| Literature DB >> 33808511 |
Flávia Cristina Seabra Pires1, Joicy Corrêa de Oliveira2, Eduardo Gama Ortiz Menezes3, Ana Paula de Souza E Silva1, Maria Caroline Rodrigues Ferreira1, Leticia Maria Martins Siqueira3, Andryo Orfi Almada-Vilhena4, Julio Cesar Pieczarka4, Cleusa Yoshiko Nagamachi4, Raul Nunes de Carvalho Junior5.
Abstract
The use of clean technologies in the development of bioactive plant extracts has been encouraged, but it is necessary to verify the cytotoxicity and cytoprotection for food and pharmaceutical applications. Therefore, the objective of this work was to obtain the experimental data of the supercritical sequential extraction ofEntities:
Keywords: DPPH; ORAC; fatty acids; flavonoids; global yield; lutein; phenolic compounds; supercritical CO2; supercritical CO2+ethanol; triglycerides
Year: 2021 PMID: 33808511 PMCID: PMC8065398 DOI: 10.3390/foods10040737
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Operating conditions of CO2–SFE and CO2+EtOH–SFE of murici pulp (B. crassifolia) and characterization of the different defatted pulps and extracts.
| Samples | Pressure | ρSolvent | Luteín Content | Phenolic Compounds | Flavonoids Content | ORAC | DPPH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oils | 22 | 695 | 62.38 ± 0.67 c | n.d. | n.d. | 34.44 ± 0.21 b | 6.01 ± 0.31 a |
| 32 | 804 | 196.18 ± 0.90 b | n.d. | n.d. | 43.48 ± 0.88 a | 6.04 ± 0.19 a | |
| 49 | 900 | 224.77 ± 0.67 a | n.d. | n.d. | 32.83 ± 0.27 c | 6.01 ± 0.19 a | |
| Defatted pulps | 22 | 695 | 30.31 ± 0.06 a | 24.58 ± 0.86 a | 0.43 ± 0.01 b | 1.90 ± 0.06 a | 2.47 ± 0.10 a |
| 32 | 804 | 21.93 ± 0.10 c | 19.67 ± 0.27 b | 0.52 ± 0.01 a | 1.45 ± 0.03 c | 1.69 ± 0.15 b | |
| 49 | 900 | 22.58 ± 0.10 b | 12.02 ± 0.42 c | 0.34 ± 0.01 c | 1.58 ± 0.04 b | 1.37 ± 0.13 c | |
| Ethanolic extracts | 22 | 775 | 242.16 ± 0.55 a | 6.73 ± 0.15 c | 0.65 ± 0.07 a | 100.88 ± 1.41 b | 12.87 ± 0.38 c |
| 32 | 858 | 163.76 ± 0.94 b | 7.93 ± 0.27 b | 0.59 ± 0.02 a | 117.45 ± 2.40 a | 15.01 ± 0.19 b | |
| 49 | 944 | 88.46 ± 0.58 c | 20.63 ± 0.76 a | 0.64 ± 0.01 a | 122.61 ± 3.79 a | 17.14 ± 0.45 a |
* Different letters in the same column, per sample, showed a difference in significance level of 5% (p < 0.05); ORAC: oxygen radical absorbance capacity; DPPH: Antioxidant Activity; CO2 –SFE: extraction with supercritical CO2; CO2+EtOH–SFE: extraction with supercritical CO2 and ethanol; n.d: not detected; LOD of lutein = 6.17 × 10−4 kg/m3; LOD of phenolic compounds = 1.22 × 10−4 kg/m3; LOD of flavonoids = 1.28 × 10−4 kg/m3; LOD of ORAC = 5.92 × 10−4 mol/m3; LOD of DPPH = 6.46 × 10−4 mol/m3.
Figure 1Global yield isotherms of murici pulp extracts (B. crassifolia) obtained by CO2-SFE () (A) and CO2+EtOH-SFE () (B), at 343.15 K (Standard deviations ≤ 0.4%).
Figure 2Total ion chromatogram of oils of murici pulp extracts (B. crassifolia) obtained by CO2-SFE, at 343.15 K and 22 MPa (A), 32 MPa (B), and 49 MPa (C), with the peak numbers corresponding to the compounds identification cited in Table 2.
Total fatty acids and functional potential of the oils of murici pulp (B. crassifolia) obtained by CO2-SFE at 343.15 K.
