| Literature DB >> 29086882 |
Nur Fauwizah Azahar1,2, Siti Salwa Abd Gani3,4, Nor Fadzillah Mohd Mokhtar2,5.
Abstract
This study focused on maximizing the extraction yield of total phenolics and flavonoids from Curcuma Zedoaria leaves as a function of time (80-120 min), temperature (60-80 °C) and ethanol concentration (70-90 v/v%). The data were subjected to response surface methodology (RSM) and the results showed that the polynomial equations for all models were significant, did not show lack of fit, and presented adjusted determination coefficients (R2) above 99%, proving their suitability for prediction purposes. Using desirability function, the optimum operating conditions to attain a higher extraction of phenolics and flavonoids was found to be 75 °C, 92 min of extraction time and 90:10 of ethanol concentration ratios. Under these optimal conditions, the experimental values for total phenolics and flavonoids of Curcuma zedoaria leaves were 125.75 ± 0.17 mg of gallic acid equivalents and 6.12 ± 0.23 mg quercetin/g of extract, which closely agreed with the predicted values. Besides, in this study, the leaves from Curcuma zedoaria could be considered to have the strong antioxidative ability and can be used in various cosmeceuticals or medicinal applications.Entities:
Keywords: Antioxidant activity; Curcuma zedoaria; Flavonoids; Phenolic; Response surface methodology
Year: 2017 PMID: 29086882 PMCID: PMC5624860 DOI: 10.1186/s13065-017-0324-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Cent J ISSN: 1752-153X Impact factor: 4.215
The experimental data obtained for the three responses based on the CCD matrix
| Run no | Type | Temperature ( | Time ( | Solvent ratio ( | Phenolic | Flavonoid content |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fact | 80.0 | 80.0 | 90.0 | 131.96 | 6.18 |
| 2 | Fact | 60.0 | 120.0 | 70.0 | 116.76 | 6.00 |
| 3 | Center | 70.0 | 100.0 | 80.0 | 122.20 | 6.24 |
| 4 | Fact | 80.0 | 120.0 | 70.0 | 122.90 | 6.07 |
| 5 | Axial | 53.18 | 100.0 | 80.0 | 116.14 | 6.09 |
| 6 | Center | 70.0 | 100.0 | 80.0 | 122.64 | 6.23 |
| 7 | Axial | 70.0 | 66.36 | 80.0 | 115.32 | 6.31 |
| 8 | Axial | 86.82 | 100.0 | 80.0 | 135.77 | 6.05 |
| 9 | Axial | 70.0 | 100.0 | 96.82 | 119.17 | 6.35 |
| 10 | Fact | 80.0 | 80.0 | 70.0 | 121.80 | 6.21 |
| 11 | Axial | 70.0 | 100.0 | 63.18 | 105.10 | 6.06 |
| 12 | Fact | 80.0 | 120.0 | 90.0 | 122.43 | 6.22 |
| 13 | Fact | 60.0 | 80.0 | 70.0 | 98.76 | 6.08 |
| 14 | Fact | 60.0 | 80.0 | 90.0 | 115.83 | 6.33 |
| 15 | Center | 70.0 | 100.0 | 80.0 | 122.32 | 6.23 |
| 16 | Center | 70.0 | 100.0 | 80.0 | 122.24 | 6.21 |
| 17 | Fact | 60.0 | 120.0 | 90.0 | 122.30 | 6.38 |
| 18 | Axial | 70.0 | 133.64 | 80.0 | 122.27 | 6.26 |
| 19 | Center | 70.0 | 100.0 | 80.0 | 122.55 | 6.22 |
| 20 | Center | 70.0 | 100.0 | 80.0 | 122.25 | 6.23 |
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the model
| Sources | Sum of squares | Degree of freedom | Mean squares |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenolic content (mg/g GAE) | |||||
| Model | 1191.21 | 9 | 132.36 | 1662.76 | < 0.0001 |
| | 450.69 | 1 | 450.69 | 5661.84 | < 0.0001 |
| | 56.30 | 1 | 56.30 | 707.27 | < 0.0001 |
| | 229.32 | 1 | 229.32 | 2880.92 | < 0.0001 |
| | 135.30 | 1 | 135.30 | 1699.75 | < 0.0001 |
| | 20.87 | 1 | 20.87 | 262.13 | < 0.0001 |
| | 61.38 | 1 | 61.38 | 771.14 | < 0.0001 |
| | 25.87 | 1 | 25.87 | 325.02 | < 0.0001 |
| | 20.46 | 1 | 20.46 | 257.06 | < 0.0001 |
| | 181.23 | 1 | 181.23 | 2276.79 | < 0.0001 |
| Residual | 0.80 | 10 | 0.080 | ||
| Lack of fit | 0.63 | 5 | 0.13 | 3.74 | 0.0870 |
| Pure error | 0.17 | 5 | 0.034 | ||
| Cor total | 1192.01 | 19 | |||
| R2 = 0.9993 | |||||
| Flavonoid content (mg QE/g of extract) | |||||
| Model | 0.22 | 9 | 0.024 | 229.66 | < 0.0001 |
| | 0.002 | 1 | 0.002 | 21.86 | 0.0009 |
| | 0.003 | 1 | 0.003 | 31.89 | 0.0002 |
| | 0.11 | 1 | 0.11 | 1065.88 | < 0.0001 |
| | 0.0006 | 1 | 0.0006 | 5.82 | 0.0365 |
| | 0.033 | 1 | 0.033 | 308.93 | < 0.0001 |
| | 0.012 | 1 | 0.012 | 114.14 | < 0.0001 |
| | 0.044 | 1 | 0.044 | 421.70 | < 0.0001 |
| | 0.0006 | 1 | 0.0006 | 57.66 | < 0.0001 |
| | 0.0008 | 1 | 0.0008 | 8.25 | 0.0166 |
| Residual | 0.001 | 10 | 0.0001 | ||
| Lack of fit | 0.0005 | 5 | 0.0001 | 0.97 | 0.5115 |
| Pure error | 0.0005 | 5 | 0.0001 | ||
| Cor total | 0.22 | 19 | |||
| R2 = 0.9952 | |||||
Fig. 1Response surface plots for the effects of temperature, time and ethanol concentration on total phenolic contents of Curcuma zedoaria leaves extracts. a Temperature versus time. b Ethanol concentration versus temperature. c Time versus ethanol concentration
Fig. 2Response surface plots for the effects of temperature, time and ethanol concentration on total flavonoid content of Curcuma zedoaria leaves extracts. a Temperature versus time. b Ethanol concentration versus temperature. c Time versus ethanol concentration
Comparison between the predicted and experimental values for antioxidants from extracts of Curcuma zedoaria leaves
| Condition | Response values | |
|---|---|---|
| Phenolic content | Flavonoid content | |
| Predicted | 126.25 | 6.24 |
| Experimental | 125.75 ± 0.17 | 6.12 ± 0.23 |
Independent test variables and their coded and uncoded value used for CCD matrix
| Variables | Units | Coded & uncoded level of variables | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| −α | −1 | 0 | 1 | +α | ||
| Temperature, | °C | 53 | 60 | 70 | 80 | 87 |
| Time, | Min | 66 | 80 | 100 | 120 | 133 |
| Solvent ratio, | v/v% | 63 | 70 | 80 | 90 | 97 |