| Literature DB >> 23874607 |
Jing Zhou1, Xiaoxue Zheng, Qi Yang, Zhenyi Liang, Donghai Li, Xiaobo Yang, Jing Xu.
Abstract
Ultrasonic-assisted extraction (UAE) was developed to extract phenolic and flavonoid antioxidants from Clerodendrum cyrtophyllum Turcz leaves. The optimal experimental parameters for antioxidant extraction from C. cyrtophyllum leaves were measured using single-factor experimentation combined with response surface methodology (RSM). Total phenolic content (TPC) and total flavonoid content (TFC) assays were used to quantify antioxidant compounds. Next, antioxidant radical scavenging capacity was measured using 2,2'-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) and 2,2' -azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulphonicacid) (ABTS) radicals. Optimized extraction conditions for UAE from C. cyrtophyllum leaves were as follows: 60.9% ethanol, 85.4 min, and 63.3°C for maximal TPC extraction (16.8 ± 0.2 mg GAE/g DW); 67.7% ethanol, 82.9 min, and 63.0 °C for maximal TFC extraction (49.3 ± 0.4 mg RT/g DW); 48.8% ethanol, 85.1 min, and 63.9 °C for maximal DPPH radical-scavenging capacity (86.8 ± 0.2%); and 50.6% ethanol, 81.3 min, and 63.4 °C for maximal ABTS radical-scavenging capacity (92.9 ± 0.5%). Ethanol concentration was the most important factor in the extraction process. Our work offers optimal extraction conditions for C. cyrtophyllum as a potential source of natural antioxidants.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23874607 PMCID: PMC3713038 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068392
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Five-level, three-independent variable central composite rotatable design and experimental data for response variables for optimization of C. cyrtophyllum leaf extracts.
| Run | Process variables – real and (coded) values | Responses | |||||
|
|
|
| TPC (mg GAE/g DW) | TFC (mg RE/ | DPPH radical- scavenging capacity (%) | ABTS radical- scavenging capacity (%) | |
| 1 | 20 (−1) | 60 (−1) | 50 (−1) | 6.6±0.1 | 14.3±0.2 | 54.0±1.0 | 55.9±1.8 |
| 2 | 20 (−1) | 60 (−1) | 70 (1) | 11.0±0.1 | 20.3±0.4 | 72.9±1.2 | 87.6±2.7 |
| 3 | 20 (−1) | 100 (1) | 50 (−1) | 7.8±0.1 | 21.8±0.8 | 61.0±0.9 | 73.2±3.0 |
| 4 | 20 (−1) | 100 (1) | 70 (1) | 12.2±0.3 | 25.2±0.7 | 76.4±1.3 | 88.0±1.5 |
| 5 | 60 (1) | 60 (−1) | 50 (−1) | 13.6±0.3 | 41.5±0.4 | 76.5±0.7 | 89.2±0.7 |
| 6 | 60 (1) | 60 (−1) | 70 (1) | 15.0±0.6 | 44.0±0.3 | 78.7±0.2 | 90.0±2.0 |
| 7 | 60 (1) | 100 (1) | 50 (−1) | 14.8±0.5 | 42.5±0.8 | 79.9±0.4 | 91.1±1.3 |
| 8 | 60 (1) | 100 (1) | 70 (1) | 16.2±0.2 | 48.1±1.5 | 81.7±0.5 | 87.9±0.5 |
| 9 | 74 (1.68) | 80 (0) | 60 (0) | 15.9±0.5 | 46.1±0.2 | 77.2±0.5 | 89.6±0.7 |
| 10 | 6 (−1.68) | 80 (0) | 60 (0) | 7.3±0.3 | 12.7±0.6 | 55.9±1.2 | 66.1±0.6 |
| 11 | 40 (0) | 114 (1.68) | 60 (0) | 12.7±0.6 | 36.2±0.6 | 76.6±0.6 | 89.0±0.2 |
| 12 | 40 (0) | 46 (−1.68) | 60 (0) | 11.2±0.2 | 30.0±0.5 | 71.2±0.9 | 80.7±1.1 |
| 13 | 40 (0) | 80 (0) | 77 (1.68) | 14.6±0.5 | 35.0±0.6 | 79.5±0.5 | 90.9±1.6 |
| 14 | 40 (0) | 80 (0) | 43 (−1.68) | 11.0±0.1 | 27.8±0.4 | 63.1±1.7 | 80.6±1.3 |
| 15 | 40 (0) | 80 (0) | 60 (0) | 14.8±0.8 | 42.8±0.3 | 82.8±0.3 | 89.4±0.8 |
| 16 | 40 (0) | 80 (0) | 60 (0) | 15.3±0.3 | 40.7±0.6 | 83.8±1.1 | 91.0±0.7 |
| 17 | 40 (0) | 80 (0) | 60 (0) | 15.0±0.6 | 41.4±0.5 | 83.5±1.1 | 90.1±1.0 |
| 18 | 40 (0) | 80 (0) | 60 (0) | 15.0±0.8 | 40.8±0.3 | 85.6±0.7 | 91.8±0.5 |
Responses are the means ± SD (n = 3).
