Next Article in Journal
Screening and Application of Chitin Synthase Inhibitors
Next Article in Special Issue
Extraction of Anthocyanins from Red Raspberry for Natural Food Colorants Development: Processes Optimization and In Vitro Bioactivity
Previous Article in Journal
Numerical Simulations of Molten Breakup Behaviors of a de Laval-Type Nozzle, and the Effects of Atomization Parameters on Particle Size Distribution
Previous Article in Special Issue
Mathematical Model for the Removal of Essential Oil Constituents during Steam Distillation Extraction
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Processes
Volume 8
Issue 9
10.3390/pr8091028
processes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Subcritical Water Extraction of Epigallocatechin Gallate from Camellia sinensis and Optimization Study Using Response Surface Methodology

by
Nguyen Tuan Hiep
1,*,
Hoang Thanh Duong
1,
Dang Tuan Anh
1,
Nguyen Hoai Nguyen
2,
Do Quang Thai
1,
Do Thi Thuy Linh
1,
Vu Thi Huong Anh
1 and
Nguyen Minh Khoi
1,*
1
National Institute of Medicinal Materials, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam
2
Faculty of Biotechnology, Ho Chi Minh City Open University, Ho Chi Minh City 700000, Vietnam
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Processes 2020, 8(9), 1028; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8091028
Submission received: 27 July 2020 / Revised: 14 August 2020 / Accepted: 19 August 2020 / Published: 22 August 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Supercritical Fluid Extraction)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background: Camellia sinensis is a plant whose leaves and buds are used to produce tea. With many medicinal activities already found, green tea has been consumed widely in the world. Methods: The subcritical water extraction (SWE) of epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) from green tea leaves and the effect of the different extraction conditions are investigated by response surface methodology (RSM). Furthermore, the model of the extraction processes is reviewed for application at the industrial scale. Results: Based on the RSM data, the maximum yield of extraction is determined via optimizing different parameters of the extraction processes. Optimal conditions are as follows: extraction time of 6 min, extraction temperature at 120 °C, and a sample/solvent ratio of 1:40 g/mL. Under such conditions, the best yield of EGCG is 4.665%. Moreover, the model of the extraction processes, which can be utilized for industry scale purpose, indicates a good correlation with the experimental data. Conclusions: Overall, SWE is competent and environmental-friendly, and it is also a highly selective and fast method. SWE is a promising method to take the place of organic solvents used in the extraction of weak polar and even non-polar natural compounds. Further studies on the scale-up of the extraction processes are ongoing.

