 29 | 11 | Bilan et al. (2002) | |||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA + AEC | F4 | GC | 94 | 3 | 3 | Ac | DP | 46 | – | “ | |||||
| HCl pH 2-2.3 hot | AEC | FeF | HPLC | 87 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 1 | DP | 28 | ND | Anastyuk et al. (2012b) | ||||
| HCl 0.2M hot | Sterile | HPLC | 69 | 7 | 9 | 8 | 6 | 1 | ND | ND | Skriptsova et al. (2012) | |||||
| HCl 0.2M hot | Reprod. | HPLC | 77 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 10 | ND | ND | “ | ||||||
| HCl pH2-2.3 | FeF | HPLC | 78 | 8 | 10 | 4 | Ac | DP | 23 | ND | Prokofjeva et al. (2013) | |||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | GC | 96 | 4 | EA | 27 | 4 | Bittkau et al. (2020) | |||||||||
| d | Enz.pH6 + CaCl2 2% | AEC | FeF2 | PAD | 75 | 3 | 15 | 2 | 1 | 1 | HexA 3 | DP | 35 | e | Nguyen et al. (2020) | |
| d | Enz.pH6 + CaCl2 2% | AEC | FeF3 | PAD | 88 | 2 | 9 | HexA 1 | DP | 39 | e | “ | ||||
| Fucus serratus | HCl 0.01M+CaCl2 1% | GC | 76 | 18 | 5 | 1 | Tit | 22 | 15 | Mabeau and Kloareg (1987) | ||||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | AEC | F3 | GC | 86 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 1 | Ac | DP | 22 | – | Bilan et al. (2006) | |||
| CaCl2 2% hot | AEC | F4 | GC | 94 | 3 | 3 | Ac | DP | 32 | – | “ | |||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA + AEC | GC | 69 | 7 | 13 | 6 | 5 | DP | 29 | 8 | Cumashi et al. (2007) | |||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | GC | 41 | 10 | 4 | 2 | 43 | EA | 12 | 6 | Bittkau et al. (2020) | ||||||
| Fucus spiralis | HCl 0.01M+CaCl2 1% | GC | 90 | 7 | 3 | tr. | Tit | 36 | 10 | Mabeau and Kloareg (1987) | ||||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA | GC | 80 | 7 | 7 | 3 | 3 | DP | 26 | 8 | Cumashi et al. (2007) | |||||
| Ascophyllum nodosum | HCl 0.2M | AP/R | Ascoph. | CC | 49 | 51 | BC | 12 | 19 | Larsen et al. (1966) | ||||||
| HCl 0.2M +AP/R | CaCl2 0.04M+CE | F2 | CC | 86 | 14 | BC | 30 | 3 | “ | |||||||
| H2O + OA pH 2.8f | CaCl2 2% | GC | 70 | 14 | 16 | JL | 21 | 11 | Percival (1968) | |||||||
| HCl pH 2 | Ethanol ppt | F1 | GC | 37 | 29 | 3 | 21 | 11 | M | 13 | 26 | Medcalf and Larsen (1977a) | ||||
| HCl pH 2 | Ethanol ppt | F2 | GC | 73 | 11 | 2 | 10 | 5 | M | 21 | 16 | “ | ||||
| HCl pH 2 | Ethanol ppt | F3 | GC | 81 | 9 | 2 | 4 | 4 | M | 25 | 6 | “ | ||||
| HCl pH 2 | Ethanol ppt | F4 | GC | 34 | 14 | 27 | 15 | 10 | M | 15 | 7 | “ | ||||
| HCl pH 2 | Ethanol ppt | F5 | GC | 71 | 7 | 14 | 4 | 4 | M | 8 | 7 | “ | ||||
| HCl pH 2 | CaCl2 1M+AP/R | GC | 44 | 4 | 40 | 4 | HexA 8 | M | 15 | 8 | Medcalf et al. (1978) | |||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA | GC | 67 | 11 | 12 | 7 | 3 | DP | 24 | 9 | Cumashi et al. (2007) | |||||
| H2O + HCl 0.2M | AP/R | HPLC | 47 | 40 | 2 | 10 | 1 | DP | 10 | 21 | Nakayasu et al. (2009) | |||||
| H2O + HCl 0.2M | AP/R | HPLC | 82 | 8 | 7 | 2 | 1 | DP | 24 | 2 | Zhang et al. (2015) | |||||
| HCl 0.1M, MWg | CaCl2 2% | PAD | 40 | 14 | 6 | 11 | 24 | DP | 27 | e | Yuan and Macquarrie (2015) | |||||
| Ascophyllum mackaii | H2O hot | CaCl2 1%+AP/R | AMF | HPLC | 57 | 4 | 16 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 11 | DP | 22 | e | Qu et al. (2014) | |
| Pelvetia canaliculata | pH 7.5+CaCl2 1% | EtOH+TCA 10% | FF | GC | 82 | 4 | 10 | 2 | 2 | Tit | 29 | 4 | Mabeau et al. (1990) | |||
| Triton 0.5%, pH 7.5+CaCl2 1% | EtOH+TCA 10% | TF | GC | 65 | 13 | 11 | 6 | 5 | Tit | 20 | 6 | “ | ||||
| HCl 0.01M+CaCl2 1% | HT | GC | 81 | 9 | 7 | 2 | 1 | Tit | 40 | 2 | “ | |||||
| Na2CO3 3% | HCl 0.01M ppt | OHT | GC | 90 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 1 | Tit | 33 | 4 | “ | ||||
| Silvetia babingtonii | HCl pH 2-2.3 hot | AEC | SbF | HPLC | 77 | 5 | 12 | 6 | DP | 25 | ND | Anastyuk et al. (2012b) | ||||
| HCl 0.2M hot | Sterile | HPLC | 71 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 10 | ND | ND | Skriptsova et al. (2012) | ||||||
| HCl 0.2M hot | Reprod. | HPLC | 80 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 4 | ND | ND | “ | ||||||
Reported compositions of the fucoidans from the family Fucaceae (Fucales).
aKey: AEC, anion exchange chromatography; SEC, size-exclusion chromatography; HC, hydrophobic chromatography; CE, cation exchange; PQA, precipitation with quaternary ammonium salts; AP/R alcohol precipitation and redissolution.
bKey for the less common abbreviations: PAD, HPAEC with pulse amperometric detector; GC, gas chromatography; CC, column chromatography on carbon-Celite.
cKey: DP, method of Dodgson and Price (1962) or equivalent; Pb, titration with lead nitrate (Medcalf et al., 1972); EA, elemental analysis; Tit, titration with cetylpyridinium chloride, pH 1.5 (Scott, 1960); BC, method of barium chloranilate (Lloyd, 1959).
dAnalyzed as Fucus distichus subsp. evanescens.
eThe information for the uronic acid is included in the molar ratio of monosaccharides.
fOxalic acid/ammonium oxalate extraction of the residue.
gMicrowave-aided extraction.
It should be mentioned that the high proportions of Glc found in some unpurified extracts are probably becoming from laminaran. This has occurred, for instance, in the sample of Fucus serratus isolated by Bittkau et al. (2020), as lower proportions of this monosaccharide have been found in other studies (Table 1). The studies of Bilan et al. (2002, 2004, 2006) on different Fucus species, carried out with careful separations involving anion exchange chromatography have shown in all cases that at high ionic strengths, they were able to isolate, with good yields, a fucan sulfate almost devoid of other monosaccharides (Fuc ≥ 94%, Table 1, fraction F4).
Ascophyllum nodosum is the other characteristic species from the family Fucaceae which has been thoroughly studied since the early studies of Kylin (1913), followed by further reports indicating the presence of a sulfated polysaccharide with a Fuc/Gal ratio of 8:1 (Percival and McDowell, 1967). The name ascophyllan was coined (to distinguish from the fucoidan characteristic of Fucus vesiculosus) for the isolated polysaccharide, composed of Fuc, Xyl, and sulfate groups, along with uronic acids. Medcalf and Larsen (1977a, b) determined a complex mixture of polysaccharides in this seaweed, and concluded that the fucan constituted the backbone of the molecule, whereas the ascophyllan-like components were attached as branches. Besides, they also determined that the uronic acid present was not glucuronic acid, as indicated in previous reports, but mannuronic and guluronic acid, i.e., the components of alginic acid, suggesting that contamination with this polysaccharide was difficult to avoid. For the fucoidans of this seaweed, an attempt was made to compare the results of the various researchers (Table 1), taking into account that most extractions were carried out in acid medium. However, the original Fuc/Xyl ratio close to 1 found by Larsen et al. (1966) was only reproduced by Nakayasu et al. (2009). Medcalf and Larsen (1977a) found a series of highly heterogeneous fractions, whereas 1 year later, using the same seaweed sample, Medcalf et al. (1978) found a polysaccharide with a Fuc/Gal ratio close to 1. The proportion of uronic acids in purified samples varied between 2 and 21%, whereas the content of sulfate varied between 8 and 24%. In summary, no common pattern between the determinations carried out by different researchers was observed.
Within the Fucaceae, it is clear that polysaccharides from the genus Fucus tend to be fucose-rich (more than 70% of the monosaccharides), although reports diverge, and important proportions of other monosaccharides appear in some cases (Table 1). On the other hand, in the genus Ascophyllum, important proportions of Xyl and uronic acid-containing fractions appear, although some purification steps allowed to obtained fucans equivalent to those of Fucus, suggesting that mixtures of different kinds of polymers appear in all the samples that have been surveyed in this study, and they might change their proportions in the different species, and using different extraction and purification methods.
The family Sargassaceae comprises much more species than the Fucaceae (512 against 18, Guiry and Guiry, 2020). This family has the largest number of species studied from the point of view of its polysaccharides. The fucoidans from at least 26 different species of the genus Sargassum alone were analyzed. Table 2 shows the results for the different fucoidans isolated from this genus. For S. horneri, Ermakova et al. (2011) postulated the presence of Rha in substantial amounts within the polysaccharides (Table 2). However, their NMR spectra did not show the presence of this sugar, and in a further work by the same group (Silchenko et al., 2017) the fucoidans were purified without any trace of Rha. In S. latifolium, Asker et al. (2007) isolated three fractions where Glc and GlcA are the major components and Fuc is a minor one, not responding to the classical fucoidan composition. Other atypical polysaccharides were reported in S. pallidum (Liu et al., 2016) carrying high-mannose fucoidans, rich in uronic acids and scarcely sulfated, and in S. thunbergii (Luo et al., 2019), where a fucoidan completely devoid of sulfate groups was reported (Table 2).
TABLE 2
| Species | Extraction | Purification/ | Acronym | Monosaccharide composition (moles %) | Sulfate | UA (%) | References | |||||||||
| Fractionationa | Methodb | Fuc | Xyl | Gal | Man | Glc | Rha | GlcA | Others | Methodc | % | |||||
| Sargassum aquifolium | H2O + HCl pH 1 | AEC | 0.5M | GC | 14 | 15 | 37 | 13 | 21 | DP | 6 | 28 | Bilan et al. (2017) | |||
| H2O + HCl pH 1 | AEC | 1M | GC | 41 | 15 | 29 | 9 | 6 | DP | 22 | 14 | “ | ||||
| H2O + HCl pH 1 | AEC | 1.5M | GC | 36 | 9 | 48 | 4 | 3 | DP | 29 | 5 | “ | ||||
| Sargassum binderi | CaCl2 2% hot | PQA | Fsar | GC | 60 | 5 | 19 | 7 | 7 | Ac | EA | 8 | d | Lim et al. (2016) | ||
| Sargassum cinereum | H2O+CaCl2 1% | HPLC | 66 | 7 | 24 | 3 | DP | 4 | ND | Somasundaram et al. (2016) | ||||||
| Sargassum crassifolium | CaCl2 2% hot | PQA | Fsc | GC | 56 | 2 | 41 | 1 | DP | 28 | 8 | Yuguchi et al. (2016) | ||||
| H2O, PTe | AP/R | SC3 | PAD | 37 | 5 | 37 | 11 | 11 | IC | 22 | 24 | Yang et al. (2017) | ||||
| Sargassum duplicatum | HCl 0.1M hot | AEC+HC | SdF1 | GC | 40 | 57 | 3 | Ac | DP | 32 | ND | Shevchenko et al. (2017) | ||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC+HC | SdF2 | GC | 59 | 2 | 39 | Ac | DP | 38 | ND | “ | |||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC, NH3 | SdF | GC | 51 | 49 | Ac | DP | 32 | ND | Usoltseva et al. (2017a) | ||||||
| Sargassum feldmanii | HCl 0.1M hot | AEC+HC | SfF2 | GC | 72 | 28 | DP | 25 | ND | Shevchenko et al. (2017) | ||||||
| Sargassum filipendula | Enz.pH 8 | Acetone ppt | SF-0.7 | HPLC | 22 | 16 | 27 | 16 | 16 | DP | 11 | d | Costa et al. (2011) | |||
| Enz.pH 8 | Acetone ppt | SF-2.0 | HPLC | 22 | 4 | 49 | 13 | 11 | DP | 18 | “ | |||||
| Sargassum fulvellum | HCl pH 2 hot | PQA | Fr 0.5 | GC | 38 | 23 | 26 | 6 | 7 | DP | 13 | 23 | Koo et al. (2001) | |||
| HCl pH 2 hot | PQA | Fr 3 | GC | 44 | 6 | 43 | 3 | 4 | DP | 55 | 4 | “ | ||||
| Sargassum fusiforme | H2O, hot | AEC+SEC | SFPS | GC | 53 | 9 | 20 | 21 | DP | 11 | 6 | Chen et al. (2012) | ||||
| Enzymes | AP/R+SEC | 65A | GC | 42 | 15 | 21 | 6 | 2 | 14 | DP | 17 | d | Hu et al. (2016) | |||
| H2O+CaCl2 2% | AEC+SEC | FP08S2 | GC | 37 | 18 | 19 | 7 | 19 | EA | 21 | d | Cong et al. (2016) | ||||
| HCl 0.01M+CaCl2 4M | AEC+SEC | SFF42 | HPLC | 31 | 6 | 19 | 29 | 3 | 12 | DP | 17 | 12 | Wu et al. (2019) | |||
| HCl 0.01M+CaCl2 4M | AEC+SEC | SFF5 | HPLC | 50 | 3 | 31 | 10 | 3 | 3 | DP | 24 | 10 | “ | |||
| Sargassum hemiphyllum | H2O, PTe | CaCl2 2%+AP/R | SH3 | PAD | 54 | 1 | 19 | 15 | 3 | 8 | Ac | IC | 24 | 6 | Huang et al. (2017) | |
| Sargassum henslowianum | H2O, AP/R | AEC+SEC | SHAP-1 | HPLC | 76 | 24 | EA | 32 | 0 | Sun et al. (2020) | ||||||
| H2O, AP/R | AEC+SEC | SHAP-2 | HPLC | 75 | 25 | EA | 32 | 0 | “ | |||||||
| Sargassum horneri | HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | Sh-F1 | HPLC | 81 | 3 | 8 | 7 | DP | 15 | ND | Ermakova et al. (2011) | ||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | Sh-F2 | HPLC | 90 | 10 | DP | 0 | ND | “ | |||||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | Sh-F3 | HPLC | 69 | 31 | DP | 17 | ND | “ | |||||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | AEC | GC | 90 | 10 | DP | 23 | ND | Silchenko et al. (2017) | ||||||||
