| Literature DB >> 31936550 |
Xiaoyan Hou1, Xia Huang1, Jianlong Li2, Guangyang Jiang1, Guanghui Shen1, Shanshan Li1, Qingying Luo1, Hejun Wu1, Meiliang Li1, Xingyan Liu1, Anjun Chen1, Meng Ye3, Zhiqing Zhang1.
Abstract
In order to evaluate the antioxidant and α-glucosidase activities of polysaccharides from Chrysanthemum morifolium cv. Hangju (CMPs), the response surface methodology was applied to optimize the parameters for extraction progress of CMPs by ultrasound, with heat reflex extraction (HRE) performed as the control. The difference in the physicochemical properties of polysaccharides obtained by the two methods were also investigated. The maximum yields (8.29 ± 0.18%) of polysaccharides extracted by ultrasonic assisted extraction (UAE) were obtained under the optimized conditions of ultrasonic power 501 W, extraction time 19 min, and ratio of liquid-to-raw material 41 mL/g. Polysaccharides extracted by UAE possessed lower protein contents (2.56%) and higher uronic acids contents (7.08%) and low molecular weight fractions than that by HRE. No significant differences were found in monosaccharide composition and Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) spectra of polysaccharides extracted by UAE and HRE, while polysaccharides by UAE possessed stronger antioxidant and α-glucosidase inhibitory activities. Therefore, UAE was an efficient way to obtain CMPs.Entities:
Keywords: Chrysanthemum morifolium cv. Hangju; antioxidant activity; polysaccharides; ultrasonic assisted extraction; α-glucosidase inhibitory activity
Year: 2020 PMID: 31936550 PMCID: PMC7023348 DOI: 10.3390/antiox9010059
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antioxidants (Basel) ISSN: 2076-3921
Box–Behnken design matrix and the response values for the yield of CMPs by UAE.
| Run | Levels on Independent Factors | Extraction | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 20 (0) | 480 (0) | 40 (0) | 8.29 |
| 2 | 25 (1) | 480 (0) | 30 (−1) | 5.28 |
| 3 | 20 (0) | 480 (0) | 40 (0) | 8.36 |
| 4 | 25 (1) | 360 (−1) | 40 (0) | 6.88 |
| 5 | 20 (0) | 600 (1) | 30 (−1) | 5.23 |
| 6 | 20 (0) | 360 (−1) | 30 (−1) | 6.46 |
| 7 | 20 (0) | 480 (0) | 40 (0) | 8.20 |
| 8 | 15 (−1) | 480 (0) | 50 (1) | 6.50 |
| 9 | 20 (0) | 360 (−1) | 50 (1) | 5.56 |
| 10 | 20 (0) | 600 (1) | 50 (1) | 7.22 |
| 11 | 25 (1) | 480 (0) | 50 (1) | 7.31 |
| 12 | 15 (−1) | 600 (1) | 40 (0) | 7.63 |
| 13 | 15 (−1) | 360 (−1) | 40 (0) | 6.75 |
| 14 | 20 (0) | 480 (0) | 40 (0) | 8.29 |
| 15 | 25 (1) | 600 (1) | 40 (0) | 6.89 |
| 16 | 20 (0) | 480 (0) | 40 (0) | 8.11 |
| 17 | 15 (−1) | 480 (0) | 30 (−1) | 7.13 |
: extraction time; : ultrasonic power; : ratio of liquid-to-solid.
Figure 1Effect of three independent variables on the yield of CMP-U. (a) Ratio of liquid-to-solid; (b) ultrasonic power; and (c) extraction time. CMP-U: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by ultrasonic assisted extraction.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) testing the fitness of the regression equation.