1. Introduction

Camellia sinensis is a perennial green tree that naturally grows in Asia. Nowadays, it is widely cultivated throughout the world, mainly in tropical and subtropical regions. The leaves of Camellia sinensis have been used and named as green tea, a popular beverage in the world. In addition, green tea has been found to exhibit various medicinal activities such as anti-cancer, anti-cardiovascular diseases, anti-diabetes, and anti-aging [1]. Polyphenols, especially catechins, are the most crucial components that contribute to the beneficial effects of green tea [2]. Catechins (flavan-3-ols) are natural flavonols originally derived from catechu, which is the liquid extract of Acacia catechu [3]. Epigallocatechin, epicatechin gallate, epicatechin, and epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) are four main catechins found in green tea [4]. Among them, EGCG generally presents with the highest content, which can make up to 15% of the total catechins content. During extraction and storage, EGCG can be degraded, and this degradation was shown to depend on many factors including temperature and duration [4,5]. According to Friedman, the average content of EGCG decreased by 28% after six months of storage [5]. Previous studies have indicated that EGCG undergoes oxidation at temperatures below 44 °C, while epimerization ordinarily exists at higher temperatures [1].
Extraction is the first step to recover the desired natural products from the plant materials. In general, heating [6] and Soxhlet extraction [7] are the most popular traditional techniques for extraction of green tea, which show several disadvantages like time and solvents consumption, tedium, low selectivity, and/or low efficiency [8]. Recently, more modern extraction techniques are being developed for the extraction of bioactive components from Camellia sinensis. Sokmen applied sequential supercritical fluid extraction to isolated catechins from green tea; the highest yield of catechin was 2.9% under the condition of pressure 25 MPa, temperature 60 °C, extraction time 3 h, and ethanol modifier flow rate at 0.5 mL/min [9]. Vahid Ghasemzadeh-Mohammadi proposed microwave-assisted extraction and ultrasonic extraction for the optimal isolation of tea catechins. The microwave-assisted extraction was more efficient in which the best yield of catechin was 6.25% under the conditions of ultrasonic time 7.8 min, microwave power 180 W, and extraction temperature 65 °C [10]. Pressurized liquid extraction was successfully deployed for the extraction of catechin. Four different species of green tea had been experimented with and the optimum condition was found for the extraction of catechin, which had pressure values around 150 bars with a constant temperature of around 75 °C for 60 min [11].
While not a very new extraction technology, SWE offers numerous advantages. It was found to require less solvent volume as well as the time and cost of samples per experiment [12]. Furthermore, the water, which is used as the solvent, has several benefits like a minor impact on the environment and worker’s health as well as easy carrying and storage. In the experiments, the use of heat can drastically change the physical and chemical properties of water. When the temperature is increased, not only do the viscosity and surface tension of water decrease, but the dielectric constant also becomes lower [13]. In particular, the dielectric constant of water drops from 53 to 36.5 when the temperature has risen from 110 °C to 190 °C. This parameter, indicating the polarity of water, has shown to be comparable to organic solvents such as ethanol at ambient temperature [14]. Recently, subcritical water has shown excellent potential as a substitute solvent for the extraction of natural material. They are vanillin and coumarin from vanilla beans and tonka beans [15], caffeine from black tea leaves [16], and asiatic acid and asiaticoside from Centella asiatica [17].
The regular one-factor-at-a-time method in which one factor adjusts at a time while all others are retained steady has several shortcomings, including its more laborious and time-consuming protocol. Response surface methodology (RSM), a statistical experimental design, can be the alternative method to maximize the yield of extraction. RSM consists of mathematical and statistical techniques used to explore a suitable functional interaction between a response of interest and some process variable [18]. When applied with the subcritical water extraction method, optimal extraction procedures can be created to serve the purpose of research as well as for industrial applications [19,20,21].
At present, there were few investigations on the optimization of extraction of EGCG from green tea using SWE technology combined with RSM. Therefore, we reported the potential of the SWE for the extraction of EGCG from green tea. High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) was employed to analyze the EGCG levels. The stability of EGCG is investigated as a function that depends on temperature and extraction time. Based on the response surface methodology (RSM) experimental design, this study determines the optimum conditions for the EGCG extraction process. Moreover, the extraction process was also modeled and evaluated at a larger scale in order to apply to industrial production.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Materials

Green tea (Camellia sinensis) leaves were obtained as a dry sample from Thai Nguyen province, Vietnam. They were grounded and sieved to a particle size of less than 2.5 mm. The sample was stored in the dry environment at ambient temperature. Moisture content (7.75%) was determined before extraction.

2.2. Subcritical Water Extraction (SWE) Procedure

The SWE was performed using an Accelerated Solvent Extractor (ASE) 350 system from Dionex Corporation (Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Two grams of sample were mixed with 4 g of diatomaceous earth and placed in a 100 mL stainless extraction cell. A stainless-steel frit and a cellulose filter (Dionex) were placed at the bottom of the extraction cell to prevent the contamination of the powder from infiltrating into the collection bottle. The extraction cells were arranged in a cell tray and the samples were extracted under certain conditions. After extraction, the obtained extracts were transferred into collection bottles and stored at 4 °C in the refrigerator for further analyses.

2.3. Conventional Water Extraction

Green tea leaves extracts were heated (2 g of grounded green tea leaves, mixed with 40 mL of water (ratio 20 mL:1 g)) at 60 °C for 2 h. The extraction mixture was continuously stirred with a magnetic stirrer. After that, the extraction mixture was cooled and filtered through a filter. The extraction solution was centrifuged at a speed of 4000 rpm for 10 min, and the supernatant was accumulated; the solvent was vaporized under vacuum and stored at 4 °C in the refrigerator for following evaluation [22].

2.4. HPLC Analysis

Here, an HPLC method was applied for catechins (EGCG and GCG) analysis. The HPLC was performed using the Shimadzu SPD-20A system (Shimadzu Co., Ltd., Kyoto, Japan) with C18 column (250 mm × 4.6 mm, 5 µm). A mixture of methanol-0.1% phosphoric acid solution was used as the mobile phase. The elution mode was a binary, high-pressure gradient system, and the elution gradients were: 0–38 min, 25% methanol; 38–40 min, 100% methanol. Other running conditions included the detection wavelength (272 nm), the flow rate (1 mL/min), the injection volume (10 µL), and the column temperature (25 °C).

