| Literature DB >> 29086900 |
Intan Soraya Che Sulaiman1, Mahiran Basri2, Hamid Reza Fard Masoumi3,4, Wei Jian Chee3, Siti Efliza Ashari3, Maznah Ismail5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinacanthus nutans Lindau is a well-known plant, native to tropical Asian countries. Reports on this plant that is rich in phenolic compounds have focused on its therapeutic anti-inflammatory, anti-herpes simplex, antioxidant, and anti-cancer characteristics. In this paper, the influence of the extraction parameters-temperatures (60-80 °C), times (80-120 min), and solvent ratios (70:30-90:10) of water:ethanol were investigated using response surface methodology in order to determine the optimum extraction conditions that could produce maximum extraction yields of the phenolic compounds and the highest anti-radical activity of the C. nutans extract.Entities:
Keywords: 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH); Anti-radical activity; C. nutans; Central composite rotatable design (CCRD); Optimization; Total phenolic content
Year: 2017 PMID: 29086900 PMCID: PMC5471285 DOI: 10.1186/s13065-017-0285-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Cent J ISSN: 1752-153X Impact factor: 4.215
Coded independent variables used in CCRD design
| Symbol | Independent variables | Coded level | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| −1.68 | −1 | 0 | +1 | +1.68 | ||
| A | Extraction temperature (°C) | 53.18 | 60.00 | 70.00 | 80.00 | 86.82 |
| B | Extraction time (min) | 66.36 | 80.00 | 100.00 | 120.00 | 133.64 |
| C | Solvent ratio (water: ethanol), v/v% | 63.18:36.82 | 70:30 | 80:20 | 90:10 | 96.82:3.18 |
Design matrices of actual and predicted values of extraction temperatures (A), extraction times (B) and solvent ratios (water: ethanol) (C) for the extraction conditions of C. nutans leaves using the CCRD design
| Run | Type | Independent variables | Code level | Response variable | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A (°C) | B (min) | C (v/v%) | A | B | C | Extraction yield (weight %) | DPPH radical scavenging activity (inhibition %) | Total phenolic content (mg GAE/g extract) | |||||
| Act. | Pred. | Act. | Pred. | Act. | Pred. | ||||||||
| 1 | Factorial | 60 | 80 | 70:30 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 16.37 | 16.36 | 72.79 | 72.77 | 116.94 | 116.75 |
| 2 | Factorial | 80 | 80 | 70:30 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 24.50 | 24.48 | 69.87 | 69.86 | 121.63 | 121.99 |
| 3 | Factorial | 60 | 120 | 70:30 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 22.47 | 22.46 | 78.80 | 78.70 | 115.25 | 115.58 |
| 4 | Factorial | 80 | 120 | 70:30 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 17.23 | 17.26 | 54.43 | 54.52 | 99.50 | 102.08 |
| 5 | Factorial | 60 | 80 | 90:10 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 20.68 | 20.64 | 79.43 | 79.32 | 106.13 | 106.28 |
| 6 | Factorial | 80 | 80 | 90:10 | 1 | −1 | 1 | 23.26 | 22.02 | 69.45 | 69.54 | 103.00 | 102.83 |
| 7 | Factorial | 60 | 120 | 90:10 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 23.51 | 23.53 | 72.95 | 72.95 | 129.75 | 129.55 |