| Peak Number | Relative Area (% d.b.) * | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fatty Acids | 22 MPa- | 32 MPa- | 49 MPa- | |
| 1 | C14:0 | 0.51 a | 0.51 a | 0.52 a |
| 2 | C16:0 | 34.18 a | 34.38 a | 34.39 a |
| 3 | C16:1 | 1.43 a | 1.39 a | 1.39 a |
| 4 | C18:0 | 1.57 a | 1.66 a | 1.67 a |
| 5 | C18:1 | 39.21 a | 39.04 a | 39.04 a |
| 6 | C18:2 | 21.78 a | 21.58 a | 21.53 a |
| 7 | C18:3 | 0.72 a | 0.72 a | 0.74 a |
| 8 | C20:0 | 0.30 a | 0.36 a | 0.37 a |
| 9 | C22:0 | 0.18 a | 0.23 a | 0.24 a |
| 10 | C24:0 | 0.11 a | 0.12 a | 0.13 a |
| - | SFA | 36.85 a | 37.26 a | 37.32 a |
| - | UFA | 63.14 a | 62.73 a | 62.70 a |
| - | MUFA | 40.64 a | 40.43 a | 40.43 a |
| - | PUFA | 22.50 a | 22.30 a | 22.27 a |
| - | S/U | 0.58 a | 0.59 a | 0.60 a |
| - | AI | 0.57 a | 0.58 a | 0.58 a |
| - | IT | 1.09 a | 1.10 a | 1.10 a |
| - | HH | 1.82 a | 1.80 a | 1.80 a |
* The results were obtained by mass basis; C14:0 (myristic acid); C16:0 (palmitic acid); C16:1 (palmitoleic acid); C18:0 (stearic acid); C18:1 (oleic acid); C18:2 (linoleic acid); C18:3 (linolenic acid); C20:0 (arachidic acid); C22:0 (behenic acid); C24:0 (lignoceric acid); SFA (saturated fatty acids); UFA (unsaturated fatty acids); MUFA (monounsaturated fatty acids); PUFA (polyunsaturated fatty acids); AI (atherogenicity index); TI (thrombogenicity index); HI (hypocholesterolemic index). The standard deviations for all fatty acids were lower than 1.8%. Different letters in the same line showed a difference in significance level of 5% (p < 0.05).
Prediction of triglyceride composition of the oils of murici pulp (B. crassifolia) obtained by CO2-SFE at 343.15 K.
| Triglycerides | X:Y * | MM | Fração Molar (% d.b.) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22 MPa- | 32 MPa- | 49 MPa- | |||
|
| 48:0 | 806 | 3.63 | 4.05 | 4.07 |
|
| 54:3 | 884 | 6.45 | 5.98 | 5.99 |
|
| 54:6 | 878 | 1.14 | 1.02 | 1.01 |
|
| 50:1 | 832 | 13.18 | 13.83 | 13.88 |
|
| 52:2 | 858 | 15.97 | 15.76 | 15.79 |
|
| 50:2 | 830 | 7.40 | 7.68 | 7.68 |
|
| 52:4 | 854 | 5.03 | 4.86 | 4.83 |
|
| 54:4 | 882 | 10.87 | 9.97 | 9.93 |
|
| 54:5 | 880 | 6.10 | 5.54 | 5.49 |
|
| 52:3 | 856 | 17.93 | 17.50 | 17.46 |
|
| 50:2 | 830 | 1.17 | 1.14 | 1.13 |
|
| 52:1 | 860 | 1.05 | 1.32 | 1.33 |
* X = Number of carbons; Y = Number of double bonds; MM = molar mass; P (palmitic acid); O (oleic acid); Li (linoleic acid); Pa (palmitoleic acid); S (stearic acid).
Figure 3Cytotoxicity data of oil (A) and ethanolic extract (B) of murici pulp (B. crassifolia) obtained by CO2-SFE and CO2+EtOH-SFE, together with cytoprotection data using 0.05 kg/m3 of samples in HepG2 cells treated with H2O2 (C). * Different letters for the same incubation time showed a difference in significance level of 5% (p < 0.05) (ANOVA; Tukey test for multiple comparisons); C1: concentration 0.20 kg/m3; C2: concentration 0.10 kg/m3; C3: concentration 0.05 kg/m3; C4: concentration 0.025 kg/m3; C5: concentration 0.01 kg/m3; CN: negative control; CE: ethanol control; 10 H2O2: peroxide control.
Calibration curve for phenolic compounds.
| Gallic Acid Concentration (mg/L) | Absorbance * |
|---|---|
| White | 0.094 |
| 0.9 | 0.093 |
| 1.8 | 0.188 |
| 2.5 | 0.262 |
| 6.3 | 0.647 |
| 8.3 | 0.828 |
* Absorbance = mean absorbance − white absorbance.
Calibration curve for flavonoids content.
| Quercetin Concentration (mg/L) | Absorbance * |
|---|---|
| White | 0.087 |
| 0.2 | 0.098 |
| 0.5 | 0.233 |
| 2.4 | 0.400 |
| 4.5 | 0.537 |
| 6.5 | 0.669 |
| 8.3 | 0.803 |
| 10.0 | 0.896 |
| 11.5 | 0.973 |
| 13.0 | 0.087 |
* Absorbance = mean absorbance − white absorbance.
Calibration curve for ORAC.
| Trolox Concentration (µmol TE/L) | NET AUC * |
|---|---|
| 0 | 0.921 |
| 0.631 | |
| 0.204 | |
| 0.253 | |
| 1.400 | |
| 1 | 3.774 |
| 3.939 | |
| 3.470 | |
| 3.456 | |
| 2 | 6.449 |
| 6.407 | |
| 5.987 | |
| 5.963 | |
| 6.388 | |
| 5.611 | |
| 4 | 11.491 |
| 11.145 | |
| 11.440 | |
| 11.291 | |
| 8 | 20.761 |
| 19.823 | |
| 21.661 | |
| 20.461 |
* NET AUC = AUC (Antioxidant) − AUC (blank); AUC = Area under the fluorescence decay curve.
Calibration curve for antioxidant activity (DPPH).
| Trolox Concentration (µmol/L) | Absorbance * |
|---|---|
| 20.00 | 0.460 |
| 12.50 | 0.296 |
| 6.25 | 0.151 |
| 2.50 | 0.056 |
| 0.63 | 0.021 |
| 0 | 0.000 |
* Absorbance = mean absorbance − white absorbance.