2.5. Degradation Assays

The stability of catechins (EGCG and GCG) during extraction by SWE system was investigated. Independent experiments applied a series of extraction times (1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 min) and temperatures (60 °C, 80 °C, 100 °C, 120 °C, 140 °C, and 160 °C) with purified water were tested. Therefore, one experimental configuration resulted in 30 conditions for the extraction of EGCG.

2.6. Single-Factor Analysis

Prior to the development of the RSM study, the set of tests was carried out to select the experimental ranges for the independent variables. Three factors which respond to yield include: extraction time (min), extraction temperature (°C), and sample/solvent ratio (g/mL). When optimizing experimental factors, one factor was modified, while other factors were maintained at a specified value.

2.7. RSM Procedure

From the results of the single factor analysis, the three level-three factor Box–Behnken design was used in this study, requiring 17 experiments and five center points shown in Table 1. Multiple regressions explained the behavior of the system to fit a second-order polynomial model as follows:
Y = β 0 + ∑ i = 1 3 β i X i + ∑ i = 1 3 β i i X i 2 + ∑ i = 1 2 ∑ j = 1 3 β i j X i X j
Y is the response function, β 0 is an intercept, and β i , β i i , and β i j are the coefficients of the linear, quadratic, and interactive terms, respectively. Accordingly, X i and X j represent the coded independent variables.
Design-Expert 7.1.6 (Trial Version, State-Ease Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) program package was run to design the experiment and handled the data. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to check the fitness of the model and the statistical significance of the regression coefficients. Last, optimal conditions were counted from the final model and verified by an actual experiment attempt.

2.8. Modeling of the Extraction Process

Extracts of active ingredients from natural products are involved in mass transfer from solid to liquid. The kinetics of the active ingredients are based on two concurrent processes: the rapid part is the washing stage, where the active ingredients in the cell and surface are quickly extracted by direct washing with the solvents; and the slow one is diffusion stage, where remaining active ingredients in the cell are transferred by diffusion from the solid particles to the solvent [23]. The pace of the extraction process depends on these slow steps, and the rate is minimal when transported through the solid matrix.
Based on previous studies [24,25], the steady-state kinetic model leads to a first-order rate equation as shown in Equation (2):
ln ( C ∞ C ∞ − C ) = k t + b
where C∞ is the concentration (mg/10 g) in infinite time (t = ∞), C is the concentration of the extracted ingredients in the solution (mg/10 g) at time t, k is the overall rate constant, and b is an intercept.
When replacing the maximum yield (Ym) in the experiment with C, Equation (2) becomes:
ln ( Y m Y m − Y ) = k t + b
We will use Equation (3) to be suitable with the experimental data, and to obtain values for Ym and k.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Degradation Experimental Design

The effects of extraction time (min) and temperature (°C) on the yield of catechins from green tea leaves were represented in Figure 1. The concentration of catechins increased to the maximum, then decreased with the rise in temperature. More specifically, the maximum content of EGCG was 4.898% under extraction temperature/time conditions of 100 °C/5 min. After that, the efficiency of EGCG extraction was significantly reduced with the temperature ≥140 °C, such as 160 °C (yield = 1.648% at 9 min). This phenomenon was also true for GCG. However, the highest temperature point was 140 °C (yield = 2.492% at 9 min) and the yield decreased when extraction temperature/time reached 160 °C/5 min (yield = 1.798%). These results were in agreement with Sharma’s study which found that degradation of flavonoids could occur at 150 °C or higher temperature [26].
A number of factors such as the solvent type, time of extract, temperature, and the ratio between solvent and sample can affect the flavanol extraction [14]. In this study, the obtained EGCG amount was also found to depend on the extraction duration. As shown in Figure 1a, the extracted EGCG concentration decreased drastically for longer extraction times. This can be seen in a set of experiments at extraction temperature 140 °C; EGCG content reached 3.745% when the extraction time was 1 min, which is higher than the results of two experiments at the time points 5 min and 9 min. This loss of EGCG contents probably occurred due to oxidation, dimerization, and polymerization reaction [27].
In addition to possible degradation, epimerization could be observed simultaneously through the extraction process. Epimers of tea catechins partially become their isomers in particular conditions, such as high temperatures or prolonged storage. The epimerization process probably took place in the high-temperature extract, in which EGCG was converted into GCG [28,29]. The data in Figure 1 indicated that the epimerization would occur over a long time of extraction, which reduced the proportions of EGCG and gradually increased GCG, simultaneously. When the extraction temperature was fixed at 120 °C, the EGCG concentration was dropped from 4.708% to 3.980% while GCG content was rising from 0.543% to 1.778%. EGCG was epimerized more quickly at higher extraction temperatures, so the pattern was repeated; the EGCG decreased while GCG increased. At the 5-min extraction time tests, EGCG was highest at 100 °C (yield = 4.898%), then was reduced to 2.285% at 140 °C. Meanwhile, at the same rising of temperature condition, GCG concentration was improved from 0.292% to 2.527%. However, at temperatures of >140 °C, epimerization rarely happened [30], and the remaining flavanols were destroyed by thermal degradation.
According to these results, the loss of EGCG in the extraction process is influenced by parameters such as temperature, extraction time, and epimerization. These factors will be carefully considered while optimizing the condition for EGCG extraction of green tea leaves.

