PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 1, 20260 citationsOpen Access

Deep eutectic solvent-based ultrasonic assisted extraction of polysaccharides and antioxidants from Astragalus hamosus L. seedpod

RTReza TabarakiFFFariba Fatahi

Key Points

  • The research aims to evaluate the efficiency of different solvents and extraction techniques for polysaccharides and antioxidants from Astragalus hamosus seedpods.
  • Comparison of twenty solvents and four extraction techniques
  • Utilization of choline chloride-urea as a deep eutectic solvent
  • Optimization of extraction variables using response surface methodology and Box-Behnken design
  • Assessment of antioxidant capacity through six different assays
  • Ultrasonic-assisted extraction provided the highest efficiency
  • Extraction yield reached 44.5%, with total carbohydrate content at 2.90 mgGlu/gdw
  • Major monosaccharides identified include rhamnose, mannose, and galactose in specific molar ratios
  • Robust antioxidant capacity indicated by various assays

Abstract

In this study, the efficiency of various solvents and techniques was compared for the extraction of polysaccharides and antioxidants from Astragalus hamosus. Among twenty solvents and four extraction techniques, ultrasonic-assisted extraction using choline chloride-urea (a deep eutectic solvent, DES) demonstrated the best performance. Extraction variables were optimized by the response surface methodology (RSM), and Box-Behnken design (BBD). Extraction yield and total carbohydrate content (TCC) were 44.5% and 2.90 mgGlu/gdw, respectively. Rhamnose, mannose and galactose (molar ratio: 0.34:1.18:1.0) were major monosaccharides in the extracted polysaccharides. Six antioxidant assays—total phenolic content (TPC), total flavonoid content (TFC), DPPH assay, ferric-reducing antioxidant power (FRAP), trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEAC), and reducing power assay (RPA)—were used to evaluate antioxidant capacity. Additionally, different extraction methods, including ultrasonic-assisted, microwave-assisted, maceration, and Soxhlet extractions were compared.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Tabaraki et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69a3d8caec16d51705d2ff4ahttps://doi.org/10.57647/tpr.2025.0903.17
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper