| Literature DB >> 32121455 |
Ester Paulitsch Trindade1, Franklin Teixeira Regis1, Gabriel Araújo da Silva1, Breno Nunes Aguillar2, Marcelo Vítor de Paiva Amorim3, George Leandro Ramos Ferreira4, Cícero Flávio Soares Aragão4, Lílian Grace da Silva Solon1,2.
Abstract
This work reports on the preparation of a drying process from the ethanolic extract of Muirapuama and its characterization through green analytical techniques. The spray-drying processes were performed by using ethanolic extract in a ratio of 1:1 extract/excipient and 32 factorial design. The properties of dried powder were investigated in terms of total flavonoid content, moisture content, powder yield, and particle size distribution. An analytical eco-scale was applied to assess the greenness of the developed protocol. Ultra-high performance liquid chromatography (UHPLC)with reduced solvent consumption in the analysis was compared to the conventional HPLC method. A Fourier transform near-infrared (FT-NIR) spectroscopic method was applied based on the principal component scores for the prediction of extract/excipient mixtures and partial least squares regression model for quantitative analysis. NIR spectroscopy is an economic, powerful, and fast methodology for the detection of excipient in muirapuama dried extracts, generating no residue in the analysis. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images showed samples with a higher concentration of excipient, presenting better morphological characteristics and a lower moisture absorption rate. An eco-scale score value of 85 was achieved for UHPLC and 100 was achieved for NIR (excellent green analysis). Above all, these methods are rapid and green for the routine analysis of herbal medicines based on dried extracts.Entities:
Keywords: Analytical Eco-Scale; Muirapuama; NIR; Ptychopetalumolacoides Benth; SEM; UHPLC; dried extract; green analytical techniques; spray drying
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32121455 PMCID: PMC7179191 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25051095
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Number of particles (N), average values (x), and standard deviation (σ) of particle areas identified and calculated by ImageJ® software.
| Collector | Cyclone | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample | N |
| σ | N |
| σ |
| ESB | 8669 | 0.14 | 0.16 | 5254 | 0.17 | 0.21 |
| ESA | 7148 | 0.18 | 0.19 | - | - | - |
| 01 | 4282 | 0.26 | 0.23 | 7432 | 0.17 | 0.17 |
| 02 | 5840 | 0.27 | 0.21 | 8196 | 0.13 | 0.16 |
| 03 | 11191 | 0.09 | 0.11 | 11965 | 0.12 | 0.13 |
| 04 | 9955 | 0.15 | 0.16 | 2381 | 0.24 | 0.23 |
| 05 | 8894 | 0.12 | 0.16 | 11513 | 0.12 | 0.13 |
| 06 | 13431 | 0.09 | 0.13 | 5136 | 0.23 | 0.21 |
| 07 | 4231 | 0.31 | 0.24 | - | - | - |
| 08 | - | - | - | 5840 | 0.23 | 0.21 |
| 09 | - | - | - | 7903 | 0.16 | 0.17 |
Figure 1Images obtained by SEM of the dried extracts, which were subscribed as number 1 (indicates the images of samples obtained in the cyclone) and number 2 (those obtained in the collector). (A) Sample 01, (B) Sample 02, (C) Sample 03, (D) Sample 04, (E) Sample 05, (F) Sample 06, (G) Sample 07, (H) Sample 08, (I) Sample 09, (J) ESA, and (K) ESB P. olacoides.
Figure 2Overlap of chromatographic profiles of the obtained dried extracts.
Figure 3Surface response graph 32 for temperature and Aerosil® percentage factors in relation to total flavonoid content. Surface response in 3D (A) and 2D contour plot (B).
Figure 4Near-infrared (NIR) spectral data obtained from 800 to 2500 nm with no mathematical treatment.
Figure 5Spectral data obtained from 800 to 2500 nm after Savitzky–GolaySmoothing (SGS) 7w.
Figure 6Principal component analysis showing the distribution of the samples based on the mixtures of dried extract/excipient and the extracts obtained in different parts of equipment (collector or cyclone).
Analytical parameters comparison and eco-scale score obtained for the UHPLC and NIR methodologies applied to the analysis of herbal medicine dried extract.
| Analytical Procedure | Analytes | Reagents Consumed Value [PPs] | Instrumental Hazard Value [PPs] | Eco-Scale Score * |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UHPLC-DAD | Flavonoids | Acetonitrile-8 | Energy used <0.1 kwh per sample-0 | 85 |
| Formic acid-4 | Waste-3 | |||
| Occupational hazard-0 | ||||
| FT-NIR | Flavonoids | Direct measurement | Energy used <0.1 kwh per sample-0 | 100 |
| Aerosil® | (no reagents consumed)-0 | Waste—0 | ||
| Occupational hazard-0 | ||||
| HPLC-DAD ** | Flavonoids | Acetonitrile-8 | Energy used ≤1.5 kwh per sample-1 | 82 |
| Formic acid-4 | Waste-5 | |||
| Occupational hazard-0 |
* Analytical eco-scale score = 100-total penalty points (PPs). The result of calculation is ranked on a scale, where the score: >75 represents excellent green analysis; >50 represents acceptable green analysis; and <50 represents inadequate green analysis [10]. ** Based on Zeirak, 2010 [22].