3.2. Single Factor Analysis

As can be seen in Figure 2a, the influence of temperature (°C) on extraction yield (%) was studied. The temperature was adjusted from 60 °C to 160 °C, while other extraction variables were set as follows: a ratio of sample to water of 1:80 and extraction time of 5 min. The yield of EGCG increased with the temperature up to 100 °C and began to drop off, and the maximum extraction value was 4.898% at 100 °C. This result pointed out that the temperature improved the extraction of EGCG to a positive level, followed by its possible loss, due to the degradation at a higher temperature as shown in Figure 1. The outcome of this experiment can be explained by the fact that the temperature changes the properties of water like solubility, viscosity, and surface tension considerably. For example, the viscosity of water decreases threefold as the temperature rises from 25 °C to 100 °C [31]. All of the changes will stimulate the interaction of water with the compounds and, therefore, boost the yield of extraction [32]. Although the positive influence of higher temperatures on the extraction yield is substantial, this cannot be increased endlessly. When the temperature reaches some point, the degradation and epimerization of tea catechins could take place in thermal procedures and reduce the extraction efficiency.
Similarly, Figure 2b revealed the time extraction (min) effect on the yield of EGCG (%). In this series of experiments, the duration was varied from 1 min to 7 min when other extraction factors were kept at fixed values: a ratio of sample to water of 1:80 and temperature of 100 °C. When the extraction time increases from 1 to 7 min, the yield of the extracted EGCG continuously increases from 4.435 to 4.898% at 5 min, while it is reduced to 4.557% at 7 min because of the degeneration of EGCG caused by prolonged vulnerability at high temperature. In this matter, the yield of extraction increases when the extraction time is lengthened in a specific time range. However, after the equilibrium is reached, the extraction will not be affected by the change of time [33]. Apart from that, because of the unstable structure, EGCG tends to degrade when extending the extraction time [14]. Moreover, additional extraction time not only delays the process, but it also leads to additional energy and, as a result, leads to extra operational costs. Therefore, the extraction time was chosen as 5 min for the following experiments.
In the third experiment, the yield of EGCG extraction (%) by the various ratio of material to water (g/mL) from 1:10 to 1:70 was presented in Figure 2c. The extraction temperature and extraction time were fixed at 100 °C and 5 min, respectively. The extraction yields of EGCG built up from 2.153% to 4.249%, with a step up in the ratio from 1:10 to 1:50. These results match up well to those of Pan et al., [34], who described a boost in the extraction of polyphenolic compounds as the sample to solvent ratio increased. The increase in the ratio of sample to solvent can enlarge the total extraction surface area so the solutes will have higher propensities to move from the matrix to the solvent. However, such an increase in the EGCG content was not detected when increasing the ratio from 1:50 to 1:70 in the present study. Instead, it went to be stable. This might be because of the exhaustion of the content of the extractable compound, where the additional solvent cannot obtain any further EGCG from the sample.
According to the single-parameter study, we adopted an extraction temperature of 80–120 °C, extraction time of 3–7 min, and the ratio of raw material to water 1:40–1:60 for RSM experiments.

