| Literature DB >> 35268607 |
Branimir Pavlić1, Živan Mrkonjić1, Nemanja Teslić2, Aleksandra Cvetanović Kljakić1, Milica Pojić2, Anamarija Mandić2, Alena Stupar2, Filipa Santos3, Ana Rita C Duarte3, Aleksandra Mišan2.
Abstract
Wild thyme (Thymus serpyllum L.) herbal dust has been recognized as a potential underutilized resource for the recovery of antioxidants. The aim of this paper was to optimize natural deep eutectic solvent (NADES) extraction of polyphenols to obtain improved antioxidant activity of extracts determined by selected in vitro assays (DPPH, FRAP, and ABTS). Twenty different NADES systems were investigated in the first step of the screening of the extraction solvent and l-proline (Pro)-glycerine (Gly) based solvents provided the best results. Preliminary experiments organized by 25-1 fractional factorial design narrowed down the number of extraction factors from five (temperature, extraction time, NADES type, water content and L/S ratio) to three and determined their experimental domain for the final step. A face-centered central composite design with temperature (40-55-70 °C), extraction time (60-120-180 min) and L/S ratio (10-20-30 g NADES/g sample) was applied for influence analysis and process optimization. Multi-response optimization suggested a temperature of 65 °C, time of extraction of 180 min and L/S ratio of 28 g NADES/g DW as optimal extraction parameters. Experimental validation confirmed good agreement between experimental and predicted results in the extract obtained at optimal conditions and the interactions in the most suitable NADES (N16; Pro-Gly-H2O; 1:2:1) were confirmed by the 1H-NMR.Entities:
Keywords: NADES; RSM optimization; Thymus serpyllum L.; antioxidant activity; polyphenols
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35268607 PMCID: PMC8911718 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27051508
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
25−1 fractional factorial design was used for the preliminary study with the experimental domain of the independent factors and observed values of target responses.
| Run | Factors | Responses | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A: Temperature [°C] | B: Extraction Time | C: L/S Ratio | D: NADES Type * | E: Water Content [%] | TP | DPPH | ||||||
| 1 | −1 | 50 | 1 | 120 | 1 | 20 | Level 2 | N16 | −1 | 20 | 57.79 | 74.55 |
| 2 | 1 | 60 | −1 | 60 | 1 | 20 | Level 2 | N16 | −1 | 20 | 63.41 | 84.86 |
| 3 | −1 | 50 | 1 | 120 | −1 | 10 | Level 2 | N16 | 1 | 25 | 53.57 | 63.45 |
| 4 | −1 | 50 | 1 | 120 | 1 | 20 | Level 1 | N15 | 1 | 25 | 54.19 | 57.96 |
| 5 | −1 | 50 | −1 | 60 | 1 | 20 | Level 1 | N15 | −1 | 20 | 50.62 | 54.25 |
| 6 | 1 | 60 | −1 | 60 | 1 | 20 | Level 1 | N15 | 1 | 25 | 52.11 | 52.50 |
| 7 | 1 | 60 | 1 | 120 | −1 | 10 | Level 1 | N15 | 1 | 25 | 44.13 | 37.59 |
| 8 | 1 | 60 | 1 | 120 | −1 | 10 | Level 2 | N16 | −1 | 20 | 59.52 | 69.75 |
| 9 | −1 | 50 | −1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | Level 2 | N16 | −1 | 20 | 51.87 | 54.60 |
| 10 | 1 | 60 | 1 | 120 | 1 | 20 | Level 1 | N15 | −1 | 20 | 52.37 | 54.25 |
| 11 | −1 | 50 | −1 | 60 | 1 | 20 | Level 2 | N16 | 1 | 25 | 58.47 | 64.19 |
| 12 | 1 | 60 | 1 | 120 | 1 | 20 | Level 2 | N16 | 1 | 25 | 64.24 | 91.16 |
| 13 | −1 | 50 | −1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | Level 1 | N15 | 1 | 25 | 43.31 | 39.97 |
| 14 | 1 | 60 | −1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | Level 2 | N16 | 1 | 25 | 54.84 | 72.47 |
| 15 | −1 | 50 | 1 | 120 | −1 | 10 | Level 1 | N15 | −1 | 20 | 44.45 | 40.13 |
| 16 | 1 | 60 | −1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | Level 1 | N15 | −1 | 20 | 44.93 | 39.88 |
* categorical variable.
Figure 1The effect of applied NADES on (a) total phenol content and (b) antioxidant activity toward DPPH radicals in wild thyme extracts. Results were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD) and different letters represent statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) according to Tukey’s test.
Figure 2Pareto chart exhibiting effects of temperature (A), extraction time (B), L/S ratio (C), NADES (D) and water content (E) on (a) TP and (b) DPPH.
