| Literature DB >> 33273520 |
Anna Dzimitrowicz1, Aleksandra Bielawska-Pohl2, Pawel Pohl3, Piotr Cyganowski4, Agata Motyka-Pomagruk5, Tymoteusz Klis3, Malgorzata Policht3, Aleksandra Klimczak2, Piotr Jamroz3.
Abstract
We present an optimized non-thermal atmospheric plasma (NTAP)-based reaction-discharge system that was applied for a continuous-flow treatment of apple juice (AJ). To optimize this system for a high-throughput production of AJ with ameliorated properties, the effect of several parameters was studied using design of experiments approach followed by the response surface methodology. Additionally, nutritional, physicochemical, microbiological and cytotoxic properties of resulting AJ were assessed. It was established that NTAP treatment of AJ led to rise in concentration of Ca, Fe, K, Mg, Na and Sr by 8-10% as well as Al, B, Ba, Cu, Mn and Zn by 11-15%. Additionally, the increased total phenolic content by ~ 11% in addition to the prolonged by up to 12 days shelf life of the product were observed. Moreover, it was found that the NTAP-treatment of AJ did not change the structure of organic compounds present in AJ, in addition to its °Brix value, color and ferric ion reducing antioxidant power. Furthermore, AJ subjected to NTAP did not show any cytotoxic activity towards non-malignant human intestinal epithelial cells but exhibited induced cell cytotoxicity in human colorectal adenocarcinoma cells. Our study provided arguments for future introduction of these types of preparations to the global market.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33273520 PMCID: PMC7712830 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-78131-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
The Box-Behnken design matrix, showing the standard order, the run order, the level of analyzed parameters, and responses of the system.
| Standard order | Run order | F, mL min−1 | d, mm | I, mA | A, a. u | T, °C |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | 1 | 4.0 (0) | 3.0 (− 1) | 30 (− 1) | 1.72 | 41.0 |
| 7 | 2 | 4.0 (0) | 5.0 (+ 1) | 30 (− 1) | 1.01 | 35.2 |
| 9 | 3 | 2.0 (− 1) | 3.0 (− 1) | 40 (0) | 1.53 | 32.0 |
| 12 | 4 | 6.0 (+ 1) | 5.0 (+ 1) | 40 (0) | 0.865 | 39.6 |
| 2 | 5 | 2.0 (− 1) | 4.0 (0) | 50 (0) | 1.56 | 30.0 |
| 3 | 6 | 6.0 (+ 1) | 4.0 (0) | 30 (− 1) | 0.847 | 35.6 |
| 13 | 7a | 4.0 (0) | 4.0 (0) | 40 (0) | 0.971 | 39.6 |
| 8 | 8 | 4.0 (0) | 5.0 (+ 1) | 50 (+ 1) | 1.12 | 34.9 |
| 6 | 9 | 4.0 (0) | 3.0 (− 1) | 50 (+ 1) | 1.19 | 39.7 |
| 11 | 10 | 2.0 (− 1) | 5.0 (+ 1) | 40 (0) | 1.37 | 30.1 |
| 10 | 11 | 6.0 (+ 1) | 3.0 (− 1) | 40 (0) | 0.950 | 42.8 |
| 4 | 12 | 6.0 (+ 1) | 4.0 (0) | 50 (+ 1) | 0.956 | 43.6 |
| 15 | 13a | 4.0 (0) | 4.0 (0) | 40 (0) | 1.01 | 40.4 |
| 14 | 14a | 4.0 (0) | 4.0 (0) | 40 (0) | 1.05 | 40.2 |
| 1 | 15 | 2.0 (− 1) | 4.0 (0) | 30 (− 1) | 1.26 | 33.0 |
Studied parameters and responses are labeled as follows: F the flow rate of the FLC, I the discharge current, d the discharge gap, A the absorbance, T the temperature.
aCenter points. The treatments carried out at the following settings of the parameters: F (in mL min−1) = 4.0 (0), d (in mm) = 4.0 (0) and I (in mA) = 40 (0).
