| Literature DB >> 34073180 |
Guolin Shi1, Longfei Lin1, Yuling Liu1, Gongsen Chen1, Anhui Yang1,2, Yanqiu Wu1,2, Yingying Zhou1,2, Hui Li1.
Abstract
In this work, microwave-assisted ionic liquids treatment, followed by hydro-distillation (MILT-HD), as an efficient extraction technology, was used to extract essential oil. The purpose for this was to use multivariate analysis (MVA) models to investigate the effects of potential critical process parameters on the extraction efficiency of essential oil, and explore the mechanism of ionic liquids (ILs). According to the design of experiment (DoE), under optimal process conditions, the extraction efficiency of essential oil was dramatically enhanced, and had low energy demands. Since little is known regarding those mechanisms, according to the non-covalent interaction analysis, the underlying mechanism for ILs improving extraction efficiency was explored based on the density functional theory (DFT). The results showed that ILs could form intense non-covalent bond interaction with cellulose. It helped destroy the network hydrogen bond structure of cellulose in plant cells and caused the essential oils in the cells to be more easily exposed to the extraction solution, thereby accelerating extraction efficiency. Based on this work, it is conducive to understand the MILT-HD process better and gain knowledge of the mechanism of ILs.Entities:
Keywords: density functional theory; essential oil; ionic liquids; multi-objective optimization; multivariate analysis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34073180 PMCID: PMC8197825 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26113169
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Box–Behnken experimental design matrix for the extraction of essential oil during the MILT process.
| Runs | Process Parameters | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 70 | 4 | 20 |
| 2 | 50 | 6 | 20 |
| 3 | 70 | 4 | 20 |
| 4 | 50 | 4 | 10 |
| 5 | 70 | 6 | 30 |
| 6 | 70 | 2 | 10 |
| 7 | 90 | 2 | 20 |
| 8 | 50 | 2 | 20 |
| 9 | 70 | 6 | 10 |
| 10 | 70 | 4 | 20 |
| 11 | 90 | 6 | 20 |
| 12 | 50 | 4 | 30 |
| 13 | 90 | 4 | 30 |
| 14 | 90 | 4 | 10 |
| 15 | 70 | 2 | 30 |
Figure 1The extraction efficiency of essential oil in the DoE.
ANOVA results for the response surface quadratic method for Yeo.
| Source | Sum of Square | DF | Mean Square | Significance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 2.29 | 4 | 0.57 | 18.66 | 0.0001 | Significant |
|
| 0.48 | 1 | 0.48 | 15.74 | 0.0027 | Significant |
|
| 0.98 | 1 | 0.98 | 31.85 | 0.0002 | Significant |
|
| 0.62 | 1 | 0.62 | 20.08 | 0.0012 | Significant |
|
| 0.21 | 1 | 0.21 | 6.96 | 0.0248 | Significant |
| Residual | 0.31 | 10 | 0.031 | Significant | ||
| Lack of fit | 0.30 | 8 | 0.037 | 10.49 | 0.0899 | Not significant |
| R2 | 0.8818 |
Figure 2Response surface graphs of Yeo. (a) Interaction of ILs ratio and microwave irradiation time; (b) Interaction of ILs ratio and microwave power; (c) Interaction of irradiation time and microwave power.
Predicted and experimental values of the responses obtained under optimal extraction conditions.
| Desirability | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predicted | 73.19 | 6.00 | 30.00 | 3.437 | 3.440 | 0.1358 | 0.943 |
| Experimental | 73.20 | 6.00 | 30.00 | 3.633 ± 0.112 | 3.633 ± 0.112 | 0.1447 ± 0.0088 | |
| RE (%) | 5.70 | 5.61 | 6.55 |
Note: RE (%) represents relative error.
Figure 3The extraction efficiency of essential oil from Foeniculi fructus using different methods.
