| Literature DB >> 31139392 |
ZiLuan Fan1, Lu Li1, XiaoLin Bai1, Hua Zhang2, QiRui Liu1, He Zhang1, YuJie Fu3, Rumbani Moyo2.
Abstract
The objective of this research was twofold: first, to optimize the extraction process of Lonicera japonica polyphenols using a response surface methodology, and second, to study the antioxidant activity and tyrosinase inhibitory capacity of the polyphenols of different purities. High-speed shearing homogenization extraction was used to extract the polyphenols from L. japonica. The antioxidant activity and the effect of polyphenols on tyrosinase activity were studied using free radical scavenging assay and the tyrosinase method, respectively. The optimal extraction conditions with an extraction yield of 6.96% for polyphenols were determined as follows: ethanol volume fraction 57%, shearing time 3.30 min, and solid-liquid ratio 1:58. Lonicera japonica polyphenols exhibited potent scavenging activity on 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) and 2, 2'-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS), and inhibitory capacity on tyrosinase. The results suggested that L. japonica polyphenols could be explored as a natural antioxidant and tyrosinase inhibitor.Entities:
Keywords: Lonicera japonica; antioxidants; polyphenols; tyrosinase
Year: 2019 PMID: 31139392 PMCID: PMC6526639 DOI: 10.1002/fsn3.1021
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Food Sci Nutr ISSN: 2048-7177 Impact factor: 2.863
Box–Behnken design matrix for optimization of parameters and the response values for the extraction yield of polyphenols. Ethanol volume fraction (A), shearing time (B), and solid–liquid ratio (C)
| No. | A/% | B/min | C/(g/ml) | Extraction yield/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 30 | 1 | 1:50 | 6.48142 |
| 2 | 70 | 1 | 1:50 | 6.48142 |
| 3 | 30 | 5 | 1:50 | 6.39549 |
| 4 | 70 | 5 | 1:50 | 6.55017 |
| 5 | 30 | 3 | 1:30 | 5.87986 |
| 6 | 70 | 3 | 1:30 | 5.84548 |
| 7 | 30 | 3 | 1:70 | 5.87985 |
| 8 | 70 | 3 | 1:70 | 6.75643 |
| 9 | 50 | 1 | 1:30 | 5.86267 |
| 10 | 50 | 5 | 1:30 | 6.18923 |
| 11 | 50 | 1 | 1:70 | 6.67049 |
| 12 | 50 | 5 | 1:70 | 6.65330 |
| 13 | 50 | 3 | 1:50 | 6.87673 |
| 14 | 50 | 3 | 1:50 | 6.83267 |
| 15 | 50 | 3 | 1:50 | 6.90830 |
| 16 | 50 | 3 | 1:50 | 6.79080 |
| 17 | 50 | 3 | 1:50 | 6.82518 |
Figure 1(a–c) Single factor assay: (a) Effect of solid–liquid ratio on the extraction yield of polyphenols. (b) Effect of ethanol volume fraction on the extraction yield of polyphenols. (c) Effect of shearing time on the extraction yield of polyphenols
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for extraction yield of polyphenols (Y) as a function of Ethanol volume fraction (A), shearing time (B), and solid–liquid ratio (C) used during extraction
| Source | Sum of squares | Degree of freedom | Mean squares |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 2.27 | 9 | 0.25 | 16.20 | 0.0007 |
| A | 0.12 | 1 | 0.12 | 7.98 | 0.0256 |
| B | 0.011 | 1 | 0.011 | 0.69 | 0.4349 |
| C | 0.60 | 1 | 0.60 | 38.27 | 0.0005 |
| AB | 5.981E‐003 | 1 | 5.981E‐003 | 0.38 | 0.5549 |
| AC | 0.21 | 1 | 0.21 | 13.33 | 0.0082 |
| BC | 0.030 | 1 | 0.030 | 1.90 | 0.2107 |
| A2 | 0.39 | 1 | 0.39 | 25.10 | 0.015 |
| B2 | 0.011 | 1 | 0.011 | 0.71 | 0.4288 |
| C2 | 0.81 | 1 | 0.81 | 51.85 | 0.0002 |
| Residual | 0.11 | 7 | 0.016 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 0.089 | 3 | 0.030 | 5.85 | 0.0605 |
| Pure Error | 0.020 | 4 | 5.058E‐003 | ||
| Cor Total | 2.38 | 16 |
Significant.
Not significant.
Figure 2(a–c) Response 3D surface Logic: (a) Solid–liquid ratio, interaction of ethanol volume fraction and polyphenols extraction yield. (b) Shearing time, interaction of solid–liquid ratio on polyphenols extraction yield. (c) Volume fraction of ethanol, interaction of shearing time on polyphenols extraction yield
Figure 3(a, b) Free radical scavenging assay: (a) The effect of the total polyphenols extraction on the scavenging of DPPH. (b) The effect of the total polyphenols extraction on the scavenging of ABTS
Figure 4The effects of total polyphenols on the inhibitory ability of tyrosinase