| Sargassum latifolium | H2O, hot | AEC+SEC | SP-I | HPLC | 14 | 14 | 42 | 23 | 16 | d | Asker et al. (2007) | |||||
| H2O, hot | AEC+SEC | SP-II | HPLC | 10 | 13 | 41 | 29 | 19 | d | “ | ||||||
| H2O, hot | AEC+SEC | SP-III | HPLC | 16 | 12 | 32 | 35 | 22 | d | “ | ||||||
| Sargassum mcclurei | HCl pH 2.5 hot | HC+AEC | SmF1 | HPLC | 27 | 6 | 20 | 34 | 13 | DP | 17 | ND | Thinh et al. (2013) | |||
| HCl pH 2.5 hot | HC+AEC | SmF2 | HPLC | 45 | 5 | 34 | 5 | 10 | DP | 26 | ND | “ | ||||
| HCl pH 2.5 hot | HC+AEC | SmF3 | HPLC | 59 | 41 | DP | 35 | ND | “ | |||||||
| Sargassum muticum | pH 7.5+CaCl2 1% | EtOH+TCA 10% | FF | GC | 44 | 5 | 46 | 3 | 3 | Tit | 12 | 9 | Mabeau et al. (1990) | |||
| Triton 0.5%, pH 7.5+CaCl2 1% | EtOH+TCA 10% | TF | GC | 84 | 2 | 14 | Tit | 8 | 11 | “ | ||||||
| HCl 0.01M+CaCl2 1% | HF | GC | 46 | 21 | 11 | 17 | 5 | Tit | 9 | 25 | “ | |||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | 1SmF1 | GC | 52 | 33 | 15 | DP | 26 | ND | Usoltseva et al. (2017b) | ||||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | 1SmF3 | GC | 67 | 33 | Ac | DP | 48 | ND | “ | ||||||
| Sargassum oligocystum | HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | 1SoF1 | HPLC | 43 | 4 | 8 | 35 | 8 | DP | 17 | ND | Men’shova et al. (2013) | |||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | 1SoF2 | HPLC | 53 | 5 | 21 | 10 | 10 | DP | 24 | ND | “ | ||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | 1SoF3 | HPLC | 77 | 23 | DP | 32 | ND | “ | |||||||
| Sargassum pallidum | HCl 0.2M hot | Sterile | HPLC | 46 | 8 | 10 | 10 | 14 | 13 | ND | ND | Skriptsova et al. (2012) | ||||
| HCl 0.2M hot | Reprod. | HPLC | 52 | 6 | 16 | 9 | 3 | 14 | ND | ND | “ | |||||
| H2O, r.t. | Ethanol ppt | SPC60 | GC | 41 | 5 | 17 | 27 | 10 | DP | 4 | 33 | Liu et al. (2016) | ||||
| H2O, hot | Ethanol ppt | SPH60 | GC | 32 | 4 | 14 | 23 | 25 | DP | 4 | 29 | “ | ||||
| H2O, hot | Ethanol ppt | SPH70 | GC | 37 | 4 | 24 | 22 | 10 | DP | 7 | 20 | “ | ||||
| Sargassum polycystum | HCl pH 2-3 hot | HC+AEC | F1 | GC | 29 | 22 | 19 | 19 | 11 | DP | 7 | 23 | Bilan et al. (2013) | |||
| HCl pH 2-3 hot | HC+AEC | F2 | GC | 44 | 13 | 28 | 9 | 5 | DP | 20 | 11 | “ | ||||
| HCl pH 2-3 hot | HC+AEC | F3 | GC | 69 | 4 | 25 | tr. | tr. | DP | 33 | 2 | “ | ||||
| HCl pH 2-3 hot | HC+AEC | F4 | GC | 63 | 3 | 34 | DP | 34 | 2 | “ | ||||||
| Enzymes pH 4.5 | CaCl2 5M | SPF | PAD | 63 | 6 | 8 | NIf 22 | DP | 28 | Fernando et al. (2018) | ||||||
| Sargassum ringgoldianum | HCl 0.05M | Ca(AcO)2+AEC | Fr-B | GC | 44 | 17 | 18 | 17 | 5 | DP | 16 | 10 | Mori and Nisizawa (1982) | |||
| HCl 0.05M | Ca(AcO)2+AEC | Fr-C | GC | 58 | 6 | 28 | 7 | 1 | DP | 24 | 7 | “ | ||||
| Sargassum stenophyllum | H2O+CaCl2 4M | PQA | F2 | GC | 60 | 9 | 21 | 10 | DP | 19 | 11 | Duarte et al. (2001) | ||||
| H2O+CaCl2 4M | PQA | F3 | GC | 52 | 7 | 23 | 17 | DP | 21 | 10 | “ | |||||
| H2O+CaCl2 4M | PQA | F5 | GC | 60 | 5 | 31 | 2 | 2 | DP | 28 | 2 | “ | ||||
| Sargassum swartzii | HCl 0.1M +CaCl2 2% | PQA+AEC | F2 | PAD | 50 | 3 | 29 | 5 | 3 | Ara 7 | DP | 15 | 13 | Ly et al. (2005) | ||
| HCl 0.1M +CaCl2 2% | PQA+AEC | F3 | PAD | 56 | 2 | 29 | 3 | 3 | Ara 5 | DP | 18 | 5 | “ | |||
| HCl 0.1M +CaCl2 2% | PQA+AEC | F4 | PAD | 56 | 2 | 28 | 4 | 3 | Ara 4 | DP | 28 | 8 | “ | |||
| HCl 0.05 M+CaCl2 4% | AEC | FF1 | HPLC | 58 | 6 | 22 | 14 | DP | 19 | 18 | Dinesh et al. (2016) | |||||
| HCl 0.05 M+CaCl2 4% | AEC | FF2 | HPLC | 63 | 4 | 18 | 15 | DP | 24 | 13 | “ | |||||
| Sargassum tenerrimum | HCl 0.1M +K2CO3 2% | CaCl2 2%+ HCl 0.1M | C | GC | 73 | 15 | 9 | 3 | DP/IR | 2 | 9 | Sinha et al. (2010) | ||||
| Sargassum trichophyllum | H2O, hot | AEC+SEC | ST-F | GC | 80 | 20 | Rho | 23 | 1 | Lee et al. (2011) | ||||||
| Sargassum thunbergii | H2O+NaOH 0.5M | AEC | STSP-I | GC | 55 | 45 | DP | 0 | ND | Luo et al. (2019) | ||||||
| Sargassum vachellianum | H2O | CaCl2 | SPS | HPLC | 65 | 5 | 12 | 15 | 3 | DP | 12 | 1 | Jesumani et al. (2020) | |||
| Sargassum vulgare | Enz. pH 8 | AEC | Flo 1.5 | Col. | 50g | 25 | HexA 25 | TB | ∼ 15 | d | Dietrich et al. (1995) | |||||
| Enz. pH 8 | AEC | Flo 2.5 | Col. | 77g | 8 | HexA 15 | TB | ∼ 41 | d | “ | ||||||
Reported compositions of the fucoidans from the genus Sargassum (Sargassaceae, Fucales).
aKey: AEC, anion exchange chromatography; SEC, size-exclusion chromatography; HC, hydrophobic chromatography; PQA, precipitation with quaternary ammonium salts; AP/R alcohol precipitation and redissolution.
bKey for the less common abbreviations: PAD, HPAEC with pulse amperometric detector; GC, gas chromatography; Col., colorimetric methods.
cKey: DP, method of Dodgson and Price (1962) or equivalent; IC, ion chromatography; EA, elemental analysis; IR, estimation by area of IR bands; TB, toluidine blue; Rho, rhodizonate; Tit, titration with cetylpyridinium chloride, pH 1.5 (Scott, 1960).
dThe information for the uronic acid is included in the molar ratio of monosaccharides. ePT = high pressure and temperature.
fNI = sugar not identified.
gFuc, Xyl and uronic acid were the only monosaccharides which could be determined.
Dietrich et al. (1995) studied the polysaccharides from Sargassum vulgare, differentiating whole plants and floaters. The fucoidan fractions corresponded to sulfated xylofucans containing important proportions of uronic acids. The proportion of sulfate is clearly higher in floaters. The ratio Fuc/Xyl/HexA varied between 1:0.5:0.5 and 1:0.1:0.2. However, only Fuc, Xyl and uronic acid have been determined in this investigation, missing other sugars possibly present.
For Sargassum fusiforme, the presence of galacturonic acid was detected (Hu et al., 2014). However, it has been shown later that this monosaccharide was part of a contaminating polysaccharide which could be separated by careful fractionation (Cong et al., 2016; Hu et al., 2016).
For the remaining members of the Fucales, the data is shown in Table 3. Mian and Percival (1973) carried out studies on Bifurcaria bifurcata and Himanthalia lorea. The data is shown only partially in Table 3, as Gal could not be quantified. Fractionation by ion exchange chromatography showed fractions with high uronic acid/low sulfate content using lower ionic strengths, and high sulfate, high Fuc, low uronic acid content in the later elutions. This behavior was observed for many further studies, regardless of the taxonomy of the seaweed. In some cases, like for Nizamuddinia zanardinii, the authors have devoted a lot of work in order to search for different extraction methods (Alboofetileh et al., 2019a,b,c). In Table 3 we have included the analysis of one extraction method, as the characteristics of the polysaccharides appear to be quite similar.
TABLE 3
| Species | Extraction | Purification/ | Acronym | Monosaccharide composition (moles %) | Sulfate | UA (%) | References | |||||||||
| Fractionationa | Methodb | Fuc | Xyl | Gal | Man | Glc | Rha | GlcA | Others | Methodc | % | |||||
| Family Sargassaceae | ||||||||||||||||
| Bifurcaria bifurcata | CaCl2 2% +HCl pH2 | AEC | 0.3M | GC+PC | XX | X | tre | JL | 5 | 20 | Mian and Percival (1973) | |||||
| CaCl2 2% +HCl pH2 | AEC | 1M | GC+PC | XX | tr. | Xe | JL | 30 | 3 | “ | ||||||
| HCl 0.01M+CaCl2 1% | GC | 73 | 10 | 10 | 4 | 3 | Tit | 20 | 16 | Mabeau and Kloareg (1987) | ||||||
| Coccophora langsdorfii | HCl 0.1M r.t. | AEC | Cf2 | HPLC | 86 | 3 | 7 | HexA 4,Ac | DP | 25 | d | Imbs et al. (2016) | ||||
| Cystoseira barbata | HCl 0.1M hot | CBSP | GC | 45 | 4 | 34 | 3 | 8 | 6 | Ac | EA | 23 | 7 | Sellimi et al. (2014) | ||
| Cystoseira compressa | HCl 0.1M hot | CCF | GC | 62 | 4 | 24 | 8 | DP | 15 | 9 | Hentati et al. (2018) | |||||
| Cystoseira indica | H2O, r.t. | CiWE | GC | 75 | 14 | 11 | DP/IR | 8 | 4 | Mandal et al. (2007) | ||||||
| H2O, r.t. | AEC | CiF3 | GC | 84 | 7 | 5 | 4 | DP/IR | 9 | 2 | “ | |||||
| Hizikia fusiforme | H2O+CaCl2 3M | AEC | F2 | GC | 38 | 8 | 18 | 30 | 4 | 1 | DP | 12 | 29 | Li et al. (2006) | ||
| H2O+CaCl2 3M | AEC+SEC | F33 | GC | 38 | 5 | 22 | 27 | 5 | 2 | DP | 3 | 32 | “ | |||
| H2O+CaCl2 3M | AEC | YF5 | HPLC | 44 | 21 | 18 | 16 | DP | 20 | d | Wang et al. (2012) | |||||
| Hormophysa cuneiformis | H2O+HCl pH 1 | FHC | GC | 39 | 5 | 47 | 5 | 4 | DP | 23 | 5 | Bilan et al. (2018) | ||||
| H2O+HCl pH 1 | AEC | F2 | GC | 33 | 11 | 50 | 4 | 2 | DP | 18 | 7 | “ | ||||
| H2O+HCl pH 1 | AEC | F3 | GC | 79 | 2 | 19 | DP | 35 | 2 | “ | ||||||
| Nizamuddinia zanardinii | H2O | CaCl2 1% | HWE-F | GC | 31 | 6 | 28 | 32 | 5 | DP | 18 | 1 | Alboofetileh et al. (2019a) | |||
| Turbinaria conoides | HCl 0.1M | AEC | AF3 | GC | 54 | 18 | 28 | + | DP/IR | 4 | ND | Chattopadhyay et al. (2010) | ||||
| Turbinaria ornata | HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | ToF2 | HPLC | 83 | 17 | DP | 32 | ND | Ermakova et al. (2016) | ||||||
| Enzymes pH 4.5 | CaCl2+AEC | F2 | PAD | 46 | 22 | NIf 32 | DP | 10 | ND | Jayawardena et al. (2019) | ||||||
| Enzymes pH 4.5 | CaCl2+AEC | F7 | PAD | 63 | 5 | 6 | NI 25 | DP | 30 | ND | “ | |||||
| Turbinaria turbinata | Enzymes pH 5 | AEC | TtF3 | GC | 61 | 2 | 19 | 4 | 13 | Ara 1,Ac | ND | ND | Monsur et al. (2017) | |||
| Family Durvillaeaceae | ||||||||||||||||
| Durvillaea antarctica | H2O, MWg | DAP | GC | 3 | 3 | 9 | 78 | Sorbose 8 | ND | ND | He et al. (2016) | |||||
| Durvillaea potatorum | HCl pH 1 hot | Acetone ppt | AFS | HPLC | 32 | 4 | 64 | DP | 13 | – | Lorbeer et al. (2017) | |||||
| Family Himanthaliaceae | ||||||||||||||||
| Himanthalia elongata | H2O+HCl 0.1M | F-HCl | GC | 17 | 1 | 29 | 3 | 50 | DP | 6 | 3 | Mateos-Aparicio et al. (2018) | ||||
| Himanthalia lorea | CaCl2 2% +HCl pH2 | AEC | 0.3M | GC+PC | XX | X | tr.e | JL | 2 | 19 | Mian and Percival (1973) | |||||
| CaCl2 2% +HCl pH2 | AEC | 1M | GC+PC | XX | tr. | Xe | JL | 29 | 4 | “ | ||||||
| Family Seirococcaceae | ||||||||||||||||
| Marginariella boryana | H2SO4 1% r.t. | Reprod. | GC | 72 | 2 | 17 | 1 | 7 | ND | 3 | Wozniak et al. (2015) | |||||
| H2SO4 1% r.t. | Vegetat. | GC | 45 | 21 | 12 | 13 | 7 | 2 | ND | 13 | “ | |||||
| Seirococcus axillaris | HCl pH 1 hot | Acetone ppt | AFS | HPLC | 61 | 16 | 14 | 3 | 2 | 4 | DP | 20 | d | Lorbeer et al. (2017) | ||
Reported compositions of the fucoidans from the order Fucales not belonging to the family Fucaceae or to the genus Sargassum (Sargassaceae).
aKey: AEC, anion exchange chromatography; SEC, size-exclusion chromatography.
bKey for the less common abbreviations: PC, paper chromatography; GC, gas chromatography; PAD, HPAEC with pulse amperometric detector.
cKey DP, method of Dodgson and Price (1962) or equivalent; JL, method of Jones and Letham (1954); IR, estimation by area of IR bands; EA, elemental analysis by different methods; Tit, titration with cetylpyridinium chloride, pH 1.5 (Scott, 1960).
dThe information for the uronic acid is included in the molar ratio of monosaccharides.
eAs galactose could not be quantified, the data is semiquantitative.
fNI = sugar not identified.
gMicrowave-aided extraction.
For Marginariella boryana, Wozniak et al. (2015) analyzed the polysaccharides extracted from vegetative structures (blades and vesicles) and receptacles (reproductive structures) separately. The proportions of Xyl, Man, and uronic acid increase significantly in the vegetative structures (Table 3). Within the family Durvillaeaceae two species were studies. Both in Durvillaea antarctica (He et al., 2016) and D. potatorum (Lorbeer et al., 2017), the proportion of Glc was so large that it obscured the analysis of the fucoidan constituents, even when purification procedures (successful with other seaweeds) to avoid contamination with laminaran were carried out (Lorbeer et al., 2017).
Most of the fucoidans analyzed from the Fucales were galactofucans, usually with small proportions of Xyl, with the exception of those of Ascophyllum nodosum (Table 1). Man and GlcA appeared in variable amounts.
Dictyotales
The data on the fucoidans from different species of the order Dictyotales is shown in Table 4. It should be mentioned that for Dictyota mertensii, the information is incomplete, as only Fuc, Xyl and uronic acid have been determined (Dietrich et al., 1995).
