| Literature DB >> 26437389 |
Zhi-Jian Tan1, Chao-Yun Wang2, Zi-Zhen Yang3, Yong-Jian Yi4, Hong-Ying Wang5, Wan-Lai Zhou6, Fen-Fang Li7.
Abstract
In this work, a two-step extraction methodology of ionic liquid-based ultrasonic-assisted extraction (IL-UAE) and ionic liquid-based aqueous two-phase system (IL-ATPS) was developed for the extraction and purification of secoisolariciresinol diglucoside (SDG) from flaxseed. In the IL-UAE step, several kinds of ILs were investigated as the extractants, to identify the IL that affords the optimum extraction yield. The extraction conditions such as IL concentration, ultrasonic irradiation time, and liquid-solid ratio were optimized using response surface methodology (RSM). In the IL-ATPS step, ATPS formed by adding kosmotropic salts to the IL extract was used for further separation and purification of SDG. The most influential parameters (type and concentration of salt, temperature, and pH) were investigated to obtain the optimum extraction efficiency. The maximum extraction efficiency was 93.35% under the optimal conditions of 45.86% (w/w) IL and 8.27% (w/w) Na₂SO₄ at 22 °C and pH 11.0. Thus, the combination of IL-UAE and IL-ATPS makes up a simple and effective methodology for the extraction and purification of SDG. This process is also expected to be highly useful for the extraction and purification of bioactive compounds from other important medicinal plants.Entities:
Keywords: aqueous two-phase system; ionic liquid; purification; secoisolariciresinol diglucoside; ultrasonic-assisted extraction
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26437389 PMCID: PMC6332368 DOI: 10.3390/molecules201017929
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Ionic liquids-based ultrasound-assisted extraction of SDG using five types of ILs.
Figure 2Single-factor experiments of IL concentration (I–V represent the IL concentrations of 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, and 60% (w/w)),ultrasonic irradiation time (I–V represent the ultrasonic irradiation time of 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 min), and liquid–solid ratio (I–V represent the liquid–solid ratio of 10:1, 20:1, 30:1, 40:1, and 50:1) for the extraction of SDG using IL-UAE.
Arrangement and results of the three-factor/three-level response surface design.
| Run | Factor A: IL Concentration (%, | Factor B: Liquid–Solid Ratio | Factor C:Ultrasonic Irradiation Time (min) | Response Average Extraction Yield (mg/g) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 60 | 10:1 | 50 | 12.5521 |
| 2 | 50 | 20:1 | 50 | 15.7939 |
| 3 | 50 | 20:1 | 50 | 15.9827 |
| 4 | 60 | 30:1 | 50 | 15.4370 |
| 5 | 50 | 10:1 | 40 | 13.7683 |
| 6 | 40 | 30:1 | 50 | 12.0817 |
| 7 | 50 | 30:1 | 60 | 15.3657 |
| 8 | 50 | 10:1 | 60 | 14.5096 |
| 9 | 50 | 30:1 | 40 | 15.5716 |
| 10 | 40 | 10:1 | 50 | 12.6094 |
| 11 | 60 | 20:1 | 60 | 15.5444 |
| 12 | 60 | 20:1 | 40 | 15.7341 |
| 13 | 50 | 20:1 | 50 | 15.8536 |
| 14 | 50 | 20:1 | 50 | 15.7837 |
| 15 | 40 | 20:1 | 40 | 14.3129 |
| 16 | 50 | 20:1 | 50 | 15.5716 |
| 17 | 40 | 20:1 | 60 | 14.9624 |
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the quadratic response surface model.
| Source | Degrees of Freedom | Sum of Squares | Mean Square | F-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 9 | 26.15 | 2.91 | 65.53 | <0.0001 |
| A | 1 | 3.51 | 3.51 | 79.23 | <0.0001 |
| B | 1 | 3.15 | 3.15 | 70.95 | <0.0001 |
| C | 1 | 0.12 | 0.12 | 2.79 | 0.1386 |
| AB | 1 | 2.91 | 2.91 | 65.66 | <0.0001 |
| AC | 1 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 3.97 | 0.0865 |
| BC | 1 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 5.06 | 0.0595 |
| A2 | 1 | 5.53 | 5.53 | 124.76 | <0.0001 |
| B2 | 1 | 9.23 | 9.23 | 208.24 | <0.0001 |
| C2 | 1 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 22.57 | 0.0021 |
| Residual | 7 | 0.31 | 0.044 | ||
| Lack of fit | 3 | 0.22 | 0.074 | 3.33 | 0.1376 |
| Pure Error | 4 | 0.089 | 0.022 | ||
| Cor total | 16 | 26.46 |
Figure 3Response surface plots showing the effects of variables on the average extraction yield of SDG: (a) interaction of the IL concentration and liquid–solid ratio; (b) interaction of the IL concentration and ultrasonic irradiation time; and (c) interaction of the liquid–solid ratio and ultrasonic irradiation time.
Comparison of three different methods (HRE, MAE, and UAE) for extraction of SDG (IL concentration is 50% (w/w) and liquid–solid ratio is 20:1).
| Extraction Methods | HRE | MAE | UAE | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time (min) | 20 | 40 | 60 | 40 | 40 |
| Extraction yield (mg/g) | 2.6953 | 9.6581 | 12.6324 | 16.1263 | 16.0854 |
Figure 4Effect of (a) salt; (b) temperature; and (c) pH on the extraction efficiency of SDG by IL-ATPS.
Figure 5HPLC chromatograms for (a) SDG standard; (b) IL-UAE sample; and (c) IL-ATPS sample.
Figure 6Back-extraction of SDG using organic solvents.