| Literature DB >> 35369084 |
Ali Tao1, Xuehua Feng1, Yajing Sheng1, Zurong Song1.
Abstract
In order to investigate the fermentation process of Artemisia polysaccharides, this paper showcases an investigation into the effects of fermentation time, fermentation temperature, strain inoculum, Artemisia annua addition, and shaker speed on the polysaccharides production of Artemisia annua. The yield of Artemisia polysaccharides content was determined based on the optimization of single-factor test, and then a response surface test was conducted with temperature, inoculum, and time as response variables and the yield of Artemisia polysaccharides as response values. The fermentation process was then optimized and the antioxidant activity of Artemisia polysaccharides was monitored using DPPH, ABTS+, OH, and total reducing power. The optimum fermentation process was determined by the test to be 5% inoculum of Aspergillus niger, temperature 36°C, time 2 d, shaker speed 180 r/min, and 4% addition of Artemisia annua, and the extraction of Artemisia polysaccharides was up to 17.04% by this condition of fermentation. The polysaccharides from Artemisia annua fermented by Aspergillus Niger had scavenging effects on DPPH, ABTS, and OH free radicals.Entities:
Keywords: Artemisia annua polysaccharide; Aspergillus niger; fermentation process; optimization; response surface; single factor
Year: 2022 PMID: 35369084 PMCID: PMC8969580 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.842766
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
Response surface test factors and levels.
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |
| A Inoculum amount/% | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| B Temperature/°C | 35 | 36 | 37 |
| C Fermentation time/d | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| D | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Figure 1Effect of Aspergillus niger inoculum on the yield of Artemisia polysaccharides.
Figure 2Effect of temperature on the yield of Artemisia polysaccharides.
Figure 3Effect of time on the yield of Artemisia polysaccharides.
Figure 4Effect of shaking bed speed on the yield of Artemisia polysaccharides.
Figure 5Effect of Artemisia annua addition on the yield of Artemisia polysaccharides.
Response surface test design and results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | 1 | −1 | 0 | 14.72 |
| 2 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 15.40 |
| 3 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 15.86 |
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16.88 |
| 5 | 0 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 15.55 |
| 6 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 15.63 |
| 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 | −1 | 13.85 |
| 8 | 1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 15.01 |
| 9 | 0 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 14.05 |
| 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16.68 |
| 11 | 0 | 0 | −1 | −1 | 14.14 |
| 12 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 14.64 |
| 13 | 1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 14.10 |
| 14 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 14.92 |
| 15 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 15.70 |
| 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16.84 |
| 17 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 15.04 |
| 18 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 14.82 |
| 19 | 0 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 14.56 |
| 20 | 0 | −1 | −1 | 0 | 14.59 |
| 21 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 14.86 |
| 22 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 16.47 |
| 23 | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 15.49 |
| 24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17.16 |
| 25 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 14.65 |
| 26 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 15.78 |
| 27 | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 15.61 |
| 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17.12 |
| 29 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 1 | 14.64 |
Response surface regression model analysis of variance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 24.73 | 14 | 1.77 | 24.26 | <0.0001 | Extremely significant |
| A | 1.01 | 1 | 1.01 | 13.86 | 0.0023 | Significant |
| B | 0.0588 | 1 | 0.0588 | 0.8077 | 0.384 | Non-significant |
| C | 0.7057 | 1 | 0.7057 | 9.69 | 0.0076 | Significant |
| D | 4.8 | 1 | 4.8 | 65.95 | <0.0001 | Extremely significant |
| AB | 0.0144 | 1 | 0.0144 | 0.1978 | 0.6633 | Non-significant |
| AC | 0.0132 | 1 | 0.0132 | 0.1817 | 0.6764 | Non-significant |
| AD | 0.429 | 1 | 0.429 | 5.89 | 0.0293 | Non-significant |
| BC | 0.1444 | 1 | 0.1444 | 1.98 | 0.1808 | Non-significant |
| BD | 0.1369 | 1 | 0.1369 | 1.88 | 0.1918 | Non-significant |
| CD | 1.12 | 1 | 1.12 | 15.44 | 0.0015 | Significant |
| A2 | 3.91 | 1 | 3.91 | 53.7 | <0.0001 | Extremely significant |
| B2 | 5.21 | 1 | 5.21 | 71.59 | <0.0001 | Extremely significant |
| C2 | 9.62 | 1 | 9.62 | 132.1 | <0.0001 | Extremely significant |
| D2 | 6.17 | 1 | 6.17 | 84.72 | <0.0001 | Extremely significant |
| Residual | 1.02 | 14 | 0.0728 | |||
| Lack of fit | 0.8572 | 10 | 0.0857 | 2.12 | 0.2445 | non-significant |
| Pure error | 0.1619 | 4 | 0.0405 | |||
| Cor total | 25.74 | 28 | ||||
| Adeq precision | 16.0412 |
Figure 6Response plot of the interaction between inoculum and temperature on yield.
Figure 11Response plot of the interaction between time and Artemisia annua addition on yield.
Comparison of fermentation method and hot water method.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fermentation | 48 | 36 | 4 | 17.04 |
| Hot-water | 4 | 90 | 4 | 9.81 |
Figure 12Antioxidant activity assay.