4.6 Article

Employing Response Surface Methodology for the Optimization of Ultrasound Assisted Extraction of Lutein and β-Carotene from Spinach

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 20, 期 4, 页码 6611-6625

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules20046611

关键词

lutein; -carotene; spinach; ultrasound; TLC; densitometry; mass spectrometry

资金

  1. Higher Committee for Education Development in Iraq (HCED)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The extraction of lutein and -carotene from spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.) leaves is important to the dietary supplement industry. A Box-Behnken design and response surface methodology (RSM) were used to investigate the effect of process variables on the ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE) of lutein and -carotene from spinach. Three independent variables, extraction temperature (degrees C), extraction power (%) and extraction time (min) were studied. Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) followed by UV visualization and densitometry was used as a simple and rapid method for both identification and quantification of lutein and -carotene during UAE. Methanol extracts of leaves from spinach and authentic standards of lutein and -carotene were separated by normal-phase TLC with ethyl acetate-acetone (5:4 (v/v)) as the mobile phase. In this study, the combination of TLC, densitometry, and Box-Behnken with RSM methods were effective for the quantitative analysis of lutein and -carotene from spinach extracts. The resulting quadratic polynomial models for optimizing lutein and -carotene from spinach had high coefficients of determination of 0.96 and 0.94, respectively. The optimal UAE settings for output of lutein and -carotene simultaneously from spinach extracts were an extraction temperature of 40 degrees C, extraction power of 40% (28 W/cm(3)) and extraction time of 16 min. The identity and purity of each TLC spot was measured using time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Therefore, UAE assisted extraction of carotenes from spinach can provide a source of lutein and -carotene for the dietary supplement industry.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据