3.3. Optimization of Extraction Using RSM

BBD model was used to enhance the three variables of extraction: extraction time, extraction temperature, and the ratio of sample to water. Table 2 showed the results of 17 experiments under particular conditions influencing the performance of EGCG extract. From the table, EGCG extraction varied from 3.437% to 4.651%. Data from the BBD model were carried out for the regression analysis in which the second-order polynomial model was presented to reveal the relationship between extraction efficiency and three aspects.
The analysis of ANOVA results in Table 3 indicated that the terms of the model were significant with p-values < 0.05. The lack of fit testing was utilized to find out the adequacy of the fit. With p-value > 0.05, the model was able to fit sufficiently with the experimental data. The R2 of 0.9138 reasonably settled with the adjusted R2 of 0.8029 (both > 0.8), which showed that the model had a solid correlation between experimental data and the data predicted by the model. The high reliability of the experiments was likewise reflected in the low CV value of 5.29. Table 2 also showed that the linear coefficients (X1) and quadratic coefficients (X1X3; X2X3; X12) were statistically significant with p-values < 0.05. Therefore, X1, X12, X1X3, and X2X3 were variables that affected EGCG extraction efficiency.
The effects of independent variables and their synergy with the yield of the EGCG extract was characterized by 3D response surface and 2D contour line in Figure 3. Visually, extraction efficiency increased proportionally with condition specifications. However, as these conditions exceeded the optimal point (120 °C, 6 min, 1:40 g/mL), the EGCG content obtained stops increasing, and eventually began to decrease. The condition collected from the software was then employed to perform actual extraction for verification. After a batch of tripled experiments, the efficiency of EGCG extraction was 4.665% ± 0.196%, which was closed to the prediction of the model (4.617%). Given the results, the predictability of the model for the extraction of EGCG from Camellia sinensis was confirmed in the experimental condition.
To assess the data fitting, a probability distribution histogram model could be used for the residuals to evaluate the contrast between the predicted and empirical values. Figure 4a showed the residuals in a straight line to confirm the normal distribution model and the analytical hypothesis. To check if the order of observations affects the results, the residuals versus experimental runs were performed for analysis of experimental data. From Figure 4b, all data points were within the allowed limits. Figure 4c showed the relationship between the actual and predicted values of EGCG yield, which demonstrated that the model was sufficient due to the small residuals and the matter the residuals are closely related to the diagonal line.
The comparison of EGCG yield and extraction time of this study with other reported extraction methods are shown in Table 4. Kwang Jin Lee extracted EGCG from green tea using the dipping method—specifically, using water as solvent for 60 min. The resulting concentration of EGCG was found to be 0.90% [35]. Sena Saklar Ayyildiz reported that ground green tea was treated with hot water and with ultrasonic processors for 52.49 min, by which 4.81% EGCG was obtained [36]. Using microwave-assisted water extraction proposed by Ezzohra Nkhili, EGCG content in the extracts was 5.84% under the condition of temperature 100 °C and 20 min extraction duration [37]. From Table 4, EGCG yield by SWE is not much different from other reported research values, while SWE is also the most expeditious and cheapest method. These facts indicate that SWE is not only “green” chemistry but is also a valuable and competent method.
In our experiments, SWE extraction (120 °C, 6 min, 1:40 g/mL) extracted higher amounts of EGCG from green tea (4.665%) than hot water extraction (4.090%). Overall, the contents of EGCG obtained using SWE extraction were higher than those obtained using conventional water extraction. Additionally, the time used for SWE extraction was much shorter (6 min) than that used for conventional solvent extraction (120 min). It is confirmed that increased extraction time leads to the degradation of bioactive molecules of tea due to fractional epimerization of EGCG into GCG [38].
Conventional solvent extractions with organic solvents and Shoxlet have been commonly operated for the isolation of bioactive compounds from plant material, especially in green tea [39]. In most cases, the conventional system for tea extraction is an old, time- and solvent-consuming, and strenuous process with limited yield efficiency. All these characteristics are main reasons to explain why their application in the industry or studies including the analysis of numerous samples is not a simple matter. In addition to these properties, environmental acceptability of green extraction techniques is gaining attention over traditional extraction techniques for isolation of natural products, which reduces chances of environmental hazards. SWE is one of the newer methods for tea extraction in noxious organic solvent-free attempts [40]. In some cases, SWE can reduce extraction times by up to 50% when compared with conventional extraction methods [41,42,43]. Furthermore, subcritical water is an applicable solvent for a variety of extraction, and a sustainable alternate for toxic organic solvents [44].

3.4. Modeling Extraction Process

As presented in Figure 5 and Table 5, the EGCG yield enhanced considerably with the extraction time increasing from 1 to 3 min, while the yield was not quite altered after 3 min. This is probably for reaching a dynamic equilibrium between internal and external diffusion in 3 min to 5 min. The R2 value (R2 = 0.8358) suggests that the model seems to be valid in illustrating experimental data (Figure 6), indicating that the model might be reasonable for analyzing the extraction processes under the condition that the product was not decomposed.

