4.7 Article

Extraction, identification and quantification of polyphenols from spent coffee grounds by chromatographic methods and chemometric analyses

Journal

WASTE MANAGEMENT
Volume 96, Issue -, Pages 15-24

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2019.07.009

Keywords

Polyphenols; Spent coffee grounds; Extraction; cLC-DAD; LC-MS/MS; Chemometrics

Funding

  1. Community of Madrid/FEDER program [S2013/ABI-3028]
  2. Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [CTQ 2017-83569-C2-1-1]
  3. Complutense University of Madrid, Spain [CT17/17-CT18/17]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A solid-liquid extraction method using ethanol-water mixtures was combined with cLC-DAD, LC-MS/MS and chemometric analyses for establishing the optimum extraction conditions of valuable polyphenols from spent coffee grounds. Chlorogenic and p-coumaric acids were the most abundant polyphenols found, ranging from 0.02 to 4.8 mg g(-1) and 0.173-0.50 mg g(-1), respectively. In addition, total polyphenol content (9-29 mg GAE g(-1) DW), total flavonoid content (11-27 mg QE g(-1) DW), total antioxidant activity (0.3 7 mg GAE g(-1) DW) and free radical scavenging ability (DPPH assay, 64-927 mu g extract g(-1) at EC50) of obtained extracts were determined. Response surface methodology allowed obtaining predictive models for the extraction of each individual polyphenol. On the other hand, multifactorial ANOVA was used to establish differences between coffee and spent coffee ground extracts. Principal component analysis was also employed to relate antioxidant activities, total polyphenol and total flavonoid contents with both the polyphenols extracted and the residue coffee type. The overall results suggested that spent coffee grounds could be reused as a promising, inexpensive and natural source of bioactive polyphenols with potential industrial applications, thus minimizing the waste disposal and environmental impact. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available