| Literature DB >> 35892773 |
Santiago P Aubourg1, Marcos Trigo1, María Jesús González1, Salomé Lois1, Isabel Medina1.
Abstract
A novel approach of bioactive lipid extraction by different green solvents was carried out on squid (Doryteuthis gahi) by-products. By-products (viscera, heads, skin, tails, etc.), considered as a single product, were subjected to the following solvent systems: ethanol, acetone, ethyl acetate, 1/1 ethanol/acetone, 1/1 ethanol/ethyl acetate, and 1/1 acetone/ethyl acetate. Analyses carried out included lipid yield, lipid class content, and fatty acid (FA) composition. Results were compared to the lipid extract obtained by the traditional procedure (1/1 chloroform/methanol). Lipid yields obtained by green solvents led to a 33.4-73.2% recovery compared to traditional extraction; the highest values (p < 0.05) were obtained by ethanol-containing systems. Compared to the traditional procedure, ethanol systems showed an 85.8-90.3% recovery of phospholipid compounds and no differences (p > 0.05) in the ω3/ω6 ratio. Green-extracting systems led to higher average values for eicosapentaenoic acid content (15.66-18.56 g·100 g-1 total FAs) and polyene index (1.93-3.29) than chloroform/methanol extraction; differences were significant (p < 0.05) for systems including acetone and ethyl acetate. No differences (p > 0.05) were detected for docosahexaenoic acid content between the traditional procedure and green systems, with all values being included in the 31.12-32.61 g·100 g-1 total FA range. The suitability of EtOH-containing green systems for extraction of bioactive lipid compounds from squid by-products was concluded.Entities:
Keywords: PUFA; Patagonian squid; acetone; bioactive lipids; by-products; ethanol; ethyl acetate; green extraction; phospholipids; ω3/ω6 ratio
Year: 2022 PMID: 35892773 PMCID: PMC9330110 DOI: 10.3390/foods11152188
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Determination * of lipid yield and lipid class content of initial by-products and lyophilised by-products obtained by different lipid-extracting systems **.
| Substrate | Extracting System | Lipid Determination | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lipid Yield | FFAs | STs | TAGs | ||
| Initial by-products | CHCl3/MeOH | 19.0 ± 0.5 a | 228.2 ± 6.1 c | 103.6 ± 2.6 a | 8.5 ± 0.1 c |
| Lyophilised by-products | CHCl3/MeOH | 103.8 ± 1.8 e | 194.4 ± 6.7 a | 102.6 ± 4.8 a | 8.4 ± 0.7 c |
| EtOH | 65.6 ± 4.2 d | 210.1 ± 4.5 b,c | 138.5 ± 2.6 b | 1.2 ± 0.7 a | |
| AcMe | 36.3 ± 0.4 b | 366.3 ± 14.8 f | 260.0 ± 9.5 e | 7.0 ± 0.7 b,c | |
| AcOEt | 46.8 ± 1.6 c | 256.7 ± 8.0 d | 188.3 ± 6.9 c | 6.1 ± 1.1 b | |
| EtOH/AcMe | 73.6 ± 2.7 d | 197.72 ± 2.2 a | 127.8 ± 6.7 b | 1.6 ± 0.3 a | |
| EtOH/AcOEt | 71.1 ± 1.2 d | 201.3 ± 2.9 a,b | 132.5 ± 1.1 b | 2.2 ± 0.9 a | |
| AcMe/AcOEt | 41.6 ± 2.1 c | 307.6 ± 2.4 e | 232.0 ± 14.8 d | 5.4 ± 1.0 b | |
* Results expressed as average values of three independent determinations (n = 3) ± standard deviations. Data included in brackets correspond to average contents of lipid classes expressed as g·kg−1 by-products. In each column, different lowercase letters (a–f) indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). ** Extracting systems: 1/1 chloroform/methanol (CHCl3/MeOH), ethanol (EtOH), acetone (AcMe), ethyl acetate (AcOEt), 1/1 ethanol/acetone (EtOH/AcMe), 1/1 ethanol/ethyl acetate (EtOH/AcOEt), and 1/1 acetone/ethyl acetate (AcMe/AcOEt). Other abbreviations employed: FFAs (free fatty acids), STs (sterols), and TAGs (triacylglycerols).