The output of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) test.
| DF | Adjusted SS | Adjusted MS | F-valuea | p-valueb | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A = 4.79—1.32⋅10-1F—7.72⋅10-1d—6.46⋅10-2I + 1.62⋅10-2dI | |||||
| S = 0.1571, R2 = 76.30%, R2-adjusted = 66.82% | |||||
| Model | 4 | 0.7946 | 0.1986 | 8.05 | 0.004 |
| Linear | 3 | 0.6910 | 0.2303 | 9.33 | 0.003 |
| F | 1 | 0.5593 | 0.5593 | 22.66 | 0.001 |
| D | 1 | 0.1317 | 0.1317 | 5.34 | 0.044 |
| I | 1 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.00 | 0.977 |
| Two-way interactions | |||||
| Error | 10 | 0.2468 | 0.0247 | ||
| Total | 14 | 1.0414 | |||
| T = 2.42⋅101 + 2.74⋅10-1F—1.96d—6.14⋅10-1I—7.44⋅10-1F2—1.40⋅10-2I2 + 1.38FI | |||||
| S = 1.383, R2 = 94.58%, R2-adjusted = 90.52% | |||||
| Model | 6 | 267.234 | 44.539 | 23.27 | 0.000 |
| Linear | 3 | 198.787 | 66.262 | 34.62 | 0.000 |
| F | 1 | 166.531 | 166.531 | 87.02 | 0.000 |
| D | 1 | 30.811 | 30.811 | 16.10 | 0.004 |
| I | 1 | 1.445 | 1.445 | 0.76 | 0.410 |
| Square | 2 | 38.197 | 19.098 | 9.98 | 0.007 |
| F2 | 1 | 32.916 | 32.916 | 17.20 | 0.003 |
| I2 | 1 | 7.300 | 7.300 | 3.81 | 0.087 |
| Two-way interactions | 1 | 30.250 | 30.250 | 15.81 | 0.004 |
| F × I | 1 | 30.250 | 30.250 | 15.81 | 0.004 |
| Error | 8 | 15.310 | 1.914 | ||
| Total | 14 | 282.544 | |||
DF Degrees of freedom, SS Sum of squares, MS Mean squares, S Standard deviation of residuals representing how far data values fall from fitted values. R2 Coefficient of determination showing the percentage of variation in the response that is explained by the model.
aProbability measuring the evidence against the null hypothesis.
bThe test statistics determining association of a given model/term with the response.
Figure 1Normal probability plots and scatter plots of standardized residuals versus the observation (run) order for established models for (A) the absorbance (A) at the λ = 284 nm in UV/Vis absorption spectra of NTAP-treated apple juice and (B) the temperature (t) of this juice.
Figure 2Optimization plots with optimal values for the NTAP treatment of apple juice.
The total concentration of Al, B, Ba, Ca, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Ni, Sr, Sr, and Zn in the untreated and NTAP-treated apple juice.
| Element | Concentration, mg L−1 | Increase, % | Fcalc.b | tcalc.c | Recoveryd, % | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Untreated | NTAP-treated/NTAP-treateda | |||||
| Al | 0.662 (3.6%) | 0.746/0.660 (2.0%) | 12.7 | 96.6 (2.2%) | ||
| B | 2.60 (1.3%) | 2.91/2.59 (1.5%) | 11.9 | − | 102.1 (3.2%) | |
| Ba | 0.096 (2.2%) | 0.108/0.100 (1.9%) | 12.5 | 97.5 (1.9%) | ||
| Ca | 71.2 (1.7%) | 77.3/68.80 (3.2%) | 8.6 | − | 98.0 (2.7%) | |
| Cd | < 0.005 | < 0.005 | – | – | – | 94.8 (2.4%) |
| Cr | < 0.009 | < 0.009 | – | – | – | 92.7 (3.6%) |
| Cu | 0.054 (4.3%) | 0.061/0.050 (3.8%) | 13.0 | 95.9 (4.2%) | ||
| Fe | 0.869 (6.6%) | 0.959/0.854 (6.4%) | 10.4 | − | 101.5 (2.5%) | |
| K | 860 (4.5%) | 927/825 (7.7%) | 7.8 | − | 99.1 (1.2%) | |
| Mg | 47.6 (1.0%) | 52.3/46.6 (2.1%) | 9.9 | − | 98.3 (2.2%) | |
| Mn | 0.342 (1.4%) | 0.384/0.342 (1.6%) | 12.3 | − | 96.3 (2.9%) | |
| Na | 17.7 (1.5%) | 19.2/17.1 (3.0%) | 8.5 | − | 105.3 (4.7%) | |
| Ni | < 0.003 | < 0.003 | – | – | – | 94.1 (2.0%) |
| Sr | 0.202 (1.3%) | 0.222/0.198 (1.9%) | 9.9 | − | 99.3 (1.2%) | |
| Zn | 0.082 (2.6%) | 0.094/0.084 (1.8%) | 14.6 | 97.6 (2.8%) | ||
The average concentrations (n = 3) along with the relative standard deviations (RSDs) in brackets.