4. Conclusions

The application of SWE is a reasonable replacement for the conventional extraction methods, due to the facts that quicker extraction time needs to be utilized for cost-effective extraction and the commonly available water is used as an extraction solvent in this technology, and because of the chance to directly use acquired extracts as semi-products or products for food or pharmaceutical industry without an additional process of separation or purification. Therefore, in this study, SWE was used for the recovery of EGCG from Camellia sinensis. Moreover, the response surface methodology was used and verified to be suitable for the optimization of the SWE condition extraction. RSM results validate that optimal values of extraction time, extraction temperature, and solvent/solid ratio are, respectively, 6 min, 120 °C, and 40 mL/g. Additionally, EGCG yield reached 4.665% under the above-optimized extraction conditions. The concentration of EGCG in the extracts was determined by HPLC. Moreover, our results confirmed that mathematical modeling of the extraction of EGCG from green tea is possible, yielding a useful tool for process control, even though there remains the problem of the complex interaction of the extraction conditions. This model also the presents potential for analysis of extraction processes on other active ingredients from natural products.
Overall, SWE is not only competent and environmentally friendly, but is also a highly selective and fast method. A main disadvantage of SWE is the high functional pressure, which needs expensive equipment. However, in the case of bioactive compounds such as antioxidants like EGCG, cost should not play a restricting role. Because natural antioxidants could be wanted, food components and expenses are given back by other compensations such as the high purity of extracts and the effectiveness of the technique. Therefore, SWE is a candidate to take the place of organic solvents used in the extraction of weak polar and even non-polar natural compounds. Further studies to set up a cost-efficiency pilot version of commercial equipment and scale-up of the extraction process are ongoing.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.T.H.; formal analysis, D.T.T.L., V.T.H.A., and D.Q.T.; investigation, H.T.D. and D.T.A.; writing—original draft preparation, H.T.D.; writing—review and editing, N.H.N. and N.T.H.; supervision, N.M.K.; project administration, N.M.K. and N.T.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

Accelerated solvent extractor ASE
Analysis of variance ANOVA
Box–Behnken design BBD
Epicatechin EC
Epicatechin gallate ECG
Epigallocatechin EGC
Epigallocatechin gallate EGCG
Gallocatechin gallate GCG
High-performance liquid chromatography HPLC
Subcritical water extraction SWE
Response surface methodology RSM

