| Literature DB >> 27058523 |
Nahida Siddiqui1, Vidhu Aeri2.
Abstract
Betulinic acid (BA) is a pentacyclic triterpenoid acid obtained from the stem bark of Tecomella undulata Seem. (Bignoniaceae). Development of an efficient extraction method for the isolation of BA is important as it has a wide range of pharmacological activity. A Box-Behnken design (BBD) was used to investigate the effect of extraction variables such as temperature (30-60 °C), time (4-8 h) and solvent to drug ratio (300-500 mL/100 g) on the maximization of BA yield and its quantification using validated densitometric high performance thin layer chromatography coupled with ultraviolet detection (HPTLC-VIS). A quadratic polynomial model was found to best fit the model with R² = 0.99. The optimized Soxhlet extraction yielded 2.449% w/w of BA at a temperature 53.86 °C, time 6.38 h and solvent to drug ratio 371 mL/100 g. BA in Tecomella undulata bark was detected at Rf value of 0.65 at 510 nm using the solvent system toluene-ethyl acetate-glacial acetic acid (8.5:1.5:0.02 v/v/v). The analytical method was validated and the linear regression analysis reflects good linear relationship (R² = 0.9902). Lower %RSD and SEM suggested that the developed HPTLC-VIS method was precise, accurate and robust. Therefore, these economical techniques are very efficient and promising for the extraction and quantification of pharmaceutically important BA.Entities:
Keywords: Bignoniaceae; Box-Behnken design; Tecomella undulata; betulinic acid; high performance thin layer chromatography (HPTLC)
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27058523 PMCID: PMC6273192 DOI: 10.3390/molecules21040393
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Chemical structure of BA (betulinic acid).
Figure 2HPTLC chromatogram of BA standard.
Figure 3HPTLC chromatogram of BA in hexane extract of Tecomella undulata bark.
Densitometric validation summary of betulinic acid.
| Parameters | |
|---|---|
| Linearity range | 100–600 ng |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.9902 |
| Regression equation (peak area) | Y= −174.788 + 3.090X |
| LOD (ng) | 6.37 |
| LOQ (ng) | 19.32 |
| 0.65 | |
| BA yield | 2.4% |
Figure 4Normal distribution graph between residuals and normal score.
Intra and Inter-day Method Precision (n = 6).
| Amount of Betulinic Acid/Spot (ng) | Mean | SD | %RSD | SEM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intra-day | ||||
| 200 | 871.73 | 0.86 | 0.098 | 0.35 |
| 400 | 1317.12 | 1.06 | 0.080 | 0.43 |
| Inter-day | ||||
| 200 | 860.71 | 1.41 | 0.16 | 0.58 |
| 400 | 1328.073 | 1.74 | 0.13 | 0.71 |
Accuracy Analysis (n = 3).
| Amount of Betulinic Acid in Sample (mg) | % Age of Standard Betulinic Acid Added in a Sample | % Recovery of Betulinic Acid (Peak Area) | %RSD | SEM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.06 | 0 | 98.69 | 0.5 | 0.29 |
| 0.06 | 50 | 97.44 | 1.05 | 0.59 |
| 0.06 | 100 | 97.58 | 1.27 | 0.72 |
| 0.06 | 150 | 99.26 | 1.03 | 0.59 |
Robustness of Method (n = 3).
| Betulinic Acid (ng/Spot) | Ratio of Solvent System | |
|---|---|---|
| Toluene–Ethyl Acetate–Glacial Acetic Acid (8.2:1.8:0.02 | Toluene–Ethyl acetate–Glacial Acetic Acid (8.5:1.5:0.02 | |
| 200 | 0.16 | 0.57 |
| 400 | 0.075 | 0.49 |
BBD Matrix for optimization of extraction of yield of BA.
