| Literature DB >> 35204137 |
Nemanja Teslić1, Filipa Santos2, Filipe Oliveira2, Alena Stupar1, Milica Pojić1, Anamarija Mandić1, Branimir Pavlić3, Aleksandra Cvetanović Kljakić3, Ana Rita C Duarte2, Alexandre Paiva2, Aleksandra Mišan1.
Abstract
Defatted raspberry seeds were used as an alternative source of antioxidants and ellagic acid (EA) extracted using Natural deep eutectic solvents (NADES). In the preliminary study, the best NADES combination (citric acid-betaine) and the most influential variables (temperature, time, and NADES/plant ratio) were selected for the further optimization process. All samples were analyzed in terms of total polyphenol, EA content, and antioxidant activity. Two sets of optimal conditions were generated by response surface methodology. The first set (Opt1) was designed for higher conversion of ellagitannins to EA while the latter set (Opt2) for higher EA content/100 g extract. Opt1 and Opt2 had higher values for all investigated responses compared to 80% ethanolic extract but had a lower conversion rate of ellagitannins to EA compared to acidified methanol extract. The third set of parameters (Opt3) selected beyond the initial experimental domain was used to obtain a sample with the highest EA content/100 g extract. Due to their nature, NADES extracts are ready to use and could have various technological roles in products since they are antioxidants, acidifiers, and colorants. NADES raspberry extracts exhibited higher anti-proliferative activity compared to ethanolic extracts in terms of EC50 values. However, the main contributor of anti-cancer activity in NADES raspberry extracts were individual NADES compounds and/or their newly formed NADES structure.Entities:
Keywords: acidic NADES; by-product valorization; ellagic acid; hydrolysis and extraction
Year: 2022 PMID: 35204137 PMCID: PMC8868079 DOI: 10.3390/antiox11020254
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antioxidants (Basel) ISSN: 2076-3921
Total polyphenol (TP) content, antioxidant activity, and ellagic acid content obtained by NADES, 80% ethanol solution, and acidified methanol solutions. Extractions were performed at 60 °C for 30 min with 20 g/g of NADES/plant ratio in a water bath placed on a magnetic stirrer hot plate.
| Sample | TP | DPPH | Ellagic Acid | Ellagic Acid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LA:FRC:H2O (5:1:0.8) | 39.80 ± 0.80 h | 412.15 ± 26.15 c,d | 63.86 ± 2.13 a,b | 2.70 ± 0.08 b |
| LA:GLC:H2O (5:1:0.8) | 31.72 ± 0.90 d | 406.91 ± 6.57 c,d | 66.18 ± 1.66 a,b | 2.76 ± 0.05 b |
| MA:BET (1:1) | 33.27 ± 1.43 d,e | 375.84 ± 8.34 b,c | 61.78 ± 3.71 a,b | 2.95 ± 0.36 b |
| MA:BET (2:1) | 34.07 ± 0.73 d,e,f | 406.36 ± 10.24 c,d | 72.01 ± 2.87 b | 3.01 ± 0.07 b |
| TAR:BET (1:1) | 26.91 ± 0.64 b,c | 348.14 ± 16.60 b | 60.13 ± 1.81 a,b | 2.59 ± 0.26 b |
| TAR:BET (2:1) | 30.49 ± 1.82 c,d | 352.34 ± 27.48 b | 71.23 ± 2.11 b | 3.18 ± 0.22 b |
| LA:BET:H2O (1:1:0.16) | 39.02 ± 1.69 g,h | 410.23 ± 9.21 c,d | 63.53 ± 1.82 a,b | 3.18 ± 0.56 b |
| LA:BET:H2O (2:1:0.32) | 35.43 ± 0.61 e,f,g | 431.18 ± 6.62 d | 63.43 ± 0.98 a,b | 3.05 ± 0.38 b |
| CA:BET:H2O (1:1:1) | 31.23 ± 2.59 d | 387.15 ± 13.46 b,c | 66.07 ± 4.31 a,b | 2.80 ± 0.15 b |
| CA:BET:H2O (2:1:2) | 32.57 ± 1.45 d,e | 401.20 ± 8.45 c,d | 75.17 ± 3.14 b | 3.20 ± 0.13 b |
| ETOH 80% | 20.67 ± 0.73 a | 197.78 ± 2.76 a | 45.23 ± 0.88 a | 1.37 ± 0.03 a |
| 2M HCl in MEOH 4 | 37.33 ± 1.46 f,g,h | 4128.92 ± 35.91 f | 1031.41 ± 20.73 d | 4.34 ± 0.09 c |
| 2M HCl in MEOH | 26.54 ± 2.30 b | 597.10 ± 8.38 e | 703.28 ± 16.25 c | 20.82 ± 0.48 d |
1 Galic acid equivalent; 2 Trolox equivalent; 3 Dry weight of defatted raspberry seeds; 4 Hydrolysis and extraction performed at 85 °C during 2 h in a water bath placed on a magnetic stirrer and sequel sonication in an ultrasonic bath at 80 °C for 30 min. Results are presented as mean values ± sd (n = 3) followed by different letters which within the same row represent statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) according to post hoc Tukey’s HSD test.
