Oilseed meal proteins: From novel extraction methods to nanocarriers of bioactive compounds

Hadidi, Milad; Tan, Chen; Assadpour, Elham; Jafari, Seid Mahdi

doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.137971

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 106 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are a wide variety of techniques for obtaining bioactive compounds from plant sources, which can include processes that improve extraction, such as homogenization, sonication, temperature changes, shaking water baths, electrical pulses, enzymatic processes and supercritical fluid use. Each of these methods has different applications and efficiencies depending on the material undergoing treatment [15,16]. Therefore, the choice of method is essential in the processing of new products.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of the Byproducts of Myrciaria dubia and Psidium guajava and Optimization of the Extraction of Their Bioactive Compounds by Ultrasound-Assisted Extraction and Mechanical Agitation

Carranza Carranza,

Chavez,

dos Santos Ferreira

2024

Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The food industry generates considerable byproducts that are often discarded and have high contents of usable bioactive compounds. The aim of this study was to characterize the byproducts of camu-camu (Myrciaria dubia) (shell and seed) and guava (Psidium guajava) (shell) production. The extraction and stabilization of the bioactive compounds of camu-camu and guava were also optimized. The variables of ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE) (shaking time, sonication time and volume–mass ratio) and mechanical shaking-based extraction (MS) (shaking speed, volume–mass ratio and shaking time) were optimized with the surface response method and a Box–Behnken design. The responses studied were total phenolic content (TPC) and antioxidant capacity (AC) evaluated by the degradation of the radical 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) technique and by the ferric reducing antioxidant powder (FRAP) test. For ultrasound-assisted extraction, the optimal sonication time was 15 min for both the M. dubia and P. guajava shells, and the volume–mass ratios were 50 mL/g for the M. dubia shell and 60 mL/g for the P. guajava shell. However, for M. dubia seeds, there was an agitation time of 3 h, a sonication time of 4.4 min and a volume–mass ratio of 50 mL/g. During extraction by mechanical stirring, the optimal volume–mass ratio for both M. dubia seeds and P. guajava shells was 60 mL/g, while for M. dubia shells, it was 50 mL/g. For the shells and seeds of M. dubia and the shells of P. guajava, the optimal stirring times were 2, 6.4 and 7.7 h, respectively, and the optimal stirring speeds were 172.2, 250 and 256.3 rpm, respectively. Under these optimal conditions, the highest total phenolic content (TPC) results were acquired from the cuma-cuma peel (CCP) extract (26.2 mg gallic acid equivalent (GAE)/g sample) obtained by UAE and from guava peel (GP) extract (27.9 mg GAE/g sample) obtained by MS. The optimized models showed that MS was more efficient than UAE for obtaining bioactive compounds from byproducts of M. dubia and P. guajava. However, UAE required much shorter extraction times than MS. In conclusion, the models obtained for the recovery of bioactive compounds could be applied in large-scale industries to fully exploit the byproducts studied.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%