4.7 Article

Formation and relevance of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural in bioactive subcritical water extracts from olive leaves

期刊

FOOD RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
卷 47, 期 1, 页码 31-37

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2012.01.008

关键词

5-hydroxymethylfurfural; HMF; Subcritical water extraction; SWE; Antiproliferative; Antioxidant; Maillard reaction

资金

  1. Ministerio de Educacion y Ciencia [AGL2008-05108-C03-01, AGL2011-29857-C03-01]
  2. CONSOLIDER-INGENIO [CSD2007-00063 FUN-CFOOD]
  3. ALIBIRD [S2009/AGR-1469]
  4. MICINN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although subcritical water extraction (SWE) has already shown its great potential for the attainment of natural bioactive extracts, concerns still remain on possible unexpected reactions that can arise during the extraction process, usually taking place at high pressure and temperature. It is already well-known that different components might be formed during the SWE extraction protocol due e.g. to Maillard reaction, which can improve the bioactivity of the obtained extracts. On the other hand, the formation of other compounds derived from these reactions, such as 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), has raised some concerns, mainly related to its safety. In this work, the formation of HMF during subcritical water extraction, at different conditions, from olive leaves has been monitored by using liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry (LC-MS) and diode array detection (LC-DAD). The possible influence of this compound in the overall antioxidant and antiproliferative activities against colon cancer cells has been also studied. Results showed an increase of HMF formation when increasing the extraction temperature, being the maximum concentration achieved at 200 degrees C (3.17 mu g HMF/mg extract); nevertheless, the HMF contained in the olive leave extracts did not influence the antioxidant capacity or the antiproliferative activity of the natural extracts, thus demonstrating the safety of the SWE process. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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