| Source | Sum of Squares | Df | Mean Square | F-Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 17.03 | 9 | 1.89 | 133.87 | <0.0001 |
| X1 | 0.34 | 1 | 0.34 | 24.07 | 0.0017 |
| X2 | 0.22 | 1 | 0.22 | 15.40 | 0.0057 |
| X3 | 0.78 | 1 | 0.78 | 54.81 | 0.0001 |
| X1X2 | 0.19 | 1 | 0.19 | 13.38 | 0.0081 |
| X1X3 | 1.77 | 1 | 1.77 | 125.11 | <0.0001 |
| X2X3 | 2.09 | 1 | 2.09 | 147.68 | <0.0001 |
| X12 | 0.63 | 1 | 0.63 | 44.71 | 0.0003 |
| X22 | 2.87 | 1 | 2.87 | 202.68 | <0.0001 |
| X32 | 7.20 | 1 | 7.20 | 509.09 | <0.0001 |
| Residual | 0.099 | 7 | 0.014 | ||
| Lack of fit | 0.062 | 3 | 0.021 | 2.20 | 0.2312 |
| Pure error | 0.037 | 4 | 9.350 × 10−3 | ||
| Cor total | 17.31 | 16 | |||
| R2 | 0.9942 | ||||
| Adjusted R2 | 0.9868 | ||||
| CV % | 1.68 |
Figure 2Response surface plots (left) and contour plots (right) showing the interactive effects of different variables on the yield of CMP-U. (a,b) Ultrasonic power and extraction time; (c,d) ratio of liquid-to-solid and extraction time; (e,f) ratio of liquid-to-solid and ultrasonic power.
Physicochemical properties of C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by UAE and HRE.
| Items | CMP-U | CMP-H |
|---|---|---|
| Yield (%) | 8.29 ± 0.18 a | 7.25 ± 0.10 b |
| Protein content (%) | 2.56 ± 0.08 b | 3.36 ± 0.09 a |
| Uronic acid (%) | 7.08 ± 0.25 a | 1.61 ± 0.10 b |
| Constituent monosaccharides and molar ratios | ||
| Glucose | 1 | 1 |
| Fructose | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Rhamnose | 0.040 | 0.052 |
| Galactose | 0.065 | 0.095 |
| Xylose | 0.113 | 0.214 |
| Arabinose | 0.184 | 0.045 |
CMP-H: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by hot reflux extraction; CMP-U: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by ultrasonic assisted extraction; different letters (a,b) in superscript for each index denote a significant difference (p < 0.05).
Figure 3HPLC chromatogram of monosaccharides in CMPs. MD: mixed standard of monosaccharides; 1: fructose; 2: rhamnose; 3: glucose; 4: galactose; 5: xylose; 6: arabinose; CMP-H: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by hot reflux extraction; CMP-U: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by ultrasonic assisted extraction.
Molecular weight distribution of CMP-U and CMP-H.
| Molecular Weight Distribution | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Polysaccharides | Retention Time (min) | Mw (Da) | Mn (Da) | Area % |
| CMP-U | 13.987 | 669,143 | 153,373 | 26.27 |
| 18.492 | 2115 | 1231 | 36.21 | |
| 20.205 | 214 | 179 | 37.51 | |
| CMP-H | 14.350 | 521,905 | 108,418 | 37.44 |
| 18.557 | 2628 | 1464 | 28.74 | |
| 20.058 | 321 | 225 | 33.82 | |
CMP-H: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by hot reflux extraction; CMP-U: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by ultrasonic assisted extraction.
Figure 4Gel permeation chromatography (GPC) spectrums of C. morifolium polysaccharides. (a) CMP-H; (b) CMP-U. CMP-H: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by hot reflux extraction; CMP-U: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by ultrasonic assisted extraction.
Figure 5Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) spectra of CMP-H and CMP-U. CMP-H: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by hot reflux extraction; CMP-U: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by ultrasonic assisted extraction.
Figure 6Antioxidant activities of CMP-H and CMP-U. (a) DPPH free radical scavenging activity; (b) hydroxyl radical scavenging activity; (c) ferrous chelating activity, and (d) total reducing power. CMP-H: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by hot reflux extraction; CMP-U: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by ultrasonic assisted extraction.
Figure 7α-glucosidase inhibitory effect of CMP-U and CMP-H. CMP-H: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by hot reflux extraction; CMP-U: C. morifolium polysaccharides obtained by ultrasonic assisted extraction.