The main objective of the current work was to assess the suitability of ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE) for the oil recovery from Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Mill. (O. ficus indica) seeds as compared to conventional extraction technique; Soxhlet extraction (SE). In the present study, the recovery oil yield, the saponifiable and unsaponifiable lipids of seeds oils obtained by different extraction methods, were compared. In addition, determination of the wound healing and analgesic activities of the plant seed oil, in vitro and in vivo, were evaluated. UAE and SE methods recovered total oil yields of 2.15% and 2.01%; respectively. Study of fatty acids composition exposed that the predominant fatty acids were linoleic acid (75.2% and 84.9%), oleic acid (14.01% and 8.18%) and palmitic acid (8.91% and 5.71%) for UAE and SE, respectively. Moreover, the most abundant sterol was β-Sitosterol (73.41% and 72.12%) followed by campesterol (8.84% and 8.57%) for UAE and SE, respectively. UAE significantly improved bioactivities of the oil with a significant increase in wound healing rate (85.7%) and inhibition of abdominal writhing (71.0%) compared to those obtained for oil prepared by SE (73.3% and 28.1%, respectively). Conclusion: Compared to conventional extraction method SE, the application of the innovative technique UAE for oil extraction increased the obtained oil yield of O. ficus indica and enhanced the biological activities in-vitro as well as in-vivo.
Background Conventional extraction methods have many limitations and drawbacks, including, prolonged extraction time, present safety concern and environmental risks, with low quality extracts. We report the use of ultrasonic (UAE) and microwave (MAE) assisted technologies as techniques for improving the extraction of pharmaceutically active materials from Opuntia ficus-indica (OFI) a species of prickly pear. Results The pulp and peel of the plant fruit were used and the total phenolic and flavonoid content were evaluated. Antioxidant assay (DPPH), was employed to prescreen different extracts. The Hepa1c1c7 model was used for testing the induction of chemopreventive marker protein NAD (P) H-quinone oxidoreductase 1 (NQO1). In vitro anti-inflammatory activity was performed on RAW 264.7 macrophage model induced for nitric oxide (NO) release in the presence of lipopolysaccharide. In vivo study included testing the therapeutic potential of some extracts on carrageenan induced paw edema in adult rats. Our data showed that fruit peels had the highest contents of phenolic and flavonoid compounds of OFI extracted using microwave assisted extraction (MAE) at 800 W power for 5 min extraction time (EXM1) with a percentage increase of 74.1% and 115.3% respectively, when compared to conventional maceration. The fruit pulp showed the highest phenolic and flavonoid content using MAE at 400 W power for 15 min extraction time (EXM2) with a percentage increase of 55.4% and 105.8% respectively, when compared to conventional maceration. DPPH prescreen revealed the potency of the EXM1 among other tested extracts, recording EC50 148 µg/ml. Although in vitro chemopreventive as anti-inflammatory model revealed no activity on (NQO1) induction of EXM1, the in vivo model gave positive results. Edema size reduction percentage of EXM1 was 104% after 4 hours. Anti-inflammatory markers indicated that EXM1 inhibited COX-2, IL-6, TNF-α, and TGF-β1 more significantly than indomethacin and conventional extraction methods, while inhibition levels of NO and MDA in case of EXM2 extract were more significantly than other extraction methods. Moreover, extracts obtained using MAE showed a significant increase in antioxidant enzymes (GSH and SOD) than those obtained using conventional method. Conclusions The data obtained further confirming the beneficial value of MAE and UAE technologies for extraction of the active material of (OFI).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.