| Literature DB >> 36076828 |
Anastasia Kyriakoudi1, Alexandros Tsiouras1, Ioannis Mourtzinos1.
Abstract
The present study proposes a green extraction approach for the recovery of lycopene from tomato fruits. Different hydrophobic natural deep eutectic solvents (HNADESs) based on terpenes (i.e., menthol and thymol) and fatty acids (i.e., decanoic acid and dodecanoic acid) were prepared at different molar ratios, characterised in terms of density, rheological properties, and Fourier transform-infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy, and were examined for their effectiveness to extract lycopene from tomato. Response surface methodology (RSM) was employed to optimise the extraction parameters, namely duration (min) and solvent:solid ratio (v/w). Spectrophotometry and RP-HPLC-DAD were used in order to monitor the process efficiency. The combination of decanoic acid and dodecanoic acid was found to exhibit comparable extraction capacity to acetone. Taking into account that the HNADESs used in the present study are considered green, biodegradable and of low cost, the obtained carotenoid rich extracts are expected to be of use in industrial food applications.Entities:
Keywords: Fourier transform-infrared spectroscopy; hydrophobic natural deep eutectic solvents; lycopene; response surface methodology; tomato
Year: 2022 PMID: 36076828 PMCID: PMC9455282 DOI: 10.3390/foods11172645
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Abbreviations, molar ratios and physicochemical characterisation of the prepared HNADESs, and tomato carotenoids content (mg/100 g fresh weight), as determined by RP-HPLC-DAD and UV-Vis spectrophotometry after extraction with different HNADESs during the screening process.
| HBA | HBD | Abbreviation | Molar Ratio | Density * | Flow Behaviour Index ( | Flow Consistency Index (b) * | RP-HPLC-DAD | UV-Vis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lycopene Content | β-Carotene Content | Total Carotenoids Content | Total Carotenoids Content | |||||||
| mg/100 g Fresh Weight | ||||||||||
| Menthol | Capric Acid | Ment/Cap | 1:1 | 0.877 | 1.259 | 0.016 | 2.73 ± 0.07 c | 0.17 ± 0.01 e | 2.97 ± 0.06 c | 2.55 ± 0.03 c |
| Ment/Cap | 1:2 | 0.879 | 1.593 | 0.009 | 1.34 ± 0.04 b | 0.10 ± 0.01 c | 1.46 ± 0.05 a | 1.32 ± 0.02 a | ||
| Ment/Cap | 2:1 | 0.876 | 1.203 | 0.020 | 1.06 ± 0.08 a | 0.08 ± 0.01 b | 1.19 ± 0.08 a | 1.07 ± 0.01 a | ||
| Menthol | Lauric Acid | Ment/Lau | 1:1 | 0.881 | 2.051 | 0.007 | 4.93 ± 0.56 g | 0.13 ± 0.03 d | 5.39 ± 0.64 g | 4.97 ± 0.01 e |
| Ment/Lau | 1:2 | 0.876 | 2.201 | 0.006 | 2.89 ± 0.28 c | 0.07 ± 0.02 d | 3.18 ± 0.33 c, d | 2.89 ± 0.04 c | ||
| Ment/Lau | 2:1 | 0.887 | 2.251 | 0.005 | 1.44 ± 0.02 b | 0.10 ± 0.02 c | 2.47 ± 0.77 b | 1.99 ± 0.02 b | ||
| Thymol | Capric Acid | Thym/Cap | 1:1 | 0.909 | 1.531 | 0.008 | 3.40 ± 0.18 e | 0.19 ± 0.01 g | 3.64 ± 0.24 d | 3.54 ± 0.06 d |
| Thym/Cap | 1:2 | 0.918 | 1.549 | 0.008 | 4.58 ± 0.06 f | 0.19 ± 0.03 g | 5.28 ± 0.66 f, g | 4.97 ± 0.05 e | ||
| Thym/Cap | 2:1 | 0.925 | 1.540 | 0.008 | 4.42 ± 0.17 f | 0.24 ± 0.01 h | 4.81 ± 0.23 e, f | 4.76 ± 0.05 e | ||
| Thymol | Lauric Acid | Thym/Lau | 1:1 | 0.912 | 2.055 | 0.005 | 4.53 ± 0.37 f | 0.25 ± 0.03 i | 4.88 ± 0.44 e, f | 4.69 ± 0.02 e |
| Thym/Lau | 1:2 | 0.893 | 1.384 | 0.020 | 5.41 ± 0.69 i | 0.19 ± 0.01 g | 5.87 ± 0.75 i | 5.58 ± 0.04 f | ||
| Thym/Lau | 2:1 | 0.911 | 2.094 | 0.005 | 5.15 ± 0.12 h, i | 0.28 ± 0.05 j | 5.66 ± 0.17 g, h | 5.49 ± 0.03 f | ||
| Capric acid | Lauric Acid | Cap/Lau | 1:1 | 0.881 | 1.355 | 0.012 | 2.98 ± 0.06 c, d | 0.18 ± 0.03 f | 3.32 ± 0.07 d | 3.01 ± 0.13 d |
| Cap/Lau | 1:2 | 0.859 | 1.000 | 0.008 | 7.51 ± 0.10 j | 0.32 ± 0.05 k | 8.04 ± 0.10 j | 7.74 ± 0.07 g | ||
| Cap/Lau | 2:1 | 0.865 | 1.547 | 0.024 | 3.19 ± 0.04 d | 0.17 ± 0.01 e | 3.52 ± 0.04 d | 3.45 ± 0.07 d | ||
| Acetone | 8.15 ± 0.14 k | 0.37 ± 0.01 l | 8.86 ± 0.17 k | 8.75 ± 0.03 h | ||||||
* Results are expressed as the mean value of two independent measurements. ** Different lowercase letters as superscripts within the same column for each HNADES differ significantly according to Duncan’s test at p < 0.05. *** Results are expressed as the mean value of three independent experiments ± standard deviation. # Expressed as lycopene.
