| Literature DB >> 30539007 |
Malek Ennaifer1,2, Taroub Bouzaiene1, Moncef Chouaibi2, Moktar Hamdi1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The decoction of Pelargonium graveolens yields an antioxidant-rich extract and a water-soluble polysaccharide. This study aims (1) to investigate the effect of process parameters (extraction time and temperature) on the antioxidant activity of the decoction and the extraction yield of CPGP by response methodology and (2) to study the chemical properties of the optimized decoction and rheological properties of the corresponding extracted polysaccharide.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30539007 PMCID: PMC6260416 DOI: 10.1155/2018/2691513
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Process of Pelargonium graveolens decoction and polysaccharide extraction.
Experimental factors and their levels in CCD.
| Surface | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Levels | Star points | |||||
| Factor | Unit | -1 | 0 | 1 | - | + |
|
| ||||||
| (X1) Extraction temperature | °C | 81 | 88 | 95 | 78 | 98 |
|
| ||||||
| (X2) Extraction time | min | 10 | 14 | 18 | 8 | 20 |
α = 1.41.
Central composite design for the decoction: temperature and time, with observed responses (total phenolic content, DPPH scavenging activity, and crude Pelargonium graveolens polysaccharide yield).
| TEST |
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
| |||||||
| Temperature (°C) | Coded level | Time (min) | Coded level | Total phenolic content (mg GAE/gDM) | DPPH scavenging activity (%) | CPGP yield (%) | |
|
| |||||||
| 1 | 81 | -1 | 10 | -1 | 28.24 | 72.9 | 3.48 |
|
| |||||||
| 2 | 95 | 1 | 10 | -1 | 36.04 | 81.93 | 8.97 |
|
| |||||||
| 3 | 81 | -1 | 18 | 1 | 30.37 | 65.13 | 4.11 |
|
| |||||||
| 4 | 95 | 1 | 18 | 1 | 36.36 | 85.92 | 7.78 |
|
| |||||||
| 5 | 88 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 30.79 | 68.7 | 7.25 |
|
| |||||||
| 6 | 88 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 33.8 | 77.2 | 4.99 |
|
| |||||||
| 7 | 78 | -1.41 | 14 | 0 | 27.05 | 60.5 | 4.06 |
|
| |||||||
| 8 | 98 | 1.41 | 14 | 0 | 36.54 | 88.44 | 8.21 |
|
| |||||||
| 9 | 88 | 0 | 8 | -1.41 | 32.27 | 79.41 | 5.64 |
|
| |||||||
| 10 | 88 | 0 | 20 | 1.41 | 32.4 | 76.47 | 7.33 |
|
| |||||||
| 11 | 88 | 0 | 12 | -0.5 | 31.64 | 73.11 | 4.68 |
|
| |||||||
| 12 | 88 | 0 | 16 | 0.5 | 31.63 | 83.19 | 5.48 |
|
| |||||||
| 13 | 84 | -0.5 | 14 | 0 | 26.86 | 67.65 | 3.69 |
|
| |||||||
| 14 | 92 | 0.5 | 14 | 0 | 34.42 | 81.3 | 5.95 |
|
| |||||||
| 15 | 79 | -1.3 | 12 | -0.5 | 28.47 | 65.69 | 3.43 |
|
| |||||||
| 16 | 97 | 1.3 | 16 | 0.5 | 35.54 | 83.82 | 6.93 |
Parameters of the polynomial models representing the studied responses (Y1-Y3).
|
| Y1 | Y2 | Y3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Coefficient |
| Coefficient |
| Coefficient |
|
|
| ||||||
| b0 | 32.524 |
| 77.720 |
| 4.937 |
|
|
| ||||||
| b1 | 3.911 |
| 8.227 |
| 1.702 |
|
|
| ||||||
| b2 | 0.224 | n.s | -0.503 | n.s | 0.195 | n.s |
|
| ||||||
| b11 | -0.161 | n.s | -1.976 | n.s | 0.446 | n.s |
|
| ||||||
| b22 | 0.032 | n.s | 0.277 | n.s | 0.738 |
|
|
| ||||||
| b12 | -0.442 | n.s | 2.508 | n.s | -0.562 | n.s |
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Significance level (%) |
|
|
| |||
|
| ||||||
| Df | 13 | 13 | 13 | |||
|
| ||||||
| Sum of squares | 1.28E+02 | 9.16E+02 | 42.341 | |||
|
| ||||||
| Mean square | 24.04 | 1.66E+02 | 7.673 | |||
|
| ||||||
|
| 0.949 | 0.910 | 0.902 | |||
|
| ||||||
|
| 0.918 | 0.854 | 0.847 | |||
∗∗∗: Significant at the level 99.9%
∗∗: Significant at the level 99%
∗: Significant at the level 95%
n.s: not significant
Df: degrees of freedom.
Figure 2Contour plots and 3D-response surfaces for (a) total phenolic content, (b) DPPH scavenging activity, and (c) CPGP yield, as a function of time and temperature of decoction.
Optimal conditions for the extraction process.
| Variable | Value | Factor | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| X1 | 0.773326 | Temperature | 93 |
|
| |||
| X2 | -0.634008 | Time | 11 |
Predicted values of the responses at optimal conditions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Y1 | Total phenolic content |
| 99.65 | 1 | 42.51 | 99.65 |
|
| ||||||
| Y2 | DPPH scavenging activity |
| 98.43 | 1 | 48.69 | 98.43 |
|
| ||||||
| Y3 | CPGP yield |
| 98.45 | 1 | 63.20 | 98.45 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 98.84 | 50.76 | 98.84 | |||
di: percentage of calculated desirability.
Predicted and experimental values of responses at optimal and modified conditions.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 93 | 11 | 34.98 | 82.10 | 6.97 |
|
| |||||
|
| 94±2 | 10 | 33.02 ±0.58 | 68.05±0.74 | 6.43±0.31 |
Color (L, a, b) index of the Pelargonium graveolens optimized extract.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Decoction extract | 18,74 ± 0,68 | 2,17 ± 0,33 | 11,07 ± 0,63 |
L∗: Lightness, a∗(-green/+red), b∗(-blue/+yellow).
Chemical content and antioxidant properties of Pelargonium graveolens optimized decoction extract.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 33.01 ± 0.49 | 19.76 ± 0.41 | 5.31 ± 0.56 | 136.10 ± 0.62 |
Figure 3Flow behaviors of crude Pelargonium graveolens polysaccharide at different concentrations (0.5, 1, and 2 %; w/v).
Flow behavior index (n) and consistency index (k) of CPGP at different concentrations.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 0,5 | 0.283±0.01a | 322.60±5.80a | 0.998 |
|
| |||
| 1 | 0.277±0.02b | 354.60±7.50b | 0.995 |
|
| |||
| 2 | 0.279±0.01c | 382.70±6.94c | 0.999 |
The different letters indicated significant difference at p<5%.
Figure 4Shear stress versus shear rate of crude Pelargoinum graveolens polysaccharide water solution at different concentrations.
Figure 5Fourier transform infrared spectra of extracted CPGP.