| 8 | Factorial | 80 | 120 | 90:10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 23.18 | 11.60 | 75.77 | 41.90 | 107.00 | 107.35 |
| 9 | Axial | 53.18 | 100 | 80:20 | −1.68 | 0 | 0 | 22.15 | 22.16 | 74.41 | 74.54 | 111.00 | 111.02 |
| 10 | Axial | 86.82 | 100 | 80:20 | 1.68 | 0 | 0 | 18.97 | 18.96 | 46.08 | 45.98 | 97.00 | 96.76 |
| 11 | Axial | 70 | 66.36 | 80:20 | 0 | −1.68 | 0 | 18.25 | 18.29 | 80.22 | 80.24 | 117.00 | 116.98 |
| 12 | Axial | 70 | 133.64 | 80:20 | 0 | 1.68 | 0 | 14.69 | 14.65 | 57.94 | 61.98 | 120.00 | 119.80 |
| 13 | Axial | 70 | 100 | 63.18:36.82 | 0 | 0 | −1.68 | 17.23 | 23.02 | 74.70 | 74.72 | 119.50 | 119.27 |
| 14 | Axial | 70 | 100 | 96.82:3.18 | 0 | 0 | 1.68 | 21.85 | 21.86 | 69.60 | 69.61 | 72.25 | 114.90 |
| 15 | Center | 70 | 100 | 80:20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20.29 | 20.33 | 56.88 | 74.41 | 107.13 | 118.39 |
| 16 | Center | 70 | 100 | 80:20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21.29 | 20.33 | 74.35 | 74.41 | 117.69 | 118.39 |
| 17 | Center | 70 | 100 | 80:20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21.07 | 20.33 | 74.00 | 74.41 | 136.00 | 118.39 |
| 18 | Center | 70 | 100 | 80:20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.44 | 20.33 | 73.53 | 74.41 | 102.75 | 118.39 |
| 19 | Center | 70 | 100 | 80:20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19.54 | 20.33 | 74.55 | 74.41 | 109.31 | 118.39 |
| 20 | Center | 70 | 100 | 80:20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20.37 | 20.33 | 74.34 | 74.41 | 119.06 | 118.39 |
Quadratic polynomial equations for the three responses in terms of coded factors
| Responses | Equations | |
|---|---|---|
| Extraction yield |
| (3) |
| DPPH radical scavenging activity |
| (4) |
| TPC |
| (5) |
In these equations, Y is the predicted response, A, B and C are the values of the independent variables, extraction temperature (°C), extraction time (min) and solvent ratio (water: ethanol) (v/v%), respectively
Fig. 1Comparison between predicted and actual values of the response variables a extraction yield b DPPH radical scavenging activity and c TPC of C. nutans leaves
ANOVA for the quadratic polynomial models developed for the response variables; extraction yields, DPPH radical scavenging activity and TPC of C. nutans leaves
| Extraction yield (weight %) | DPPH radical scavenging activity (inhibition %) | TPC (mg GAE/g extract) | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source | Sum of squares | DF | Mean square |
|
| Sum of squares | DF | Mean square |
|
| Sum of squares | DF | Mean square |
|
|
| Model | 100.54 | 9 | 11.17 | 2923.40 | <0.0001 | 1185.13 | 9 | 131.68 | 7138.07 | <0.0001 | 957.55 | 9 | 106.39 | 267.02 | <0.0001 |
| A-extraction temperature | 8.28 | 1 | 8.28 | 2166.64 | <0.0001 | 750.41 | 1 | 750.41 | 40,677.85 | <0.0001 | 200.12 | 1 | 200.12 | 502.24 | <0.0001 |
| B-extraction time | 11.29 | 1 | 11.29 | 2954.88 | <0.0001 | 156.47 | 1 | 156.47 | 8481.93 | <0.0001 | 7.81 | 1 | 7.81 | 19.60 | 0.0115 |