TABLE 4
| Species | Extraction | Purification/ | Acronym | Monosaccharide composition (moles %) | Sulfate | UA (%) | References | |||||||||
| Fractionationa | Methodb | Fuc | Xyl | Gal | Man | Glc | Rha | GlcA | Others | Methodc | % | |||||
| Canistrocarpus cervicornis | Enz.pH 8 | Acetone ppt | CC-0.7 | HPLC | 33 | 17 | 50 | DP | 19 | d | Camara et al. (2011) | |||||
| Enz.pH 8 | Acetone ppt | CC-2.0 | HPLC | 20 | 10 | 40 | 10 | 20 | DP | 20 | d | “ | ||||
| Dictyopteris plagiogramma | CaCl2 2% +HCl pH2 | C | GC | 42 | 10 | 16 | 8 | 3 | 21 | JL | 4 | d | Percival et al. (1981) | |||
| Dictyopteris polypodioides | HCl 0.1M hot | HC+AEC | Dp-F2 | HPLC | 48 | 19 | 5 | 14 | 5 | 9 | DP | 13 | ND | Sokolova et al. (2011) | ||
| HCl 0.1M hot | HC+AEC | Dp-F4 | HPLC | 38 | 8 | 31 | 4 | 8 | 12 | DP | 13 | ND | “ | |||
| Dictyota dichotoma | HCl pH 1 hot | Ethanol ppt | R | PC | 25 | 16 | 25 | 10 | 24 | BC | 16 | d | Abdel-Fattah et al. (1978) | |||
| HCl pH 2 r.t. | PQA | EAR-0.5 | GC | 40 | 30 | 6 | 16 | 4 | DP | 13 | 40 | Rabanal et al. (2014) | ||||
| HCl pH 2 r.t. | PQA | EAR-2 | GC | 43 | 16 | 28 | 10 | 2 | DP | 33 | 14 | “ | ||||
| HCl pH 2 hot | PQA | EAH1-1.5 | GC | 41 | 26 | 5 | 25 | 1 | 2 | DP | 19 | 30 | “ | |||
| HCl pH 2 hot | PQA | EAH2-0.5 | GC | 26 | 36 | 4 | 33 | 1 | DP | 10 | 42 | “ | ||||
| HCl pH 2 hot | PQA | EAH4-0.5 | GC | 10 | 30 | 5 | 51 | 3 | DP | 5 | 48 | “ | ||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC+HC | DdF | GC | 52 | 12 | 10 | 9 | 17 | Ac | DP | 2 | ND | Shevchenko et al. (2017) | |||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC (x 2) | DdF | HPLC | 58 | 20 | 12 | 9 | Ac | DP | 29 | ND | Usoltseva et al. (2018b) | ||||
| Dictyota divaricata | HCl 0.1M hot | AEC+HC | DdiF1 | GC | 61 | 31 | 4 | 4 | Ac | DP | 11 | ND | Shevchenko et al. (2017) | |||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC+HC | DdiF2 | GC | 43 | 5 | 44 | 4 | 4 | DP | 18 | ND | “ | ||||
| Dictyota menstrualis | Enz. pH 8 | Acetone ppt | F1.0v | PC+GC | 30 | 24 | 24 | HexA 21 | ∼ 5 | d | Albuquerque et al. (2004) | |||||
| Enz. pH 8 | Acetone ppt | F1.5v | PC+GC | 31 | 9 | 47 | HexA 13 | ∼ 16 | d | “ | ||||||
| Dictyota mertensii | Enz. pH 8 | AEC | 1M | Col. | 26e | 32 | HexA 42 | TB | ∼ 20 | d | Dietrich et al. (1995) | |||||
| Enz. pH 8 | AEC | 2.5+3M | Col. | 56e | 11 | HexA 33 | TB | ∼ 37 | d | “ | ||||||
| Enz. pH 8 | Acetone ppt | ADm | GC | 33 | 20 | 47 | DP | ∼ 22 | d | Queiroz et al. (2008) | ||||||
| Lobophora variegata | Enz. pH 8 | Acet + SEC | Lv | GC | 25 | 75 | Ac | DP | ∼ 3 | – | Medeiros et al. (2008) | |||||
| Padina australis | CaCl2 2% hot | PQA | Fpa | GC | 60 | 8 | 29 | 3 | DP | 22 | 21 | Yuguchi et al. (2016) | ||||
| Padina boryana | HCl 0.1M hot | AEC+HC | PbF | GC | 61 | 31 | 4 | 3 | Ac | DP | 18 | ND | Shevchenko et al. (2017) | |||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC (x 2) | PbF | GC | 40 | 37 | 17 | 6 | Ac | DP | 19 | ND | Usoltseva et al. (2018a) | ||||
| Padina gymnospora | Enz. pH 8 | Acet + SEC | PF1 | PC+GC | 36 | 11 | 7 | 46 | DP | 6 | d | Silva et al. (2005) | ||||
| Enz. pH 8 | Acet + SEC | PF2 | PC+GC | 39 | 8 | 6 | 47 | DP | 3 | d | “ | |||||
| Padina pavonica | CaCl2 2% +HCl pH2 | AEC | 0.3M | PC+GC | XX | X | tr.f | JL | 3 | 20 | Mian and Percival (1973) | |||||
| CaCl2 2% +HCl pH2 | AEC | 1M | PC+GC | XX | tr. | Xf | JL | 17 | 5 | “ | ||||||
| HCl pH 2.5 hot | AEC | Purified | PC | 16 | 16 | 11 | 13 | 13 | 30 | BC | 19 | d | Hussein et al. (1980) | |||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | 4PpF1 | HPLC | 43 | 13 | 9 | 17 | 17 | DP | 4 | ND | Men’shova et al. (2012) | ||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | 4PpF2 | HPLC | 53 | 16 | 16 | 10 | 5 | DP | 14 | ND | “ | ||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | 4PpF3 | HPLC | 59 | 6 | 18 | 18 | DP | 18 | ND | “ | |||||
| Padina tetrastomatica | H2O | CaCl2 2% ppt | PtWE1 | GC | 59 | 23 | 10 | 3 | 5 | ND | 9 | Karmakar et al. (2009) | ||||
| H2O | AEC+SEC | F3 | GC | 72 | 25 | 3 | DP/IR | ∼ 8 | 4 | “ | ||||||
| HCl 0.1M r.t. | Ext. A | GC | 68 | 16 | 9 | 5 | 2 | DP/IR | ∼ 3 | 5 | Karmakar et al. (2010) | |||||
| HCl 0.1M +K2CO3 2% | CaCl2 2% ppt | Ext. C | GC | 73 | 16 | 11 | DP/IR | ∼ 6 | 5 | “ | ||||||
| Spatoglossum asperum | H2O+CaCl2 1% | AP/R | HPLC | 61 | 6 | 25 | 4 | 3 | DP | 21 | ND | Palanisamy et al. (2017) | ||||
| Spatoglossum schroederi | Enz. pH 8 | Acetone ppt | Fuc. A | GC | 53 | 18 | 29 | DP | ∼ 28 | d | Queiroz et al. (2008) | |||||
| Enz. pH 8 | Acetone ppt | Fuc. B | GC | 27 | 14 | 55 | 4 | DP | ∼ 37 | d | “ | |||||
| Enz. pH 8 | Acet.+AEC | Fuc. B | GC | 28 | 14 | 56 | 2 | TB | 19 | d | Menezes et al. (2018) | |||||
| Stoechospermum marginatum | H2O | AEC (x 2) | F3 | GC | 96 | 2 | 2 | DP/IR | 13 | – | Adhikari et al. (2006) | |||||
Reported compositions of the fucoidans from the order Dictyotales.
aKey: AEC, anion exchange chromatography; SEC, size-exclusion chromatography; HC, hydrophobic chromatography; PQA, precipitation with quaternary ammonium salts; Acet, fractional precipitation with acetone; AP/R alcohol precipitation and redissolution.
bKey for the less common abbreviations: PC, paper chromatography; GC, gas chromatography; Col., colorimetric methods.
cKey DP, method of Dodgson and Price (1962) or equivalent; JL, method of Jones and Letham (1954); BC, method of barium chloranilate (Lloyd, 1959); TB, method of toluidine blue; IR, estimation by area of IR bands.
dThe information for the uronic acid is included in the molar ratio of monosaccharides.
eFuc, Xyl and uronic acid were the only monosaccharides which could be determined.
fAs galactose could not be quantified, the data is semiquantitative.
Padina pavonica was studied by Mian and Percival (1973), named then as P. pavonia. As occurred with the other seaweeds studied in that paper, the data on the table are incomplete, as Gal could not be quantified. Fraction 0.3M was rich in Fuc and Xyl, whereas fraction 1M was richer in Fuc, together with Gal. For this seaweed, Men’shova et al. (2012) carried out a seasonal study which showed that the proportion of Gal of the fucoidans increased markedly in all fractions when stepping down from spring to summer.
The fucoidans from the Dictyotales appear to be more heterogeneous than most of those of the Fucales. High proportions of Man and Rha appeared often (Table 4). However, an almost pure fucan sulfate was reported to be present in Stoechospermum marginatum (Adhikari et al., 2006) after careful purification.
Laminariales
Two species of Laminariales have been included in the early studies of Kylin (1913). They are Laminaria digitata and Saccharina lattisima (as Laminaria saccharina).
Many different species from the Laminariales have been studied thereafter, including species from four families (Agaraceae, Alariaceae, Laminariaceae, and Lessoniaceae). In order to keep up with the Silberfeld et al. (2014) taxonomy, we have included also a species from the Chorda genus (family Chordaceae) which has been recently proposed to be included in a new order, the Chordales (Starko et al., 2019). The data for the family Laminariaceae are shown in Table 5, whereas those of the remaining families appear in Table 6. It is worth noting that the species studied as Laminaria cichorioides and L. japonica are included in Table 5 as Saccharina cichorioides and S. japonica, respectively, in order to keep up with the newer taxonomy (Guiry and Guiry, 2020).
TABLE 5
| Species | Extraction | Purification/ | Acronym | Monosaccharide composition (moles %) | Sulfate | UA (%) | References | |||||||||
| Fractionationa | Methodb | Fuc | Xyl | Gal | Man | Glc | Rha | GlcA | Others | Meth.c | % | |||||
| Kjelmaniella crassifolia | pH 6.5 hot | HCl pH 2 ppt | HPLC | 84 | 5 | 10 | ND | 7 | Sakai et al. (2002) | |||||||
| Enz. pH 4.5 | AEC | F1 | HPLC | 30 | 3 | 49 | 6 | 4 | 9 | Ac | DP | 23 | d | Song et al. (2018) | ||
| Enz. pH 4.5 | AEC | F2 | HPLC | 47 | 8 | 15 | 12 | 1 | 16 | Ac | DP | 16 | d | “ | ||
| Enz. pH 4.5 | AEC | F3 | HPLC | 67 | 2 | 23 | 3 | 1 | 4 | DP | 32 | d | “ | |||
| Laminaria angustata | H2O | PQA+AEC | F4 | GC | 90 | 10 | EA | ∼22 | 1 | Kitamura et al. (1991) | ||||||
| HCl pH 2 +PQA | AEC+SEC | LA-5 | GC | 2 | 98 | DP | 38 | 3 | Nishino et al. (1994b) | |||||||
| HCl 0.1M | PQA+AEC | LA-2 | PAD | 95 | 5 | DP | 56 | 2 | Tako et al. (2010) | |||||||
| Laminaria bongardiana | CaCl2 2% hot | PQA+AEC | F-2 | GC | 53 | 8 | 20 | 15 | 3 | Ac | DP | 20 | 12 | Bilan et al. (2016) | ||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA+AEC | F-3 | GC | 39 | 4 | 54 | 2 | 1 | Ac | DP | 26 | 3 | “ | |||
| Laminaria cichorioides | See Saccharina cichorioides | |||||||||||||||
| Laminaria digitata | HCl 0.01M+CaCl2 1% | GC | 62 | 21 | 9 | 4 | 4 | Tit | 9 | 15 | Mabeau and Kloareg (1987) | |||||
| pH 7.5+CaCl2 1% | EtOH+TCA 10% | FF | GC | 65 | 4 | 24 | 3 | 4 | Tit | 18 | 7 | Mabeau et al. (1990) | ||||
| Triton 0.5%, pH 7.5+CaCl2 1% | EtOH+TCA 10% | TF | GC | 47 | 15 | 20 | 11 | 7 | Tit | 11 | 12 | “ | ||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA | GC | 73 | 5 | 15 | 4 | 3 | DP | 27 | 7 | Cumashi et al. (2007) | |||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | GC | 67 | 14 | 14 | 5 | EA | 20 | 10 | Bittkau et al. (2020) | |||||||
| Laminaria hyperborea | Exudation | UF | pFuc | GC | 98 | 2 | tr. | EA | 54 | – | Kopplin et al. (2018) | |||||
| Laminaria japonica | See Saccharina japonica | |||||||||||||||
| Laminaria longipes | HCl 0.1M r.t. | AEC | LlF | GC | 100 | DP | 32 | ND | Usoltseva et al. (2019) | |||||||
| Laminaria religiosa | HCl pH 2 hot | PQA | Fr 0.5 | GC | 34 | 12 | 14 | 21 | 19 | DP | 9 | 35 | Koo et al. (2001) | |||
| HCl pH 2 hot | PQA | Fr. 3 | GC | 61 | 1 | 28 | 7 | 3 | DP | 39 | 18 | “ | ||||
| Macrocystis pyrifera | Exudation | AP/R | PC+CC | 92 | 2 | 6 | tr. | 19 | – | Schweiger (1962) | ||||||
| SigmaTM | HPLC | 79 | 3 | 12 | 3 | 3 | DP | 27 | 5 | Zhang et al. (2015) | ||||||
| HCl pH 1 hot | Acetone ppt | AFS | HPLC | 80 | 17 | 3 | DP | 24 | – | Lorbeer et al. (2017) | ||||||
| Saccharina cichorioides | HCl 0.4%+H2O | HC | L.c.F-2 | HPLC | 81 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 8 | DP | ∼35 | ND | Zvyagintseva et al. (1999) | ||
| HCl 0.4% r.t. | HC | Lc2-F1 | HPLC | 72 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 5 | DP | ∼30 | ND | Zvyagintseva et al. (2003) | ||||
| HCl 0.4% +H2O | HC | Lc2-F2 | HPLC | 100 | DP | ∼36 | ND | “ | ||||||||
| HCl pH 2-2.3 hot | AEC | Lc-F2 | HPLC | 98 | 2 | DP | 30 | ND | Anastyuk et al. (2010) | |||||||
| HCl 0.1M r.t. | AEC | Sc-F1 | HPLC | 95 | 5 | DP | 21 | ND | Vishchuk et al. (2013) | |||||||
| HCl 0.1M r.t. | AEC | Sc-F2 | HPLC | 100 | DP | 39 | ND | “ | ||||||||
| HCl pH 2-2.3 | AEC | ScF | HPLC | 89 | 2 | 6 | 3 | DP | 26 | ND | Prokofjeva et al. (2013) | |||||
| HCl 0.1M r.t. | AEC | ScF | GC | 98 | 2 | DP | 36 | ND | Usoltseva et al. (2019) | |||||||
| Saccharina gurjanovae | HCl pH 2-2.3 | AEC | SgGF | HPLC | 64 | 21 | 15 | Ac | DP | 28 | ND | Prokofjeva et al. (2013) | ||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | AEC (x 2) | SgF | GC | 76 | 24 | Ac | DP | 25 | ND | Shevchenko et al. (2015) | ||||||
| Saccharina japonica | HCl 0.4% +H2O | HC | L.j.-F-2 | HPLC | 94 | 2 | 3 | 1 | ND | ND | Zvyagintseva et al. (1999) | |||||
| HCl 0.4% r.t. | HC | Lj1-F1 | HPLC | 55 | 7 | 26 | 6 | 3 | 3 | ND | ND | Zvyagintseva et al. (2003) | ||||
| HCl 0.4% +H2O | HC | Lj1-F2 | HPLC | 84 | 1 | 12 | 1 | 2 | DP | ∼25 | ND | “ | ||||
| HCl pH 3 r.t. | AEC | L | HPLC | 61 | 5 | 14 | 16 | 4 | DP | 21 | 18 | Ozawa et al. (2006) | ||||
| HCl pH 3 r.t. | AEC | GA | HPLC | 90 | 10 | DP | 38 | 1 | “ | |||||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | Sj-F1 | HPLC | 53 | 1 | 29 | 15 | 2 | DP | 10 | ND | Vishchuk et al. (2011) | ||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | Sj-F2 | HPLC | 61 | 2 | 33 | 1 | 3 | Ac | DP | 23 | ND | “ | |||
| HCl 0.2M hot | Sterile | HPLC | 41 | 8 | 14 | 12 | 14 | 11 | ND | ND | Skriptsova et al. (2012) | |||||
| HCl 0.2M hot | Reprod. | HPLC | 25 | 3 | 13 | 4 | 48 | 7 | ND | ND | “ | |||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | Sj-sF2 | HPLC | 62 | 6 | 21 | 9 | 2 | DP | 21 | ND | Vishchuk et al. (2012) | ||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | Sj-fF2 | HPLC | 58 | 37 | 5 | DP | 23 | ND | “ | ||||||
| HCl pH 2-2.3 | AEC | SjGF | HPLC | 50 | 1 | 44 | 5 | Ac | DP | 23 | ND | Prokofjeva et al. (2013) | ||||
| HCl pH 2.5 hot | B | CZE | 54 | 3 | 29 | 3 | 1 | 10 | ND | d | Guo et al. (2013) | |||||
| H2O hot | CaCl2 1%+AP/R | LJF | HPLC | 34 | 2 | 37 | 23 | 1 | 3 | DP | 14 | 3 | Qu et al. (2014) | |||
| HCO2H 0.1%, PTe | CaCl2 1% | HPLC | 57 | 17 | 21 | 5 | DP | 24 | 10 | Saravana et al. (2016) | ||||||
| Saccharina latissima | CaCl2 2% hot | PQA | GC | 80 | 3 | 10 | 2 | 5 | DP | 30 | 5 | Cumashi et al. (2007) | ||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA+AEC | F-1.0 | GC | 46 | 5 | 32 | 14 | 3 | DP | 16 | 23 | Bilan et al. (2010) | ||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA+AEC | F-1.25 | GC | 78 | 2 | 18 | 2 | DP | 37 | 2 | “ | |||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | AEC | B06-F2 | GC | 56 | 14 | 14 | 13 | 3 | EA | 6 | – | Ehrig and Alban (2015) | ||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | AEC | B06-F3 | GC | 76 | 3 | 20 | 1 | EA | 16 | – | “ | |||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | GC | 84 | 7 | 7 | 2 | EA | 29 | 6 | Bittkau et al. (2020) | |||||||
| Enz.pH6 + CaCl2 2% | AEC | SlF3 | PAD | 63 | 3 | 27 | 2 | HexA 4 | DP | 46 | d | Nguyen et al. (2020) | ||||
| Saccharina longicruris | CaCl2 2% +HCl 0.01M | B | ND | EA | 14 | 8 | Rioux et al. (2007) | |||||||||
Reported compositions of the fucoidans from the family Laminariaceae (order Laminariales).
aKey: AEC, anion exchange chromatography; SEC, size-exclusion chromatography; HC, hydrophobic chromatography; PQA, precipitation with quaternary ammonium salts; AP/R alcohol precipitation and redissolution; UF, ultrafiltration.
bKey for the less common abbreviations: PAD, HPAEC with pulse amperometric detector; PC, paper chromatography; GC, gas chromatography; CC, column chromatography on cellulose; CZE, capillary zone electrophoresis.
cKey DP, method of Dodgson and Price (1962) or equivalent; EA, elemental analysis by different methods; Tit, titration with cetylpyridinium chloride, pH 1.5 (Scott, 1960).
dThe information for the uronic acid is included in the molar ratio of monosaccharides.
eHigh pressure and temperature have been applied.
TABLE 6
| Species | Extraction | Purification/ | Acronym | Monosaccharide composition (moles %) | Sulfate | UA (%) | References | |||||||||
| Fractionationa | Methodb | Fuc | Xyl | Gal | Man | Glc | Rha | GlcA | Others | Methodc | % | |||||
| Family Agaraceae | ||||||||||||||||
| Costaria costata | HCl pH 2-2.3 hot | FLM7 | HPLC | 62 | 4 | 18 | 5 | 7 | 4 | DP | 12 | ND | Imbs et al. (2009) | |||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | CcF | HPLC | 51 | 3 | 43 | tr. | 3 | Ac | DP | 19 | ND | Ermakova et al. (2011) | |||
| HCl pH 2-2.3 r.t. | HC | F1.5 | HPLC | 70 | 20 | 7 | 3 | DP | 24 | d | Imbs et al. (2011) | |||||
| HCl pH 2-2.3 hot | AEC | 5F2 | GC | 30 | 16 | 8 | 15 | 15 | DP | 15 | d | Anastyuk et al. (2012a) | ||||
| HCl pH 2-2.3 hot | AEC | 5F3 | GC | 40 | 12 | 21 | 12 | 6 | 7 | DP | 15 | d | “ | |||
| HCl pH 2-2.3 | CcGF | HPLC | 63 | 30 | 3 | 2 | Ac | DP | 23 | ND | Prokofjeva et al. (2013) | |||||
| Enz. pH 4.5 | AP/R+AEC | F2 | GC | 17 | 7 | 8 | 61 | 8 | Grav | 1 | ND | Wang et al. (2014) | ||||
| Enz. pH 4.5 | AP/R+AEC | F4 | GC | 47 | 17 | 17 | 12 | 8 | Grav | 23 | ND | “ | ||||
| Enz. pH 4.5 | AEC | 6F1 | GC | 21 | 11 | 20 | 30 | 7 | 10 | DP | 9 | 4 | Liu et al. (2018) | |||
| Enz. pH 4.5 | AEC | 6F2 | GC | 31 | 15 | 9 | 26 | 11 | 8 | DP | 10 | 6 | “ | |||
| Family Alariaceae | ||||||||||||||||
| Alaria angusta | HCl 0.1M hot | HC+AEC | AaF2 | HPLC | 75 | 7 | 18 | DP | 14 | ND | Menshova et al. (2015) | |||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | HC+AEC | AaF3 | HPLC | 53 | 47 | Ac | DP | 24 | ND | “ | ||||||
| Alaria marginata | HCl 0.1M hot | HC+AEC | AmF2 | HPLC | 81 | 9 | 11 | DP | 21 | ND | Usoltseva et al. (2016) | |||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | HC+AEC | AmF3 | HPLC | 48 | 5 | 47 | Ac | DP | 28 | ND | “ | |||||
| Alaria ochotensis | HCl 0.2M hot | Sterile | HPLC | 18 | 4 | 10 | 4 | 59 | 6 | ND | ND | Skriptsova et al. (2012) | ||||
| HCl 0.2M hot | Reprod. | HPLC | 25 | 3 | 23 | 5 | 40 | 4 | ND | ND | “ | |||||
| HCl pH 2-2.3 | AEC | AoGF | HPLC | 54 | 38 | 8 | DP | 24 | ND | Prokofjeva et al. (2013) | ||||||
| Undaria pinnatifida | HCl 0.15M | AEC+SEC | CF-4B | GC | 48 | 52 | EA | 32 | 2 | Lee et al. (2004) | ||||||
| H2SO4 1% r.t. | AEC | F2M | GC | 54 | 45 | 1 | EA | ∼ 28 | 1 | Hemmingson et al. (2006) | ||||||
| HCl 0.2M hot | UF | F > 30K | HPLC | 64 | 32 | 4 | DP | 32 | ND | You et al. (2010) | ||||||
| HCl 0.1M r.t. | AP/R+AEC | GC | 51 | 4 | 45 | Ac | EA | 30 | ND | Synytsya et al. (2010) | ||||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | Up-F1 | HPLC | 59 | 2 | 30 | 8 | 1 | DP | 14 | ND | Vishchuk et al. (2011) | ||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | Up-F2 | HPLC | 51 | 48 | 1 | Ac | DP | 29 | ND | “ | |||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA+AEC | F1 | GC | 49 | 4 | 38 | 7 | 3 | DP | 7 | 4 | Mak et al. (2013) | ||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA+AEC | F3 | GC | 60 | 2 | 29 | 7 | 3 | DP | 25 | 1 | “ | ||||
| HCl 0.2M r.t. | GC | 53 | 42 | 2 | 3 | ND | 2 | Wozniak et al. (2015) | ||||||||
| SigmaTM | PAD | 55 | 45 | DP | 26 | 2 | Lu et al. (2018) | |||||||||
| H2O+CaCl2 2% | SEC | F300 | HPLC | 56 | 7 | 35 | 2 | DP | 20 | 5 | Koh et al. (2019) | |||||
| Family Chordaceaee | ||||||||||||||||
| Chorda filum | CaCl2 2% hot | AEC | A-2 | GC | 95 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | Ac | DP | 26 | – | Chizhov et al. (1999) | ||
| Na2CO3 3% | AEC | C-1 | GC | 83 | 3 | 1 | 8 | 4 | DP | 13 | 5 | “ | ||||
| Na2CO3 3% | AEC | C-2 | GC | 72 | 11 | 5 | 7 | 4 | DP | 13 | 3 | “ | ||||
| Family Lessoniaceae | ||||||||||||||||
| Ecklonia cava | HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | Ec-F1 | HPLC | 70 | 15 | 4 | 11 | DP | 19 | ND | Ermakova et al. (2011) | ||||
| HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | Ec-F2 | HPLC | 57 | 16 | 23 | 4 | DP | 22 | ND | “ | |||||
| Enz.+CaCl2 4M | PQA+AEC | F1 | PAD | 53 | 8 | 33 | 2 | 4 | DP | 20 | 16 | Lee et al. (2012) | ||||
| Enz.+CaCl2 4M | PQA+AEC | F2 | PAD | 60 | 4 | 31 | 1 | 4 | DP | 16 | 14 | “ | ||||
| Enz.+CaCl2 4M | PQA+AEC | F3 | PAD | 78 | 8 | 10 | 2 | 2 | DP | 39 | 9 | “ | ||||
| Ecklonia kurome | H2O+PQA | AEC+SEC | B-I | GC | 34 | 34 | 13 | 18 | DP | 19 | 30 | Nishino et al. (1989) | ||||
| H2O+PQA | AEC+SEC | C-I | GC | 97 | 3 | DP | 47 | 2 | “ | |||||||
| H2O+PQA | AEC+SEC | C-II | GC | 83 | 17 | DP | 43 | 4 | “ | |||||||
| Ecklonia maxima | H2O hot | CaCl2 1% +AP/R | EMF | HPLC | 63 | 2 | 12 | 17 | 3 | 3 | DP | 21 | tr. | Qu et al. (2014) | ||
| Ecklonia radiata | HCl pH 2 hot | CaCl2 0.5% | 6 min | HPLC | 57 | 6 | 37 | DP | 22 | 2 | Lorbeer et al. (2015) | |||||
| HCl pH 1 hot | Acetone ppt | AFS | HPLC | 84 | 3 | 8 | 3 | 3 | DP | 28 | 1 | Lorbeer et al. (2017) | ||||
| Eisenia bicyclis | HCl 0.1M hot | AEC | EbF | HPLC | 67 | 7 | 20 | 7 | DP | 14 | ND | Ermakova et al. (2013) | ||||
| Lessonia nigrescens | HCl pH 2 hot | B-Stipes | PC+GC | 63 | 14 | 13 | 10 | JL | 6 | 29 | Percival et al. (1983) | |||||
| HCl pH 2 hot | B-Frond | PC+GC | 82 | 12 | 6 | JL | 7 | 17 | “ | |||||||
| HCl pH 2+ Na2CO3 3% | AEC | DF | PC+GC | 57 | 13 | 21 | 9 | JL | ND | ND | “ | |||||
| H2O hot | CaCl2 1% +AP/R | LNF | HPLC | 65 | 11 | 14 | 4 | 6 | DP | 17 | – | Qu et al. (2014) | ||||
| Lessonia trabeculata | H2O hot | CaCl2 1% +AP/R | LTF | HPLC | 53 | 3 | 25 | 11 | 4 | 4 | DP | 16 | tr. | Qu et al. (2014) | ||
| Lessonia vadosa | CaCl2 2%+HCl 0.25M | GC | ∼100 | tr. | tr. | DP | 38 | – | Chandía and Matsuhiro (2008) | |||||||
| Lessonia sp. | CaCl2 2% hot | AEC | B’-F1 | GC | (~100 | tr. | tr. | DP | 37 | 4 | Leal et al. (2018) | |||||
Reported compositions of the fucoidans from the order Laminariales (families other than the Laminariaceae).
aKey: AEC, anion exchange chromatography; SEC, size-exclusion chromatography; HC, hydrophobic chromatography; PQA, precipitation with quaternary ammonium salts; AP/R alcohol precipitation and redissolution; UF, ultrafiltration.
bKey for the less common abbreviations: PAD, HPAEC with pulse amperometric detector; GC, gas chromatography.
cKey: JL, method of Jones and Letham (1954); DP, method of Dodgson and Price (1962) or equivalent; IC, ion chromatography; EA, elemental analysis; Grav, gravimetric method.
dThe information for the uronic acid is included in the molar ratio of monosaccharides.
eThis family has been included recently in a separate order, the Chordales (Starko et al., 2019).
Many galactofucans have been found within the Laminariaceae family, usually with low proportions of Xyl or Man. However, several fractions containing almost pure fucans have been found in Laminaria angustata, L. hyperborea, Macrocystis pyrifera, Saccharina cichorioides, and S. japonica (Table 5). For L. angustata, Nishino et al. (1994b) have isolated a homogalactan sulfate, probably in the only case that an almost fucose-free product is found within the “fucoidan” fractions of brown seaweeds. The trend showing mixtures of polysaccharides separable by charge also occurs for the products from the Laminariales: usually heterogeneous polymers, containing high proportions of uronic acids, and low sulfation appear in the early-eluting fractions of anion exchange chromatography, whereas highly sulfated fucans or galactofucans appear in the late-eluting fractions.
Seasonal differences were also observed: for Costaria costata, Imbs et al. (2009) determined that the proportion of Fuc, Gal, Glc, and sulfate increased from spring to summer, whereas those of Man, Rha, and Xyl decreased. This trend is similar to that observed by Men’shova et al. (2012) for Padina pavonica (see above). In another study, carried out for Saccharina cichorioides (as Laminaria cichorioides), it has been shown that after the summer, and through fall, the proportion of Fuc decreases again, whereas that of Man increases clearly (Anastyuk et al., 2010).
On the basis of chemical degradations and NMR spectroscopy, Bilan et al. (2010) arrived to many structural features of the fucoidans from Saccharina lattisima. Ehrig and Alban (2015) have shown the large effect of the marine habitat and season on the characteristics of the isolated fucoidans of this seaweed. Samples picked up in the Baltic Sea showed more laminaran contamination and lower fucoidan yields, fucose, and sulfate content than those collected around the Faroe Islands (regardless of the season), although the uronic acid content was similar. Regarding the season effects, the proportion of sulfate was higher in fucoidans from seaweeds collected in September than in May. Anion-exchange chromatography separation showed that only from the September-collected seaweed it was possible to obtain high yields of a high-fucose fraction with the highest biological activity. However, in a further work from the same group (Bittkau et al., 2020), the authors have isolated such a fraction with high fucose and sulfate content from the same North Atlantic location, in July without the need of any purification, suggesting that the year of collection has a major effect on the composition of the isolated fucoidans.
A study carried out with an unidentified species of Alaria (Alaria sp., Vishchuk et al., 2012) was later ascertained as being A. ochotensis (Prokofjeva et al., 2013). In the Alaria species studied so far, it is noteworthy to mention the presence of fucogalactans with approximately equal proportions of Fuc and Gal (Table 6).
For Costaria costata, high proportions of Man have been encountered in the polymers, especially in the less charged fractions isolated in some studies (Wang et al., 2014). In any case, Man appears conspicuously in most of the studies carried out on fucoidans of any origin.
The polysaccharides from Undaria pinnatifida were studied by many research groups, probably due to the fact that this seaweed, native from northeastern Asia, is very invasive and now is widespread all around the world (Casas et al., 2004; Thornber et al., 2004). It is worth noting that most of the studies have shown the presence of a galactofucan with high proportions of Gal, sometimes leveling out with Fuc. The proportion of other sugars (Man, Xyl and uronic acids) is usually low, whereas the proportion of sulfate is considerable, but lower than those of other species (Table 6).
Other Orders
The analysis of the fucoidans of different species of the order Ectocarpales appears in Table 7. In this survey, only reports for ten different species (belonging to three families) of the order have been found. Highly sulfated galactofucans or homofucans coexist with polysaccharides containing significant proportions of Man, GlcA and/or Xyl.
TABLE 7
| Species | Extraction | Purification/ | Acronym | Monosaccharide composition (moles %) | Sulfate | UA (%) | References | ||||||||||
| Fractionationa | Methodb | Fuc | Xyl | Gal | Man | Glc | Rha | GlcA | Others | Methodc | % | ||||||
| Ascoseirales | |||||||||||||||||
| Ascoseira mirabilis | CaCl2 2% hot | AEC+SEC | 1AF | PC+GC | 29 | 9 | 19 | 9 | 10 | 25 | JL | 12 | d,e | Finch et al. (1986) | |||
| Na2CO3 3% hot | AEC+SEC | 3AF | PC+GC | 17 | 9 | 31 | 14 | 9 | 17 | JL | 8 | d,e | “ | ||||
| Desmarestiales | |||||||||||||||||
| Desmarestia aculeata | Na2CO3 3% hot | GC+PC | 21 | 3 | 41 | 35 | JL | Low | d | Percival and Young (1974) | |||||||
| Desmarestia firma | H2O | AEC | F0.3M | GC+PC | X | X | X | ∼50f | X | ManA X | JL | 1 | 17 | Carlberg et al. (1978) | |||
| Desmarestia ligulata | H2O | AEC | F0.2M | GC | 52 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 38 | JL | 3 | d | “ | ||||
| H2O | AEC | F0.5M | GC | 66 | 7 | 18 | 9 | JL | 20 | 4 | “ | ||||||
| Desmarestia viridis | HCl 0.1M hot | AEC+HC | DvF | GC | 63 | 13 | 17 | 7 | Ac | DP | 12 | ND | Shevchenko et al. (2017) | ||||
| Ectocarpales | |||||||||||||||||
| Family Adenocystaceae | |||||||||||||||||
| Adenocystis utricularis | HCl pH 2 r.t. | PQA | EA1-5 | GC | 47 | 4 | 9 | 26 | 6 | 8 | DP | 5 | 42 | Ponce et al. (2003) | |||
| HCl pH 2 r.t. | PQA | EA1-20 | GC | 83 | 15 | 1 | DP | 23 | 4 | “ | |||||||
| HCl pH 2 hot | PQA | EA2-5 | GC | 58 | 3 | 6 | 29 | 1 | 3 | DP | 6 | 31 | “ | ||||
| HCl pH 2 hot | PQA | EA2-20 | GC | 75 | 1 | 21 | 1 | 1 | 1 | DP | 21 | 6 | “ | ||||
| Family Chordariaceae | |||||||||||||||||
| Cladosiphon okamuranus | HCl pH3 | CaCl2 3.5%+AEC | GC | 86 | 14 | Ac | DP | ∼ 12 | d | Nagaoka et al. (1999) | |||||||
| ND | GC | 91 | 2 | 7 | DP | 15 | 23 | Cumashi et al. (2007) | |||||||||
| HCl 0.05M r.t. | CaCl2 0.1M | CAF | PAD | 99 | 1 | Ac | DP | ∼ 16 | 12 | Teruya et al. (2009) | |||||||
| ND | CE | GC | 95 | 3 | 1 | DP | 15 | 9 | Lim et al. (2019) | ||||||||
| Chordaria flagelliformis | CaCl2 2% hot | AEC | F2 | GC | 80 | 5 | 12 | 2 | Ac | DP | 18 | 16 | Bilan et al. (2008) | ||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | AEC | F3 | GC | 96 | 4 | Ac | DP | 27 | 13 | “ | |||||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | AEC | F4 | GC | 100 | Ac | DP | 27 | 10 | “ | ||||||||
| Dictyosiphon foeniculaceus | CaCl2 2% hot | GC | 39 | 32 | 16 | 6 | 5 | EA | 9 | 10 | Bittkau et al. (2020) | ||||||
| Leathesia difformis | HCl pH 2 r.t. | Ea | GC | 90 | 6 | 4 | DP | 6 | 3 | Feldman et al. (1999) | |||||||
| Nemacystus decipiens | H2O, Pressure | HN0 | PAD | 66 | 10 | 3 | 3 | 9 | Fru 9,GalN 2 | IC | 20 | 36 | Li et al. (2017) | ||||
| H2O | CaCl2 3M+AEC | NP1 | HPLC | 74 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 15 | DP | 4 | d | Cui et al. (2018) | |||||
| H2O+CaCl2 | AEC+SEC | NP2 | HPLC | 76 | 2 | 2 | 20 | Ac | DP | 19 | d | “ | |||||
| Papenfussiella lutea | H2SO4 1% r.t. | GC | 55 | 4 | 9 | 1 | 31 | ND | 5 | Wozniak et al. (2015) | |||||||
| Punctaria plantaginea | CaCl2 2% hot | PQA | GC | 69 | 27 | 4 | DP | 19 | 2 | Bilan et al. (2014) | |||||||
| Family Scytosiphonaceae | |||||||||||||||||
| Chnoospora minima | Enzymes pH 4.5 and 8 | CaCl2+AEC | F2,1 | PAD | 19 | 38 | 7 | NIg 31, Ara 3 | DP | 5 | ND | Fernando et al. (2017) | |||||
| Enzymes pH 4.5 and 8 | CaCl2+AEC | F2,4 | PAD | 79 | 3 | NI 18 | DP | 34 | ND | “ | |||||||
| Enzymes pH 4.5 | CaCl2 5M | CMF | PAD | 65 | 6 | 9 | 1 | NI 19 | DP | 24 | ND | Fernando et al. (2018) | |||||
| Scytosiphon lomentaria | HCl pH 2 r.t. | PQA | A5 | GC | 38 | 15 | 15 | 24 | 3 | 5 | DP | 6 | 20 | Ponce et al. (2019) | |||
| HCl pH 2 r.t. | PQA | A30 | GC | 88 | 12 | DP | 29 | 2 | “ | ||||||||
| Ralfsiales | |||||||||||||||||
| Analipus japonicus | CaCl2 2% hot | PQA+AEC | F1 | GC | 74 | 12 | 12 | 2 | Ac | DP | 13 | 12 | Bilan et al. (2007) | ||||
| CaCl2 2% hot | PQA+AEC | F2 | GC | 84 | 4 | 11 | Ac | DP | 23 | 6 | “ | ||||||
| Scytothamnales | |||||||||||||||||
| Scytothamnus australis | H2SO4 1% r.t. | GC | 92 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | ND | 2 | Wozniak et al. (2015) | |||||||
| Splachnidium rugosum | CaCl2 2% hot | GC | 86 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 2 | ND | 2 | “ | |||||||
Reported compositions of the fucoidans from the orders Ascoseirales, Desmarestiales, Ectocarpales, Ralfsiales, and Scytothamnales.
aKey: AEC, anion exchange chromatography; SEC, size-exclusion chromatography; HC, hydrophobic chromatography; PQA, precipitation with quaternary ammonium salts; CE cation exchange.
bKey for the less common abbreviations: PAD, HPAEC with pulse amperometric detector; GC, gas chromatography.
cKey: JL, method of Jones and Letham (1954); DP, method of Dodgson and Price (1962) or equivalent; IC, ion chromatography; EA, elemental analysis.
dThe information for the uronic acid is included in the molar ratio of monosaccharides.
eEven after purification, these samples contain 10–12% of alginic acid.
fOnly the proportion of Glc is indicated. The remaining monosaccharides were not quantified.
gNI = sugar not identified.
The analysis of the fucoidans from four species from the Desmarestiales is also shown in Table 7. It should be taken into account that these seaweeds contain free sulfuric acid in their vacuoles (Carlberg et al., 1978), making them very labile when taken out from the marine environment. This requires special techniques in order to obtain neutral extracts unaffected by the strong acid.
To the best of our knowledge, the fucoidans from only one species from the Ascoseirales and Ralfsiales, and two of the Scytothamnales have been studied (Table 7). The fucoidans from the three samples from the Ralfsiales and Scytothamnales appear to be particularly rich in Fuc and poor in uronic acids, whereas the Ascoseira sample was quite heterogeneous (Finch et al., 1986, Table 7).
Concluding Remarks
The current review has surveyed most of the compositional data on fucoidans extracted from different species, in many cases after purification; more than 100 species were screened through the literature. Besides the obvious purpose of providing a reliable source of compositional data gathered in a set of tables, this review attempted to foresee if there is any correlation of these compositional data with their taxonomy, or if other factors are more important than the taxonomic origin.
These general considerations can be deduced from the analysis of the compositional data:
- 1.
Separation by charge is the most efficient method to obtain “pure” fucoidan fractions. Either using anion-exchange chromatography with increasing concentrations of salt as eluant, or by precipitating with cationic detergents and redissolving at increasing ionic strengths, two main type of polymers can be separated: (a) those appearing at low ionic strengths, usually highly heterogeneous in their monosaccharidic composition (containing Fuc, Xyl, Gal, Man, Rha, GlcA), with low-sulfate content, and high uronic acid content, and b) those appearing at high ionic strengths, containing mainly Fuc, accompanied with variable proportions of Gal, highly sulfated and containing little (or none) uronic acids. Fractions containing intermediate proportions of both polysaccharides appear at medium ionic strengths. Figure 3 depicts the composition of fractions belonging to each of the first groups from selected seaweeds, showing clearly the marked differences between both groups. This behavior is observed for samples from the orders Fucales, Laminariales, Ascoseirales, Desmarestiales, Ectocarpales, and Ralfsiales (Mian and Percival, 1973; Carlberg et al., 1978; Bilan et al., 2002, 2013, 2016, 2018; Ponce et al., 2003, 2019; Ozawa et al., 2006; Mak et al., 2013); however, for the Dictyotales, the trend is obscured due to the abundance of Man and/or uronic acids in the products separated at each ionic strength (Table 4). It has been postulated that the biological activity is concentrated on the galactofucan components (Ponce et al., 2003, 2019; Croci et al., 2011).
FIGURE 3
- 2.
Acetate esters of the fucoidans are very common. As a matter of fact, this constituent has been found in almost every sample where it was searched. Determinations of acetyl groups are not very common, as they are only encountered through NMR spectra or specific colorimetric techniques. They are labile enough in mild alkaline or acid media as to get undetected when using some extraction procedures (Bernhard and Hammett, 1953; Wuts and Greene, 2006). Anyway, almost all of the seven tables report acetyl groups on some species. It is highly probable that searching in other species would have resulted in many more positive results.
- 3.
In some cases, Man and Rha appear together, usually in fractions with lower sulfate contents. For Man, structural explanations have already been reported in terms of fucomannoglucuronans (Bilan et al., 2010), but for Rha no structural function has been found so far. Rha seems to appear in higher proportions within the order Dictyotales and the family Sargassaceae (Fucales).
- 4.
The Dictyotales appear to be the most “atypical” order, as usually large proportions of Man and uronic acids appear. In one species which was highly fractionated, Man becomes the most important monosaccharide in the low-charged fractions, and it is still important in the fractions with more sulfate groups (Table 4; Rabanal et al., 2014). However, fractions with high proportions of monosaccharides different than Fuc were found in most of the taxa studied so far (see Tables).
- 5.
The uronic acid content should be considered with due care. Sometimes it corresponds to GlcA actually comprising the fucoidan structure, but sometimes it corresponds to contamination with alginic acid (e.g., Finch et al., 1986; Lorbeer et al., 2017), a polysaccharide present in all of the brown seaweeds studied so far. By the same token, the Glc present in the samples should almost certainly correspond to contaminating laminarans (Lorbeer et al., 2017; Mateos-Aparicio et al., 2018). Only in a few cases, Glc has been shown to be part of the fucoidan structure (e.g., Duarte et al., 2001).
- 6.
There are several factors to consider when comparing the compositional data of fucoidans from different seaweeds and research groups. The taxon is just one of them. Others like geographical location, year and season of harvest of the seaweed, extraction and purification methods, analytical methods, different parts or reproductive stages of the seaweeds are also of paramount importance in defining the final characteristics.
- 7.
The geographic site of harvesting appears to be very important: Zvyagintseva et al. (2003) found marked differences between the fucoidans of Fucus evanescens collected in different spots of the southern Okhotsk Sea. Ehrig and Alban (2015) also found a significant difference between the composition and yields of fucoidans of Saccharina lattisima samples collected in the North Atlantic and in the Baltic Sea. This factor, together with the year of collection might explain the large differences in composition found for species studied by different groups (or at different times) even with similar extraction and purification procedures.
- 8.
The season of harvesting has also influence over the composition of the fucoidans: a trend with increasing yields, and proportions of sulfate, Fuc, Gal and Glc (together with a decrease in the Man and Rha content) is observed as the collection month progressed from March to October, in the Northern Hemisphere (Imbs et al., 2009; Anastyuk et al., 2010; Men’shova et al., 2012; Ehrig and Alban, 2015).
- 9.
The effect of the extraction conditions is more controversial: Ponce et al. (2003) and Wozniak et al. (2015) found very little differences when switching the extraction solvent from water to CaCl2 to diluted HCl. Alboofetileh et al. (2019b) found differences in yield and in sulfate content but a very similar monosaccharide composition using enzymes, ultrasound, or both combined. Rodríguez-Jasso et al. (2011) found a significant difference in composition and yields when changing the time and the pressure of a microwave-assisted water extraction. Nguyen et al. (2020) have shown a sharply different composition of the chemically and enzymatically-extracted crude products, being the latters richer in alginic acid and sulfate/Fuc ratios. After purification, the compositions might level off. However, the enzyme-aided extraction, also used by other groups (Dietrich et al., 1995; Albuquerque et al., 2004; Silva et al., 2005; Medeiros et al., 2008; Queiroz et al., 2008; Costa et al., 2011; Camara et al., 2011; Lee et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2014; Hu et al., 2016; Monsur et al., 2017; Fernando et al., 2017, 2018; Liu et al., 2018; Menezes et al., 2018; Song et al., 2018; Jayawardena et al., 2019; Alboofetileh et al., 2019a,b) appears to be an interesting prospect, considering cleaner chemical issues and the possibility of finding enhanced biological activities in comparison with chemically extracted products (Nguyen et al., 2020).
Some differences were found between the fucoidans isolated from reproductive and sterile tissue of five different seaweeds (Skriptsova et al., 2012, see Tables 1, 2, 5, 6). Usually the reproductive tissue is less heterogeneous, and carries more Fuc and less Glc than the sterile tissue. Regarding the extraction of fucoidans from different parts of the seaweeds, Percival et al. (1983) extracted separately the polysaccharides from fronds and stipes from Lessonia nigrescens, whereas Wozniak et al. (2015) compared the fucoidans isolated from reproductive structures and from vegetative structures in Marginariella boryana. The fucoidans from stipes and the vegetative structures, respectively, appear to be more heterogeneous (less Fuc and more uronic acids).
In order to obtain fucoidan samples devoid of contaminants, the best results were obtained by carrying out the extractions with dilute HCl or CaCl2, or using these agents after the extraction (for instance enzymatic) in order to precipitate the alginate in the first place, followed by a careful separation by charge (anion exchange chromatography eluting with increasing ionic strength, or precipitation with quaternary ammonium salts followed by redissolution with increasing ionic strengths). Further purification of each fraction by size-exclusion chromatography usually yield fucoidans devoid of alginic acid or laminaran contaminants.
The conclusion is that with so many variables determining the composition of the fucoidans, the subtle differences that might appear among the different higher taxa (order, family) surveyed in this review are overridden. Probably, comparisons carried out in the same labs with the same methods might help, or more profound structural studies might throw light on chemotaxonomical issues in the future.
Statements
Author contributions
NP was involved in the conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, writing, and visualization of this work. CS was involved in the conceptualization, formal analysis, writing, visualization, and funding of this work. Both authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Funding
This work was supported by grants from the University of Buenos Aires (20020170100255BA), National Research Council of Argentina-CONICET (PIP 298/14 and P-UE 22920160100068CO), and ANPCyT-Argentina (PICT 2017-1675).
Acknowledgments
We are indebted to Dr. María C. Rodríguez for her help on botanical/psychological issues, and to Dr. Marina Ciancia for her kind invitation to participate in this issue.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1
Abdel-FattahA. F.HusseinM. M.-D.FouadS. T. (1978). Carbohydrates of the brown seaweed Dictyota dichotoma.Phytochemistry17741–743. 10.1016/S0031-9422(00)94218-3
2
AdhikariU.MateuC. G.ChattopadhyayK.PujolC. A.DamonteE. B.RayB. (2006). Structure and antiviral activity o sulfated fucans from Stoechospermum marginatum.Phytochemistry672474–2482. 10.1016/j.phytochem.2006.05.024
3
AlboofetilehM.RezaeiM.TabarsaM.RittáM.DonalisioM.MariattiF.et al (2019a). Effect of different non-conventional extraction methods on the antibacterial and antiviral activity of fucoidans extracted from Nizamuddinia zanardinii.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.124131–137. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.11.201
4
AlboofetilehM.RezaeiM.TabarsaM.YouS. (2019b). Bioactivities of Nizamuddinia zanardinii sulfated polysaccharides extracted by enzyme, ultrasound and enzyme-ultrasound methods.J. Food Sci. Technol.561212–1220. 10.1007/s13197-019-03584-1
5
AlboofetilehM.RezaeiM.TabarsaM.YouS.MariattiF.CravottoG. (2019c). Subcritical water extraction as an efficient technique to isolate biologically-active fucoidans from Nizamuddinia zanardinii.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.128244–253. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.01.119
6
AlbuquerqueI. R. L.QueirozK. C. S.AlvesL. G.SantosE. A.LeiteE. L.RochaH. A. O. (2004). Heterofucans from Dictyota menstrualis have anticoagulant activity.Braz. J. Med. Biol. Res.37167–171. 10.1590/S0100-879X2004000200002
7
AleM. T.MikkelsenJ. D.MeyerA. S. (2011). Important determinants for fucoidan bioactivity: a critical review of structure-function relations and extraction methods for fucose-containing sulfated polysaccharides from brown seaweeds.Mar. Drugs92106–2130. 10.3390/md9102106
8
AnastyukS. D.ImbsT. I.SemenovaM. L.DmitrenokP. S.ZvyagintsevaT. N. (2012a). ESIMS analysis of fucoidan preparations from Costaria costata, extracted from alga at different life-stages.Carbohydr. Polym.90993–1002. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2012.06.033
9
AnastyukS. D.ShevchenkoN. M.DmitrenokP. S.ZvyagintsevaT. N. (2012b). Structural similarities of fucoidans from brown algae Silvetia babingtonii and Fucus evanescens, determined by tandem MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry.Carbohydr. Res.35878–81. 10.1016/j.carres.2012.06.015
10
AnastyukS. D.ShevchenkoN. M.NazarenkoE. L.ImbsT. I.GorbachV. I.DmitrenokP. S.et al (2010). Structural analysis of a highly sulfated fucan from the brown alga Laminaria cichorioides by tandem MALDI and ESI mass spectrometry.Carbohydr. Res.3452206–2212. 10.1016/j.carres.2010.07.043
11
AskerM. M. S.MohamedS. F.AliF. M.El-SayedO. H. (2007). Chemical structure and antiviral activity of water-soluble sulfated polysaccharides from Surgassum latifolium.J. Appl. Sci. Res.31178–1185.
12
BernhardS. A.HammettL. P. (1953). Specific effects in acid catalysis by ion-exchange resins. II. Hydrolysis of esters in water solution.J. Amer. Chem. Soc.755834–5835. 10.1021/ja01119a017
13
BilanM. I.GrachevA. A.ShashkovA. S.KellyM.SandersonC. J.NifantievN. E.et al (2010). Further studies on the composition ans structure of a fucoidan preparation from the brown alga Saccharisima latissima.Carbohydr. Res.3452038–2047. 10.1016/j.carres.2010.07.009
14
BilanM. I.GrachevA. A.ShashkovA. S.NifantievN. E.UsovA. I. (2006). Structure of a fucoidan from the brown seaweed Fucus serratus L.Carbohydr. Res.341238–245. 10.1016/j.carres.2005.11.009
15
BilanM. I.GrachevA. A.ShashkovA. S.ThuyT. T. T.VanT. T. T.LyB. M.et al (2013). Preliminary investigation of a highly sulfated galactofucan fraction isolated from the brown alga Sargassum polycystum.Carbohydr. Res.37748–57. 10.1016/j.carres.2013.05.016
16
BilanM. I.GrachevA. A.UstuzhaninaN. E.ShashkovA. S.NifantievN. E.UsovA. I. (2002). Structure of a fucoidan from the brown seawed Fucus evanescens C.Ag.Carbohydr. Res.337719–730. 10.1016/S0008-6215(02)00053-8
17
BilanM. I.GrachevA. A.UstuzhaninaN. E.ShashkovA. S.NifantievN. E.UsovA. I. (2004). A highly regular fraction of a fucoidan from the brown seaweed Fucus distichus L.Carbohydr. Res.339511–517. 10.1016/j.carres.2003.10.028
18
BilanM. I.KlochkovaN. G.UstyuzhaninaN. E.ChizhovA. O.ShashkovA. S.NifantievN. E.et al (2016). Polysaccharides of algae 68. Sulfated polysaccharides from the Kamchatka brown alga Laminaria bongardiana.Russ. Chem. Bull. Int. Ed.652729–2736. 10.1007/s11172-016-1643-1
19
BilanM. I.ShashkovA. S.UsovA. I. (2014). Structure of a sulfated xylofucan from the brown alga Punctaria plantaginea.Carbohydr. Res.3931–8. 10.1016/j.carres.2014.04.022
20
BilanM. I.UsovA. I. (2008). Structural analysis of fucoidans.Nat. Prod. Comm.31639–1648. 10.1177/1934578X0800301011
21
BilanM. I.UstyuzhaninaN. E.ShashkovA. S.ThanhT. T. T.BuiM. L.TranT. T. V.et al (2017). Sulfated polysaccharides of the Vietnamese brown alga Sargassum aquifolium (Fucales, Sargassaceae).Carbohydr. Res.44923–31. 10.1016/j.carres.2017.06.016
22
BilanM. I.UstyuzhaninaN. E.ShashkovA. S.ThanhT. T. T.BuiM. L.TranT. T. V.et al (2018). A sulfated galactofucan from the brown alga Hormophysa cuneiformis (Fucales, Sargassaceae).Carbohydr. Res.46948–54. 10.1016/j.carres.2018.09.001
23
BilanM. I.VinogradovaE. V.TsvetkovaE. A.GrachevA. A.ShashkovA. S.NifantievN. E.et al (2008). A sulfated glucuronofucan containing both fucofuranose and fucopyranose residues from the brown alga Chordaria flagelliformis.Carbohydr. Res.3432605–2612. 10.1016/j.carres.2008.06.001
24
BilanM. I.ZakharovaA. N.GrachevA. A.ShashkovA. S.NifantievN. E.UsovA. I. (2007). Polysaccharides of alga: 60. Fucoidan from the Pacific brown alga Analipus japonicus (Harv.) Winne (Ectocarpales, Scytosiphonaceae).Russ. J. Bioorg. Chem.3338–46. 10.1134/S1068162007010049
25
BittkauK. S.NeupaneS.AlbanS. (2020). Initial evaluation of six different brown algae species as source for crude bioactive fucoidans.Algal Res.45:101759. 10.1016/j.algal2019.101759
26
CamaraR. B. G.CostaL. S.FidelisG. P.NobreL. D. T. B.Dantas-SantosN.CordeiroL. S.et al (2011). Heterofucans from the brown seaweed Canistrocarpus cervicornis with anticoagulant and antioxidant activities.Mar. Drugs9124–138. 10.3390/md9010124
27
CarlbergG. E.PercivalE.RahmanM. A. (1978). Carbohydrates of the seaweeds, Desmarestia ligulata and D. firma.Phytochemistry171289–1292. 10.1016/S0031-9422(00)94576-X
28
CasasG.ScrosatiR.PirizM. L. (2004). The invasive kelp Undaria pinnatifida (Phaeophyceae, Laminariales) reduces native seaweed diversity in Nuevo Gulf (Patagonia, Argentina).Biol. Invasion.6411–416. 10.1023/B:BINV.0000041555.29305.41
29
ChandíaN. P.MatsuhiroB. (2008). Characterization of a fucoidan from Lessonia vadosa (Phaeophyta) and its anticoagulant and elicitor properties.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.42235–240. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2007.10.023
30
CharrierB.Le BailA.de ReviersB. (2012). Plant Proteus: brown algal morphological plasticity and underlying developmental mechanisms.Trends Plant Sci.17468–477. 10.1016/j.tplants.2012.03.003
31
ChattopadhyayN.GhoshT.SinhaS.ChattopadhyayK.KarmakarP.RayB. (2010). Polysaccharides from Turbinaria conoides: structural features and antioxidant capacity.Food Chem.118823–829. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.05.069
32
ChenX.NieW.FanS.ZhangJ.WangY.LuJ.et al (2012). A polysaccharide from Sargassum fusiforme protects against immunosuppression in cyclophophosphamide-treated mice.Carbohydr. Polym.901114–1119. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2012.06.052
33
ChizhovA. O.DellA.MorrisH. R.HaslamS. M.McDowellR. A.ShashkovA. S.et al (1999). A study of fucoidan from the brown seaweed Chorda filum.Carbohydr. Res.320108–119. 10.1016/S0008-6215(99)00148-2
34
CongQ.ChenH.LiaoW.XiaoF.WangP.QinY.et al (2016). Structural characterization and effect on anti-angiogenic activity of a fucoidan from Sargassum fusiforme.Carbohydr. Polym.136899–907. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.09.087
35
CosenzaV. A.NavarroD. A.PonceN. M. A.StortzC. A. (2017). “Seaweed polysaccharides: structure and applications,” in Industrial Applications of Renewable Biomass Products. Past, Present, and Future, edsGoyanesS. N.D’AccorsoN. B. (Cham: Springer Int.), 75–116. 10.1007/978-3-319-61288-1_3
36
CostaL. S.FidelisG. P.TellesC. B. S.Dantas-SantosN.CamaraR. B. G.CordeiroS. L.et al (2011). Antioxidant and antiproliferative activities of heterofucans from the seaweed Sargassum filipendula.Mar. Drugs9952–966. 10.3390/md9060952
37
CrociD. O.CumashiA.UshakovaN. A.PreobrazhenskayaM. E.PiccoliA.TotaniL.et al (2011). Fucans, but not fucomannoglucuronans, determine the biological activities of sulfated polysaccharides from Laminaria saccharina brown seaweed.PLoS One6:e17283. 10.1371/journal.pone.0017283
38
CuiK.TaiW.ShanX.HaoJ.LiG.YuG. (2018). Structural characterization and anti-thrombotic properties of fucoidan from Nemacystus decipiens.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.1201817–1822. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.09.079
39
CumashiA.UshakovaN. A.PreobrazhenskayaM. E.D’InceccoA.PiccoliA.TotaniL.et al (2007). A comparative study of the anti-inflammatory, anticoagulant, antiangiogenic, and antiadhesive activities of nine different fucoidans from brown seaweeds.Glycobiology17541–552. 10.1093/glycob/cwm014
40
DavisT. A.VoleskyB.MucciA. (2003). A review of the biochemistry of heavy metal biosorption by brown algae.Water Res.374311–4330. 10.1016/S0043-1354(03)00293-8
41
de ReviersB.RousseauF.DraismaS. G. A. (2007). “Classification of the Phaeophyceae from past to present and current challenges,” in Unraveling the Algae: the Past, Present and Future of Algal Systematic, edsBrodieJ.LewisJ. (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press), 267–284. 10.1201/9780849379901
42
Deniaud-BouëtE.HardouinK.PotinP.KloaregB.HervéC. (2017). A review about brown algal cell walls and fucose-containing sulfated polysaccharides: cell wall context, biomedical properties, and key research challenges.Carbohydr. Polym.175395–408. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.07.082
43
Deniaud-BouëtE.KervarecN.MichelG.TononT.KloaregB.HervéC. (2014). Chemical and enzymatic fractionation of cell walls from fucales: insights into the structure of the extracellular matrix of brown algae.Ann. Bot.1141203–1216. 10.1093/aob/mcu096
44
DietrichC. P.FariasG. G. M.de AbreuL. R. D.LeiteE. L.da SilvaL. F.NaderH. B. (1995). A new approach for the characterization of polysaccharides from algae: presence of four main acidic polysaccharides in three species of the class Phaeophyceae.Plant Sci.108143–153. 10.1016/0168-9452(95)04142-H
45
DineshS.MenonT.HannaL. E.SureshV.SathuvanM.ManikannanM. (2016). In vitro anti-HIV-1 activity of fucoidan from Sargassum swartzii.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.8283–88. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2015.09.078
46
DodgsonK. S.PriceR. C. (1962). A note on the determination of ester sulfate content of sulfated polysaccharides.Biochem. J.84106–110. 10.1042/bj0840106
47
DraismaS. G. A.PetersA. F.FletcherR. L. (2003). “Evolution and taxonomy in the Phaeophyceae: effects of the molecular age on brown algal systematic,” in Out of the Past. Collected Reviews to Celebrate the Jubilee of the British Phycological Society, ed.NortonT. A. (Belfast: British Phycological Society), 87–102.
48
DraismaS. G. A.Prud‘homme van ReineW. F.StamW. T.OlsenJ. L. (2001). A reassessment of phylogenetic relationships within the Phaeophyceae based on RUBISCO large subunit and ribosomal DNA sequences.J. Phycol.37586–603. 10.1046/j.1529-8817.2001.037004586.x
49
DuarteM. E. R.CardosoM. A.NosedaM. D.CerezoA. S. (2001). Structural studies on fucoidans from the brown seaweed Sargassum stenophyllum.Carbohydr. Res.333281–293. 10.1016/S0008-6215(01)00149-5
50
EhrigK.AlbanS. (2015). Sulfated galactofucan from the brown alga Saccharina latissima – Variability of yield, structural composition, and bioactivity.Mar. Drugs1376–101. 10.3390/md13010076
51
ErmakovaS.Men´shovaR.VishchukO.KimS.-M.UmB.-H.IsakovV.et al (2013). Water-soluble polysaccharides from the brown alga Eisenia bicyclis: structural characteristics and antitumor activity.Algal Res.251–58. 10.1016/j.algal.2012.10.002
52
ErmakovaS.SokolovaR.KimS.-M.UmB.-H.IsakovV.ZvyagintsevaT. (2011). Fucoidans from brown seaweeds Sargassum hornery, Eclonia cava, Costaria costata: structural characteristics and anticancer activity.Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol.164841–850. 10.1007/s12010-011-9178-2
53
ErmakovaS. P.MenshovaR. V.AnastyukS. D.Malyarenko (Vishchuk)O. S.ZakharenkoA. M.(Thinh)P. D.et al (2016). Structure, chemical and enzymatic modification, and anticancer activity of polysaccharides from the brown alga Turbinaria ornata.J. Appl. Phycol.282495–2505. 10.1007/s10811-015-0742-y
54
FeldmanS. C.ReynaldiS.StortzC. A.CerezoA. S.DamonteE. B. (1999). Antiviral properties of fucoidans fractions from Leathesia difformis.Phytomedicine6335–340. 10.1016/S0944-7113(99)80055-5
55
FernandoI. P. S.SanjeewaK. K. A.SamarakoonK. W.KimH.-S.GunasekaraU. K. D. S. S.ParkY.-J.et al (2018). The potential of fucoidans from Chnoospora minima and Sargassum polycystum in cosmetics: antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, skin-whitening, and antiwrinkle activities.J. Appl. Phycol.303223–3232. 10.1007/s10811-018-1415-4
56
FernandoI. P. S.SanjeewaK. K. A.SamarakoonK. W.LeeW. W.KimH.-S.KangN.et al (2017). A fucoidan fraction purified from Chnoospora minima; a potential inhibitor of LPS-induced inflammatory responses.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.1041185–1193. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.07.031
57
FinchP.PercivalE.SlaidingI. R.WeigelH. (1986). Carbohydrates of the antartic brown seaweed Ascoseira mirabilis.Phytochemistry25443–448. 10.1016/S0031-9422(00)85498-9
58
GuiryM. D.GuiryG. M. (2020). AlgaeBase. World-Wide Electronic Publication, National University of Ireland, Galway. Available online at: http://www.algaebase.org(accessed April 18, 2020).
59
GuoH.LiuF.JiaG.ZhangW.WuF. (2013). Extraction optimization and analysis of monosaccharide composition of fucoidan from Saccharina japonica by capillary zone electrophoresis.J. Appl. Phycol.251903–1908. 10.1007/s10811-013-0024-5
60
HeJ.XuY.ChenH.SunP. (2016). Extraction, structural characterization, and potential antioxidant activity of the polysaccharides from four seaweeds.Int. J. Mol. Sci.17:1988. 10.3390/ijms17121988
61
HemmingsonJ. A.FalshawR.FurneauxR. H.ThompsonK. (2006). Structure and antiviral activity of the galactofucan sulfates extracted from Undaria pinnatifida (Phaeophyta).J. Appl. Phycol.18185–193. 10.1007/s10811-006-9096-9
62
HentatiF.DelattreC.UrsuA. V.DesbrièresJ.Le CerfD.GardarinC.et al (2018). Structural characterization and antioxidant activity of water-soluble polysaccharides from the tunisian brown seaweed Cystoseira compressa.Carbohydr. Polym.198589–600. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.06.098
63
HuP.LiZ.ChenM.SunZ.LingY.JiangJ.et al (2016). Structural elucidation and protective role of a polysaccharide from Sargassum fusiforme on ameliorating learning and memory deficiencies in mice.Carbohydr. Polym.139150–158. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.12.019
64
HuP.XueR.LiZ.ChenM.SunZ.JiangJ.et al (2014). Structural investigation and immunological activity of a heteropolysaccharide from Sargassum fusiforme.Carbohydr. Res.39028–32. 10.1016/j.carres.2014.02.027
65
HuangC.-Y.KuoC.-H.ChenP.-W. (2017). Compressional-puffing pretreatment enhances neuroprotective effects of fucoidans from the brown seaweed Sargassum hemiphyllum on 6-hydroxydopamine-induced apoptosis in SH-SY5Y cells.Molecules23:E78. 10.3390/molecules23010078
66
HusseinM. M.Abdel-AzizA.SalemH. M. (1980). Sulphated heteropolysaccharides from Padina pavonia.Phytochemistry192131–2132. 10.1016/S0031-9422(00)8220
67
ImbsI.ErmakovaS. P.Malyarenko (Vishchuk)O. S.IsakovV. V.Zvyagintseva(N.) (2016). Structural elucidation of polysaccharide fractions from the brown alga Coccophora langsdorfii and in vitro investigation of their anticancer activity.Carbohydr. Polym.135162–168. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.08.062
68
ImbsT. I.ShevchenkoN. M.SemenovaT. L.SukhoverkhovS. V.ZvyagintsevaT. N. (2011). Compositional heterogeneity of sulfated polysaccharides synthesized by the brown alga Costaria costata.Chem. Nat. Compd.4796–97. 10.1007/s10600-011-9839-y
69
ImbsT. I.ShevchenkoN. M.SukhoverkhovS. V.SemenovaT. L.SkriptsovaA. V.ZvyagintsevaT. N. (2009). Seasonal variations of the composition and structural characteristics of polysaccharides from the brown alga Costaria costata.Chem. Nat. Compd.45786–791. 10.1007/s10600-010-9507-7
70
JayawardenaT. U.FernandoI. P. S.LeeW. W.SanjeewaK. K. A.KimH.-S.LeeD.-S.et al (2019). Isolation and purification of fucoidan fraction in Turbinaria ornata from the Maldives; inflamation inhibitory potential under LPS stimulated conditions in in-vitro and in-vivo models.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.131614–623. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.03.105
71
JesumaniV.DuH.PeiP.AslamM.HuangN. (2020). Comparative study on skin protection activity of polyphenol-rich extract and polysaccharide-rich extract from Sargassum vachellianum.PLoS One15:e0227308. 10.1371/journal.pone.0227308
72
JonesA. S.LethamD. S. (1954). A submicro method for the estimation of sulphur.Chem. Ind.662–663.
