4.7 Article

Comparative in vitro studies of the biological potential and chemical composition of stems, leaves and berries Aronia melanocarpa's extracts obtained by subcritical water extraction

期刊

FOOD AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY
卷 121, 期 -, 页码 458-466

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2018.09.045

关键词

Subcritical water extraction; Aronia; HPLC; Antioxidants; Enzyme inhibitors; Cytotoxicity; Antimicrobial activity

资金

  1. Serbian Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development [TR31013]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Preparation of functional products as well as natural-based products requires non-toxic but effective extraction techniques. In this study, subcritical water extraction was used for the extraction of different aronia parts in order to explore their potential. Stems, leaves and berries of Aronia melanocarpa were extracted under the following conditions: temperature 130 degrees C; pressure 35 bar; time 20 min. The total phenols and flavonoid contents of the produced extracts were evaluated by conventional spectrophotometric methods. Additionally, the main phenolic compounds were also identified and quantified by high performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection (HPLC-DAD). The biological potential of the extracts was evaluated by determining their antioxidant (DPPH, ABTS and lipid peroxidation assays), antimicrobial, enzyme inhibitory (cholinesterase and elastase) and cytotoxic effects (HeLa, A-549, LS-174T, MRC-5 cell lines). The results indicate that leaves and berries extracts exhibited stronger antioxidant action when compared with stems. The strongest cholinesterase and elastase inhibitory activity was also found in berries extract. Similarly, the extracts obtained from leaves and berries showed considerable cytotoxic effects against tested cell lines. A moderate antimicrobial effects was observed too. Demonstrated biological potential of all three aronia parts can trace a new road map for developing newly designed functional products.

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