| Literature DB >> 29188046 |
Abstract
The influence of particle size and extraction solvent on the antioxidant properties of aqueous and ethanolic extracts of tea (Camellia sinensis), ginger (Zingiber officinale), and tea-ginger (2:1) blend was investigated. The powder sizes studied were 0.425, 0.710, and 1.180 mm. Extracts were analyzed for DPPH radical scavenging activity, ABTS radical scavenging activity, total phenol content (TPC), iron chelating activity, total flavonoid content, and peroxide scavenging activity. The powder with the lowest particle size of 0.425 mm tends to produce aqueous extracts of tea, ginger, and tea-ginger with highest antioxidant content. At this lowest particle size all the antioxidant properties assayed were maximized. The TPC of aqueous extracts obtained from the 0.425 mm tea, ginger, and tea-ginger powders were 685.44 ± 175, 283.58 ± 19, and 483.02 ± 176 mg gallic acid equivalent (GAE) L-1, respectively. The TPC of aqueous extracts obtained from the 0.710 mm tea, ginger, and tea-ginger powders were 679.06 ± 169, 208.94 ± 147, and 400.10 ± 130 mg GAE L-1, respectively. However, for the aqueous ethanolic and ethanolic extracts, the particle size that maximized the antioxidant extraction varied depending on the antioxidant property that was being assayed. The study suggests that particle size influences the extraction of antioxidants. Also, the optimum powder size that would maximize antioxidant extraction is dependent on the solvent used and the antioxidant property being measured.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidants; ginger; particle size; solvent extraction; tea
Year: 2017 PMID: 29188046 PMCID: PMC5694873 DOI: 10.1002/fsn3.509
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Food Sci Nutr ISSN: 2048-7177 Impact factor: 2.863
Powder samples and solvents used to evaluate particle size effect on antioxidant extraction
| Powder sample | Powder size (mm) | Extraction solvents |
|---|---|---|
| Tea | 0.425, 0.710,1.180 | Water, absolute ethanol, aqueous ethanol (v/v) |
| Ginger | 0.425, 0.710 | Water, absolute ethanol, aqueous ethanol (v/v) |
| Tea–ginger blend (2:1) | 0.425, 0.710 | Water, absolute ethanol |
0.425 mm powder size (0.425 ≥ x < 0.710), 0.710 mm powder size (0.710 ≥ x < 1.180), 1.180 mm powder size (≥1.180).
Extraction conditions
| Treatment | Temperature (°C) | Concentration (g 100 ml−1) | Time (min) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aqueous ginger extraction | 96.00 | 2.10 | 90.00 |
| Aqueous tea extraction | 54.00 | 2.10 | 88.00 |
| Aqueous ethanolic (50% v/v) ginger extraction | 30.00 | 1.90 | 91.00 |
| Aqueous ethanolic (50% v/v) tea extraction | 30.00 | 1.75 | 5.00 |
| Absolute ethanolic ginger extraction | 44.00 | 2.10 | 47.00 |
| Absolute ethanolic tea extraction | 66.00 | 0.80 | 90.00 |
| Aqueous tea–ginger 2:1 extraction | 96.00 | 1.68 | 90.00 |
| Ethanolic tea–ginger 2:1 extraction | 50.00 | 2.10 | 5.00 |
Influence of particle size on antioxidant properties of aqueous extracts
| Particle size (mm) | Total flavonoid content (mg CE L−1) | Total phenol content (mg GAE L−1) | ABTS (mg TE L−1) | Peroxide scavenging activity (%) | Iron chelating activity (%) | DPPH (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| 0.425 | 12,711.11 ± 3,980 a | 685.44 ± 175 a | 0.903 ± 0.032 a | 61.80 ± 10 a | 85.82 ± 6 a | 97.53 ± 0.70 a |
| 0.710 | 12,002.78 ± 4,335 ab | 679.06 ± 169 b | 0.890 ± 0.042 a | 60.82 ± 4 a | 84.03 ± 8 b | 96.25 ± 2 b |
| 1.180 | 9,641.67 ± 2,456 b | 458.68 ± 88 c | 0.755 ± 0.22 b | 55.18 ± 11 b | 86.29 ± 3 a | 96.67 ± 2 b |
|
| ||||||
| 0.425 | 2,083.05 ± 1,428 a | 283.58 ± 19 a | 0.932 ± 0.035 a | 69.32 ± 4 a | 84.48 ± 16 a | 95.98 ± 2 a |
| 0.710 | 2,655.56 ± 1,627 a | 208.94 ± 147 b | 0.940 ± 0.041 a | 68.36 ± 10 a | 74.53 ± 9 b | 96.64 ± 2 a |
|
| ||||||
| 0.425 | 8,975.00 ± 2,361 a | 483.02 ± 176 a | 0.922 ± 0.033 a | 74.84 ± 0.033 a | 87.13 ± 10 a | 97.84 ± 1 a |
| 0.710 | 7,954.17 ± 539 a | 400. 10 ± 130 b | 0.900 ± 0.025 b | 71.09 ± 8 a | 85.61 ± 4 a | 97.59 ± 0.88 a |
Mean ± SD values in the same column and row heading followed by the same alphabet are not significantly different (p > .05) LSD. Data presented as mean of triplicate measurement.
