Extraction Techniques of Bioactive Compounds: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Nilesh Nirmal
,
Anandu Chandra Khanashyam
,
Anjaly Shanker Mundanat
,
Kartik Shah
,
Karthik Sajith Babu
,
Priyamvada Thorakkattu
,
Fahad Al-Asmari
,
R. Pandiselvam

Fruit wastes and/or by-products that food agro-industries accumulate are typically made up of underutilized residual biomasses that are rich in various bioactive functional components. Fruit wastes have been researched for the extraction of phenolic compounds, dietary fibers, and other bioactive substances, as they are rich sources of phytochemicals. Fruit and vegetable wastes from the agri-food sector are produced in enormous quantities and, due to their high moisture content and microbial load, can lead to significant environmental damage. Bioactive components could degrade quickly, even with the slightest alterations in extraction techniques. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure conditions that will stabilize the bioactive components before and after extraction. Choosing an appropriate optimized extraction technique is critical as it decides the final quality of the bioactive compound.

  • bioactive compounds
  • extraction techniques

1. Introduction

Presented with a wide range of bioactive chemicals and a multitude of plant species, it is essential to develop a standardized and comprehensive screening method for extracting compounds that are advantageous to human health. The use of bioactive chemicals in several industrial fields, including the food, chemical, and pharmaceutical industries, indicates the need for the most efficient and standardized technique to extricate bioactive compounds from plant materials. The extraction of bioactive components from plant matrix can be accomplished using a variety of extraction techniques, and the choice of an appropriate technique alters the cost, duration, and accessibility of the procedure. An efficient extraction approach should be able to target bioactive compounds from the plant matrix, have high selectivity towards analytical procedures and bioassays, and provide a robust and reproducible method that is free of fluctuations in the sample matrix [1]. The bioactive components can be extracted by using conventional or novel extraction techniques. Some of the widely used extraction techniques in the food industry, along with their advantages and disadvantages, are discussed in Table 1.

Table 1. Techniques for the extraction of bioactive components.
Technique Advantages Disadvantages Bioactive Component References
Maceration
  • Can be used for extracting thermolabile components.
  • Cheap method
  • Lower extraction efficiency
  • High extraction time
  • Requires solvent in a larger volume
 Polyphenols, anthocyanins, flavonoids, and essential oils [2][3][4]
Percolation
  • More efficient than maceration
  • Lower extraction efficiency
  • High extraction time
 Alkaloids,
Sterols, flavonoids, glycosides, saponins, phenols, lignins, sterols, and tannins		 [5][6]
Decoction
  • More economical
  • Only use water as a solvent
  • Environment friendly
  • Effective only for heat-stable compounds
  • Not suitable for light-sensitive compounds
  • Heat and mass transfer efficiency is a crucial factor
 Antioxidants and polyphenol [7][8][9]
Reflux or solid–liquid extraction
  • Uses less solvent and has a shorter extraction time
  • Easy
  • High repeatability
  • Not suitable for volatile and heat-sensitive compounds
 Essential oils, flavonoids, and polyphenols [10][11][12]
Soxhlet extraction
  • High efficiency
  • Low cost
  • Basic technique and easy to use
  • Not suitable for volatile and heat-sensitive compounds
  • Requires large quantities of solvents
  • Sample preparation is time-consuming
 Phenolics, antioxidants, essential oils, and flavonoids [13][14][15][16]
Supercritical fluid extraction (SFE)
  • Greater penetration of the sample matrix and superior mass transfer compared with a liquid solvent
  • Reduced extraction period
  • Higher selectivity as the solvation power can be adjusted by altering the pressure and/or temperature.
  • Ideal for extracting thermolabile compounds
  • Minimal waste generation
  • Needs a sophisticated mechanism as a precise temperature and pressure should be maintained
  • Not suitable for extracting polar compounds
 Flavonoids, antioxidants, carotenoids, fatty acids, essential oils, terpenes, and polyphenols [17]
Microwave-assisted extraction (MAE)
  • Reduced extraction time
  • Lower solvent usage
  • Cost-effective
  • Better extraction yield compared with traditional methods
  • Not suitable for heat-sensitive compounds
  • Not effective for non-polar compounds
 Phenolic compounds, glycosides, flavonoids, terpenoids, essential oils, alkaloids, and saponins [18][19]
Enzyme-assisted extraction (EAE)
  • Can be used to extract cell-wall-bound components
  • Suitable for heat-sensitive materials
  • Higher-quality extracts due to the high specificity and efficiency of enzymes
  • Environmentally friendly
  • Not many enzymes have been studied and optimized for their extraction efficiency
 Anthocyanins, polyphenols, carotene, terpenes, and flavonoids [20][21]
Pulsed electric field extraction (PEFE)
  • Non-thermal technique.
  • Minimal degradation of thermolabile compounds
  • Can be used as a pre-treatment before conventional extraction
  • Continuous method
  • Short extraction time
  • Not suitable for products with high electrical conductivity as it reduces the resistance in the system
 Phenols, flavonoids, proteins, anthocyanins, and carbohydrates [22][23][24][25][26]
High-hydrostatic-pressure extraction
  • Low energy consumption
  • High yield
  • Effective in extracting both polar and non-polar compounds
  • Needs expensive equipment
  • Need a lot of maintenance
 Phenolic compounds, carotenoids, flavonoids, pectin, lutein, lycopene, and catechin [27]
Ultrasound-assistedextraction (UAE)
  • Low energy consumption
  • High yield
  • Short processing time
  • Can be used for heat-sensitive compounds
  • Can produce free radicals that will affect the quality of bioactive compounds
  • Difficult to scale up for industrial uses
 Phenolic compounds, flavonoids, oils, and anthocyanins