Key data for the major components of the Foeniculi fructus essential oil.
| No. | Components | Retention Index | Molecular Formula | Molecular Weight | Relative Peak Area (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MD | MILT-HD | |||||
| 1 | Acetic acid, butyl ester | 785 | C6H12O2 | 116 | ND | 0.68 |
| 2 | Furfural | 831 | C5H4O2 | 96 | ND | 0.49 |
| 3 | 948 | C10H16 | 136 | 0.95 | 1.25 | |
| 4 | 1018 | C10H16 | 136 | 6.85 | 8.32 | |
| 5 | 998 | C10H16 | 136 | 1.36 | 1.53 | |
| 6 | Fenchone | 1121 | C10H16O | 152 | 1.84 | 1.82 |
| 7 | 1-Butylimidazole | 1013 | C7H12N2 | 124 | ND | 2.07 |
| 8 | Estragole | 1172 | C10H12O | 148 | 31.28 | 28.71 |
| 9 | Anisic aldehyde | 1171 | C10H12O | 148 | 0.76 | 0.83 |
| 10 | Anethole | 1190 | C10H12O | 148 | 53.95 | 48.29 |
| 11 | Palmitic acid, methyl ester | 1878 | C17H34O2 | 270 | ND | 0.63 |
| Total identified peak area (%) | 96.99 | 94.62 | ||||
Figure 4Total ion chromatogram of the essential oil obtained by different methods: (A) HD; (B) MILT–HD.
Comparison of the economic value and environmental impact of different extraction approaches.
| MILT–HD | HD | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Pretreatment | Hydrodistillation | Hydrodistillation | |
| Heating method | Microwave | Electric stove | Electric stove |
| Effective electric power (W) | 390 | 600 | 600 |
| Time consumption (h) | 0.100 | 1.17 | 2.89 |
| Electricity consumption (kW·h) | 0.0390 | 0.702 | 1.73 |
| Total electricity consumption (kW·h) | 0.741 | 1.73 | |
| Yield of essential oil (mL/g) | 0.0363 | 0.0193 | |
| Yield of essential oil per kilowatt hour (mL/g/(kW·h)) | 0.0490 | 0.0112 | |
| Environmental impact (g CO2 emission) | 592.8 | 1384 | |
Figure 5SEM images of the tested samples. (a) Sample of raw material; (b) Sample of HD; (c) Sample of MILT–HD.
Figure 6FTIR spectra of the tested samples.
Figure 7Geometry of the cellobiose/[C4mim]Br. Carbon: gray; oxygen: red; nitrogen: blue; bromine: dark brown.
Topological parameters at BCPs for cellobiose/ILs.
| H-Bond | v2 | Vcp | λ1 | λ2 | λ3 | EHB | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Br71⋯C24-H25 | 0.0166 | 0.0448 | −0.0085 | −0.0150 | 0.0750 | −0.0152 | −2.6590 |
| Br71⋯C36-H37 | 0.0230 | 0.0568 | −0.0137 | 0.1044 | −0.0233 | −0.0243 | −4.3095 |
| Br71⋯C26-H27 | 0.0221 | 0.0569 | −0.0135 | −0.0218 | −0.0212 | 0.0999 | −4.2372 |
| O31⋯C53-H55 | 0.0145 | 0.0518 | −0.0094 | −0.0143 | −0.0162 | 0.0822 | −2.9492 |
| O31⋯C45-H50 | 0.0181 | 0.0664 | −0.0122 | 0.1065 | −0.0211 | −0.0191 | −3.8133 |
| O43⋯C45-H50 | 0.0132 | 0.0460 | −0.0087 | −0.0108 | −0.0123 | 0.0691 | −2.7446 |
| O41⋯C60-H61 | 0.0094 | 0.0308 | −0.0061 | 0.0454 | −0.0068 | −0.0078 | −1.9123 |
| O21⋯C43-H44 | 0.0157 | 0.0561 | −0.0107 | 0.0894 | −0.0173 | −0.0161 | −3.3708 |
Figure 8The RDG scatter plot (a) and sign (λ2) ρ mapped RDG isosurfaces (b) of cellobiose/[C4mim]Br.
Figure 93D overlap images for donor-acceptor orbital interactions.
Figure 10Graphic mechanism of ILs to enhance extraction efficiency.