Grain and sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolorL. Moench) serves as a novel source of bioactive compounds for human health

Abstract

Grain sorghum is an important staple food crop grown globally while sweet sorghum is increasingly considered as a promising biofuel feedstock. Biofuels are the major economic products from the processing of large quantities of biomass, which is currently being utilized to make value-added products in the biorefinery approach. To date, these value-added products are typically commodity chemicals and waste materials used in agriculture. However, there are opportunities to generate high-value bioactive compounds from sorghum grain and biomass. Chronic diseases, such as cancers, are the top causes for morbidity and mortality in developed nations and are promoted by inflammation and oxidative stress. Globally, colorectal cancer results in approximately one-half million deaths annually. It is estimated that as much as 80% of colorectal cancer cases can be attributed to environmental and dietary factors. The sorghum grain and ligno-cellulosic biomass generated for biofuel production has been reported to be high in bioactive compounds, including phenolic acids and flavonoids, with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. This review focuses on the bioactive compounds of grain and sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench), for their anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, anti-colon cancer, and immune modulator functions. The review summarizes previous efforts to identify and quantify bioactive compounds in sorghum and documents their anti-cancer biological activities. Finally, this review discusses bioactive compound extraction methodologies and technologies as well as considerations for incorporating these technologies into current biorefining practices.

Sorghum Grain: From Genotype, Nutrition, and Phenolic Profile to Its Health Benefits and Food Applications

“…According to their structure, the phenolic acids can be divided into two categories: benzoic and cinnamic acid ( Figure 2). The main phenolic acids reported in sorghum grain are gallic, vanillic, protocatechuic, cinnamic, p-coumaric, p-hydroxybenzoic, syringic, ferulic, caffeic, and sinapic acids (Althwab, Carr, Weller, Dweikat, & Schlegel, 2015;Vanamala, Massey, Pinnamaneni, Reddivari, & Reardon, 2018).…”

Changes in phenolic content, antioxidant activity, and volatile compounds during processing of fermented sorghum grain tea

“…Sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench), the fifth primary cereal crop in the world, has been attracting much attention because of its high content of phytochemicals (Ragaee, Abdel‐Aal, & Noaman, 2006). Sorghum grains contain high portion of bioactive phytochemicals such as phenolic acids, procyanidins, 3‐deoxyanthocyanidins, and condensed tannins (Vanamala, Massey, Pinnamaneni, Reddivari, & Reardon, 2017; Xiong, Zhang, Warner, & Fang, 2019a). Epidemiological studies have consistently shown that the consumption of sorghum products is associated with reduced risk of chronic diseases, including type II diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer owing to the phenolic profile (Awika & Rooney, 2004).…”

Association of whole grain, refined grain, and cereal consumption with gastric cancer risk: A meta‐analysis of observational studies

“…Overall, the search yielded 498 articles, and 320 remained for further evaluation after 178 duplicated articles were excluded. Of the 23 full‐text reports remaining after title and abstract screening, four studies (Denova‐Gutierrez, Hernandez‐Ramirez, & Lopez‐Carrillo, ; Karagulle, Fidan, Kavgaci, & Ozdemir, ; Terry, Lagergren, Ye, Wolk, & Nyren, ; Wang et al., ) without available OR and 95% CI were ruled out, and another eight studies (Fraser, ; Gil, Ortega, & Maldonado, ; Jansen et al., ; Lafiandra, Riccardi, & Shewry, ; McCullough et al., ; Shamberger, Tytko, & Willis, ; So, Law, Law, Chan, & Chair, ; Vanamala, Massey, Pinnamaneni, Reddivari, & Reardon, ) were not included because they did not investigate cereal or grain consumption and GC risk. After this review, 11 observational studies evaluating the risk of GC remained for the analysis (Buckland et al., ; Chatenoud et al., ; Chen et al., ; De Stefani et al., ; Kasum, Jacobs, Nicodemus, & Folsom, ; Lissowska et al., ; Lucenteforte et al., ; Ramón, Serra, Cerdó, & Oromí, ; Wang et al., ; Ward, ; Zhang et al., ).…”