References

  1. Wang, R.; Zhou, W.; Jiang, X. Reaction kinetics of degradation and epimerization of epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) in aqueous system over a wide temperature range. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2008, 56, 2694–2701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Wang, H.; Provan, G.J.; Helliwell, K. HPLC determination of catechins in tea leaves and tea extracts using relative response factors. Food Chem. 2003, 81, 307–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Zheng, L.T.; Ryu, G.-M.; Kwon, B.-M.; Lee, W.-H.; Suk, K. Anti-inflammatory effects of catechols in lipopolysaccharide-stimulated microglia cells: Inhibition of microglial neurotoxicity. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2008, 588, 106–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Vuong, Q.V.; Golding, J.B.; Nguyen, M.; Roach, P.D. Extraction and isolation of catechins from tea. J. Sep. Sci. 2010, 33, 3415–3428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Friedman, M.; Levin, C.; Lee, S.U.; Kozukue, N. Stability of green tea catechins in commercial tea leaves during storage for 6 months. J. Food Sci. 2009, 74, H47–H51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Vuong, Q.V.; Golding, J.B.; Stathopoulos, C.E.; Nguyen, M.H.; Roach, P.D. Optimizing conditions for the extraction of catechins from green tea using hot water. J. Sep. Sci. 2011, 34, 3099–3106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Chin, F.-S.; Chong, K.-P.; Markus, A.; Wong, N.K. Tea polyphenols and alkaloids content using soxhlet and direct extraction methods. World J. Agric. Sci. 2013, 9, 266–270. [Google Scholar]
  8. Xi, J.; Wang, B. Optimization of ultrahigh-pressure extraction of polyphenolic antioxidants from green tea by response surface methodology. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2013, 6, 2538–2546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sökmen, M.; Demir, E.; Alomar, S.Y. Optimization of sequential supercritical fluid extraction (SFE) of caffeine and catechins from green tea. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2018, 133, 171–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ghasemzadeh-Mohammadi, V.; Zamani, B.; Afsharpour, M.; Mohammadi, A. Extraction of caffeine and catechins using microwave-assisted and ultrasonic extraction from green tea leaves: An optimization study by the IV-optimal design. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 2017, 26, 1281–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Jaiswal, S.G.; Naik, S. Research Article Pressurized Liquid Extraction of Antioxidant Compounds from Green Tea. Am. J. Food Technol. 2017, 12, 358–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Ko, M.-J.; Cheigh, C.-I.; Cho, S.-W.; Chung, M.-S. Subcritical water extraction of flavonol quercetin from onion skin. J. Food Eng. 2011, 102, 327–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Mazaheri, H.; Lee, K.T.; Bhatia, S.; Mohamed, A.R. Subcritical water liquefaction of oil palm fruit press fiber for the production of bio-oil: Effect of catalysts. Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 101, 745–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Ko, M.-J.; Cheigh, C.-I.; Chung, M.-S. Optimization of subcritical water extraction of flavanols from green tea leaves. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 6828–6833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Doctor, N.; Parker, G.; Vang, K.; Smith, M.; Kayan, B.; Yang, Y. Stability and Extraction of Vanillin and Coumarin under Subcritical Water Conditions. Molecules 2020, 25, 1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Shalmashi, A.; Golmohammad, F.; Eikani, M.H. Subcritical water extraction of caffeine from black tea leaf of Iran. J. Food Process Eng. 2008, 31, 330–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kim, W.-J.; Kim, J.; Veriansyah, B.; Kim, J.-D.; Lee, Y.-W.; Oh, S.-G.; Tjandrawinata, R.R. Extraction of bioactive components from Centella asiatica using subcritical water. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2009, 48, 211–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhang, X.; Xu, F.; Gao, Y.; Wu, J.; Sun, Y.; Zeng, X. Optimising the extraction of tea polyphenols, (−)-epigallocatechin gallate and theanine from summer green tea by using response surface methodology. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2012, 47, 2151–2157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zeković, Z.; Vidović, S.; Vladić, J.; Radosavljević, R.; Cvejin, A.; Elgndi, M.A.; Pavlić, B. Optimization of subcritical water extraction of antioxidants from Coriandrum sativum seeds by response surface methodology. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2014, 95, 560–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Yang, L.; Qu, H.; Mao, G.; Zhao, T.; Li, F.; Zhu, B.; Zhang, B.; Wu, X. Optimization of subcritical water extraction of polysaccharides from Grifola frondosa using response surface methodology. Pharmacogn. Mag. 2013, 9, 120. [Google Scholar]
