| Literature DB >> 25045392 |
Yang Ye1, Xiao-Shan Tang1, Fang Chen1, Lin Tang1.
Abstract
Extraction of phenolics from Idesia polycarpa defatted fruit residue was optimized by the maximization of the yield in total phenolics, using the response surface methodology. The optimized conditions were 50% ethanol, 5 h extraction time, 1 : 40 liquid to solid ratio, and 80°C extraction temperature. The experimental average total phenolics yield was 54.49 ± 4.26 mg/g. These antioxidant properties of phenolics were comprehensively analyzed for the first time. All the extracts not only demonstrated the significant free radical scavenging activities and metal chelating activity but also inhibited lipid, lipoprotein peroxidation and revealed reducing power activity. Ethyl acetate extraction (EAE) also inhibited mushroom tyrosinase activity and significantly increased the average skin-whitening index (L value) of the skin of C57BL/6 mice, indicating its potential use for skin hyperpigmentation in humans. The results of cell experiments showed EAE could strongly inhibit cellular tyrosinase activity, which had led to the decrease of melanogenesis in B16 mouse melanoma cells. Overall, EAE is an excellent natural antioxidant and depigmenting agent, which can be developed as a new food additive, medicine, and cosmetic.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25045392 PMCID: PMC4087257 DOI: 10.1155/2014/931269
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Effect of different extraction factors and total phenolics and flavonoids contents. ((a)–(e)) Effect of different extraction factors performed by single-factor test; (f) the total phenolics and flavonoids contents of all extracts at the same 8 mg/mL concentration. Each value is expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3).
Box-Behnken design and observed responses.
| Run |
|
|
|
| Response: |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 50.00 | 4.00 | 40.00 | 80.00 | 5.2221 |
| 2 | 70.00 | 4.00 | 40.00 | 80.00 | 4.9714 |
| 3 | 50.00 | 6.00 | 40.00 | 80.00 | 5.1743 |
| 4 | 70.00 | 6.00 | 40.00 | 80.00 | 5.0347 |
| 5 | 60.00 | 5.00 | 30.00 | 70.00 | 4.3575 |
| 6 | 60.00 | 5.00 | 50.00 | 70.00 | 4.5147 |
| 7 | 60.00 | 5.00 | 30.00 | 90.00 | 4.2877 |
| 8 | 60.00 | 5.00 | 50.00 | 90.00 | 4.2887 |
| 9 | 50.00 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 70.00 | 4.7512 |
| 10 | 70.00 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 70.00 | 4.6228 |
| 11 | 50.00 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 90.00 | 4.5787 |
| 12 | 70.00 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 90.00 | 4.4212 |
| 13 | 60.00 | 4.00 | 30.00 | 80.00 | 4.6159 |
| 14 | 60.00 | 6.00 | 30.00 | 80.00 | 4.61 |
| 15 | 60.00 | 4.00 | 50.00 | 80.00 | 4.9015 |
| 16 | 60.00 | 6.00 | 50.00 | 80.00 | 4.7915 |
| 17 | 50.00 | 5.00 | 30.00 | 80.00 | 4.6551 |
| 18 | 70.00 | 5.00 | 30.00 | 80.00 | 4.5633 |
| 19 | 50.00 | 5.00 | 50.00 | 80.00 | 5.0227 |
| 20 | 70.00 | 5.00 | 50.00 | 80.00 | 4.8912 |
| 21 | 60.00 | 4.00 | 40.00 | 70.00 | 4.5651 |
| 22 | 60.00 | 6.00 | 40.00 | 70.00 | 4.4915 |
| 23 | 60.00 | 4.00 | 40.00 | 90.00 | 4.3118 |
| 24 | 60.00 | 6.00 | 40.00 | 90.00 | 4.2655 |
| 25 | 60.00 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 80.00 | 5.4548 |
| 26 | 60.00 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 80.00 | 5.5487 |
| 27 | 60.00 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 80.00 | 5.3117 |
| 28 | 60.00 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 80.00 | 5.4224 |
| 29 | 60.00 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 80.00 | 5.3845 |
aPhenolics extraction yield is percentage content of the extracted phenolics in the studied raw material.
