| Literature DB >> 36119886 |
Bobby Shekarau Luka1,2, Taitiya Kenneth Yuguda3, Meriem Adnouni4, Riyang Zakka2, Ibrahim Bako Abdulhamid5, Bumbyerga Garboa Gargea2.
Abstract
Crude extracts from cashew apple pomace (CAP) dried at different temperatures were used in High-Pressure Liquid Chromatography to quantify total alkaloids content (TAC), total flavanoids content (TFC), total saponin content (TSC) and total phenolics content (TPC). Diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) was used to determine the antioxidant capacity (AOC) of CAP. Fourier-Transformed Infrared Spectroscopy-Attenuated Total Reflectance (FTIR-ATR) was used to identify the functional groups present in the pomace. TAC, TFC, TSC and TPC were used as inputs to model AOC using Gaussian Process Regression (GPR), and Support Vector Regression (SVR) and a coupled model was developed using the residuals of GPR and SVR. It was found that increasing drying temperature decreased TAC, TFC, TPC and AOC but TSC increased. Both GPR and SVR predicted AOC with high accuracy. Drying CAP at lower temperature preserved more bioactive compounds hence high AOC; FTIR-ATR showed that CAP has good hydration capacity and contains majorly inorganic phosphates, aliphatic hydrocarbons and primary alcohols. Model coupling enhanced AOC prediction.Entities:
Keywords: Bioactive compounds quantification; Cashew apple pomace; Coupled GPR–SVR; Drying; Gaussian Process Regression modeling; Predicting antioxidant capacity; Support Vector Regression modeling
Year: 2022 PMID: 36119886 PMCID: PMC9479022 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10461
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Figure 1GPR–SVR model coupling.
Profile of bioactive compounds from cashew apple pomace and their antioxidant capacity at different drying temperatures.
| Drying temperature (°C) | TAC (mg/g sample) | TFC (mg/g sample) | TSC (mg/g sample) | TPC (mg/g sample) | DPPH inhibition (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 60 | 36.3 ± 0.1 | 16.61 ± 0.09 | 8.76 ± 0.52 | 91.63 ± 0.48 | 32.15 ± 0.43 |
| 65 | 35.83 ± 0.05 | 14.2 ± 1 | 6.81 ± 0.03 | 89 ± 1 | 31.8 ± 0.1 |
| 70 | 32.1 ± 0.3 | 10.6 ± 0.9 | 10.03 ± 0.03 | 87.11 ± 0.37 | 30 ± 1 |
| 75 | 28.9 ± 0.1 | 10.1 ± 0.6 | 12.13 ± 0.34 | 82 ± 2 | 29 ± 1 |
| 80 | 25.53 ± 0.05 | 9.6 ± 0.2 | 13.44 ± 0.76 | 78 ± 1 | 27 ± 1 |
| 85 | 23.78 ± 0.06 | 8.54 ± 0.11 | 15.75 ± 0.05 | 77 ± 1 | 26.7 ± 0.2 |
| 90 | 21 ± 1 | 7.6 ± 0.5 | 16.65 ± 0.86 | 72 ± 1 | 24.14 ± 0.19 |
| 95 | 18.1 ± 0.2 | 6.6 ± 0.7 | 18.81 ± 0.27 | 70.32 ± 0.48 | 22 ± 1 |
| 100 | 16.3 ± 0.2 | 6.9 ± 1 | 21.42 ± 0.45 | 66 ± 1 | 21 ± 1 |
Mean value for n number of test () and standard deviation.
Figure 3Correlation matrix of bioactive compounds from dried cashew apple pomace.
Figure 2FTIR-ATR light absorbance profile of cashew apple pomace at different wavenumber.
Figure 4Prediction performance of GPR model (a) Correlation (b) Residual.
Figure 5Prediction performance of SVR model (a) Correlation (b) Residual.
Figure 6Prediction performance of the coupled model (a) Correlation (b) Residual.