[1][28][29][30]

 

2. Conventional Methods

The polarity/ionic strength of various solvents in use, along with the usage of heat and/or mixing, are the key factors influencing the effectiveness of conventional extraction processes [31]. Soxhlet extraction, maceration, solvent extraction, reflux extraction, etc. are examples of traditional extraction techniques. In maceration, the sample is ground into fine particles to enhance its surface area and facilitate solvent mixing (water or an organic solvent). The solvent is then combined with the ground materials, followed by continuous agitation, and contaminants are later removed using filtration. The relatively simple extraction technique of maceration has the drawbacks of a lengthy extraction period and poor extraction effectiveness. However, thermolabile components could be best extracted using maceration. Another extraction method that is more effective than maceration is percolation. It is an unceasing process that utilizes a special piece of machinery called a percolator, in which the saturated solvent is continuously changed out for a new solvent. The percolator is typically filled with dried powdered samples, which are then mixed with boiling water and macerated for a few hours. To obtain concentrated extracts, evaporation is carried out after the completion of extraction [32]. Another common extraction method is called decoction, which involves boiling the crude aqueous extract to a pre-determined volume for a specific amount of time to extract the heat-stable components. The liquid is allowed to cool and is strained or filtered after it settles. The method can be used to extract water-soluble components. It should be noted that this process is ineffective for materials that are sensitive to heat and light, and volatile or thermolabile substances cannot be obtained using decoction. In addition, mass transfer and kinetic effects must be taken into account [7]. Compared with percolation or maceration, reflux or solid–liquid extraction is more effective, uses less solvent, and has a shorter extraction time [31]. This procedure involves mixing a dry sample with the solvent in a heated, agitated jar. Better mass transfer and contact efficiency between the solvent and the treated matrix are gained when the vapors are allowed to condense and trickle back into the flask. Compounds with high thermolability cannot be extracted using this method [19]. Soxhlet extraction has long been the most extensively operated method for concentrating analytes and separating bioactive components from natural materials. Utilizing the principles of reflux and siphoning to constantly extract the bioactive component with fresh solvent, the Soxhlet extraction process combines the benefits of both percolation and reflux extraction. Compared with maceration or percolation, the Soxhlet extraction process has a high extraction efficiency, takes less time, and has lower solvent consumption. However, the high temperature and prolonged heat exposure could increase the thermal degradation of the bioactive compounds [13].

3. Novel Emerging Methods

Numerous studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of traditional extraction techniques, including the Soxhlet extraction and maceration processes. However, using such techniques requires the use of a lot of time, energy, and solvent. There are alternative extraction methods that have faster extraction times, higher selectivity, and higher efficiency, and use less solvent to overcome the disadvantages of conventional extraction procedures. These procedures are referred to as non-conventional or green extraction methods, or novel extraction methods [33]. The application of novel technologies, such as ultrasound and pulsed electric fields, to grapes has increased the polyphenol content by 32–23% and decreased the energy consumption by 17.6 fold [34]. Some of the promising non-conventional extraction techniques are discussed below.

3.1. Supercritical Fluid Extraction (SFE)

Since Hannay and Hogarth’s discovery of supercritical fluid in 1879, it has been utilized for extraction purposes, and in 1964, it was employed in the food industry to decaffeinate coffee [1]. SFE has gained popularity in recent years as a method for extracting bioactive components from plants at atmospheric temperatures while avoiding thermal denaturation. Supercritical fluid (SF) is used as the extraction solvent in supercritical fluid extraction. A substance can only reach the characteristic supercritical state if it is subjected to pressure and temperatures beyond its critical point. Supercritical fluid exhibits liquid-like density and solvation power, and gas-like viscosity, surface tension, and diffusion characteristics in its supercritical state. These characteristics allow for faster and higher-yielding chemical extraction. Due to its low critical temperature (31 °C), inertness, low cost, and non-toxicity, supercritical carbon dioxide is frequently utilized in SFE. The main aspects that affect the extraction efficiency of SCF extraction are the process temperature, pressure, flow rate, and sample volume [17]. The efficiency of SFE in extracting bioactive components from plant matrices has been reported in various studies [35]. SFE can be used to extract alkaloids, such as Pyrrolidine [36], caffeine [37], Olchicine [38], and Vinblastine [39], essential oils [40], terpenes [41], flavonoids [42], and phenolic compounds [43].

3.2. Microwave-Assisted Extraction (MAE)

The microwave-assisted extraction technique is regarded as a novel practice that uses microwave radiation to extract soluble compounds into a fluid from a variety of matrices. Electromagnetic radiation with frequencies between 300 MHz and 300 GHz is known as microwaves [44]. They are composed of electric and magnetic fields that oscillate perpendicular to each other. The microwave heating principle relies on the dipole rotation and ionic conduction mechanisms. The resistance of the medium to the flow of ions during ionic conduction causes heat to be produced, whereas the electromagnetic field change brought on by microwave radiation will frequently cause changes in molecular orientation, thereby producing heat by molecular friction [45]. The high extraction yield in MAE is due to the synergistic effect of the heat and mass gradients. MAE involves three stages; first, the solvent’s penetration into the plant matrix, followed by the breakdown of the components by electromagnetic waves, and the transport of the solubilized components from the insoluble matrix to the bulk solution. Finally, liquid and residual solid phase separations are performed [46]. MAE can be used to extract a variety of bioactive components, such as flavonoids [47], isoflavone [48], saponins [49], piperine [50], carotenoids [51], terpenes [52], essential oils [53][54], polysaccharides [55], etc.

3.3. Enzyme-Assisted Extraction (EAE)

The phytochemicals in plant matrices can be either disseminated in the cell cytoplasm or found attached to the polysaccharide–lignin network by hydrogen or hydrophobic interactions, making the compounds inaccessible for extraction using a solvent in a typical extraction technique [46]. It has been suggested that enzymatic pre-treatment is a novel and efficient method for releasing bound molecules and improving the total yield. To acquire bioactive chemicals, enzyme-assisted extraction (EAE) can be used as a pre-extraction or extraction procedure. The plant cell wall is destroyed, releasing the bound bioactive chemicals attached to the lipid and carbohydrate chains [20][21]. The major enzymes that are used in EAE are cellulases [56], pectinase [57], hemicellulase [58], amylase [59], glucosidase [60], etc. EAE can be used for extracting bioactive components such as anthocyanins [61], polyphenols [62], oleoresin [63], flavonols [64], terpenes [65], carotene [66], etc.

3.4. Pulsed Electric Field Extraction (PEFE)

Pulsed Electric Field Extraction (PEFE) promotes mass transfer during extraction by breaking down membrane structures, thereby considerably enhancing the extraction yield and decreasing the extraction time. The cell membrane experiences an electric potential when it is deferred in an electric field, and when the electric potential exceeds a critical value, repulsion between charge-carrying molecules creates pores in vulnerable regions of the membrane, dramatically increasing permeability. The field strength, pulse count, specific energy, and treatment temperature are all factors that affect PEFE treatment [67]. Due to its energy efficiency, PEFE processing is a feasible technique for the food, pharmaceutical, and biotech industries. PEFE can be used for extracting polyphenols [24], flavonoids [23], proteins [25], anthocyanins [26], and carbohydrates [22].

3.5. High-Pressure Extraction

High-pressure extraction, also known as pressurized liquid extraction (PLE), accelerated solvent extraction, enhanced solvent extraction, or pressurized fluid, involves using a high pressure to keep solvents in the liquid state above their usual boiling point. The high pressure maintains solvents in a liquid condition above their boiling point, leading to high lipid solubility, high lipid solute diffusion rates, and high solvent penetration of the matrix [68]. Compared with other procedures, PLE significantly reduces the extraction time and amount of solvent used and has excellent repeatability. High-pressure extraction has been effectively used by researchers to extract an array of bioactive components, such as phenolic compounds, carotenoids, flavonoids, pectin, etc. [27].

3.6. Ultrasound-Assisted Extraction (UAE)

With frequencies between 20 kHz and 100 MHz, ultrasound is a specific kind of sound wave that is not audible to humans. Similar to other waves, it compresses and expands the medium as it travels through it. This process causes a phenomenon known as cavitation, which denotes the formation, expansion, and collapse of bubbles. This event releases a significant amount of energy, which causes cell rupture [30]. The process of applying intense ultrasonic waves for extraction is known as ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE). The technology is renowned for its ease of use and relative affordability when compared with other traditional extraction methods. Moreover, UAE has lower solvent usage, a shorter extraction time, and lower energy consumption. Sonication can also facilitate efficient mixing and quicker energy transfer. UAE is an efficient technique for the extraction of bioactive compounds, such as polyphenols, flavonoids, anthocyanins, etc. from various plant matrices [1][28][29][30].

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/foods12030556

References

  1. Azmir, J.; Zaidul, I.S.M.; Rahman, M.M.; Sharif, K.M.; Mohamed, A.; Sahena, F.; Jahurul, M.H.A.; Ghafoor, K.; Norulaini, N.A.N.; Omar, A.K.M. Techniques for extraction of bioactive compounds from plant materials: A review. J. Food Eng. 2013, 117, 426–436.
  2. Cujic, N.; Savikin, K.; Jankovic, T.; Pljevljakusic, D.; Zdunic, G.; Ibric, S. Optimization of polyphenols extraction from dried chokeberry using maceration as traditional technique. Food Chem. 2016, 194, 135–142.
  3. Masi, E.; Taiti, C.; Heimler, D.; Vignolini, P.; Romani, A.; Mancuso, S. PTR-TOF-MS and HPLC analysis in the characterization of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) from Italy and Iran. Food Chem. 2016, 192, 75–81.
  4. Naviglio, D.; Formato, A.; Vitulano, M.; Cozzolino, I.; Ferrara, L.; Zanoelo, E.F.; Gallo, M. Comparison Between the Kinetics of Conventional Maceration and A Cyclic Pressurization Extraction Process for the Production of Lemon Liqueur Using A Numerical Model. J. Food Process Eng. 2017, 40, e12350.
  5. Rathore, S.K.; Bhatt, S.; Dhyani, S.; Jain, A. Preliminary phytochemical screening of medicinal plant Ziziphus mauritiana Lam. fruits. Int. J. Curr. Pharm. Res. 2012, 4, 160–162.
  6. Leela, C.; Shashank, B.; Suresh, D. Phytochemical screening of secondary metabolites of euphorbia Neriifolia linn. Glob. J. Res. Med. Plants Indig. Med. 2013, 2, 292.
  7. Tandon, S.; Rane, S. Decoction and Hot Continuous Extraction Techniques. In Extraction Technologies for Medicinal and Aromatic Plants; Handa, S.S., Khanuja, S.P.S., Longo, G., Rakesh, D.D., Eds.; ICS-UNIDO: Trieste, Italy, 2008; Volume 93.
  8. Kaneria, M.; Kanani, B.; Chanda, S. Assessment of effect of hydroalcoholic and decoction methods on extraction of antioxidants from selected Indian medicinal plants. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Biomed. 2012, 2, 195–202.
  9. Rijo, P.; Falé, P.L.; Serralheiro, M.L.; Simões, M.F.; Gomes, A.; Reis, C. Optimization of medicinal plant extraction methods and their encapsulation through extrusion technology. Measurement 2014, 58, 249–255.
  10. Sagar, N.A.; Pareek, S.; Sharma, S.; Yahia, E.M.; Lobo, M.G. Fruit and Vegetable Waste: Bioactive Compounds, Their Extraction, and Possible Utilization. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2018, 17, 512–531.
  11. Garcia-Salas, P.; Morales-Soto, A.; Segura-Carretero, A.; Fernandez-Gutierrez, A. Phenolic-compound-extraction systems for fruit and vegetable samples. Molecules 2010, 15, 8813–8826.
  12. Aliboudhar, H.; Tigrine-Kordjani, N. Effect of extraction technique on the content and antioxidant activity of crude extract of Anacyclus clavatus flowers and their essential oil composition. Nat. Prod. Res. 2014, 28, 2140–2149.
  13. Luque de Castro, M.D.; Priego-Capote, F. Soxhlet extraction: Past and present panacea. J. Chromatogr. A 2010, 1217, 2383–2389.
  14. Alara, O.R.; Abdurahman, N.H.; Ukaegbu, C. Soxhlet extraction of phenolic compounds from Vernonia cinerea leaves and its antioxidant activity. J. Appl. Res. Med. Aromat. Plants 2018, 11, 12–17.
  15. Kumar, P. Effect of temperature and time intervals on the solvent extraction of essential oil from azadirachta indica (neem) leaf powder by using soxhlet extraction method. World J. Pharm. Res. 2018, 8, 939–946.
  16. Feng, C.H.; García-Martín, J.F.; Broncano Lavado, M.; López-Barrera, M.d.C.; Álvarez-Mateos, P. Evaluation of different solvents on flavonoids extraction efficiency from sweet oranges and ripe and immature Seville oranges. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 55, 3123–3134.
  17. Da Silva, R.P.; Rocha-Santos, T.A.; Duarte, A.C. Supercritical fluid extraction of bioactive compounds. Trends Anal. Chem. 2016, 76, 40–51.
  18. Zhang, H.-F.; Yang, X.-H.; Wang, Y. Microwave assisted extraction of secondary metabolites from plants: Current status and future directions. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2011, 22, 672–688.
  19. Sridhar, A.; Ponnuchamy, M.; Kumar, P.S.; Kapoor, A.; Vo, D.N.; Prabhakar, S. Techniques and modeling of polyphenol extraction from food: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2021, 19, 3409–3443.
  20. Gligor, O.; Mocan, A.; Moldovan, C.; Locatelli, M.; Crișan, G.; Ferreira, I.C.F.R. Enzyme-assisted extractions of polyphenols—A comprehensive review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 88, 302–315.
  21. Nadar, S.S.; Rao, P.; Rathod, V.K. Enzyme assisted extraction of biomolecules as an approach to novel extraction technology: A review. Food Res. Int. 2018, 108, 309–330.
  22. Yan, L.G.; He, L.; Xi, J. High intensity pulsed electric field as an innovative technique for extraction of bioactive compounds—A review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2017, 57, 2877–2888.
  23. Redondo, D.; Venturini, M.E.; Luengo, E.; Raso, J.; Arias, E. Pulsed electric fields as a green technology for the extraction of bioactive compounds from thinned peach by-products. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2018, 45, 335–343.
  24. El Kantar, S.; Boussetta, N.; Lebovka, N.; Foucart, F.; Rajha, H.N.; Maroun, R.G.; Louka, N.; Vorobiev, E. Pulsed electric field treatment of citrus fruits: Improvement of juice and polyphenols extraction. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2018, 46, 153–161.
  25. Rajha, H.N.; Boussetta, N.; Louka, N.; Maroun, R.G.; Vorobiev, E. A comparative study of physical pretreatments for the extraction of polyphenols and proteins from vine shoots. Food Res. Int. 2014, 65, 462–468.
  26. Medina-Meza, I.G.; Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V. Assisted extraction of bioactive compounds from plum and grape peels by ultrasonics and pulsed electric fields. J. Food Eng. 2015, 166, 268–275.
  27. Khan, S.A.; Aslam, R.; Makroo, H.A. High pressure extraction and its application in the extraction of bio-active compounds: A review. J. Food Process Eng. 2019, 42, e12896.
  28. Wen, C.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, H.; Dzah, C.S.; Zandile, M.; Duan, Y.; Ma, H.; Luo, X. Advances in ultrasound assisted extraction of bioactive compounds from cash crops–A review. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2018, 48, 538–549.
  29. Kumar, K.; Srivastav, S.; Sharanagat, V.S. Ultrasound assisted extraction (UAE) of bioactive compounds from fruit and vegetable processing by-products: A review. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2021, 70, 105325.
  30. Vilkhu, K.; Mawson, R.; Simons, L.; Bates, D. Applications and opportunities for ultrasound assisted extraction in the food industry—A review. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2008, 9, 161–169.
  31. Zhang, Q.-W.; Lin, L.-G.; Ye, W.-C. Techniques for extraction and isolation of natural products: A comprehensive review. Chin. Med. 2018, 13, 1–26.
  32. Azwanida. A Review on the Extraction Methods Use in Medicinal Plants, Principle, Strength and Limitation. Med. & Arom. Plants 2015, 4, 196.
  33. Mena-García, A.; Ruiz-Matute, A.I.; Soria, A.C.; Sanz, M.L. Green techniques for extraction of bioactive carbohydrates. TrAC, Trends Anal. Chem. 2019, 119, 115612.
  34. Maza, M.; Álvarez, I.; Raso, J. Thermal and Non-Thermal Physical Methods for Improving Polyphenol Extraction in Red Winemaking. Beverages 2019, 5, 47.
  35. Uwineza, P.A.; Waskiewicz, A. Recent Advances in Supercritical Fluid Extraction of Natural Bioactive Compounds from Natural Plant Materials. Molecules 2020, 25, 3847.
  36. Carrara, V.; Garcia, V.; Faiões, V.; Cunha-Júnior, E.; Torres-Santos, E.; Cortez, D. Supercritical fluid extraction of pyrrolidine alkaloid from leaves of Piper amalago L. Evid. -Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2017, 2017, 7401748.
  37. İçen, H.; Gürü, M. Effect of ethanol content on supercritical carbon dioxide extraction of caffeine from tea stalk and fiber wastes. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2010, 55, 156–160.
  38. Ellington, E.; Bastida, J.; Viladomat, F.; Codina, C. Supercritical carbon dioxide extraction of colchicine and related alkaloids from seeds of Colchicum autumnale L. Phytochem. Anal. Int. J. Plant Chem. Biochem. Tech. 2003, 14, 164–169.
  39. Falcão, M.A.; Scopel, R.; Almeida, R.N.; do Espirito Santo, A.T.; Franceschini, G.; Garcez, J.J.; Vargas, R.M.; Cassel, E. Supercritical fluid extraction of vinblastine from Catharanthus roseus. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2017, 129, 9–15.
  40. Conde-Hernández, L.A.; Espinosa-Victoria, J.R.; Guerrero-Beltrán, J.Á. Supercritical extraction of essential oils of Piper auritum and Porophyllum ruderale. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2017, 127, 97–102.
  41. Favareto, R.; Teixeira, M.B.; Soares, F.A.L.; Belisário, C.M.; Corazza, M.L.; Cardozo-Filho, L. Study of the supercritical extraction of Pterodon fruits (Fabaceae). J. Supercrit. Fluids 2017, 128, 159–165.
  42. Ouédraogo, J.C.W.; Dicko, C.; Kini, F.B.; Bonzi-Coulibaly, Y.L.; Dey, E.S. Enhanced extraction of flavonoids from Odontonema strictum leaves with antioxidant activity using supercritical carbon dioxide fluid combined with ethanol. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2018, 131, 66–71.
  43. Pimentel-Moral, S.; Borrás-Linares, I.; Lozano-Sánchez, J.; Arráez-Román, D.; Martínez-Férez, A.; Segura-Carretero, A. Supercritical CO2 extraction of bioactive compounds from Hibiscus sabdariffa. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2019, 147, 213–221.
  44. Vasudev, H.; Singh, G.; Bansal, A.; Vardhan, S.; Thakur, L. Microwave heating and its applications in surface engineering: A review. Mater. Res. Express 2019, 6, 102001.
  45. Sun, J.; Wang, W.; Yue, Q. Review on Microwave-Matter Interaction Fundamentals and Efficient Microwave-Associated Heating Strategies. Materials 2016, 9, 231.
  46. Ekezie, F.-G.C.; Sun, D.-W.; Cheng, J.-H. Acceleration of microwave-assisted extraction processes of food components by integrating technologies and applying emerging solvents: A review of latest developments. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 67, 160–172.
  47. Baydar, N.G.; Özkan, G.; Yaşar, S. Evaluation of the antiradical and antioxidant potential of grape extracts. Food Control 2007, 18, 1131–1136.
  48. Rostagno, M.A.; Palma, M.; Barroso, C.G. Microwave assisted extraction of soy isoflavones. Anal. Chim. Acta 2007, 588, 274–282.
  49. Chen, Y.; Xie, M.-Y.; Gong, X.-F. Microwave-assisted extraction used for the isolation of total triterpenoid saponins from Ganoderma atrum. J. Food Eng. 2007, 81, 162–170.
  50. Raman, G.; Gaikar, V.G. Microwave-assisted extraction of piperine from Piper nigrum. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2002, 41, 2521–2528.
  51. Kiss, G.A.C.; Forgacs, E.; Cserháti, T.; Mota, T.; Morais, H.; Ramos, A. Optimisation of the microwave-assisted extraction of pigments from paprika (Capsicum annuum L.) powders. J. Chromatogr. A 2000, 889, 41–49.
  52. Sánchez-Ávila, N.; Priego-Capote, F.; Ruiz-Jiménez, J.; de Castro, M.L. Fast and selective determination of triterpenic compounds in olive leaves by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry with multiple reaction monitoring after microwave-assisted extraction. Talanta 2009, 78, 40–48.
  53. Srinivas, Y.; Mathew, S.M.; Kothakota, A.; Sagarika, N.; Pandiselvam, R. Microwave assisted fluidized bed drying of nutmeg mace for essential oil enriched extracts: An assessment of drying kinetics, process optimization and quality. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2020, 66, 102541.
  54. Sagarika, N.; Prince, M.; Kothakota, A.; Pandiselvam, R.; Sreeja, R.; Mathew, S.M. Characterization and optimization of microwave assisted process for extraction of nutmeg (Myristica fragrans Houtt.) mace essential oil. J. Essent. Oil Bear. Plants 2018, 21, 895–904.
  55. Lal, A.N.; Prince, M.; Kothakota, A.; Pandiselvam, R.; Thirumdas, R.; Mahanti, N.K.; Sreeja, R. Pulsed electric field combined with microwave-assisted extraction of pectin polysaccharide from jackfruit waste. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2021, 74, 102844.
  56. Danalache, F.; Mata, P.; Alves, V.D.; Moldão-Martins, M. Enzyme-assisted extraction of fruit juices. In Fruit Juices; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; pp. 183–200.
  57. Stambuk, P.; Tomaskovic, D.; Tomaz, I.; Maslov, L.; Stupic, D.; Karoglan Kontic, J. Application of pectinases for recovery of grape seeds phenolics. 3 Biotech 2016, 6, 224.
  58. Huynh, N.T.; Smagghe, G.; Gonzales, G.B.; Van Camp, J.; Raes, K. Enzyme-assisted extraction enhancing the phenolic release from cauliflower (Brassica oleracea L. var. botrytis) outer leaves. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 7468–7476.
  59. Paolucci-Jeanjean, D.; Belleville, M.-P.; Zakhia, N.; Rios, G.M. Kinetics of cassava starch hydrolysis with Termamyl® enzyme. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2000, 68, 71–77.
  60. Dal Magro, L.; Dalagnol, L.M.G.; Manfroi, V.; Hertz, P.F.; Klein, M.P.; Rodrigues, R.C. Synergistic effects of Pectinex Ultra Clear and Lallzyme Beta on yield and bioactive compounds extraction of Concord grape juice. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 72, 157–165.
  61. Swer, T.L.; Chauhan, K.; Paul, P.K.; Mukhim, C. Evaluation of enzyme treatment conditions on extraction of anthocyanins from Prunus nepalensis L. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2016, 92, 867–871.
  62. Pinelo, M.; Zornoza, B.; Meyer, A.S. Selective release of phenols from apple skin: Mass transfer kinetics during solvent and enzyme-assisted extraction. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2008, 63, 620–627.
  63. Manasa, D.; Srinivas, P.; Sowbhagya, H. Enzyme-assisted extraction of bioactive compounds from ginger (Zingiber officinale Roscoe). Food Chem. 2013, 139, 509–514.
  64. Benucci, I.; Segade, S.R.; Cerreti, M.; Giacosa, S.; Paissoni, M.A.; Liburdi, K.; Bautista-Ortín, A.B.; Gómez-Plaza, E.; Gerbi, V.; Esti, M. Application of enzyme preparations for extraction of berry skin phenolics in withered winegrapes. Food Chem. 2017, 237, 756–765.
  65. Hardouin, K.; Bedoux, G.; Burlot, A.-S.; Donnay-Moreno, C.; Bergé, J.-P.; Nyvall-Collén, P.; Bourgougnon, N. Enzyme-assisted extraction (EAE) for the production of antiviral and antioxidant extracts from the green seaweed Ulva armoricana (Ulvales, Ulvophyceae). Algal Res. 2016, 16, 233–239.
  66. Teixeira, C.B.; Macedo, G.A.; Macedo, J.A.; da Silva, L.H.M.; Rodrigues, A.M.D.C. Simultaneous extraction of oil and antioxidant compounds from oil palm fruit (Elaeis guineensis) by an aqueous enzymatic process. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 129, 575–581.
  67. Niu, D.; Zeng, X.A.; Ren, E.F.; Xu, F.Y.; Li, J.; Wang, M.S.; Wang, R. Review of the application of pulsed electric fields (PEF) technology for food processing in China. Food Res. Int. 2020, 137, 109715.
  68. Huang, H.-W.; Hsu, C.-P.; Yang, B.B.; Wang, C.-Y. Advances in the extraction of natural ingredients by high pressure extraction technology. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2013, 33, 54–62.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback