| Literature DB >> 32946525 |
Stefania Monari1, Maura Ferri1,2, Micaela Vannini2, Laura Sisti2, Paola Marchese2, Maria Ehrnell3, Epameinondas Xanthakis3, Annamaria Celli2, Annalisa Tassoni1.
Abstract
Agro-waste reduction and reuse are among the current main social challenges. In this perspective, the present research was aimed at the complete valorisation of Garganega grape pomace by recovering bioactive phenol extracts and by testing the solid fibre extract residues in composite formulation for packaging applications. The pomace was derived from white wine production, therefore, respect to red pomace, it was promptly removed from must after pressing, and its exploitation can be particularly interesting and valuable as still rich in active compounds. Phenol extracts were obtained both via solvent-based and pressurised liquid extractions and their phytochemical compositions were compared in terms of total amount of phenols, flavonoids, flavanols, anthocyanins, hydroxycinnamic acids, and reducing sugars. Antioxidant activity and detailed phenol profiles were also achieved. The highest phenol yield was obtained via solvent-based extraction with 75% acetone (v/v), solid/liquid ratio 1:5, 2h incubation at 50°C (77.9 gGAeq/kgDW). The fibrous solid residue of the extraction was characterized via thermogravimetric analysis and used for composite preparation by melt mixing with the renewable and biodegradable PHBV polymer through a green approach (solvent-less process). The composites resulted thermally stable at high temperatures, showing initial degradation processes only at temperatures higher than 250°C. Differential scanning calorimetry analyses were carried out to study melting and crystallization phenomena, while mechanical properties were investigated by tensile tests. The materials finally showed properties similar to those of the matrix. The bio-composites can be considered as an alternative to plain PHBV, since they are less expensive and eco-friendlier thanks to a reduced polymeric content, and they could represent a suitable way for full agro-waste exploitation.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32946525 PMCID: PMC7500587 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239629
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Optimisation of solvent-based (SE) and of pressurised liquid (PLE) extraction protocols from Garganega white grape pomace.
| Solvent type | Solvent (v/v) | S/L | Temp. | Time | Total phenols | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| gGAeq/L | gGAeq/kgDW | |||||
| ethanol | 25% | 1:10 | 30°C | 2h | 0.88 ± 0.06 a | 30.52 ± 2.17 a |
| 50% | 1.13 ± 0.03 b | 39.27 ± 1.03 b | ||||
| 75% | 0.86 ± 0.01 a | 30.07 ± 0.34 a | ||||
| 25% | 1:5 | 1.41 ± 0.07 c | 24.48 ± 1.26 c | |||
| 50% | 1.81 ± 0.01 a | 31.60 ± 0.15 a | ||||
| 75% | 1.34 ± 0.10 c | 23.33 ± 1.55 c | ||||
| acetonitrile | 25% | 1:10 | 1.36 ± 0.05 d | 47.53 ± 1.68 d | ||
| 50% | 1.56 ± 0.03 e | 54.32 ± 0.94 e | ||||
| 75% | 1.17 ± 0.18 b | 40.80 ± 6.26 b | ||||
| 25% | 1:5 | 2.29 ± 0.05 b | 39.81 ± 0.86 b | |||
| 50% | 3.93 ± 0.23 f | 68.47 ± 3.94 f | ||||
| 75% | 2.97 ± 0.13 d | 51.74 ± 2.22 d | ||||
| acetone | 25% | 1:10 | 1.43 ± 0.02 d | 49.93 ± 0.64 d | ||
| 50% | 1.61 ± 0.06 e | 56.24 ± 2.07 e | ||||
| 75% | 1.67 ± 0.06 e | 58.22 ± 2.12 e | ||||
| 25% | 1:5 | 3.41 ± 0.15 e | 59.32 ± 2.59 e | |||
| 50% | 3.94 ± 0.15 f | 68.64 ± 2.71 f | ||||
| 75% | 4.21 ± 0.23 f,i | 73.34 ± 3.94 f,i | ||||
| methanol | 25% | 1:10 | 0.45 ± 0.02 g | 15.68 ± 0.59 g | ||
| 50% | 0.85 ± 0.01 a | 29.53 ± 0.17 a | ||||
| 75% | 0.76 ± 0.03 a,c | 26.34 ± 1.13 a,c | ||||
| 25% | 1:5 | 1.92 ± 0.05 a | 33.36 ± 0.86 a | |||
| 50% | 2.77 ± 0.20 d | 48.17 ± 3.33 d | ||||
| 75% | 2.38 ± 0.02 b | 41.38 ± 0.37 b | ||||
| water | 100% | 1:10 | 0.41 ± 0.00 g | 14.43 ± 0.05 g | ||
| 1:5 | 0.60 ± 0.01 h | 10.50 ± 0.18 h | ||||
| acetonitrile | 50% | 1:5 | 50°C | 1h | 3.75 ± 0.02 f | 65.24 ± 0.37 f |
| 2h | ||||||
| 4h | 3.47 ± 0.02 e | 60.37 ± 0.37 e | ||||
| acetone | 75% | 1h | 3.71 ± 0.06 f | 64.63 ± 0.99 f | ||
| 2h | ||||||
| 4h | 4.11 ± 0.04 f | 71.60 ± 0.74 f | ||||
| methanol | 50% | 1h | 2.26 ± 0.08 b | 39.37 ± 1.48 b | ||
| 2h | ||||||
| 4h | 2.70 ± 0.01 d | 46.95 ± 0.12 d | ||||
| water | 100% | 1h | 1.02 ± 0.05 g | 17.75 ± 0.86 g | ||
| 2h | ||||||
| 4h | 0.85 ± 0.02 g | 14.86 ± 0.32 g | ||||
| acetonitrile | 50% | 1:5 | 70°C | 1h | 3.69 ± 0.02 f | 64.20 ± 0.37 f |
| 2h | 3.63 ± 0.15 f | 63.15 ± 2.59 f | ||||
| 4h | 4.22 ± 0.08 f,i | 73.52 ± 1.48 f,i | ||||
| acetone | 75% | 1h | 3.77 ± 0.06 f | 65.68 ± 0.99 f | ||
| 2h | 4.01 ± 0.06 f | 69.86 ± 0.99 f | ||||
| 4h | 3.88 ± 0.02 f | 67.51 ± 0.37 f | ||||
| methanol | 50% | 1h | 2.83 ± 0.02 d | 49.22 ± 0.37 d | ||
| 2h | 3.14 ± 0.04 e | 54.70 ± 0.74 e | ||||
| 4h | 3.50 ± 0.00 e | 60.98 ± 0.00 e | ||||
| water | 100% | 1h | 1.22 ± 0.02 c,g | 21.27 ± 0.42 c,g | ||
| 2h | 1.36 ± 0.03 c | 23.66 ± 0.49 c | ||||
| 4h | 1.37 ± 0.00 c | 23.92 ± 0.07 c | ||||
| ethanol | 50% | 1:126 | 80°C | 30 min | ||
| 1:196 | 40 min | |||||
| 1:256 | 50 min | |||||
| 1:333 | 60 min | |||||
Total phenols were quantified and data expressed as g of GA equivalent per litre of extract (gGAeq/L) and as g of gallic acid (GA) equivalent per kg of pomace dry weight (gGAeq/kgDW). Different letters indicate statistically significant differences (one-way ANOVA followed by a followed by a Tuckey HDS test, p < 0.05) among data expressed with the same measure unit along the same column. Data are the mean ± SD (n = 3). In bold, the treatments selected for further characterization analyses. S/L, solid/liquid ratio (kgFW of pomace/L of solvent).
* PLE is a continuous process where the mobile phase of the solvent mixture flows through the working material which is stationary, therefore the S/L ratio is different according to the time of sampling.
Fig 1Total amounts of flavonoids (A), flavanols (B), anthocyanins (C), hydroxycinnamic acids (D), reducing sugars (E) and antioxidant activity (F) of Garganega pomace extracts.
Results are expressed as g of standard compound equivalent per kg of pomace dry weight (g eq/kgDW). Different letters indicate a statistically significant difference (oneway ANOVA followed by a followed by a Tuckey HDS test, p < 0.05) between the same type of data. Data are the mean ± SD (n = 3). AA, ascorbic acid; CAT, catechin; FA, ferulic acid; GLUC, glucose; MALV, malvidin.
Fig 2HPLC-DAD characterization of phenols extracted from Garganega pomace.
Results are expressed as g of standard compound equivalent per kg of pomace dry weight (g/kgDW). Different letters indicate a statistically significant difference (oneway ANOVA followed by a followed by a Tuckey HDS test, p < 0.05) between the same type of data. Data are the mean ± SD (n = 3). CAT, catechin; EC; epicatechin; ECG, epicatechin gallate; EGC, epigallocatechin; GA, gallic acid; PROTA, protocatechuic acid; QUERC, quercetin; RUT, rutin; SYRA, syringic acid; VANA vanillic acid.
Fig 3Thermogravimetric (TGA) curve (dotted line, left axis) and related derivative curve (solid line, right axis) of WR solid residue (A) and of PHBV polymer and related bio-composites including different WR percentages (B).
WR was obtained after SE extraction with 75% acetone, 50°C, 2h.
Fig 4Cascading approach to fully valorise white grape pomace.
In grey the applications and materials not subject of the present study.
Chemical, thermal and mechanical characteristics of PHBV reference material and bio-composites.
| Sample code | Mn
| Mw
| Tonset | TD | Tm | ΔHm | Tc | ΔHc | Tm | ΔHm | E | σ | ε |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| . 10−3 | . 10−3 | (°C) | (°C) | (°C) | (J/g) | (°C) | (J/g) | (°C) | (J/g) | (MPa) | (MPa) | (%) | |
| 64.7 | 133.2 | 288 | 302 | 172 | 78 | 114 | 73 | 168 | 82 | 1728 ± 50 | 33.2 ± 1.0 | 3.1 ± 0.1 | |
| 59.7 | 125.9 | 275 | 282 | 171 | 78 | 111 | 72 | 168 | 80 | 1638 ± 58 | 28.9 ± 1.3 | 2.9 ± 0.2 | |
| 60.4 | 132.9 | 268 | 274 | 170 | 71 | 111 | 67 | 168 | 78 | 1657 ± 51 | 27.6 ± 1.1 | 2.9 ± 0.1 | |
| 59.1 | 127.7 | 259 | 269 | 169 | 63 | 109 | 57 | 167 | 66 | 1640 ± 44 | 24.1 ± 0.9 | 2.5 ± 0.2 |
The sample code indicates the type of polymer (PHBV) and the percentage of white grape pomace residues (WR). Mn, number average molecular weight; Mw, weight average molecular weight; Tonset, temperature of initial decomposition; TD, temperature of the maximum degradation rate; Tm, melting temperature; ΔHm, melting enthalpy; Tc, crystallization temperature; ΔHc, crystallization enthalpy; E, elastic modulus; σ, tensile strength; ε, elongation at break.
a determined by gel permeation chromatography (GPC) analyses.
b determined by thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) under N2 flux, by heating at 10°C/min.
c determined by DSC during the first heating scan at 20°C/min.
d determined by differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) during the cooling scan at 20°C/min.
e determined by DSC during the second heating scan at 20°C/min.
f determined by tensile tests.