25−1 factorial design with process parameters of solid/liquid extraction and experimentally obtained values of total polyphenol (TP) content, antioxidant activity (DPPH), and ellagic acid content. Citric acid monohydrate, betaine (1 mol), and water were used for NADES formulation.
| Sample | A: Temperature [°C] | B: Moles of Citric Acid Monohydrate | C: Water Content | D: Time | E: NADES/Plant Ratio | TP | DPPH | Ellagic Acid | Ellagic Acid | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Solid/liquid extraction | ||||||||||||||
| 1 | −1 | 60 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 25 | 1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | 34.01 ± 1.05 a,b,c,d | 650.43 ± 4.28 c,d,e | 45.66 ± 0.24 a,b | 3.45 ± 0.09 d |
| 2 | 1 | 70 | 1 | 3 | −1 | 20 | 1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | 33.25 ± 2.60 a,b,c,d | 637.13 ± 12.26 c | 52.56 ± 0.03 c,d | 3.91 ± 0.01 f |
| 3 | 1 | 70 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 25 | 1 | 60 | 1 | 20 | 37.21 ± 0.32 e,f | 427.99 ± 9.87 a | 72.96 ± 0.90 f | 2.74 ± 0.05 c |
| 4 | 1 | 70 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 25 | −1 | 30 | −1 | 10 | 35.15 ± 1.33 b,c,d,e,f | 679.23 ± 10.31 d,e | 49.30 ± 0.17 b,c | 3.64 ± 0.01 e |
| 5 | 1 | 70 | −1 | 2 | 1 | 25 | −1 | 30 | 1 | 20 | 36.62 ± 1.41 d,e,f | 454.28 ± 11.16 a,b | 65.33 ± 0.89 e | 2.50 ± 0.04 a,b |
| 6 | −1 | 60 | 1 | 3 | −1 | 20 | −1 | 30 | −1 | 10 | 33.70 ± 0.43 a,b,c,d,e | 632.19 ± 11.41 c | 45.25 ± 1.79 a | 3.39 ± 0.09 d |
| 7 | 1 | 70 | −1 | 2 | −1 | 20 | 1 | 60 | 1 | 20 | 35.21 ± 0.93 b,c,d,e,f | 447.31 ± 2.09 a,b | 70.67 ± 0.94 f | 2.64 ± 0.02 b,c |
| 8 | −1 | 60 | 1 | 3 | −1 | 20 | 1 | 60 | 1 | 20 | 31.48 ± 0.80 a | 480.17 ± 17.37 b | 62.56 ± 0.71 e | 2.41 ± 0.01 a |
| 9 | −1 | 60 | −1 | 2 | −1 | 20 | 1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | 32.20 ± 0.87 a,b | 643.54 ± 2.12 c,d | 45.00 ± 0.19 a | 3.42 ± 0.01 d |
| 10 | 1 | 70 | 1 | 3 | −1 | 20 | −1 | 30 | 1 | 20 | 32.77 ± 0.28 a,b,c | 451.86 ± 14.34 a,b | 64.18 ± 0.95 e | 2.43 ± 0.03 a |
| 11 | −1 | 60 | −1 | 2 | 1 | 25 | −1 | 30 | −1 | 10 | 36.05 ± 0.66 c,d,e,f | 655.80 ± 3.56 c,d,e | 47.33 ± 2.17 a,b | 3.52 ± 0.14 d,e |
| 12 | 1 | 70 | −1 | 2 | −1 | 20 | −1 | 30 | −1 | 10 | 32.74 ± 1.63 a,b,c | 641.05 ± 12.33 c | 45.35 ± 0.78 a,b | 3.43 ± 0.01 d |
| 13 | −1 | 60 | −1 | 2 | 1 | 25 | 1 | 60 | 1 | 20 | 36.29 ± 0.10 c,d,e,f | 455.17 ± 3.03 a,b | 69.43 ± 3.87 f | 2.56 ± 0.09 a,b |
| 14 | −1 | 60 | −1 | 2 | −1 | 20 | −1 | 30 | 1 | 20 | 33.84 ± 0.44 a,b,c,d,e | 436.22 ± 11.59 a | 64.71 ± 0.47 e | 2.46 ± 0.03 a |
| 15 | 1 | 70 | −1 | 2 | 1 | 25 | 1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | 38.72 ± 1.90 f | 682.23 ± 29.08 e | 53.50 ± 0.14 d | 3.94 ± 0.03 f |
| 16 | −1 | 60 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 25 | −1 | 30 | 1 | 20 | 35.08 ± 1.19 b,c,d,e | 474.21 ± 14.51 b | 65.24 ± 0.29 e | 2.45 ± 0.02 a |
| Additional experiments with ultrasound-assisted extraction | ||||||||||||||
| 17 | 1 | 70 | 1 | 3 | −1 | 20 | 1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | nd | nd | 47.58 ± 0.23 | 2.06 ± 0.02 |
| 18 | 1 | 70 | −1 | 2 | 1 | 25 | 1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | nd | nd | 51.30 ± 2.58 | 2.11 ± 0.11 |
1 Galic acid equivalent; 2 Trolox equivalent; 3 Dry weight of defatted raspberry seeds; Nd—not determined. Results are presented as mean values ± sd (n = 3) followed by different letters which within the same row represent statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) according to post hoc Tukey’s HSD test.