73
KarmakarP.GhoshT.SinhaS.SahaS.MandalP.GhosalP. K.et al (2009). Polysaccharides from the brown seaweed Padina tetrastromatica: characterization of a sulfated fucan.Carbohydr. Polym.78416–421. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2009.04.039
74
KarmakarP.PujolC. A.DamonteE. B.GhoshT.RayB. (2010). Polysaccharides fom Padina tetrastromatica: features, chemical modification and antiviral activity.Carbohydr. Polym.80513–520. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2009.12.014
75
KitamuraK.MatsuoM.YasuiT. (1991). Fucoidan from brown seaweed Laminaria angustata var. Longissima.Agric. Biol. Chem.55615–616. 10.1271/bbb1961.55.615
76
KloaregB.DemartyM.MabeauS. (1986). Polyanionic characteristics of purified sulphated homofucans from brown algae.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.8380–386. 10.1016/0141-8130(86)90060-7
77
KohH. S. A.LuJ.ZhouW. (2019). Structure characterization and antioxidant activity of fucoidan isolated from Undaria pinnatifida grown in New Zealand.Carbohydr. Polym.212178–185. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.02.040
78
KooJ.-G.ChoiY.-S.KwakJ.-K. (2001). Blood-anticoagulant activity of fucoidans from sporophylls of Undaria pinnatifida, Laminaria religiosa, Hizikia fusiforme and Sargassum fulvellum in Korea.J. Korean Fish. Soc.34515–520.
79
KopplinG.RokstadA. M.MélidaH.BuloneV.Skjåk-BrækG.AachmannF. L. (2018). Structural characterization of fucoidan from Laminaria hyperborea: assessment of coagulation and inflammatory properties and their structure-function relationship.ACS Appl. Bio Mater.11880–1892. 10.1021/acsabm.8b00436
80
KylinH. (1913). Zur biochemie der Meersalgen.Z. Physiol. Chem.83171–197.
81
LarsenB.HaugA.PainterT. J. (1966). Sulphated polysaccharides in brown algae-I. Isolation and preliminary characterization of three sulphated polysaccharides from Ascophyllum nodosum (L.) Le Jol.Acta Chem. Scand.20219–230. 10.3891/acta.chem.scand.20-0219
82
LealD.MansillaA.MatsuhiroB.Moncada-BasualtoM.LapierM.MayaJ. D.et al (2018). Chemical structure and biological properties of sulfated fucan from the sequential extraction of subAntartic Lessonia sp. (Phaeophyceae).Carbohydr. Polym.199304–313. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.07.012
83
LeeJ.-B.HayashiK.HashimotoM.NakanoT.HayashiT. (2004). Novel antiviral fucoidan from sporophyll of Undaria pinnatifida (Mekabu).Chem. Pharm. Bull.521091–1094. 10.1248/cpb.52.1091
84
LeeJ.-B.TakeshitaA.HayashiK.HayashiT. (2011). Structures and antiviral activities of polysaccharides from Sargassum trichophyllum.Carbohydr. Polym.86995–999. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.05.059
85
LeeS.-H.KoC.-I.AhnG.YouS.KimJ.-S.HeuM. S.et al (2012). Molecular characteristics and anti-inflammatory activity of the fucoidan extracted from Ecklonia cava.Carbohydr. Polym.89599–606. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2012.03.056
86
LiB.WeiX.-J.SunJ.-L.XuS.-Y. (2006). Structural investigation of a fucoidan containing a fucose-free core from the brown seaweed. Hizikia fusiforme.Carbohydr. Res.3411135–1146. 10.1016/j.carres.2006.03.035
87
LiG.-Y.LuoZ.-C.YuanF.YuX.-B. (2017). Combined process of high-pressure homogenization and hydrothermal extraction for the extraction of fucoidan with good antioxidant properties from Nemacystus decipients.Food Bioprod. Process.10635–42. 10.1016/j.fbp.2017.08.002
88
LimS. J.AidaW. M. W.MaskatM. Y.LatipJ.BadriK. H.HassanO.et al (2016). Characterisation of fucoidan extracted from Malaysian Sargassum binderi.Food Chem.209267–273. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.04.058
89
LimS. J.AidaW. M. W.SchiehserS.RosenauT.BöhmdorferS. (2019). Structural elucidation of fucoidan from Cladosiphon okamuranus (Okinawa mozuku).Food Chem.272222–226. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.08.034
90
LiuN.WuX.FuX.DuanD.XuJ.GaoX. (2018). Characterization of polysaccharides extracted from a cultivated brown alga Costaria costata during the harvest period.J. Ocean. Univ. China171209–1217. 10.1007/s11802-018-3621-8
91
LiuX.LiuB.WeiX.-L.SunZ.-L.WangC.-Y. (2016). Extraction, fractionation, and chemical characterisation of fucoidans from the brown seaweed Sargassum pallidum.Czech J. Food Sci.34406–413. 10.17221/322/2015-CJFS
92
LloydA. G. (1959). Studies on sulphatases. 24. The use of barium chloranilate in the determination of the enzymically liberated sulphate.Biochem. J.72133–136. 10.1042/bj0720133
93
LorbeerA. J.CharoensiddhiS.LahnsteinJ.LarsC.FrancoC. M. M.BuloneV.et al (2017). Sequential extraction an characterization of fucoidans and alginates from Ecklonia radiata, Macrocystis pyrifera, Durvillaea potatorum, and Seirococcus axillaris.J. Appl. Phycol.291515–1526. 10.1007/s10811-016-0990-5
94
LorbeerA. J.LahnsteinJ.FincherG. B.SuP.ZhangW. (2015). Kinetics of conventional and microwave-assisted fucoidan extractions from the brown alga, Ecklonia radiata.J. Appl. Phycol.272079–2087. 10.1007/s10811-014-0446-8
95
LuJ.ShiK. K.ChenS.WangJ.HassounaA.et al (2018). Fucoidan extracted from the New Zealand Undaria pinnatifida-physicochemical comparison against five other fucoidans: unique low molecular weight fraction bioactivity in breast cancer cell lines.Mar. Drugs16:461. 10.3390/md16120461
96
LuoD.WangZ.NieK. (2019). Structural characterization of a novel polysaccharide from Sargassum thunbergii and its antioxidant and anti-inflammation effects.PLoS One14:e0223198. 10.1371/journal.pone.0223198
97
LyB. M.BuuN. Q.NhutN. D.ThinhP. D.VanT. T. T. (2005). Studies on fucoidan and its production from vietnamese brown seaweeds.AJSTD22371–380. 10.29037/ajstd.173
98
MabeauS.KloaregB. (1987). Isolation and analysis of the cell walls of brown algae: Fucus spiralis, F. ceranoides, F. vesiculosus, F. serratus, Bifurcaria bifurcata and Laminaria digitata.J. Exp. Bot.381573–1580. 10.1093/jxb/38.9.1573
99
MabeauS.KloaregB.JoseleauJ.-P. (1990). Fractionation and analysis of fucans from brown algae.Phytochemistry.292441–2445. 10.1016/0031-9422(90)85163-A
100
MackieW.PrestonR. D. (1974). “Cell wall and intercellular region polysaccharides,” in Algal Physiology and Biochemistry, ed.StewartW. D. P. (Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications), 58–64.
101
MakW.HamidN.LiuT.LuJ.WhiteW. L. (2013). Fucoidan from New Zealand Undaria pinnatifida: monthly variations and determination of antioxidant activities.Carbohydr. Polym.95606–614. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2013.02.047
102
MandalP.MateuC. G.ChattopadhyayK.PujolC. A.DamonteE. B.RayB. (2007). Structural features and antiviral activity of sulphated fucans from the brown seaweed Cystoseira indica.Antivir. Chem. Chemother.18153–162. 10.1177/095632020701800305
103
Mateos-AparicioI.MarteraG.GoñiI.Villanueva-SuárezM.-J.Redondo-CuencaA. (2018). Chemical structure and molecular weight influence the in vitro fermentability of polysaccharide extracts from the edible seaweeds Himanthalia elongata and Gigartina pistillata.Food Hydrocoll.83348–354. 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2018.05.016
104
MedcalfD. G.LarsenB. (1977a). Fucose-containing polysaccharides in the brown alga Ascophyllum nodosum and Fucus vesiculosus.Carbohydr. Res.59531–537. 10.1016/S0008-6215(00)83190-0
105
MedcalfD. G.LarsenB. (1977b). Structural studies on ascophyllan and the fucose-containing complexes from the brown alga Ascophyllum nodosum.Carbohydr. Res.59539–546. 10.1016/S0008-6215(00)83191-2
106
MedcalfD. G.RootC. F.CraneyC. L.MukhopadhyhayD.MillerC. J.HopewellW. D. (1972). Chemical characterization of mucilaginous polysaccharides from Ulvaceae species native to the Puget Sound.Proc. Int. Seaweed Symp7541–547.
107
MedcalfD. G.SchneiderT. L.BarnettR. W. (1978). Structural features of a novel glucuronogalactofucan from Ascophyllum nodosum.Carbohydr. Res.66167–171. 10.1016/S0008-6215(00)83249-8
108
MedeirosV. P.QueirozK. C. S.CardosoM. L.MonteiroG. R. G.OliveiraF. W.ChavanteS. F.et al (2008). Sulfated galactofucan from Lobophora variegata: anticoagulant and anti-inflammatory properties.Biochemistry731018–1024. 10.1134/S0006297908090095
109
MenezesM. M.NobreL. T. D. B.RossiG. R.Almeida-LimaJ.Melo-SilveiraR. F.FrancoC. R. C.et al (2018). A low-molecular-weight galactofucan from the seaweed, Spatoglossum schröederi, binds fibronectin and inhibits capillary-like tube formation in vitro.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.1111067–1075. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.01.119
110
MenshovaR. V.AnastyukS. D.ErmakovaS. P.ShevchenkoM. N.IsakovV. I.ZvyagintsevaT. N. (2015). Structure and anticancer activity in vitro of sulfated galactofucan from brown alga Alaria angusta.Carbohydr. Polym.132118–125. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.06.020
111
Men’shovaR. V.ErmakovaS. P.RachidiS. M.Al-HajjeA. H.ZvyagintsevaT. N.KanaanH. M. (2012). Seasonal variations of the composition, structural features, and antitumor properties of polysaccharides from Padina pavonica (Lebanon) as a function of composition.Chem. Nat. Compd.47870–875. 10.1007/s10600-012-0091-x
112
Men’shovaR. V.LepeshkinF. D.ErmakovaS. P.PokrovskiiO. I.ZvyagintsevaT. N. (2013). Effect of pretreatment conditions of brown algae by supercritical fluids on yield and structural characteristics of fucoidans.Chem. Nat. Compd.48923–926. 10.1007/s10600-013-0429-z
113
MianA. J.PercivalE. (1973). Carbohydrates of the brown seaweeds Himanthalia lorea, Bifurcaria bifurcata, and Padina pavonia. Part I. Extraction and fractionation.Carbohydr. Res.26133–146. 10.1016/S0008-6215(00)85030-2
114
MillerI. J. (1997). The chemotaxonomic significance of the water-soluble red algal polysaccharides.Recent Res. Dev. Phytochem.1531–565.
115
MonsurH. A.JaswirI.SimsekS.AmidA.AlamZ. (2017). Chemical structure of sulfated polysaccharides from brown seaweed (Turbinaria turbinata).Int. J. Food Prop.201457–1469. 10.1080/10942912.2016.1211144
116
MoriH.NisizawaK. (1982). Sugars constituents of sulfated polysaccharides from the fronds of Sargassum ringgoldianum.Bull. Jpn. Soc. Sci. Fish.48981–986. 10.2331/suisan.48.981
117
NagaokaM.ShibataH.Kimura-TakagiI.HashimotoS.KimuraK.MakinoT.et al (1999). Structural study of fucoidan from Cladosiphon Okamuranus TOKIDA.Glycoconj. J.1619–26. 10.1023/A:1006945618657
118
NakayasuS.SoegimaR.YamaguchiK.OdaT. (2009). Biological activities of fucose-containing polysaccharide ascophyllan isolated from the brown alga Ascophyllum nodosum.Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem.73961–964. 10.1271/bbb.80845
119
NguyenT. T.MikkelsenM. D.TranV. H. N.TrangV. T. D.Rhein-KnudsenN.HolckJ.et al (2020). Enzyme-assisted fucoidan extraction from brown macroalgae Fucus districhus subsp. evanescens and Saccharina lattisima.Mar. Drugs18:296. 10.3390/md18060296
120
NishinoT.NishiokaC.UraH.NagumoT. (1994a). Isolation and partial characterization of a novel aminosugar-containing fucan sulphate from commercial Fucus vesiculosus fucoidan.Carbohydr. Res.255213–224. 10.1016/S0008-6215(00)90980-7
121
NishinoT.TakabeY.NagumoT. (1994b). Isolation and partial characterization of a novel β-D-galactan sulfate from the brown seaweed Laminaria angustata var. longissima.Carbohydr. Polym.23165–173. 10.1016/0144-8617(94)90099-X
122
NishinoT.YokoyamaG.DobashiK.FujiharaM.NagumoT. (1989). Isolation, purification, and characterization of fucose-containing sulfated polysaccharides from the brown seaweed Ecklonia kurome and their blood-anticoagulant activities.Carbohydr. Res.186119–129. 10.1016/0008-6215(89)84010-8
123
OlatunjiO. (2020). “Fucoidan,” in Aquatic Biopolymers. Springer Series on Polymer and Composite Materials, ed.KaliaS. (Cham: Springer), 95–115. 10.1007/978-3-030-34709-3_5
124
OltmannsF. (1922). Morphologie und Biologie der Algen. Phaeophyceae-Rhodophyceae, 2nd Edn, Vol. II. Jena: Gustav Fischer.
125
OzawaT.YamamotoJ.YamagishiT.YamazakiN.NishizawaM. (2006). Two fucoidans in the holdfast of cultivated Laminaria japonica.J. Nat. Med.60236–239. 10.1007/s11418-006-0046-2
126
PalanisamyS.VinoshaM.MarudhupandiT.RajasekarP.PrabhuN. M. (2017). In vitro antioxidant and andibacterial activity of sulfated polysaccharides isolated from Spatoglossum asperum.Carbohydr. Polym.170296–304. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.04.085
127
PercivalE. (1968). Glucuronoxylofucan, a cell-wall component of Ascophyllum nodosum.Part. I.Carbohydr. Res.7272–283. 10.1016/S0008-6215(00)81200-8
128
PercivalE. (1979). The polysaccharides of green, red and brown seaweeds: their basic structure, biosynthesis and function.Br. Phycol. J.14103–117. 10.1080/00071617900650121
129
PercivalE.McDowellR. H. (1967). Chemistry and Enzymology of Marine Algal Polysaccharides. (New York, NY: Academic Press), 157–174.