aThe water evaporation rate was included (11.0 ± 1.5%).
bThe two-sample F-test was used at α = 0.05. Fcrit. (α = 0.05, df1 = 2, df2 = 2) = 8.78. Non-statistically significant differences are underlined.
cThe two-sample t-test was used at α = 0.05. tcrit. (α = 0.05, df = 3 + 3–2 = 4) = 2.78. Non-statistically significant differences are underlined.
dThe average values (n = 3) along with the standard deviations (SDs) in brackets.
The total content of phenolics and the FRAP value of untreated and NTAP-treated apple juice (n = 3).
| Untreated | NTAP-treated/NTAP-treateda | Increase, % | Fcalc.b | tcalc.c | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total content of phenolics, mg per L of GAE | 167.6 (3.5%) | 205.6/185.4 (1.2%) | 22.7 | + 4.941 | |
| FRAP, mmol of Fe(II) per L | 7.07(5.9%) | 7.93/7.14 (3.8%) | 12.2 |
The average concentrations (n = 3) along with the relative standard deviations (RSDs) in brackets.
aThe water evaporation rate was included (11.0 ± 1.5%).
bThe two-sample F-test was used at α = 0.05. Fcrit. (α = 0.05, df1 = 2, df2 = 2) = 8.78. Non-statistically significant differences are underlined.
cThe two-sample t-test was used at α = 0.05. tcrit. (α= 0.05, df = 3 + 3–2 = 4) = 2.78. Non-statistically significant differences are underlined.
The number of colony forming units per mL in analyzed AJ. Samples were taken 12 days post initiation of the experiment.
| Repetition | Group A: untreated and unfiltered AJ | Group B: untreated and filtered AJ | Group C: filtered and NTAP-treated AJa | Negative controlb |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | 20 CFU mL−1 | 30 CFU mL−1 | 0 CFU mL−1 | 0 CFU mL−1 |
| II | 30 CFU mL−1 | 30 CFU mL−1 | 0 CFU mL−1 | 0 CFU mL−1 |
| III | 30 CFU mL−1 | 40 CFU mL−1 | 0 CFU mL−1 | 0 CFU mL−1 |
aFLC-dc-APGD treatment conditions: F = 6.0 mL min-1, d = 4.0 mm, I = 50 mA.
bNegative control: TSA plates incubated at 37 °C for 72 h.
Figure 3Proliferation measured as the optical density at 570 nm of the human intestinal epithelial cell line (FHs 74 Int) and the human colorectal adenocarcinoma cell line (Caco-2) after exposure to untreated and NTAP-treated apple juice. Dilutions of apple juice samples ranged from × 1000 to × 10. Incubation was performed for 24 and 72 h. The data are shown as mean ± SEM values for three analyses done in triplicate. Statistical comparison was performed by using ANOVA with Dunnett's post hoc tests and compared to the control medium group (cells treated with the medium alone); *p < 0.05 or to untreated apple juices, #p < 0.05.
Figure 4Percentages of apoptotic cells. Human intestinal epithelial cells (FHs 74 Int) and human colorectal adenocarcinoma cells (Caco-2) after exposure to untreated and NTAP-treated apple juice in dilutions ranging from × 1000 to × 10. Incubation was performed for 24 and 72 h. The treatment with the culture medium was applied as the control. Percentages of alive cells, early apoptotic cells, late apoptotic cells and necrotic cells were calculated as mean ± SEM values of three independent experiments, each performed with triplicate wells for each treatment group. Statistical comparison was performed by using ANOVA with Dunnett's post hoc test and juxtaposed to the control medium group (cells treated with the medium alone), *p < 0.05 or to untreated apple juices, #p < 0.05.