| Run | Temperature (A) (°C) | Time (B) (h) | Solvent to Drug Ratio (C) (mL/100 g) | Yield (Y) BA (% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | 60 (+1) | 6 (0) | 500 (+1) | 2.305 ± 0.011 |
| 02 | 45 (0) | 6 (0) | 400 (0) | 2.413 ± 0.003 |
| 03 | 30 (−1) | 6 (0) | 300 (−1) | 1.771 ± 021 |
| 04 | 60 (+1) | 6 (0) | 300 (−1) | 2.186 ± 0.008 |
| 05 | 45 (0) | 8 (+1) | 500 (+1) | 2.241 ± 0.019 |
| 06 | 45 (0) | 6 (0) | 400 (0) | 2.421 ± 0.045 |
| 07 | 30 (−1) | 4 (−1) | 400 (0) | 1.696 ± 0.038 |
| 08 | 45 (0) | 6 (0) | 400 (0) | 2.397 ± 0.098 |
| 09 | 60 (+1) | 8 (+1) | 400 (0) | 2.358 ± 0.083 |
| 10 | 60 (+1) | 4 (−1) | 400 (0) | 2.247 ± 0.051 |
| 11 | 45 (0) | 6 (0) | 400 (0) | 2.451 ± 0.091 |
| 12 | 45 (0) | 4 (−1) | 500 (+1) | 2.154 ± 0.004 |
| 13 | 30 (−1) | 6 (0) | 500 (+1) | 1.789 ± 0.013 |
| 14 | 45 (0) | 8 (+1) | 300 (−1) | 2.253 ± 0.021 |
| 15 | 45 (0) | 6 (0) | 400 (0) | 2.388 ± 0.063 |
| 16 | 45 (0) | 4 (−1) | 300 (−1) | 2.011 ± 0.051 |
| 17 | 30 (−1) | 8 (+1) | 400 (0) | 1.961 ± 0.078 |
Result of regression analysis for model and response regression equation for the final proposed model.
| Model F Value | Adjusted | Predicted | SD | CV% | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Linear | 0.5287 | 0.4199 | 0.2828 | 0.20 | - | |
| Yield of BA | 2F1 | 0.5464 | 0.2742 | −0.2106 | 0.22 | - |
| Cubic | 0.9978 | 0.9911 | - | 0.024 | - | |
| Quadratic | 0.9962 | 0.9914 | 0.9717 | 0.024 | 1.11 |
ANOVA for the fitted quadratic polynomial model of BA extraction.
| Source | Sum of Square | Degree of Freedom | Mean Square | F-Value | Prob > F |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 1.07 | 9 | 0.12 | 205.75 | <0.0001 Significant |
| Residual | 4.05 | 7 | 5.78 | ||
| Lack of fit | 1.67 | 3 | 5.56 | 0.93 | 0.5030 Non significant |
| Pure error | 2.38 | 4 | 5.96 |
Estimated regression model of the relationship between yield of BA and independent variables (A, B, C).
| Variable | Degree of Freedom | Sum of Square | F-Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AB | 1 | 9.22 | 15.92 | 0.0053 |
| AC | 1 | 3.84 | 6.64 | 0.0366 |
| BC | 1 | 6.01 | 10.38 | 0.0146 |
| A2 | 1 | 0.31 | 528.89 | <0.0001 |
| B2 | 1 | 0.04 | 70.41 | <0.0001 |
| C2 | 1 | 0.09 | 165.61 | <0.0001 |
Figure 5Response surface model 3D plots showing the effects of independent variable of Soxhlet extraction on BA yield: (a) temperature and time (b) time and solvent to drug ratio (c) temperature and solvent to drug ratio.
Figure 6Linear correlation plot between actual and predicted values for the BA yield.
Extraction variables selected for BBD optimization.
| Independent Variable | Ranges of Independent Variable | Dependent Variable | Goal | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low (−1) | High (+1) | |||
| Temperature (°C) | 30 | 60 | Yield of BA (% | Maximized |
| Time (h) | 4 | 6 | ||
| Solvent to drug ratio (mL/100 g) | 300 | 500 | ||