130
PercivalE.RahmanM. D. A.WeigelH. (1981). Chemistry of the polysaccharides of the brown seaweed Dictyopteris plagiogramma.Phytochemistry201579–1582. 10.1016/S0031-9422(00)98535-2
131
PercivalE.YoungM. (1974). Carbohydrates of the brown seaweeds: part III. Desmarestia aculeata.Carbohydr. Res.32195–201. 10.1016/s0008-6215(00)82097-2
132
PercivalE. E.Venegas JaraM. F.WeigelH. (1983). Carbohydrates of the brown seaweed Lessonia nigrescens.Phytochemistry221429–1432. 10.1016/S0031-9422(00)84029-7
133
PonceN. M. A.FloresM. L.PujolC. A.BecerraM. B.NavarroD. A.CórdobaO.et al (2019). Fucoidans from the phaeophyta Scytosiphon lomentaria: chemical analysis and antiviral activity of the galactofucan component.Carbohydr. Res.47818–24. 10.1016/j.carres.2019.04.004
134
PonceN. M. A.PujolC. A.DamonteE. B.FloresM. L.StortzC. A. (2003). Fucoidans from the brown seaweed Adenocystis utricularis: extraction methods, antiviral activity and structural studies.Carbohydr. Res.338153–165. 10.1016/S0008-6215(02)00403-2
135
ProkofjevaM. M.ImbsT. I.ShevchenkoN. M.SpirinP. V.HornS.FehseB.et al (2013). Fucoidans and potential inhibitors of HIV-1.Mar. Drugs113000–3014. 10.3390/md11083000
136
QuG.LiuX.WangD.YuanY.HanL. (2014). Isolation and characterization of fucoidans from five brown algae and evaluation of their antioxidant activity.J. Ocean. Univ. China13851–856. 10.1007/s11802-014-2260-y
137
QueirozK. C. S.MedeirosV. P.QueirozL. S.AbreuL. R. D.RochaH. A. O.FerreiraC. V.et al (2008). Inhibition of reverse transcriptase activity of HIV by polysaccharides of brown algae.Biomed. Pharmacother.62303–307. 10.1016/j.biopha.2008.03.006
138
RabanalM.PonceN. M. A.NavarroD. A.GómezR. M.StortzC. A. (2014). The system of fucoidans from the brown seaweed Dictyota dichotoma: chemical analysis and antiviral activity.Carbohydr. Polym.101804–811. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2013.10.019
139
RiouxL.-E.TurgeonS. L.BeaulieuM. (2007). Characterization of polysaccharides extracted from brown seaweeds.Carbohydr. Polym.69530–537. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2007.01.009
140
Rodríguez-JassoR. M.MussattoS. I.PastranaL.AguilarC. N.TeixeiraJ. A. (2011). Microwave-assisted extraction of sulfated polysaccharides (fucoidan) from brown seaweed.Carbohydr. Polym.861137–1144. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.06.006
141
RousseauF.BurrowesR.PetersA. F.KuhlenkampR.de ReviersB. (2001). A comprehensive phylogeny of the Phaeophyceae based on nrDNA sequences resolves the earliest divergences.C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris324305–319. 10.1016/S0764-4469(01)01306-3
142
RousseauF.de ReviersB. (1999a). Phylogenetic relationships within the Fucales (Phaeophyceae) based on combined partial SSU + LSU rDNA sequence data.Eur. J. Phycol.3453–64. 10.1080/09670269910001736082
143
RousseauF.de ReviersB. (1999b). Circumscription of the order Ectocarpales (Phaeophyceae): bibliographical synthesis and molecular evidence.Cryptogamie Algol.205–18. 10.1016/S0181-1568(99)80002-6
144
RupérezP.AhrazemO.LealJ. A. (2002). Potential antioxidant capacity of sulfated polysaccharides from the edible marine brown seaweed Fucus vesiculosus.J. Agric. Food Chem.50840–845. 10.1021/jf010908o
145
SakaiT.KimuraH.KatoI. (2002). A marine strain of Flavobacteriaceae utilizes brown seaweed fucoidan.Mar. Biotechnol.4399–405. 10.1007/s10126-002-0032-y
146
SakaiT.KimuraH.KojimaK.ShimanakaK.IkaiK.KatoI. (2003). Marine bacterial sulfated fucoglucuronomannan (SFGM) lyase digests brown algal SFGM into trisaccharides.Mar. Biotechnol.570–78. 10.1007/s10126-002-0056-3
147
SaravanaP. S.ChoY.-J.ParkY.-B.WooH.-C.ChunB. S. (2016). Structural, antioxidante, and emulsifying activities of fucoidan from Saccharina japonica using pressurized liquid extraction.Carbohydr. Polym.153518–525. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.08.014
148
SchweigerR. G. (1962). Methanolysis of fucoidan. II. The presence of sugars other than L-fucose.J. Org. Chem274270–4272. 10.1021/jo01059a034
149
ScottJ. E. (1960). Aliphatic ammonium salts in the assay of acidic polysaccharides from tissues.Methods Biochem. Anal.8145–197. 10.1002/9780470110249.ch4
150
SellimiS.KadriN.Barragan-MonteroV.LaouerH.HajjiM.NasriM. (2014). Fucans from a Tunisian brown seaweed Cystoseira barbata: structural characteristics and antioxidant activity.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.66281–288. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2014.02.041
151
SenthilkumarK.RamajayamG.VenkatesanJ.KimS.-K.AhnB.-C. (2017). “Biomedical applications of fucoidans, seaweed polysaccharides,” in Seaweed Polysaccharides – Isolation, Biological, and Biomedical Applications, edsVenkatesanJ.AnilS.KimS.-K. (Amsterdam: Elsevier), 269–281. 10.1016/B978-0-12-809816-5.00014-1
152
ShevchenkoN. M.AnastyukS. D.MenshovaR. V.VishchukO. S.IsakovV. I.ZadorozhnyP. A.et al (2015). Further studies on structure of fucoidan from brown alga Saccharina gurjanovae.Carbohydr. Polym.121207–216. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.12.042
153
ShevchenkoN. M.Usol´tseva (Men’shova)R. V.IshinaI. A.ThinhP. D.LyB. M.ErmakovaS. P. (2017). Structural characteristic and in vitro antitumor activity of water-soluble polysaccharides from brown algae of the Russian far east and Vietnam.Chem. Nat. Compd.531–5. 10.1007/s10600-017-1897-3
154
SilberfeldT.RacaultM.-F. L. P.FletcherR. L.CoulouxA.RousseauF.de ReviersB. (2011). Systematics and evolutionary history of pyrenoid-bearing taxa in bown algae (Phaeophyceae).Eur. J. Phycol.46361–377. 10.1080/09670262.2011.628698
155
SilberfeldT.RousseauF.de ReviersB. (2014). An updated classification of brown algae (Ochrophyta, Phaeophyceae).Cryptogam. Algol.35117–156. 10.7872/crya.v35.iss2.2014.117
156
SilchenkoA. S.RasinA. B.KusaykinM. I.KalinovskyA. I.MiansongZ.ChanghengL.et al (2017). Structure, enzymatic transformation, anticancer activity of fucoidan and sulphated fucooligosaccharides from Sargasum horneri.Carbohydr. Polym.175654–660. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.08.043
157
SilvaT. M. A.AlvesL. G.QueirozK. C. S.SantosM. G. L.MarquesC. T.ChavanteS. F.et al (2005). Partial characterization and anticoagulant activity of a heterofucan from the brown seawed Padina gymnospora.Braz. J. Med. Biol. Res.38523–533. 10.1590/S0100-879X2005000400005
158
SinhaS.AstaniA.GhoshT.SchnitzlerP.RayB. (2010). Polysaccharides from Sargassum tenerrimum: structural features, chemical modification and anti-viral activity.Phytochemistry71235–242. 10.1016/j.phytochem.2009.10.014
159
SkriptsovaA. V. (2015). Fucoidans from brown algae: biosynthesis, localization, and physiological role in the thallus.Russ. J. Mar. Biol.41145–156. 10.1134/S1063074015030098
160
SkriptsovaA. V.ShevchenkoN. M.TarbeevaD. V.ZvyagintsevaT. N. (2012). Comparative study of polysaccharides from reproductive and sterile tissues of five brown seaweeds.Mar. Biotechnol.14304–311. 10.1007/s10126-011-9413-4
161
SokolovaR. V.ErmakovaS. P.AwadaS. M.ZvyagintsevaT. N.KanaanH. M. (2011). Composition, structural characteristics and antitumor properties, of polysaccharides from the brown algae Dictyopteris polypodioides and Sargassum sp.Chem. Nat. Compd.47329–334. 10.1007/s10600-011-9925-1
162
SomasundaramN.ShanmugamS.SubramanianB.JaganathanR. (2016). Cytotoxic effect of fucoidan extracted from Sargassum cinereum on colon cancer cell line HCT-15 S.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.911215–1223. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.06.084
163
SongY.WangQ.WangQ.HeY.RenD.LiuS.et al (2018). Structural characterization and antitumor effects of fucoidans from brown algae Kjellmaniella crassifolia farmed in northern China.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.119125–133. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.07.126
164
StarkoS.Soto GomezM.DarbyH.DemesK. W.KawaiH.YotsukuraN.et al (2019). A comprehensive kelp phylogeny sheds light on the evolution of an ecosystem.Mol. Phylogenet. Evol.136138–150. 10.1016/j.ympev.2019.04.012
165
StortzC. A.CerezoA. S. (2000). Novel findings in carrageenans, agaroids and “hybrid” red seaweed galactans.Curr. Top. Phytochem.4121–134.
166
SunQ. L.LiY.NiL.-Q.LiY.-X.CuiY.-S.JiangS.-L.et al (2020). Structural characterization and antiviral activity of two fucoidans from the brown algae Sargassum henslowianum.Carbohydr. Polym.229:115487. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.115487
167
SynytsyaA.KimW.-J.KimS.-M.PohlR.SynytsyaA.KvasnièkaF.et al (2010). Structure and antitumour activity of fucoidan isolated from sporophyllof Korean brown seaweed Undaria pinnatifida.Carbohydr. Polym.8141–48. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.01.052
168
TakoM.TakedaS.TeruyaT.TamakiY. (2010). Chemical characterization of fucoidans from Laminaria angustata var. longissima.Nippon Shokuhin Kagaku Kogaku Kaishi57495–502. (in Japanese) 10.3136/nskkk.57.495
169
TanI. H.DruehlL. D. (1996). A ribosomal DNA phylogeny supports the close evolutionary relationships among the Sporochnales, Desmarestiales, and Laminariales (Phaeophyceae).J. Phycol.32112–118. 10.1111/j.0022-3646.1996.00112.x
170
TeruyaT.TatemotoH.KonishiT.TakoM. (2009). Structural characteristics and in vitro macrophage of acetyl fucoidan from Cladosiphon okamuranus.Glycoconj. J.261019–1028. 10.1007/s10719-008-9221-x
171
ThinhP. D.MenshovaR. V.ErmakovaS. P.AnastyukS. D.LyB. M.ZvyagintsevaT. N. (2013). Structural characteristics and anticancer activity of fucoidan from the brown alga Sargasum mcclurei.Mar. Drugs111456–1476. 10.3390/md11051456
172
ThornberC. S.KinlanB. P.GrahamM. H.StachowiczJ. J. (2004). Population ecology of the invasive kelp Undaria pinnatifida in California: environmental and biological controls on demography.Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.26869–80. 10.3354/meps268069
173
TorodeT. A.SiméonA.MarcusS. E.JamM.Le-MoigneM. A.DuffieuxD.et al (2016). Dynamics of cell wall assembly during early embryogenesis in the brown alga Fucus.J. Exp. Bot.676089–6100. 10.1093/jxb/erw369
174
Usoltseva (Menshova)R. V.AnastyukS. D.ShevchenkoM. N.ZvyagintsevaT. N.ErmakovaS. P. (2016). The comparison of structure and anticancer activity(in)vitro of polysaccharides from brown algae Alaria marginata and A. angusta.Carbohydr. Polym.153258–265. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.07.103
175
UsoltsevaR. V.AnastyukS. D.IshinaI. A.IsakovV. V.ZvyagintsevaT. N.ThinhP. D.et al (2018a). Structural characteristics and anticancer activity in vitro of fucoidan from brown alga Padina boryana.Carbohydr. Polym.184260–268. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.12.071
176
UsoltsevaR. V.AnastyukS. D.ShevchenkoN. M.SuritsV. V.SilchenkoA. S.IsakovV. V.et al (2017a). Polysaccharides from brown algae Sargassum duplicatum: the structure and anticancer activity in vitro.Carbohydr. Polym.175547–556. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.08044
177
UsoltsevaR. V.ShevchenkoN. M.MalyarenkoO. S.AnastyukS. D.KasprikA. E.ZvyagintsevaN. V.et al (2019). Fucoidans from brown algae Laminaria longipes and Saccharina cichorioides: structural characteristics, anticancer and radiosensitizing activity in vitro.Carbohydr. Polym.221157–165. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.05.079
178
UsoltsevaR. V.ShevchenkoN. M.MalyarenkoO. S.IshinaI. A.IvannikovaS. I.ErmakovaS. P. (2018b). Structure and anticancer activity of native and modified polysaccharides from brown alga Dictyota dichotoma.Carbohydr. Polym.18021–28. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.10.006
179
UsoltsevaR. V.ZhaoP.KusaikinM. I.JiaA.YuanW.ZhangM.et al (2017b). Structural characteristics and antitumor activity of fucoidans from the brown alga Sargasum muticum.Chem. Nat. Compd.53219–223. 10.1007/s10600-017-1956-9
180
UsovA. I. (2011). Polysaccharides of the red algae.Adv. Carbohydr. Chem. Biochem.65115–217. 10.1016/B978-0-12-385520-6.00004-2
181
van den HoekC.MannD.JahnsH. M. (1996). Algae: An Introduction To Phycology.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
182
VishchukO. S.ErmakovaS. P.ZvyagintsevaT. N. (2011). Sulfated polysaccharides from brown seaweeds Saccharina japonica and Undaria pinnatifida: isolation, structural characteristics, and antitumor activity.Carbohydr. Res.3462769–2776. 10.1016/j.carres.2011.09.034
183
VishchukO. S.ErmakovaS. P.ZvyagintsevaT. N. (2013). The effect of sulfated (1(3)-α-L-fucan from the brown alga Saccharina cichorioides Miyabe on resveratrol-induced apoptosis in colon carcinoma cells.Mar. Drugs11194–212. 10.3390/md11010194
184
VishchukO. S.TarbeevaD. V.ErmakovaS. P.ZvyagintsevaT. N. (2012). Structural characteristics and biological activity of fucoidans from the brown algae Alaria sp. and Saccharina japonica of different reproductive status.Chem. Biodiv.9817–828. 10.1002/cbdv.201100266
185
WangP.ZhaoX.LvY.LiuY.LangY.WuJ.et al (2012). Analysis of structural heterogeneity of fucoidan from Hizikia fusiforme by ES-CID-MS/MS.Carbohydr. Polym.90602–607. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2012.05.084
186
WangQ.SongY.HeY.RenD.KowF.QiaoZ.et al (2014). Structural characterisation of algae Costaria costata fucoidan and its effects on CCl4-induced liver injury.Carbohydr. Polym.107247–254. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.02.071
187
WangY.XingM.CaoQ.JiA.LiangH.SongS. (2019). Biological activities of fucoidan and the factors mediating Its therapeutic effects: a review of recent studies.Mar. Drugs17:183. 10.3390/md17030183
188
WozniakM.BellT.DénesA.FalshawR.ItzhakiR. (2015). Anti-HSV-1 activity of brown algal polysaccharides and possible relevance to the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.74530–540. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2015.01.003
189
WuS.ZhangX.LiuJ.SongJ.YuP.ChenP.et al (2019). Physicochemical characterization of Sargassum fusiforme fucoidan fractions and their antagonistic effect against P-selectin-mediated cell adhesion.Int. J. Biol. Macromol.133656–662. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.03.218
190
WutsP. G. M.GreeneT. W. (2006). Greene’s Protective Groups in Organic Synthesis: Chapter 2, 4th Edn. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley, 10.1002/9780470053485.ch2
191
YangW.-N.ChenP.-W.HuangC.-Y. (2017). Compositional characteristics and in vitro evaluations of antioxidant and neuroprotective properties of crude extracts of fucoidan prepared from compressional puffing-pretreated Sargassum crassifolium.Mar. Drugs15:183. 10.3390/md15060183
192
YouS.YangC.LeeH.LeeB.-Y. (2010). Molecular characteristics of partially hydrolyzed fucoidans from sporophyll of Undaria pinnatifida and their in vitro anticancer activity.Food Chem.119554–559. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.06.054
193
YuanY.MacquarrieD. J. (2015). Microwave assisted step-by-step process for the production of fucoidan, alginate sodium, sugars, and biochar from Ascophyllum nodosum through a biorefinery concept.Biores. Technol.198819–827. 10.1016/j.biortech.2015.09.090
194
YuguchiY.TranV. T. T.BuiL. M.TakebeS.SuzukiS.NakajimaN.et al (2016). Primary structure, conformation in aqueous solution, and intestinal immunomodulating activity of fucoidan from two brown seaweed species Sargassum crassifolium and Padina australis.Carbohydr. Polym.14769–78. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.03.101
195
ZhangW.OdaT.YuQ.JinJ.-O. (2015). Fucoidan from Macrocystis pyrifera has powerful immune-modulatory effects compared to three others fucoidans.Mar. Drugs131084–1104. 10.3390/md13031084
196
ZvyagintsevaT. N.ShevchenkoN. M.ChizhovA. O.KrupnovaT. N.SundukovaE. V.IsakovV. V. (2003). Water-soluble polysaccharides of some far-eastern brown seaweeds. Distribution, structure, and their dependence on the developmental conditions.J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol.2941–13. 10.1016/S0022-0981(03)00244-2
197
ZvyagintsevaT. N.ShevchenkoN. M.PopivnichI. B.IsakovV. V.ScobunA. S.SundukovaE. V.et al (1999). A new procedure for the separation of water-soluble polysaccharides from brown seaweeds.Carbohydr. Res.32232–39. 10.1016//S0008-6215(99)00206-2
Summary
Keywords
fucoidans, brown seaweeds, phaeophyceae, taxonomy, phylogeny
Citation
Ponce NMA and Stortz CA (2020) A Comprehensive and Comparative Analysis of the Fucoidan Compositional Data Across the Phaeophyceae. Front. Plant Sci. 11:556312. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.556312
Received
27 April 2020
Accepted
02 November 2020
Published
25 November 2020
Volume
11 - 2020
Edited by
Cécile Hervé, Laboratoire de Biologie Intégrative des Modèles Marins, Station Biologique de Roscoff, France
Reviewed by
Anne S. Meyer, Technical University of Denmark, Denmark; Jasna Miroljub Nikolic, UMR 8227 Laboratoire de Biologie Intégrative des Modèles Marins, France
Updates
Copyright
© 2020 Ponce and Stortz.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Nora M. A. Ponce, aponce@qo.fcen.uba.arCarlos A. Stortz, stortz@qo.fcen.uba.ar
This article was submitted to Plant Systematics and Evolution, a section of the journal Frontiers in Plant Science
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.