| Literature DB >> 34146974 |
Atalanti Christou1, Ioannis J Stavrou2, Constantina P Kapnissi-Christodoulou3.
Abstract
Polyphenols in carobs have recently attracted great attention due to their wide range of biological and health promoting effects. A comprehensive study was conducted to find an optimum method for the extraction, purification and characterization of these valuable bioactive substances. Under this framework, the ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE) of polyphenols from carob pulp was optimized by the maximization of the yield in total phenolics using response surface methodology. In particular, the effects of solid-solvent ratio, solvent concentration, extraction time, sonication amplitude, and sonication mode were investigated and optimized using a complete experimental design. In comparison to conventional extraction techniques, UAE offered a higher yield of antioxidants and a shorter processing time. Solid-phase extraction was evaluated as a clean-up strategy prior to the electrophoretic analysis of extracts. The results from the analysis of real samples revealed the predominance of gallic acid and highlighted the great influence of the ripening stage on carobs composition.Entities:
Keywords: Carobs; Polyphenol extraction; Polyphenols; Response surface methodology; Ultrasound-assisted extraction
Year: 2021 PMID: 34146974 PMCID: PMC8220390 DOI: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2021.105630
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ultrason Sonochem ISSN: 1350-4177 Impact factor: 7.491
Natural and coded levels of independent variables used in two-level full factorial screening design.
| Factor | Symbol | Factor levels | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Low (−1) | High (+1) | ||
| Solid-solvent ratio | A | 1:10 | 1:25 |
| Solvent concentration (% acetone, v/v) | B | 50 | 80 |
| Extraction time (min) | C | 10 | 20 |
| Sonication amplitude (%) | D | 50 | 75 |
| Sonication mode (pulse duration: pulse interval (sec)) | E | continuous (0:0) | pulsed (5:5) |
Fig. 1Main effects plot for TPC.
Fig. 2Normal probability plots for (A) CUAE and (B) PUAE.
ANOVA report for the quadratic models of CUAE and PUAE.
| Source | Sum of squares (SS) | Degree of freedom (DF) | Mean square (MS) | F-value | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 110.10 | < 0.0001 (2.5·10-14) *** | |||
| B | 2948.1 | 1 | 2948.1 | 345.60 | < 0.0001 (1.6∙10-14) *** |
| C | 76.0 | 1 | 76.0 | 8.91 | 0.0071 ** |
| B2 | 1056.6 | 1 | 1056.6 | 123.86 | < 0.0001 (2.9∙10-10) *** |
| C2 | 12.9 | 1 | 12.9 | 1.51 | 0.2324 |
| B∙C | 601.2 | 1 | 601.2 | 70.47 | < 0.0001 (3.8 ∙10-8) *** |
| Residuals | 179.1 | 21 | 8.5 | ||
| R2 = 0.963, R2adj = 0.955, R2pred = 0.937 | |||||
| Model | 97.08 | < 0.0001 (8.8∙10-14) *** | |||
| B | 3595.5 | 1 | 3595.5 | 349.98 | < 0.0001 (1.4∙10-14) *** |
| C | 38.1 | 1 | 38.1 | 3.71 | 0.0678 |
| B2 | 1156.4 | 1 | 1156.4 | 112.56 | < 0.0001 (6.8∙10-10) *** |
| C2 | 172.4 | 1 | 172.4 | 16.78 | 0.0005 *** |
| B∙C | 24.4 | 1 | 24.4 | 2.38 | 0.1381 |
| Residuals | 215.7 | 21 | 10.3 | ||
| R2 = 0.959, R2adj = 0.949, R2pred = 0.929 | |||||
* Significant at p ≤ 0.05.
** Significant at p ≤ 0.01.
*** Significant at p ≤ 0.001.
Fig. 3Response surface and contour plots demonstrating the effects of solvent concentration and extraction time on TPC using (A, B) CUAE and (C, D) PUAE.
Fig. 4Recoveries of examined polyphenolic compounds on different SPE sorbents.
Fig. 5Electropherogram of ripe carob pulp extract obtained under the optimum separation conditions (35 mM borate, 15 mM β-CD, 3 mM L-AlaC4Lac, pH 9.5, 30 kV).
Quantitative data from the EKC-DAD analysis of ripe and unripe carob pulp extracts.
| Compound | Concentration (μg/g carob pulp) | % Content | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ripe | Unripe | Ripe | Unripe | |
| Catechin | 4.63 ± 0.16 | n.q. | 2 | 0 |
| Naringenin | 12.79 ± 0.33 | n.d. | 5 | 0 |
| Cinnamic acid | 9.74 ± 0.20 | n.d. | 3 | 0 |
| Kaempferol | n.d. | n.d. | 0 | 0 |
| Chlorogenic acid | n.d. | 135.44 ± 1.89 | 0 | 15 |
| Quercetin | 19.84 ± 0.70 | 122.32 ± 1.81 | 7 | 13 |
| Myricetin | n.d. | 60.80 ± 1.58 | 0 | 7 |
| Catechol | 11.99 ± 0.62 | 33.86 ± 0.82 | 4 | 4 |
| Ferulic acid | 9.18 ± 0.79 | n.d. | 3 | 0 |
| Gentisic acid | 31.03 ± 1.03 | 190.85 ± 2.66 | 11 | 21 |
| Caffeic acid | n.d. | 164.20 ± 2.83 | 0 | 18 |
| Gallic acid | 183.92 ± 3.50 | 205.10 ± 1.77 | 65 | 22 |
| 283.13 | 912.58 | 100 | 100 | |
a) non-detected.
b) non-quantified.