Figure 1Determination of phospholipid (PL) content (g·kg−1 lipids) in initial by-products (IB-P) and lyophilised by-products (LB-P) obtained by different lipid-extracting systems. Average values of three independent determinations (n = 3); standard deviations are indicated by bars. Values accompanied by different lowercase letters (a–f) indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). Extracting systems as expressed in Table 1.
Figure 2Fatty acid (FA) profile of initial by-products. Retention time (min) of individual FA is indicated in green. Assignation of peaks is expressed in blue.
Fatty acid (FA) analysis (g·100 g−1 total FAs) * in initial by-products and lyophilised by-products obtained by different lipid-extracting systems **.
| Substrate | Extracting System | FA Determination | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| STFAs | MUFAs | PUFAs | DHA | EPA | PI | ||
| Initial by-products | CHCl3/MeOH | 35.20 ± 1.10 d | 14.47 ± 0.06 b | 50.03 ± 1.13 a | 29.95 ± 0.17 a | 15.88 ± 0.04 a,b | 1.80 ± 0.10 a |
| Lyophilised by-products | CHCl3/MeOH | 35.10 ± 0.94 d | 13.73 ± 0.07 a | 51.17 ± 0.89 a,b | 31.12 ± 0.72 b | 16.05 ± 0.16 b | 1.83 ± 0.08 a |
| EtOH | 32.58 ± 0.96 c | 15.40 ± 0.48 c | 52.02 ± 0.50 b | 32.26 ± 0.44 b | 15.72 ± 0.08 a | 1.98 ± 0.09 a | |
| AcMe | 23.35 ± 0.31 a | 21.35 ± 0.41 f | 55.30 ± 0.66 d | 31.47 ± 0.51 b | 18.48 ± 0.25 c | 3.29 ± 0.09 b | |
| AcOEt | 26.12 ± 1.18 b | 18.03 ± 0.18 d | 55.85 ± 1.35 c,d | 32.61 ± 1.04 b | 18.34 ± 0.27 c | 2.82 ± 0.21 b | |
| EtOH/AcMe | 33.22 ± 0.53 c | 14.90 ± 0.20 b,c | 51.88 ± 0.33 a,b | 31.92 ± 0.20 b | 15.82 ± 0.16 a,b | 1.93 ± 0.04 a | |
| EtOH/AcOEt | 33.04 ± 1.61 c,d | 14.59 ± 0.06 b | 52.37 ± 1.59 a,b,c | 32.58 ± 1.25 b | 15.66 ± 0.27 a,b | 1.98 ± 0.17 a | |
| AcMe/AcOEt | 24.49 ± 1.54 a,b | 19.60 ± 0.23 e | 55.91 ± 1.31 c,d | 32.28 ± 1.04 b | 18.56 ± 0.17 c | 3.09 ± 0.28 b | |
* Results expressed as average values of three independent determinations (n = 3) ± standard deviations. In each column, different lowercase letters (a–f) indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). ** Abbreviations employed: STFAs (saturated fatty acids), MUFAs (monounsaturated fatty acids), PUFAs (polyunsaturated fatty acids), DHA (docosahexaenoic acid), EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid), and PI (polyene index). Extracting systems as expressed in Table 1.
Figure 3Determination of the ω3/ω6 ratio in initial by-products (IB-P) and lyophilised by-products (LB-P) obtained by different lipid-extracting systems. Average values of three independent determinations (n = 3); standard deviations are indicated by bars. Values accompanied by different lowercase letters (a–d) indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). Extracting systems as expressed in Table 1.