| Literature DB >> 23044712 |
Mandana Bimakr1, Russly Abdul Rahman, Farah Saleena Taip, Noranizan Mohd Adzahan, Md Zaidul Islam Sarker, Ali Ganjloo.
Abstract
In the present study, ultrasound-assisted extraction of crude oil from winter melon seeds was investigated through response surface methodology (RSM). Process variables were power level (25-75%), temperature (45-55 °C) and sonication time (20-40 min). It was found that all process variables have significant (p < 0.05) effects on the response variable. A central composite design (CCD) was used to determine the optimum process conditions. Optimal conditions were identified as 65% power level, 52 °C temperature and 36 min sonication time for maximum crude yield (108.62 mg-extract/g-dried matter). The antioxidant activity, total phenolic content and fatty acid composition of extract obtained under optimized conditions were determined and compared with those of oil obtained by the Soxhlet method. It was found that crude extract yield (CEY) of ultrasound-assisted extraction was lower than that of the Soxhlet method, whereas antioxidant activity and total phenolic content of the extract obtained by ultrasound-assisted extraction were clearly higher than those of the Soxhlet extract. Furthermore, both extracts were rich in unsaturated fatty acids. The major fatty acids of the both extracts were linoleic acid and oleic acid.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23044712 PMCID: PMC6268733 DOI: 10.3390/molecules171011748
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Perturbation graph showing the effect of process variables on crude extract yield.
Experimental design (coded and uncoded levels) and results of response variable.
| Run | Process Variables | CEY (mg-extract/g-dried matter) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Level (%) | Temperature (°C) | Sonication Time (min) | ||
| 1 | 34.69 (−1) | 46.94 (−1) | 36.12 (+1) | 72.10 |
| 2 | 50.00 (0) | 50.00 (0) | 30.00 (0) | 95.44 |
| 3 | 50.00 (0) | 50.00 (0) | 30.00 (0) | 96.24 |
| 4 | 65.31 (+1) | 53.06 (+1) | 23.88 (−1) | 92.81 |
| 5 | 50.00 (0) | 50.00 (0) | 30.00 (0) | 96.43 |
| 6 | 65.31 (+1) | 46.94 (−1) | 23.88 (−1) | 89.18 |
| 7 | 34.69 (−1) | 46.94 (−1) | 23.88 (−1) | 68.18 |
| 8 | 50.00 (0) | 50.00 (0) | 30.00 (0) | 94.60 |
| 9 | 34.69 (−1) | 53.06 (+1) | 36.12 (+1) | 77.50 |
| 10 | 34.69 (−1) | 53.06 (+1) | 23.88 (−1) | 72.00 |
| 11 | 65.31 (+1) | 46.94 (−1) | 36.12 (+1) | 100.1 |
| 12 | 65.31 (+1) | 53.06 (+1) | 36.12 (+1) | 108.2 |
| 13 | 50.00 (0) | 50.00 (0) | 20.00 (−1.63) | 77.23 |
| 14 | 75.00 (+1.63) | 50.00 (0) | 30.00 (0) | 106.5 |
| 15 | 25.00 (−1.63) | 50.00 (0) | 30.00 (0) | 65.33 |
| 16 | 50.00 (0) | 55.00 (+1.63) | 30.00 (0) | 90.11 |
| 17 | 50.00 (0) | 50.00 (0) | 40.00 (+1.63) | 95.15 |
| 18 | 50.00 (0) | 50.00 (0) | 30.00 (0) | 96.43 |
| 19 | 50.00 (0) | 45.00 (−1.63) | 30.00 (0) | 81.20 |
| 20 | 50.00 (0) | 50.00 (0) | 30.00 (0) | 96.17 |
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and coefficients of the final reduced regression equation.
| Source | df | CEY (mg-extract/g-dried matter) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient | Sum of Squares | |||
| Model | 8 | 3,028.59 | <0.0001 | |
| Const. | 95.86 | |||
| X1 | 1 | 12.59 | 2,112.73 | <0.0001 |
| X2 | 1 | 2.66 | 94.52 | <0.0001 |
| X3 | 1 | 4.87 | 316.81 | <0.0001 |
| X12 | 1 | −3.65 | 176.22 | <0.0001 |
| X22 | 1 | −3.76 | 186.87 | <0.0001 |
| X32 | 1 | −3.56 | 167.47 | <0.0001 |
| X1X2 | 1 | - | - | - |
| X1X3 | 1 | 2.11 | 35.66 | <0.0001 |
| X2X3 | 1 | 0.76 | 4.58 | 0.0395 |
| Residual | 10 | 8.16 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 6 | 6.03 | 0.2810 | |
| Pure Error | 4 | 2.13 | ||
| Total | 19 | 3,036.76 | ||
| R2 | 0.997 | |||
| Adjusted-R2 | 0.995 | |||
| E (%) | 0.550 | |||
Figure 2Plot of predicted crude extract yield related with experimental values.
Figure 3Response surface plots for CEY (mg-extract/g-dried matter) as a function of: (a) power level (%) and sonication time (min) (b) temperature (°C) and sonication time (min).
Figure 4Comparison the quality of extracts obtained by ultrasound-assisted extraction and Soxhlet method.
Figure 5Fatty acid composition of extracts obtained using optimized ultrasound-assisted extraction and Soxhlet method.
Figure 6Scheme of experimental set-up for ultrasound-assisted extraction [30].