| Literature DB >> 34203414 |
Katarina Šavikin1, Jelena Živković1, Teodora Janković1, Nada Ćujić-Nikolić1, Gordana Zdunić1, Nebojša Menković1, Zorica Drinić1.
Abstract
In this study we define the optimal conditions for ultrasound-assisted extraction of bioactive polyphenols from S. raeseri aerial parts using response surface methodology. The influence of ethanol concentration (10-90%), extraction temperature (20-80 °C), extraction time (10-60 min), and solid-to-solvent ratio (1:10-1:50) on total phenolic content as well as on content of individual flavonoids, and hypolaetin and isoscutellarein derivatives was studied. For the experimental design, a central composite design was chosen. In the obtained extracts, the following ranges of targeted compounds were detected: total phenol from 19.32 to 47.23 mg GAE/g dw, HYP from 1.05 to 11.46 mg/g dw, ISC 1 from 0.68 to 10.68 mg/g dw, and ISC 2 from 0.74 to 15.56 mg/g dw. The optimal extraction conditions were set as: ethanol concentration of 65%, extraction time of 50 min, extraction temperature of 63 °C, and solid-to-solvent ratio of 1:40. Contents of TP, HYP, ISC 1, and ISC 2 in optimal extracts were 47.11 mg GAE/g dw, 11.73 mg/g dw, 9.54 mg/g dw, and 15.40 mg/g dw, respectively. Experimentally set values were in good agreement with those predicted by the response surface methodology model, indicating suitability of the used model, as well as the success of response surface methodology in optimizing the conditions of the extraction.Entities:
Keywords: Sideritis; UAE; extraction optimization; hypolaetin and isoscutellarein derivatives; phenolics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34203414 PMCID: PMC8272202 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26133949
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Coded and actual levels of independent variables for the designed experiment.
| Input Variable | Symbol | Level | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| −2 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | ||
| Extraction time (min) | X1 | 5 | 20 | 35 | 50 | 65 |
| Ethanol concentration (%) | X2 | 10 | 30 | 50 | 70 | 90 |
| Solid-to-solvent ratio (g/mL) | X3 | 1:10 | 1:20 | 1:30 | 1:40 | 1:50 |
| Extraction temperature (°C) | X4 | 20 | 35 | 50 | 65 | 80 |
Central composite design with UAE parameters and experimentally obtained values of TP, HYP, ISC 1, and ISC 2 a.
| Run | Extraction Time (min) | Ethanol Concentration [%] | Solid-to-Solvent Ratio (g/mL) | Temperature (°C) | TP (mg GAE/g dw) | HYP | ISC 1 (mg/g dw) | ISC 2 (mg/g dw) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5 | 50 | 01:30 | 50 | 39.14 | 10.88 | 9.54 | 14.42 |
| 2 | 20 | 30 | 01:20 | 35 | 34.49 | 6.75 | 6 | 7.02 |
| 3 | 20 | 30 | 01:20 | 65 | 31.48 | 5.68 | 5.06 | 6.22 |
| 4 | 20 | 30 | 01:40 | 35 | 36.1 | 6.2 | 4.2 | 5.56 |
| 5 | 20 | 30 | 01:40 | 65 | 42.39 | 7.89 | 7.93 | 9.58 |
| 6 | 20 | 70 | 01:20 | 35 | 30.43 | 8.86 | 6.94 | 10.41 |
| 7 | 20 | 70 | 01:20 | 65 | 34.29 | 8.24 | 8.06 | 10.91 |
| 8 | 20 | 70 | 01:40 | 35 | 40.83 | 8.97 | 7.34 | 11.46 |
| 9 | 20 | 70 | 01:40 | 65 | 40.77 | 10.48 | 10.68 | 14.2 |
| 10 | 35 | 10 | 01:30 | 50 | 19.32 | 1.05 | 0.68 | 0.74 |
| 11 | 35 | 50 | 01:10 | 50 | 28.87 | 8.74 | 7.71 | 10.93 |
| 12 | 35 | 50 | 01:30 | 20 | 29.29 | 9.05 | 7.53 | 10.41 |
| 13 | 35 | 50 | 01:30 | 50 | 42.24 | 11.34 | 9.2 | 13.9 |
| 14 | 35 | 50 | 01:30 | 50 | 39.87 | 10.18 | 9.56 | 13.03 |
| 15 | 35 | 50 | 01:30 | 50 | 36.27 | 9.65 | 8.66 | 11.96 |
| 16 | 35 | 50 | 01:30 | 50 | 37.26 | 9.58 | 8.55 | 11.71 |
| 17 | 35 | 50 | 01:30 | 50 | 41.69 | 9.68 | 8.16 | 12.17 |
| 18 | 35 | 50 | 01:30 | 50 | 43.25 | 10.39 | 9.2 | 13.69 |
| 19 | 35 | 50 | 01:30 | 80 | 45.31 | 10.37 | 9.07 | 13.02 |
| 20 | 35 | 50 | 01:50 | 50 | 44.43 | 11.12 | 8.78 | 14.43 |
| 21 | 35 | 90 | 01:30 | 50 | 36.98 | 10.2 | 8.17 | 13.29 |
| 22 | 50 | 30 | 01:20 | 35 | 32.37 | 5.09 | 4.18 | 4.61 |
| 23 | 50 | 30 | 01:20 | 65 | 35.64 | 7.14 | 7.42 | 8.25 |
| 24 | 50 | 30 | 01:40 | 35 | 38.92 | 6.42 | 5.05 | 6.49 |
| 25 | 50 | 30 | 01:40 | 65 | 37.83 | 6.84 | 6.78 | 8.65 |
| 26 | 50 | 70 | 01:20 | 35 | 25.48 | 7.33 | 7.8 | 9.19 |
| 27 | 50 | 70 | 01:20 | 65 | 40.06 | 10.61 | 10.03 | 13.59 |
| 28 | 50 | 70 | 01:40 | 35 | 42.78 | 10.32 | 8.74 | 13.43 |
| 29 | 50 | 70 | 01:40 | 65 | 47.23 | 11.46 | 10.09 | 15.56 |
| 30 | 65 | 50 | 01:30 | 50 | 43.32 | 9.36 | 9.58 | 12.55 |
a: TP: total phenolic content; HYP: 4′-O-methylhypolaetin-7-O-[6‴-O-acetyl-β-d-allopyranosyl (1→2)]-β-d-glucopyranoside; ISC 1: isoscutellarein 7-O-[6‴-O-acetyl-β-d-allopyranosyl-(1→2)]-β-d-glucopyranoside; ISC 2: 4′-O-methylisoscutellarein-7-O-[6‴-O-acetyl-β-d-allopyranosyl-(1→2)]-β-d-glucopyranoside.
Corresponding p-values of linear, interaction, and quadratic terms of regression coefficients obtained for selected response variables (TP, HYP, ISC 1, and ISC 2) a.
| Term | Response | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TP | HYP | ISC 1 | ISC 2 | |
|
| ||||
| X1 b | 0.3807 | 0.8605 | 0.4147 | 0.9215 |
| X2 | 0.0302 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 |
| X3 | 0.0004 | 0.0193 | 0.1339 | 0.0065 |
| X4 | 0.0092 | 0.0498 | 0.0014 | 0.0034 |
|
| ||||
| X1X2 | 0.5891 | 0.3316 | 0.3866 | 0.3613 |
| X1X3 | 0.8162 | 0.8383 | 0.4669 | 0.6875 |
| X1X4 | 0.3965 | 0.2194 | 0.7378 | 0.3045 |
| X2X3 | 0.2345 | 0.4142 | 0.4848 | 0.2654 |
| X2X4 | 0.3007 | 0.6001 | 0.9391 | 0.8925 |
| X3X4 | 0.5819 | 0.7931 | 0.2578 | 0.5562 |
|
| ||||
| X12 | 0.5524 | 0.4861 | 0.5672 | 0.7984 |
| X22 | 0.0030 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 |
| X32 | 0.3950 | 0.3569 | 0.2446 | 0.3203 |
| X42 | 0.5156 | 0.2393 | 0.2737 | 0.0719 |
a: TP: total phenol content; HYP: 4′-O-methylhypolaetin-7-O-[6‴-O-acetyl-β-d-allopyranosyl (1→2)]-β-d-glucopyranoside; ISC 1: isoscutellarein 7-O-[6‴-O-acetyl-β-d-allopyranosyl-(1→2)]-β-d-glucopyranoside; ISC 2: 4′-O-methylisoscutellarein-7-O-[6‴-O-acetyl-β-d-allopyranosyl-(1→2)]-β-d-glucopyranoside. b: X1: extraction time; X2: ethanol concentration; X3: solid-to-solvent ratio; X4: extraction temperature.
Figure 1Response surfaces showing the combined effect of parameters on total phenolic content (TP).
Figure 2Response surfaces showing the combined effect of parameters on 4′-O-methylhypolaetin-7-O-[6‴-O-acetyl-β-d-allopyranosyl (1 → 2)]-β-d-glucopyranoside (HYP).
Figure 3Response surfaces showing the combined effect of parameters on isoscutellarein 7-O-[6‴-O-acetyl-β-d-allopyranosyl-(1→2)]-β-d-glucopyranoside (ISC 1).
Figure 4Response surfaces showing the combined effect of parameters on 4′-O-methylisoscutellarein-7-O-[6‴-O-acetyl-β-d-allopyranosyl-(1→2)]-β-d-glucopyranoside (ISC 2).