| Literature DB >> 35247683 |
Mihai Babotă1, Oleg Frumuzachi1, Alexandru Gâvan2, Cristian Iacoviță3, José Pinela4, Lillian Barros4, Isabel C F R Ferreira4, Leilei Zhang5, Luigi Lucini5, Gabriele Rocchetti6, Corneliu Tanase7, Gianina Crișan1, Andrei Mocan8.
Abstract
An optimized ultrasound-assisted extractive method was developed to obtain a polyphenol-enriched extract from the aerial parts of Thymus comosus Heuff. ex Griseb. et Schenk. Optimization process was conducted based on Design of Experiment (DoE) principles, determining the influence of three independent variables (time, ultrasound amplitude, ethanol concentration) on the total phenolic content of the extract (dependent variable). Additionally, the phenolic composition of the extract was characterized through UHPLC-HRMS, revealing beside the most abundant flavonoid-type compounds the presence of salvianolic acids C, D and L in high amounts. Phytochemical profile of the extract was correlated with its antioxidant activity (tested through five complementary assays) and enzyme-inhibitory potential, showing important antiglucosidase and anticholinesterase effects. Overall, it was concluded that the developed method is suitable for obtaining a good recovery of both phenolic and non-phenolic compounds from Thymus comosus aerial parts, and their presence in the optimized extract is responsible for its pharmacological potential.Entities:
Keywords: Design of Experiments; Optimisation; Phenolic compounds; Thymus comosus Heuff. ex Griseb. et Schenk; Ultrasound-assisted extraction
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35247683 PMCID: PMC8892194 DOI: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2022.105954
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ultrason Sonochem ISSN: 1350-4177 Impact factor: 7.491
Fig. 1Thymus comosus Heuff. ex Griseb. et Schenk.
DoE matrix and TPC values (mg/mL) of the extracts corresponding to each experimental run.
| Exp No | Exp Name | Run Order | Time | Amplitude | EtOH (%) | TPC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | N1 | 18 | 1 | 20 | 30 | 35.35 |
| 2 | N2 | 13 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 33.48 |
| 3 | N3 | 7 | 1 | 40 | 30 | 37.03 |
| 4 | N4 | 15 | 3 | 40 | 30 | 33.35 |
| 5 | N5 | 10 | 10 | 40 | 30 | 33.78 |
| 6 | N6 | 4 | 7 | 30 | 30 | 32.96 |
| 7 | N7 | 11 | 1 | 20 | 70 | 27.62 |
| 8 | N8 | 16 | 7 | 20 | 70 | 30.52 |
| 9 | N9 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 70 | 30.76 |
| 10 | N10 | 17 | 1 | 40 | 70 | 30.52 |
| 11 | N11 | 6 | 10 | 40 | 70 | 36.84 |
| 12 | N12 | 12 | 3 | 30 | 70 | 29.55 |
| 13 | N13 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 50 | 38.16 |
| 14 | N14 | 8 | 7 | 40 | 50 | 41.34 |
| 15 | N15 | 19 | 1 | 30 | 50 | 38.84 |
| 16 | N16 | 1 | 10 | 30 | 50 | 40.19 |
| 17 | N17 | 14 | 5 | 30 | 50 | 35.72 |
| 18 | N18 | 9 | 5 | 30 | 50 | 40.71 |
| 19 | N19 | 2 | 5 | 30 | 50 | 40.46 |
Fig. 2Graphical transposition of the DoE matrix.
The values of parameters used to evaluate experimental model fitting.
| Model Validity | Reproducibility | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.953 | 0.930 | 0.872 | 4.225 | 1.122 | 19 | 0.972 | 0.846 |
Fig. 3Scaled and centered coefficient plot of the process parameter influence.
Fig. 4Response surface plot illustrating solvent influence on the UAE developed method.
Predicted and experimentally measured values of the TPC extraction.
| TPC (mg GAE/mL) | Recovery (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Objective | DoE predicted | Experimentally measured | Predicted vs. measured value | ||
| Minimum | Target | Maximum | |||
| 39.00 | 40.50 | 42.00 | 40.39 | 41.04 | 101.6 |
Fig. 5Design space and prediction of failure for TPC.
Overview of TPC, TFC and antioxidant capacity values measured for OpTC extract.
| Assay | OpTC |
|---|---|
| TPC (mg GA eq./g dw) | 156.20 ± 1.32 |
| TFC (mg Q eq./g dw) | 33.45 ± 0.36 |
| TEAC (mg TE/g dw) | 149.93 ± 0.74 |
| FRAP (mg TE/g dw) | 527.35 ± 27.42 |
| DPPH (mg TE/g dw) | 79.28 ± 0.41 |
| TBARS (μg/mL) | 11.85 ± 0.03 |
| OxHLIA | |
| Δt = 60 min | 10.2 ± 0.3 |
| Δt = 120 min | 23.6 ± 0.4 |
Overview of in vitro antioxidant potential of OpTC.
| Enzymatic assay | Value | |
|---|---|---|
| α-Glu | OpTC | 1985.09 ± 84.91 |
| Acarbose | 286.60 ± 36.71 | |
| Tyrosinase | OpTC | N.A |
| Kojic acid | 50.2 ± 0.15 | |
| Acetylcholinesterase | OpTC | 6333.75 ± 411.71 |
| Galantamine | 1.42 ± 0.25 | |
Fig. 6Correlogram considering the significant phenolic classes and the bioactivity values measured.