Box–Behnken design with process parameters of solid/liquid extraction and experimentally obtained values of total polyphenols (TP) content, antioxidant activity (DPPH), and ellagic acid content expressed on defatted raspberry seeds and NADES extract.
| Sample | A: Temperature [°C] | B: Time | C: NADES/Plant Ratio | TP | DPPH | Ellagic Acid | Ellagic Acid | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | −1 | 65 | 0 | 100 | −1 | 15 | 35.54 ± 1.50 a | 1051.71 ± 19.65 c,d | 65.38 ± 2.15 a | 3.19 ± 0.03 e,f |
| 2 | −1 | 65 | −1 | 50 | 0 | 25 | 41.27 ± 0.99 c,d | 601.10 ± 16.24 a | 85.14 ± 7.83 b,c | 2.47 ± 0.15 b,c |
| 3 | 0 | 75 | 1 | 150 | −1 | 15 | 37.99 ± 0.92 a,b | 1087.24 ± 52.50 d | 83.56 ± 3.61 b | 4.04 ± 0.13 g |
| 4 | 1 | 85 | 1 | 150 | 0 | 25 | 43.85 ± 1.23 d,e,f | 582.99 ± 21.23 a | 143.07 ± 5.00 f | 4.02 ± 0.12 g |
| 5 | 0 | 75 | −1 | 50 | −1 | 15 | 36.30 ± 0.85 a,b | 1004.22 ± 51.82 c | 67.09 ± 1.35 a | 3.31 ± 0.04 f |
| 6 | 1 | 85 | −1 | 50 | 0 | 25 | 42.04 ± 0.40 c,d,e | 634.85 ± 7.96 a | 104.16 ± 7.25 e | 2.99 ± 0.16 d,e |
| 7 | 1 | 85 | 0 | 100 | 1 | 35 | 45.76 ± 0.82 f | 760.91 ± 30.64 b | 151.56 ± 6.04 f | 2.97 ± 0.08 d,e |
| 8 | 0 | 75 | 1 | 150 | 1 | 35 | 43.97 ± 1.90 d,e,f | 809.30 ± 20.89 b | 137.62 ± 4.39 f | 2.68 ± 0.05 c,d |
| 9 | 0 | 75 | 0 | 50 | 0 | 25 | 43.46 ± 1.11 d,e,f | 617.87 ± 29.22 a | 105.93 ± 5.39 e | 3.03 ± 0.10 e,f |
| 10 | −1 | 65 | 0 | 50 | 1 | 35 | 43.38 ± 0.88 d,e,f | 820.22 ± 5.32 b | 102.97 ± 4.10 d,e | 2.12 ± 0.07 a |
| 11 | 0 | 75 | 0 | 50 | 0 | 25 | 42.61 ± 1.52 d,e,f | 597.14 ± 1.43 a | 101.09 ± 4.26 d,e | 2.96 ± 0.06 d,e |
| 12 | −1 | 65 | 1 | 150 | 0 | 25 | 42.59 ± 0.58 d,e,f | 621.45 ± 9.81 a | 88.06 ± 6.75 b,c,d | 2.61 ± 0.12 c |
| 13 | 0 | 75 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 25 | 43.83 ± 0.89 d,e,f | 627.10 ± 7.10 a | 101.84 ± 4.99 d,e | 2.97 ± 0.10 d,e |
| 14 | 1 | 85 | 0 | 100 | −1 | 15 | 38.85 ± 0.73 b,c | 1257.69 ± 32.32 e | 99.40 ± 4.66 c,d,e | 4.83 ± 0.17 h |
| 15 | 0 | 75 | −1 | 50 | 1 | 35 | 44.91 ± 0.52 e,f | 800.80 ± 5.17 b | 109.74 ± 3.62 e | 2.22 ± 0.04 a,b |
1 Galic acid equivalent; 2 Trolox equivalent; 3 Dry weight of defatted raspberry seeds. Results are presented as mean values ± sd (n = 3) followed by different letters which within the same row represent statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) according to post hoc Tukey’s HSD test.
