| Literature DB >> 35445134 |
Fujia Chen1, Yilin Xu2, Nana Ding1, Hongyan Li1, Tongbiao Li1, Fengyun Liu1, Mengxue Liang1, Li Song1, Junhe Liu1, Enzhong Li1, Jiayang Liu3.
Abstract
This study focused on the optimization of ultrasound-assisted compound enzyme extraction for polysaccharides (RTPs) from Radix trichosanthis by orthogonal experiment and response surface methodology, and then its extraction kinetics model and antihyperlipidemic activities were studied. The optimum extraction process was as follows: cellulase-1.0%, papain-1.0%, pectase-0.5%, pH-5, extraction temperature-50°C, and liquid-to-solid ratio-30 mL/g; prediction value of RTPs was 7.54%; the experimental yield of RTPs was 7.22%, while 50 minutes was optimized in Weibull kinetics model. Then high-dose groups of RTP extract could reduce the TC, TG, and LDL-C levels and increase the level of HDL-C in high-fat mice, with the ability to lower the MDA content and enhance SOD level.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35445134 PMCID: PMC9015872 DOI: 10.1155/2022/3811036
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.246
Figure 1Effect on the extraction yield of RTPs. (a) A single factor for different concentrations of enzymes, (b) single factor for pH, (c) single factor for extraction temperature, and (d) single factor for liquid-to-solid ratio. (e) Response surface (3D) plot of interaction between pH (X1) and extraction temperature (X2), (f) response surface (3D) plot of interaction between pH and liquid-to-solid ratio (X3), and (g) response surface (3D) plot of interaction between extraction temperature and liquid-to-solid ratio. (h) Kinetics of UACEE process described by Weibull model. Notes: [RTPs]∞ = 7.8374%; R2 = 0.9936; k = 0.0521 min−1; d = 0.9825.
L9 (34) orthogonal experimental design and results.
| No. | Factor | The yield of RTPs (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||
| 1 | 1 (0.5%) | 1 (0.5%) | 1 (0.5%) | 2.76 |
| 2 | 1 (0.5%) | 2 (1.0%) | 2 (1.0%) | 3.42 |
| 3 | 1 (0.5%) | 3 (1.5%) | 3 (1.5%) | 2.85 |
| 4 | 2 (1.0%) | 1 (0.5%) | 2 (1.0%) | 4.36 |
| 5 | 2 (1.0%) | 2 (1.0%) | 3 (1.5%) | 6.89 |
| 6 | 2 (1.0%) | 3 (1.5%) | 1 (0.5%) | 6.16 |
| 7 | 3 (1.5%) | 1 (0.5%) | 3 (1.5%) | 4.12 |
| 8 | 3 (1.5%) | 2 (1.0%) | 1 (0.5%) | 6.45 |
| 9 | 3 (1.5%) | 3 (1.5%) | 2 (1.0%) | 5.8 |
| K1-1 | 3.01 | 3.747 | 5.123 | |
| K1-2 | 5.803 | 5.587 | 4.527 | |
| K1-3 | 5.457 | 4.937 | 4.62 | |
| R | 2.793 | 1.84 | 0.596 | |
| Optimum |
|
|
| |
Observed responses of Box–Behnken design for the yield of RTPs.
| No. |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.50 | 40.00 | 30.00 | 2.13 |
| 2 | 5.50 | 40.00 | 30.00 | 6.2 |
| 3 | 4.50 | 60.00 | 30.00 | 2.17 |
| 4 | 5.50 | 60.00 | 30.00 | 6.23 |
| 5 | 4.50 | 50.00 | 20.00 | 1.87 |
| 6 | 5.50 | 50.00 | 20.00 | 6.06 |
| 7 | 4.50 | 50.00 | 40.00 | 2.56 |
| 8 | 5.50 | 50.00 | 40.00 | 6.37 |
| 9 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 20.00 | 5.86 |
| 10 | 5.00 | 60.00 | 20.00 | 5.88 |
| 11 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 40.00 | 6.56 |
| 12 | 5.00 | 60.00 | 40.00 | 6.62 |
| 13 | 5.00 | 50.00 | 30.00 | 7.19 |
| 14 | 5.00 | 50.00 | 30.00 | 7.17 |
| 15 | 5.00 | 50.00 | 30.00 | 7.21 |
| 16 | 5.00 | 50.00 | 30.00 | 7.24 |
| 17 | 5.00 | 50.00 | 30.00 | 7.27 |
| Optimum | 5.17 | 46.54 | 29.90 | 7.54 |
Figure 2The indexes of antihyperlipidemic activities in high-fat mice. (a) Mouse body weights in different groups from the initial to 12 weeks. (b) Boxplots of body weights in various groups at the end of the experiment. (c–e) The relative liver, spleen, and kidney weights of variety of mice, respectively. (f) The serum lipid levels of high-fat mice treated with RTPs. (g) Serum SOD activity levels and MDA content in different groups (n = 6). NC: normal control group; HC: hyperlipidemic control; PC: positive control; HD: high-dose group; LD: low-dose group. Data expressed as the mean ± SD. ∗∗p < 0.01 and ∗p < 0.05 compared with the HC group; ##p < 0.01 compared with the NC group.