ANOVA for the effect of ethanol concentration, liquid to solid ratio, temperature, and time on the yield of phenolics using a quadratic response surface model.
| Source | SSa | dfb | MSc |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 4.15 | 14 | 0.30 | 27.40 | <0.0001 |
|
| 0.067 | 1 | 0.067 | 6.24 | 0.0256 |
|
| 4.044 | 1 | 4.044 | 0.37 | 0.5506 |
|
| 0.15 | 1 | 0.15 | 13.44 | 0.0025 |
|
| 0.11 | 1 | 0.11 | 10.18 | 0.0065 |
|
| 3.086 | 1 | 3.086 | 0.29 | 0.6016 |
|
| 3.940 | 1 | 3.940 | 0.036 | 0.8513 |
|
| 2.117 | 1 | 2.117 | 0.020 | 0.8907 |
|
| 2.709 | 1 | 2.709 | 0.25 | 0.6245 |
|
| 1.863 | 1 | 1.863 | 0.017 | 0.8974 |
|
| 6.100 | 1 | 6.100 | 0.56 | 0.4650 |
|
| 0.12 | 1 | 0.12 | 11.18 | 0.0048 |
|
| 0.42 | 1 | 0.42 | 39.23 | <0.0001 |
|
| 1.24 | 1 | 1.24 | 114.91 | <0.0001 |
|
| 3.12 | 1 | 3.12 | 288.17 | <0.0001 |
| Residual | 0.15 | 14 | 0.011 | ||
| Lack of fit | 0.12 | 10 | 0.012 | 1.57 | 0.3511 |
| Pure error | 0.031 | 4 | 7.668 | ||
|
| 0.9648 | ||||
| Adj | 0.9296 |
aSum of squares, bmean square, and cdegree of freedom.
Figure 2Response surface plots. Response surface plots showing the combined effects of ethanol concentration and extraction time (a), ethanol concentration and liquid to solid ratio (b), ethanol concentration and extraction temperature (c), extraction time and liquid to solid ratio (d), extraction time and extraction temperature (e), and liquid to solid ratio and extraction temperature (f).
DPPH, ABTS, and hydroxyl free radicals scavenging activities and inhibition of lipoprotein oxidation and SOD-like activities with IC50 values of the extracts of Idesia polycarpa fruit and BHT (or AA, VE) as positive control.
| Sample | DPPH | ABTS | Hydroxyl | Lipoproteina | SOD-like activitya (%) at 0.1 mg/mL | SOD-like activitya (%) at 0.2 mg/mL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IC50
b
| IC50
b
| IC50
b
| IC50
b
| |||
| CE | 0.093 ± 0.007** | 0.43 ± 0.04** | 2.08 ± 0.08** | 0.085 ± 0.007* | 49.33 ± 0.93* | 54.92 ± 0.63** |
| EAE | 0.032 ± 0.002** | 0.35 ± 0.03** | 7.20 ± 0.18** | 0.065 ± 0.001** | 60.00 ± 0.78** | 65.27 ± 0.39** |
| BAE | 0.131 ± 0.020** | 0.64 ± 0.10** | — | 0.353 ± 0.024** | 54.22 ± 0.39** | 59.94 ± 0.54** |
| AF | 0.213 ± 0.030** | 0.74 ± 0.04** | 2.06 ± 0.20** | 0.815 ± 0.065** | 47.43 ± 0.97 | 54.09 ± 1.02** |
| BHT | 0.067 ± 0.004 | 0.091 ± 0.008 | — | — | 45.72 ± 2.19 | 47.05 ± 2.35 |
| VE/AA | — | — | 0.095 ± 0.003 | 0.114 ± 0.016c | 96.24 ± 0.86c∗∗ | 99.11 ± 0.32c∗∗ |
aEach value is expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3).
bIC50 (mg/mL): the concentration at which 50% is inhibited.
cVE as the control.
∗ P < 0.05; ∗∗P < 0.01 compared with BHT.
Figure 3Reducing power and inhibition of β-carotene-linoleic acid system oxidation and depigmenting activity. (a) The reducing power of all extracts in the concentration range from 0.005 to 0.2 mg/mL. BHT was used as the positive control. (b) Inhibition of β-carotene-linoleic acid system oxidation by the extracts of Idesia polycarpa at 2 mg/mL. BHT was used as a positive control, and a negative control was completed instead of tests samples. (c) The metal chelating activity of all extracts in the concentration range from 2 to 10 mg/mL, compared to EDTA at the same concentration. (d) The tyrosinase inhibitory activity of different concentration of EAE/hydroquinone in mouse B16 melanoma cells (*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01 compared with the control). (e) The inhibitory effect of EAE and hydroquinone on melanogenesis of mouse B16 melanoma cells. Each value is expressed as mean with an error bar of standard deviation (n = 3). (f) Time course of skin-whitening index (L value) of mice; averaged L values (n = 8) with an error bar of standard deviation are plotted over the experimental period (P < 0.01 compared with the control group).
Effects of EAE against mushroom tyrosinase and on cell growth of B16 cells.
| Sample | Mushroom tyrosinase | Mushroom tyrosinase | Cytotoxicities |
|---|---|---|---|
| EAE | 1.009 ± 0.046 | 2.122 ± 0.106 | 29.407 ± 0.381 |
| Hydroquinone | 0.983 ± 0.032 | 2.173 ± 0.188 | 2.798 ± 0.106 |
| Arbutin | 1.407 ± 0.067A | 3.5994 ± 0.193A | — |
aLD50: 50% lethal dose.
A P < 0.01 compared with EAE.