Influence of particle size on antioxidant properties of absolute ethanolic extracts
| Particle size (mm) | Total flavonoid content (mg CE L−1) | Total phenol content (mg GAE L−1) | ABTS (mg TE L−1) | Peroxide scavenging activity (%) | Iron chelating activity (%) | DPPH (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| 0.425 | 10,183.33 ± 1,593 b | 453.26 ± 0.83b | 0.938 ± 0.02 a | 50.55 ± 4.46 ab | 77.72 ± 1.16 b | 97.27 ± 0.81 a |
| 0.710 | 16,641.66 ± 3,843 a | 466.12 ± 1.83 a | 0.838 ± 0.02 b | 56.90 ± 2.96 a | 72.99 ± 0.32 c | 96.75 ± 0.83 a |
| 1.180 | 12,225.00 ± 2,707 ab | 370.17 ± 4.32 c | 0.464 ± 0.05 c | 42.37 ± 5.05 b | 83.00 ± 1.68 a | 97.42 ± 0.19 a |
|
| ||||||
| 0.425 | 3,850.00 ± 433 a | 260.88 ± 9.19 b | 0.908 ± 0.02 a | 72.77 ± 2.94 a | 75.39 ± 1.00 b | 95.64 ± 0.87 a |
| 0.710 | 3,350.00 ± 573 a | 281.71 ± 5.85 a | 0.923 ± 0.02 a | 79.49 ± 9.00 a | 84.63 ± 1.42 a | 97.47 ± 1.41 a |
|
| ||||||
| 0.425 | 8,850.00 ± 573 a | 322.31 ± 3.47 a | 0.951 ± 0.02 a | 83.76 ± 3.81 a | 91.53 ± 0.67 a | 98.72 ± 0.50 a |
| 0.710 | 8,183.33 ± 711 a | 281.24 ± 3.52 b | 0.883 ± 0.02 b | 77.66 ± 3.53 a | 89.48 ± 0.63 b | 98.35 ± 0.31 a |
Mean ± SD values in the same column and row heading followed by the same alphabet are not significantly different (p > .05) LSD. Data presented as mean of triplicate measurement.
Influence of particle size on antioxidant properties of aqueous ethanolic extracts
| Particle size (mm) | Total flavonoid content (mg CE L−1) | Total phenol content (mg GAE L−1) | ABTS (mg TE L−1) | Peroxide scavenging activity (%) | Iron chelating activity (%) | DPPH (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| 0.425 | 12,308.33 ± 5,160 a | 823.38 ± 6.49 b | 0.874 ± 0.02 b | 62.79 ± 2.78 a | 90.78 ± 0.40 a | 98.19 ± 1.05 a |
| 0.710 | 8,475.00 ± 2,103 a | 849.81 ± 3.12 a | 0.907 ± 0.01 a | 63.03 ± 2.75 a | 88.86 ± 0.66 b | 97.84 ± 0.44 a |
| 1.180 | 8,016.67 ± 439 a | 564.69 ± 7.76 c | 0.876 ± 0.01 ab | 55.64 ± 0.63 b | 86.91 ± 0.84 c | 98.19 ± 1.51 a |
|
| ||||||
| 0.425 | 1,058.33 ± 315 a | 301.95 ± 3.38 b | 0.926 ± 0.05 a | 64.49 ± 2.07 a | 92.96 ± 1.15 a | 98.13 ± 0.50 a |
| 0.710 | 891.67 ± 315 a | 330.64 ± 6.56 a | 0.926 ± 0.06 a | 58.55 ± 0.63 b | 94.67 ± 0.91 a | 98.42 ± 0.52 a |
Mean ± SD values in the same column and row heading followed by the same alphabet are not significantly different (p > .05) LSD. Data presented as mean of triplicate measurement.
Percentage of assayed antioxidant properties maximized by the different particle sizes
| Powder | Aqueous extraction | Ethanolic extraction | Aqueous ethanolic extraction |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| 0.425 mm | 100.00% | 50.00% | 66.67% |
| 0.710 mm | 50.00% | 66.67% | 83.33% |
| 1.180 mm | 16.67% | 50.00% | 33.33% |
|
| |||
| 0.425 mm | 100.00% | 66.67% | 83.33% |
| 0.710 mm | 66.67% | 100.00% | 83.33% |
|
| |||
| 0.425 mm | 100.00% | 100.00% | — |
| 0.710 mm | 66.67% | 50.00% | — |
Percentage score was calculated from the number of times the extract from a particle size produced highest antioxidant values—for a particular solvent extraction. Hence a score of 100% means that aqueous extracts obtained from the 0.425 mm tea powder scored highest on all the six antioxidant assays when compared to the other aqueous tea extracts from the 0.710 mm and 1.180 mm powder.