Levels of independent variables in actual and coded values.
| Symbols | Factors | Level | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coded value * | ||||||
| −a ** | −1 | 0 | +1 | +a ** | ||
| Actual value | ||||||
| Χ1 | Duration (min) | 30 | 41 | 60 | 81 | 90 |
| Χ2 | Solvent:solid ratio ( | 20 | 35 | 70 | 105 | 120 |
* . ** Level a represents the distance of a star point to the center point in a CCD and is equal to 2, where n = number of variables.
Experimental design and responses of the dependent variable expressed as mg lycopene/100 g fresh weight.
| Run. | Duration (min) | Solvent:Solid Ratio | Lycopene Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| X1 | X2 | ||
| 1 | 60 | 20 | 4.09 ± 0.32 |
| 2 | 60 | 70 | 7.87 |
| 3 | 60 | 70 | 8.14 |
| 4 | 30 | 70 | 5.12 ± 0.51 * |
| 5 | 90 | 70 | 6.45 ± 0.61 * |
| 6 | 60 | 70 | 8.09 |
| 7 | 41 | 35 | 5.87 ± 0.15 |
| 8 | 41 | 105 | 2.38 ± 0.45 |
| 9 | 81 | 105 | 3.69 ± 0.16 |
| 10 | 81 | 35 | 4.99 ± 0.12 |
| 11 | 60 | 120 | 3.04 ± 0.34 |
| 12 | 60 | 70 | 8.02 |
| 13 | 60 | 70 | 7.41 |
* n = 5.
Figure 1FT-IR spectra of pure menthol, thymol, capric acid and lauric acid as well as of the prepared HNADESs.
Figure 2Surface plot for lycopene content (mg/100 g fresh weight) affected by duration of extraction (min) and solvent:solid ratio (v/w).
Application of the optimised extraction conditions (i.e., duration; 62 min, solvent:solid ratio; 64:1, v/w) to five randomly selected ripe tomato samples (n = 3).
| Sample | Extraction Conditions * | Lycopene | β-Carotene Content ** | Total Carotenoids Content ** |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | (a) | 10.88 ± 0.57 a | 0.33 ± 0.01 a | 11.91 ± 0.58 a |
| (b) | 11.01 ± 0.69 a | 0.35 ± 0.02 a | 12.44 ± 0.73 b | |
| 2 | (a) | 14.92 ± 0.33 a | 0.91 ± 0.11 a | 15.98 ± 0.17 a |
| (b) | 15.04 ± 0.34 a | 0.92 ± 0.10 a | 16.53 ± 0.42 b | |
| 3 | (a) | 11.68 ± 0.47 a | 0.69 ± 0.04 a | 12.48 ±0.55 a |
| (b) | 11.27 ± 0.76 a | 0.65 ± 0.06 a | 12.09 ± 0.82 a | |
| 4 | (a) | 11.13 ± 0.50 a | 0.59 ± 0.01 a | 11.82 ± 0.49 a |
| (b) | 10.24 ± 0.56 b | 0.53 ± 0.03 a | 10.88 ± 0.59 a | |
| 5 | (a) | 11.82 ± 0.35 a | 0.65 ± 0.06 a | 12.59 ± 0.35 a |
| (b) | 11.01 ± 0.74 a | 0.61 ± 0.03 a | 11.73 ± 0.76 a |
* Extraction conditions: (a) Cap/Lau, 1:2; and (b) acetone; ** Different lowercase letters as superscripts within the same column for each sample differ significantly according to Independent Samples t-test at p < 0.05.
Figure 3FT-IR spectra of the pure Cap/Lau 1:2 eutectic mixture, ammonia solution as well as Cap/Lau-NH3 complex.