| C-solvent ratio | 0.72 | 1 | 0.72 | 187.46 | 0.0008 | 24.00 | 1 | 24.00 | 1301.24 | <0.0001 | 12.34 | 1 | 12.34 | 30.97 | 0.0051 |
| AB | 51.89 | 1 | 51.89 | 13,579.03 | <0.0001 | 147.54 | 1 | 147.54 | 7997.49 | <0.0001 | 126.61 | 1 | 126.61 | 317.75 | <0.0001 |
| AC | 12.22 | 1 | 12.22 | 3198.83 | <0.0001 | 15.41 | 1 | 15.41 | 835.51 | <0.0001 | 27.26 | 1 | 27.26 | 68.41 | 0.0012 |
| BC | 3.01 | 1 | 3.01 | 787.41 | <0.0001 | 49.40 | 1 | 49.40 | 2678.06 | <0.0001 | 215.12 | 1 | 215.12 | 539.88 | <0.0001 |
| A2 | 0.055 | 1 | 0.055 | 14.52 | 0.0318 | 269.62 | 1 | 269.62 | 14,615.39 | <0.0001 | 226.83 | 1 | 226.83 | 569.26 | <0.0001 |
| B2 | 15.45 | 1 | 15.45 | 4042.51 | <0.0001 | 7.77 | 1 | 7.77 | 421.14 | <0.0001 | 0.00006 | 1 | 0.00006 | 0.00016 | 0.9905 |
| C2 | 3.59 | 1 | 3.59 | 938.88 | <0.0001 | 6.81 | 1 | 6.81 | 369.24 | <0.0001 | 1.37 | 1 | 1.37 | 3.45 | 0.1368 |
| Residual | 0.011 | 3 | 0.0038 | 0.092 | 5 | 0.018 | 1.59 | 1 | 0.40 | ||||||
| Lack of fit | 0.0083 | 2 | 0.0041 | 1.29 | 0.5283 | 0.064 | 3 | 0.021 | 1.53 | 0.4192 | 0.65 | 3 | 0.22 | 0.23 | 0.8721 |
| Pure error | 0.0032 | 1 | 0.0032 | 0.028 | 2 | 0.014 | 0.94 | 1 | 0.94 | ||||||
| Cor total | 100.55 | 12 | 1185.22 | 14 | 959.15 | 13 | |||||||||
| R2 | 0.9999 | 0.9999 | 0.9983 | ||||||||||||
| Adj. R2 | 0.9995 | 0.9998 | 0.9946 | ||||||||||||
| Pred. R2 | 0.9975 | 0.9991 | 0.9826 | ||||||||||||
| Adequate precision | 181.223 | 308.944 | 61.461 | ||||||||||||
DF is the degree of freedom, A is the extraction temperature, B is the extraction time, C is the solvent ratio (water: ethanol)
Fig. 2Response surface plots; a–c the interaction effect of extraction yield as a function of extraction temperature, extraction time and solvent ratio, d–f the interaction effect of DPPH radical scavenging activity as a function of extraction temperature, extraction time and solvent ratio and g–i the interaction effect of TPC as a function of extraction temperature, extraction time and solvent ratio
Predicted and actual response values for the verification model
| Set | Extraction temperature (°C) | Extraction time (min) | Solvent ratio (water: ethanol) (v/v %) | Extraction yield (%) | DPPH radical scavenging activity (%) | Total phenolic content (mg GAE/g extract) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Act. value | Pred. value | RSE (%) | Act. value | Pred. value | RSE (%) | Act. value | Pred. value | RSE (%) | ||||
| 1 | 75 | 100 | 80:20 | 19.82 | 19.87 | 0.26 | 70.27 | 68.92 | 1.96 | 117.75 | 114.99 | 2.40 |
| 2 | 70 | 100 | 75:25 | 20.69 | 20.69 | 0 | 73.7 | 74.98 | 1.70 | 116.88 | 118.93 | 1.72 |
| 3 | 70 | 100 | 83:17 | 20.18 | 20.29 | 0.55 | 71.28 | 73.89 | 3.53 | 115.25 | 117.69 | 2.30 |
Predicted and actual response values for the optimized extraction parameters
| Parameter no. | Responses | Actual value | Predicted value | RSE (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Extraction yield (%) | 23.51 | 23.53 | 0.09 |
| 2 | DPPH radical scavenging activity (%) | 72.95 | 72.95 | 0 |
| 3 | Total phenolic content (mg GAE/g extract) | 129.75 | 129.55 | 0.15 |