4.7 Article

Bio compounds of edible mushrooms: in vitro antioxidant and antimicrobial activities

期刊

LWT-FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 107, 期 -, 页码 214-220

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2019.03.017

关键词

UHPLC; Phenolic acid; Gallic acid; Antibacterial activity; Agaricus brasiliensis

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq) [304978/2016-7]
  2. Fundacao Araucaria [384/2014]
  3. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES)
  4. Universidade Federal do Parana (UFPR)
  5. Universidade Tecnologica Federal do Parana (UTFPR), Campus Curitiba

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to optimize the extraction of total phenolics from edible mushrooms, evaluate the in vitro antioxidant and antimicrobial activities and identify the main phenolic compounds present in the extracts. A Box-Behnken design was used and the effects of temperature (X1, 25-55 degrees C), solvent-to-solid ratio (X2, 30-70 mL per gram) and solvent concentration (X3, 25-75%) were evaluated. In the optimum conditions of extraction, the antioxidant (DPPH, ABTS and FRAP assays) and antimicrobial activities of the extract were tested against the bacteria: Bacillus cereus, Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli and Salmonella enteritidis. In addition, the phenolic compounds of the extracts were quantified. The A. brasiliensis mushrooms showed the higher phenolic contents (13.16 mgGAE/g) and antioxidant activity by DPPH and ABTS assays of 50.64 and 128.60 mu molTE/g, respectively, among the phenolic extracts of the mushrooms analyzed. The gallic acid was the main phenolic compound identified and the A. brasiliensis had the highest concentration (491.89 mu g/g). All extracts presented antibacterial activity for Gram-positive strains (MIC <= 200 mg/mL). The high content of antioxidant compounds, extracted by a non-toxic solvent, suggested that the A. brasiliensis extract can be applied in the food industry as a natural antioxidant.

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

4.7
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