4.6 Article

Microwave- and Ultrasound-Assisted Extraction of Cannabinoids and Terpenes from Cannabis Using Response Surface Methodology

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 27, 期 24, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules27248803

关键词

cannabis; cannabinoids; delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol; extraction; microwave; ultrasound

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), Collaborative Research and Development
  2. EXKA Inc [CRDPJ 543704-19]
  3. Collaborative Research and Training Experience
  4. Quality Assurance and Quality Control for Cannabis Production, Products and Training or QAQCC [CREATE 543319-2020]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the effects of different extraction techniques on cannabis extraction and optimized conditions for maximum yield and concentration of cannabinoids and terpenes. Ultrasound-assisted extraction outperformed microwave-assisted extraction, with sample-to-solvent ratio significantly influencing the secondary metabolite profiles in ultrasound-assisted extracts.
Limited studies have explored different extraction techniques that improve cannabis extraction with scale-up potential. Ultrasound-assisted and microwave-assisted extraction were evaluated to maximize the yield and concentration of cannabinoids and terpenes. A central composite rotatable design was used to optimize independent factors (sample-to-solvent ratio, extraction time, extraction temperature, and duty cycle). The optimal conditions for ultrasound- and microwave-assisted extraction were the sample-to-solvent ratios of 1:15 and 1:14.4, respectively, for 30 min at 60 degrees C. Ultrasound-assisted extraction yielded 14.4% and 14.2% more oil and terpenes, respectively, compared with microwave-assisted extracts. Ultrasound-assisted extraction increased cannabinoid concentration from 13.2-39.2%. Considering reference ground samples, tetrahydrocannabinolic acid increased from 17.9 (g 100 g dry matter(-1)) to 28.5 and 20 with extraction efficiencies of 159.2% and 111.4% for ultrasound-assisted and microwave-assisted extraction, respectively. Principal component analyses indicate that the first two principal components accounted for 96.6% of the total variance (PC1 = 93.2% and PC2 = 3.4%) for ultrasound-assisted extraction and 92.4% of the total variance (PC1 = 85.4% and PC2 = 7%) for microwave-assisted extraction. Sample-to-solvent ratios significantly (p < 0.05) influenced the secondary metabolite profiles and yields for ultrasound-assisted extracts, but not microwave-assisted extracts.

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