2nd order polynomial equations only with statistically significant coefficients (p < 0.05).
| Response | Equation |
|---|---|
| TP |
|
| DPPH |
|
| Ellagic acid |
|
| Ellagic acid extract |
|
Experimental validation of optimal conditions obtained with response surface methodology.
| Sample | A: Temperature [°C] | B: Time | C: Solvent/Plant Ratio | TP | DPPH | Ellagic Acid | Ellagic Acid | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predicted responses | ||||||||||
| Opt1-pred | 1 | 85 | 0.01 | 100.45 | 1 | 35 | 45.28 | 772.59 | 151.56 | 2.96 |
| Opt2-pred | 1 | 85 | 0.94 | 147.00 | −0.92 | 15.76 | 39.69 | 1125.64 | 114.48 | 5.07 |
| Experimentally obtained responses | ||||||||||
| Opt1 | 1 | 85 | 0.01 | 100.45 | 1 | 35 | 44.77 ± 1.76 c | 707.25 ± 2.87 b | 147.02 ± 7.18 c | 2.98 ± 0.13 b |
| Opt2 | 1 | 85 | 0.94 | 147.00 | −0.92 | 15.76 | 40.16 ± 1.90 b | 995.18 ± 32.08 c | 117.94 ± 5.93 b | 5.21 ± 0.17 d |
| Opt3 * | 95 | 240 | 10 | 37.97 ± 0.60 b | 679.97 ± 27.45 b | 115.62 ± 4.41 b | 7.93 ± 0.15 e | |||
| ETOH 80% | 60 | 60 | 20 | 20.67 ± 0.73 a | 197.78 ± 2.76 a | 45.23 ± 0.88 a | 1.37 ± 0.03 a | |||
| 2M HCl in MEOH | 85 | 150 | 170 | 37.33 ± 1.46 b | 4128 ± 35.91 d | 1031.41 ± 20.73 d | 4.34 ± 0.09 c | |||
1 Galic acid equivalent; 2 Trolox equivalent; 3 Dry weight of defatted raspberry seeds; Nd—not determined. Experimental results are presented as mean values ± sd (n = 3) followed by different letters which within the same row represent statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) according to post hoc Tukey’s HSD test. * NADES extract obtained with a set of conditions out of experimental domain in optimization step.
Figure 1Extract Opt3 (left) vs extract ETOH 80% (right).
Figure 21H spectra of (A) CA:BET:H2O (3:1:3; 25% w/w of final water); (B) betaine; (C) citric acid monohydrate.
Anti-proliferative activity (HT29), cytotoxicity (Caco-2), and selectivity index of optimal NADES raspberry extract (Opt3), raspberry ethanolic extract (ETOH 80%), and pure acidic NADES (CA:BET:H2O 3:1:3).
| Systems/Compounds | EC50 (mg/mL) | Selectivity Index | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cytotoxicity (Caco-2) | Anti-proliferative Activity (HT29) | ||
| Opt3—1 a | 3.80 ± 3.33 | 3.18 ± 0.37 | 1.20 |
| Opt3—2 a | ≈4.63 * | 2.16 ± 0.49 | 2.14 |
| Opt3—3 a | 4.60 ± 2.80 | ≈3.84 * | 1.20 |
| ETOH 80%—1 b | 103.10 ± 7.04 | 48.65 ± 11.54 | 2.12 |
| ETOH 80%—2 b | ≈120.60 * | 22.93 ± 4.41 | 5.26 |
| ETOH 80%—3 b | 115.30 ± 12.25 | 61.82 ± 3.17 | 1.87 |
| CA:BET:H2O (3:1:3) | 8.06 ± 4.26 | 2.08 ± 0.14 | 3.88 |
* In the range of concentrations tested, it was impossible to accurately determine the SD of the EC50. Other results are expressed as mean ± sd n = 3; a—All samples were obtained under the same extraction conditions; b—All samples were obtained under the same extraction conditions.