Face-centered central composite experimental design with real and coded NADES extraction parameters and experimentally obtained values of investigated target responses (TP, TF, DPPH, FRAP and ABTS).
| Run | Factor 1 | Factor 2 | Factor 3 | Response 1 | Response 2 | Response 3 | Response 4 | Response 5 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A: Temperature [°C] | B: Extraction Time [min] | C: L/S Ratio | TP | TF | DPPH | FRAP | ABTS | ||||
| 1 | 1 | 70 | 1 | 180 | −1 | 10 | 59.69 | 4.82 | 110.59 | 37.63 | 125.42 |
| 2 | −1 | 40 | −1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | 49.13 | 10.29 | 78.63 | 19.85 | 70.81 |
| 3 | 0 | 55 | 0 | 120 | 0 | 20 | 61.64 | 23.48 | 143.49 | 42.03 | 140.84 |
| 4 | 0 | 55 | 1 | 180 | 0 | 20 | 65.69 | 22.29 | 145.81 | 33.75 | 120.62 |
| 5 | 0 | 55 | 0 | 120 | 0 | 20 | 62.53 | 23.54 | 144.10 | 33.29 | 116.87 |
| 6 | 0 | 55 | 0 | 120 | 0 | 20 | 59.14 | 23.48 | 145.61 | 33.19 | 115.34 |
| 7 | 0 | 55 | 0 | 120 | 1 | 30 | 66.74 | 20.55 | 174.14 | 35.56 | 113.90 |
| 8 | 0 | 55 | 0 | 120 | 0 | 20 | 59.34 | 23.02 | 147.25 | 42.61 | 139.94 |
| 9 | −1 | 40 | 1 | 180 | 1 | 30 | 54.86 | 24.00 | 156.07 | 25.62 | 84.75 |
| 10 | 0 | 55 | 0 | 120 | 0 | 20 | 59.61 | 23.22 | 152.76 | 44.70 | 147.87 |
| 11 | −1 | 40 | 1 | 180 | −1 | 10 | 47.38 | 10.37 | 89.46 | 21.56 | 75.29 |
| 12 | 1 | 70 | 0 | 120 | 0 | 20 | 70.01 | 22.70 | 155.44 | 37.51 | 118.08 |
| 13 | 1 | 70 | −1 | 60 | 1 | 30 | 67.74 | 20.33 | 188.08 | 38.12 | 119.57 |
| 14 | −1 | 40 | −1 | 60 | 1 | 30 | 53.82 | 24.66 | 153.19 | 24.09 | 77.97 |
| 15 | 1 | 70 | −1 | 60 | −1 | 10 | 57.65 | 6.01 | 125.61 | 33.17 | 100.35 |
| 16 | 0 | 55 | 0 | 120 | −1 | 10 | 53.40 | 5.20 | 120.33 | 33.38 | 100.96 |
| 17 | 1 | 70 | 1 | 180 | 1 | 30 | 71.43 | 19.34 | 188.01 | 42.00 | 124.55 |
| 18 | −1 | 40 | 0 | 120 | 0 | 20 | 48.27 | 14.37 | 116.73 | 23.29 | 77.56 |
| 19 | 0 | 55 | −1 | 60 | 0 | 20 | 57.82 | 24.65 | 143.44 | 34.08 | 98.24 |
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and descriptive statistics (R2 and CV) of the fitted model for all investigated responses (TP, TF, DPPH, FRAP and ABTS).
| Source | Sum of | df * | Mean | F-Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Model | 831.71 | 9 | 92.41 | 11.7975 | 0.00055 |
| Residual | 70.50 | 9 | 7.83 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 61.07 | 5 | 12.21 | 5.1803 | 0.06809 |
| Pure Error | 9.43 | 4 | 2.36 | ||
| Cor Total | 902.21 | 18 | |||
| R2 | 0.922 | ||||
| CV [%] | 4.72 | ||||
|
| |||||
| Model | 844.22 | 9 | 93.80 | 9.4944 | 0.00127 |
| Residual | 88.92 | 9 | 9.88 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 88.72 | 5 | 17.74 | 359.7893 | <0.0001 |
| Pure Error | 0.20 | 4 | 0.05 | ||
| Cor Total | 933.14 | 18 | |||
| R2 | 0.905 | ||||
| CV [%] | 17.24 | ||||
|
| |||||
| Model | 14,833.37 | 9 | 1648.15 | 61.0444 | <0.0001 |
| Residual | 242.99 | 9 | 27.00 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 187.76 | 5 | 37.55 | 2.71975 | 0.17690 |
| Pure Error | 55.23 | 4 | 13.81 | ||
| Cor Total | 15,076.36 | 18 | |||
| R2 | 0.984 | ||||
| CV [%] | 3.69 | ||||
|
| |||||
| Model | 829.49 | 9 | 92.17 | 4.9684 | 0.01280 |
| Residual | 166.95 | 9 | 18.55 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 45.98 | 5 | 9.20 | 0.3041 | 0.88809 |
| Pure Error | 120.97 | 4 | 30.24 | ||
| Cor Total | 996.45 | 18 | |||
| R2 | 0.832 | ||||
| CV [%] | 12.88 | ||||
|
| |||||
| Model | 7899.47 | 9 | 877.72 | 4.0763 | 0.02406 |
| Residual | 1937.89 | 9 | 215.32 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 1038.55 | 5 | 207.71 | 0.9238 | 0.54581 |
| Pure Error | 899.34 | 4 | 224.84 | ||
| Cor Total | 9837.36 | 18 | |||
| R2 | 0.803 | ||||
| CV [%] | 13.48 |
* degrees of freedom.
