| Literature DB >> 26784880 |
Francisco Segovia Gómez1,2, Sara Peiró Sánchez3, Maria Gabriela Gallego Iradi4, Nurul Aini Mohd Azman5, María Pilar Almajano6.
Abstract
Consumption of avocado (Persea americana Mill) has increased worldwide in recent years. Part of this food (skin and seed) is lost during processing. However, a high proportion of bioactive substances, such as polyphenols, remain in this residue. The primary objective of this study was to model the extraction of polyphenols from the avocado pits. In addition, a further objective was to use the extract obtained to evaluate the protective power against oxidation in food systems, as for instance oil in water emulsions and meat products. Moreover, the possible synergy between the extracts and egg albumin in the emulsions is discussed. In Response Surface Method (RSM), the variables used are: temperature, time and ethanol concentration. The results are the total polyphenols content (TPC) and the antiradical power measured by Oxygen Radical Antioxidant Capacity (ORAC). In emulsions, the primary oxidation, by Peroxide Value and in fat meat the secondary oxidation, by TBARS (Thiobarbituric acid reactive substances), were analyzed. The RSM model has an R² of 94.69 for TPC and 96.7 for ORAC. In emulsions, the inhibition of the oxidation is about 30% for pure extracts and 60% for the combination of extracts with egg albumin. In the meat burger oxidation, the formation of TBARS is avoided by 90%.Entities:
Keywords: ORAC; RSM; avocado pit; emulsion; extraction; meat; oxidation
Year: 2014 PMID: 26784880 PMCID: PMC4665478 DOI: 10.3390/antiox3020439
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antioxidants (Basel) ISSN: 2076-3921
Experimental design and responses for extraction.
| Temperature (°C) | Ethanol Concentration (%) | Time (min) | TPC (mg GAE/g dw) | ORAC (mg TE/g dw) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 60.00 | 60.00 | 25.00 | 41.00 ± 0.97 | 104.16 ± 2.13 |
| 60.00 | 93.63 | 25.00 | 35.10 ± 0.24 | 116.12 ± 1.03 |
| 80.00 | 80.00 | 5.00 | 46.78 ± 0.59 | 153.17 ± 3.84 |
| 26.36 | 60.00 | 25.00 | 40.78 ± 0.17 | 70.54 ± 0.97 |
| 60.00 | 60.00 | 25.00 | 41.10 ± 0.57 | 106.10 ± 2.40 |
| 40.00 | 40.00 | 45.00 | 43.24 ± 0.76 | 104.01 ± 2.35 |
| 80.00 | 80.00 | 45.00 | 45.43 ± 0.49 | 144.94 ± 2.84 |
| 80.00 | 40.00 | 45.00 | 45.37 ± 1.39 | 130.08 ± 2.65 |
| 80.00 | 40.00 | 5.00 | 43.70 ± 0.66 | 150.03 ± 1.73 |
| 60.00 | 60.00 | 25.00 | 40.90 ± 0.47 | 104.28 ± 1.03 |
| 60.00 | 60.00 | 55.22 | 42.87 ± 0.70 | 158.77 ± 1.33 |
| 40.00 | 40.00 | 5.00 | 41.19 ± 0.55 | 99.17 ± 1.81 |
| 60.00 | 60.00 | 2.77 | 42.92 ± 1.13 | 155.44 ± 2.71 |
| 93.64 | 60.00 | 25.00 | 46.95 ± 0.09 | 126.23 ± 3.35 |
| 60.00 | 26.36 | 25.00 | 42.33 ± 0.10 | 129.78 ± 3.84 |
| 40.00 | 80.00 | 45.00 | 38.98 ± 0.45 | 100.72 ± 3.27 |
| 40.00 | 80.00 | 5.00 | 35.48 ± 0.55 | 91.01 ± 3.51 |
GAE: Galic Acid Equivalents; TE: Trolox Equivalents; TPC: Total Phenolic Content; ORAC: Oxygen Radical Antioxidant Capacity.
Figure 1Response surface model plot: the variable is the total phenolic content (TPC) of the extract. % EtOH with temperature; temperature with time; % EtOH with time.
Figure 2Response surface model plot: the variable is the Oxygen Radical Antioxidant Capacity (ORAC) of the extract. Temperature with time; % EtOH with temperature; % EtOH with time.
p-Values for each of the constants in the equation of the mathematical model.
| Term | ||
|---|---|---|
| Response | ||
| TPC | ORAC | |
| Constant | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Temperature (°C) | 0.012 | 0.069 |
| Ethanol (%) | 0.291 | 0.022 |
| Time (min) | 0.804 | 0.001 |
| Temperature (°C) × Temperature (°C) | 0.014 | 0.135 |
| Ethanol (%) × Ethanol (%) | 0.622 | 0.046 |
| Time (min) × Time (min) | 0.068 | 0.000 |
| Temperature (°C) × Ethanol (%) | 0.003 | 0.186 |
| Temperature (°C) × Time (min) | 0.119 | 0.071 |
| Ethanol (%) × Time (min) | 0.610 | 0.435 |
| Constant | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Temperature (°C) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Ethanol (%) | 0.001 | 0.031 |
| Time (min) | - | 0.000 |
| Temperature (°C) × Temperature (°C) | 0.029 | - |
| Ethanol (%) × Ethanol (%) | - | 0.033 |
| Time (min) × Time (min) | - | 0.000 |
| Temperature (°C) × Ethanol (%) | 0.004 | - |
TPC (mg GAE/g dw); ORAC (mg TE/g dw); GAE: Gallic Acid Equivalent; TE: trolox equivalent.
Mathematical equations from Response Surface Method (RSM) for each of the responses, with their respective value of R2 and R2-predicted.
| Response | Equation | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| TPC | 62.87 − 0.47 | 94.69 | 57.0 |
| ORAC | 318.2 + 2.03 | 96.7 | 75.0 |
| TPC | 69.7 − 00.53 | 85.7 | 66.76 |
| ORAC | 345.7 + 1.01 | 91.88 | 77.88 |
T: Temperature (°C); [%]: Ethanol concentration (%); t: Time (min); Pred.: response predicted by model. TPC in mg GAE/g dw and ORAC in mg TE/g dw.
Optimal conditions for the extractions for TPC and ORAC, given by RSM.
| Model | Conditions | Response | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Temperature (°C) | Ethanol (%) | Time (min) | Predicted | Predicted RM | Experimental | |
| 63 | 56 | 23 | 51.75 | 43.6 | 45.01 | |
| 93.6 | 44.7 | 7 | 206.82 | 200.66 | 154.3 | |
TPC in mg GAE/g dw; ORAC in mg TE/g dw.
Figure 3Peroxide values vs. time in the emulsions.
Figure 4The TBARS (Thiobarbituric acid reactive substances) values for the meat emulsions.