2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.supflu.2009.10.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Supercritical fluid extraction of piceid, resveratrol and emodin from Japanese knotweed

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

2
37
0
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
2
37
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on the comparison of SCE and heat reflux extraction, SCE is more suitable for emodin than for resveratrol. These results are compatible with Blanka B's research (Beňová et al, 2010). But in Blanka B's research the extraction yield of resveratrol is 0.1 mg/g by SCE with ethanol as modifier while the extraction yield is only 0.015 mg/g in our research.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Based on the comparison of SCE and heat reflux extraction, SCE is more suitable for emodin than for resveratrol. These results are compatible with Blanka B's research (Beňová et al, 2010). But in Blanka B's research the extraction yield of resveratrol is 0.1 mg/g by SCE with ethanol as modifier while the extraction yield is only 0.015 mg/g in our research.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…In addition, interferences are significant, especially from components with similar polarities as the anthraquinones, and low enrichment factors are obtained. Other protocols including dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (Shi et al 2013), ionic liquid extraction (Tan, Li, and Xu 2012), micellar extraction (Shi et al 2007), supercritical fluid extraction (Beň ová et al 2010), high-speed counter-current chromatography (Liu, Li, and Sun 2004), microwave-assisted extraction (Hemwimon, Pavasant, and Shotipruk 2007), ion exchange solid-phase extraction (Kong et al 2011), and molecular imprinting techniques (X. Chen et al 2012) have been employed for anthraquinones.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are several extraction processes described in the literature, ranging from more traditional such as maceration, percolation and Soxhlet extraction [37] to modern extraction methods such as those based on the use of compressed fluids (including supercritical fluids (SCF), gas-expanded liquids (GXLs), pressurized liquids and Cite as: Costa 5 subcritical water extraction) [38]. Supercritical fluid extraction (SFE) offers considerable 100 advantages compared to traditional extraction processes because it provides higher selectivity, shorter extraction times, higher efficiency and do not use toxic organic solvents avoiding the environment and sample contamination [39,40]. SFE has been largely applied to extract different chemical constituents from plants including low [41] and high to medium polarity compounds (such as phenolics) [39,40,42].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Supercritical fluid extraction (SFE) offers considerable 100 advantages compared to traditional extraction processes because it provides higher selectivity, shorter extraction times, higher efficiency and do not use toxic organic solvents avoiding the environment and sample contamination [39,40]. SFE has been largely applied to extract different chemical constituents from plants including low [41] and high to medium polarity compounds (such as phenolics) [39,40,42]. Furthermore, to our knowledge this extraction 105 process has never been used to evaluate the compounds" extraction profile from Copaifera sp leaves.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%