Figure 3Contribution plots for the linear, interaction and quadratic terms on (a) TP, (b) TF, (c) DPPH, (d) FRAP and (e) ABTS.
Figure 4The effect of NADES extraction parameters (temperature, extraction time and L/S ratio) on (a) TP and (b) TF.
Figure 51H-NMR spectra of (A) l-proline, (B) glycerine and (C) N16 (20% w/w of water).
Experimental validation of RSM optimization for NADES extraction of polyphenols and antioxidants from wild thyme.
| Input and Output Parameters | Goal | Lower Limit | Upper Limit | Predicted | Experimental Values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Optimal Conditions | Optimal Conditions | ||||
| Temperature [°C] | is in range | 40 | 70 | 65 | 65 |
| Extraction time [min] | is in range | 60 | 180 | 180 | 180 |
| L/S ratio [g NADES/g DW] | is in range | 10 | 30 | 28 | 28 |
| TP [mg GAE/g] | maximize | 43.38 | 71.43 | 71.43 | 71.43 ± 1.17 |
| TF [mg CE/g] | maximize | 4.82 | 24.66 | 22.81 | 19.43 ± 0.20 |
| DPPH [mg TE/g] | maximize | 78.63 | 188.08 | 179.52 | 188.01 ± 11.19 |
| FRAP [mg Fe2+/g] | maximize | 19.85 | 44.70 | 41.09 | 42.00 ± 0.28 |
| ABTS [mg TE/g] | maximize | 70.80 | 147.87 | 130.06 | 124.55 ± 3.25 |
Content of major polyphenols (phenolic acids and flavonoids) in wild thyme extract obtained under optimal conditions.
| No. | Compound | Content [mg/100 g] |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Gallic acid | 20.61 |
| 2. | Caffeic acid | 25.83 |
| 3. | Epicatechin | 21.06 |
| 4. | Rosmarinic acid | 524.18 |
| 5. | Luteolin | 28.27 |
| 6. | Quercetin | 42.27 |
Chemical content of applied NADES mixtures in the screening of extraction solvent.
| Code | Content | Molar Ratio | Water Content [%] |
|---|---|---|---|
| N1 | Citric acid (CA)–glucose (Glu) | 1:1 | - |
| N2 | Citric acid (CA)–sucrose (Suc) | 1:1 | - |
| N3 | Citric acid (CA)–betaine (Bet)–water (H2O) | 1:1:1 | 5.50 |
| N4 | Choline chloride (ChCl)–glucose (Glu) | 1:1 | - |
| N5 | Glycerin (Gly)–betaine (BET) | 2:1 | - |
| N6 | Betaine (Bet)–glycerine (Gly)–water (H2O) | 1:2:1 | 5.64 |
| N7 | Betaine (Bet)–glucose (Glu) | 1:1 | - |
| N8 | Glycerin (Gly)–fructose (Fru) | 4:1 | - |
| N9 | Choline chloride (ChCl)–glycerin (Gly) | 1:2 | - |
| N10 | Choline chloride (ChCl)–glycerin (Gly)–water (H2O) | 2:1:1 | 5.27 |
| N11 | Lactic acid (LA)–glucos –water (H2O) | 5:1:3 | 7.89 |
| N12 | Choline chloride (ChCl)–lactic acid (LA) | 1:4 | 11.23 |
| N13 | Glucose (Glu)–tartaric acid (TA) | 1:1 | - |
| N14 | Lactic acid (LA)–fructose (Fru) | 5:1 | 11.16 |
| N15 | 1:2 | 9.69 | |
| N16 | 1:2:1 | 5.68 | |
| N17 | Malic acid (MA)–betaine (Bet)–water (H2O) | 2:1:5 | 18.95 |
| N18 | Tartaric acid (TA)–betaine (Bet)–water (H2O) | 2:1:5 | 17.75 |
| N19 | Choline chloride (ChCl)–citric acid (CA) | 1:1 | - |
| N20 | 1,2-Propanediol (PD)–choline chloride (ChCl)–water (H2O) | 1:1:1 | 7.71 |
Experimental plan for the isolation of polyphenolic antioxidants from wild thyme.
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
| OFAT 1 | Sample to solvent ratio: 1:20 m/mTemperature: 50 °C | NADES: N1–N20 | TP 2 |
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
| 25−1 fractional factorial design | Stirring speed: 700 rpm | Temperature: 50 and 60 °C | TP |
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
| RSM | NADES: N16 | Temperature: 40, 55 and 70 °C | TP |
* maximized, 1 One-factor-at-a-time, 2 total phenol content, 3 antioxidant activity toward DPPH radicals, 4 total flavonoids content, 5 reducing activity towards Fe3+ ions, 6 antioxidant activity towards ABTS+ radicals.