Figure 1Effect of (A) ethanol concentration (extraction time 60 min, extraction temperature 60°C), (B) extraction time (40% ethanol, extraction temperature 60°C), (C) extraction temperature (40% ethanol, extraction time 80 min) on TPC, TFC, DPPH and ABTS radical scavenging capacity from C. cyrtophyllum leaf extracts.
Regression models fitted to the experimental data of response variables.
| Response | Model equationa | Probability of lack of fit |
|
| TPC (mg GAE/g DW) | Y = 15.013364+4.513759 | 0.1597 | 0.9937b |
| TFC (mg RE/g DW) | Y = 41.384322+18.636959 | 0.1040 | 0.9877b |
| DPPH radical scavenging capability (%) | Y = 83.864603+10.942177 | 0.1594 | 0.9822b |
| ABTS radical scavenging capability (%) | Y = 90.535606+11.522496 | 0.0617 | 0.9729b |
X1, EtOH (%); X2, Time (min); X3, T (°C). Coded values. b P<0.001.
Figure 2Response surface plots of TPCs of C. cyrtophyllum leaf extracts as affected by ethanol concentration, temperature, and time in UAE.
(A) Ethanol concentration and time (temperature 60°C); (B) ethanol concentration and temperature (time 80 min); (C) temperature and time (40% ethanol).
Predicted and experimental values of response variables under optimal conditions.
| Responses | Optimum extraction conditions | Maximum value | |||
| EtOH (%) | Time (min) | T (°C) | Experimental | Predicted | |
| TPC(mg GAE/g DW) | 60.9 | 85.4 | 63.3 | 16.8±0.2 | 16.7 |
| TFC(mg RE/g DW) | 67.7 | 82.9 | 63.0 | 49.3±0.4 | 49.4 |
| DPPH radical scavenging ability (%) | 48.8 | 85.1 | 63.9 | 86.8±0.3 | 86.4 |
| ABTS radical scavenging ability (%) | 50.6 | 81.3 | 63.4 | 92.9±0.5 | 93.2 |
Responses are the means ± SD (n = 3).
Correlation between response variables under different extraction conditions.
|
| EtOH (%) | Time (min) |
| ||||||
| TPC | TFC | DPPH | TPC | TFC | DPPH | TPC | TFC | DPPH | |
| TFC | 0.9185 | 0.6031NS | 0.8329c | ||||||
| DPPH | 0.7537c | 0.8763b | 0.2258NS | 0.5413NS | 0.9375 | 0.8101c | |||
| ABTS | 0.8162c | 0.8464b | 0.7617c | 0.7318c | 0.6486NS | 0.5449NS | 0.3463NS | 0.3599NS | 0.3121NS |
P<0.005, b P<0.01, c P<0.05; NS: non-significant; r: correlation coefficient.