  21. Tian, Y.; Wang, Y.; Ma, Y.; Zhu, P.; He, J.; Lei, J. Optimization of subcritical water extraction of resveratrol from grape seeds by response surface methodology. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Bharadwaz, A.; Bhattacharjee, C. Extraction of polyphenols from dried tea leaves. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 2012, 3, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  23. Xi, J.; He, L.; Yan, L. Kinetic modeling of pressure-assisted solvent extraction of polyphenols from green tea in comparison with the conventional extraction. Food Chem. 2015, 166, 287–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Poojary, M.M.; Passamonti, P. Extraction of lycopene from tomato processing waste: Kinetics and modelling. Food Chem. 2015, 173, 943–950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Spiro, M.; Siddique, S. Kinetics and equilibria of tea infusion: Kinetics of extraction of theaflavins, thearubigins and caffeine from Koonsong broken pekoe. J. Sci. Food Agric. 1981, 32, 1135–1139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Sharma, K.; Ko, E.Y.; Assefa, A.D.; Ha, S.; Nile, S.H.; Lee, E.T.; Park, S.W. Temperature-dependent studies on the total phenolics, flavonoids, antioxidant activities, and sugar content in six onion varieties. J. Food Drug Anal. 2015, 23, 243–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Hatano, T.; Hori, M.; Kusuda, M.; Ohyabu, T.; Ito, H.; Yoshida, T. Characterization of the oxidation products of (-)-epigallocatechin gallate, a bioactive tea polyphenol, on incubation in neutral solution. Heterocycles 2004, 63, 1547–1554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Liang, H.; Liang, Y.; Dong, J.; Lu, J. Tea extraction methods in relation to control of epimerization of tea catechins. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2007, 87, 1748–1752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Suematsu, S. Studies on Preservation of Constituents in Canned Drinks. Part V: A New Extraction Procedure for Determination of Caffeine and Catechins in Green Tea. J. Jpn. Soc. Food Sci. Technol. 1995, 42, 419–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Kothe, L.; Zimmermann, B.F.; Galensa, R.J.F.C. Temperature influences epimerization and composition of flavanol monomers, dimers and trimers during cocoa bean roasting. Food Chem. 2013, 141, 3656–3663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Korson, L.; Drost-Hansen, W.; Millero, F.J. Viscosity of water at various temperatures. J. Phys. Chem. 1969, 73, 34–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Priego-Capote, F. Accelerated liquid extraction. Natural Product Extraction. 2013, pp. 157–195. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1039/9781849737579-00157 (accessed on 25 May 2020).
  33. Zhang, Q.-W.; Lin, L.-G.; Ye, W.-C. Techniques for extraction and isolation of natural products: A comprehensive review. Chin. Med. 2018, 13, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Pan, X.; Niu, G.; Liu, H. Microwave-assisted extraction of tea polyphenols and tea caffeine from green tea leaves. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2003, 42, 129–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Lee, K.J.; Lee, S.H. Extraction behavior of caffeine and EGCG from green and black tea. Biotechnol. Bioprocess Eng. 2008, 13, 646–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ayyildiz, S.S.; Karadeniz, B.; Sagcan, N.; Bahar, B.; Us, A.A.; Alasalvar, C. Optimizing the extraction parameters of epigallocatechin gallate using conventional hot water and ultrasound assisted methods from green tea. Food Bioprod. Process. 2018, 111, 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Nkhili, E.; Tomao, V.; El Hajji, H.; El Boustani, E.S.; Chemat, F.; Dangles, O. Microwave-assisted water extraction of green tea polyphenols. Phytochem. Anal. 2009, 20, 408–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Perva-Uzunalić, A.; Škerget, M.; Knez, Ž.; Weinreich, B.; Otto, F.; Grüner, S. Extraction of active ingredients from green tea (Camellia sinensis): Extraction efficiency of major catechins and caffeine. Food Chem. 2006, 96, 597–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chang, C.J.; Chiu, K.-L.; Chen, Y.-L.; Chang, C.-Y. Separation of catechins from green tea using carbon dioxide extraction. Food Chem. 2000, 68, 109–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Banerjee, S.; Chatterjee, J. Efficient extraction strategies of tea (Camellia sinensis) biomolecules. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 52, 3158–3168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Gamiz-Gracia, L.; De Castro, M.L. Continuous subcritical water extraction of medicinal plant essential oil: Comparison with conventional techniques. Talanta 2000, 51, 1179–1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Kubatova, A.; Miller, D.J.; Hawthorne, S.B. Comparison of subcritical water and organic solvents for extracting kava lactones from kava root. J. Chromatogr. A 2001, 923, 187–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Giray, E.S.; Kırıcı, S.; Kaya, D.A.; Türk, M.; Sönmez, Ö.; Inan, M. Comparing the effect of sub-critical water extraction with conventional extraction methods on the chemical composition of Lavandula stoechas. Talanta 2008, 74, 930–935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Carr, A.G.; Mammucari, R.; Foster, N. A review of subcritical water as a solvent and its utilisation for the processing of hydrophobic organic compounds. Chem. Eng. J. 2011, 172, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Processes 08 01028 g001 550
Figure 1. Effects of extraction temperature and duration of the SWE method on the yield of (a) EGCG and (b) GCG.
Figure 1. Effects of extraction temperature and duration of the SWE method on the yield of (a) EGCG and (b) GCG.
Processes 08 01028 g001
Processes 08 01028 g002 550
Figure 2. Effects of extraction factors on yield of EGCG extraction: (a) temperature; (b) time; (c) sample/solvent ratio.
Figure 2. Effects of extraction factors on yield of EGCG extraction: (a) temperature; (b) time; (c) sample/solvent ratio.
Processes 08 01028 g002
Processes 08 01028 g003a 550Processes 08 01028 g003b 550
Figure 3. Response surface and contour plots for factors influencing yields of EGCG extraction include (a) temperature and ratio; (b) temperature and time; and (c) ratio and time.
Figure 3. Response surface and contour plots for factors influencing yields of EGCG extraction include (a) temperature and ratio; (b) temperature and time; and (c) ratio and time.
Processes 08 01028 g003aProcesses 08 01028 g003b
Processes 08 01028 g004a 550Processes 08 01028 g004b 550
Figure 4. (a) The normal probability plot of residuals, (b) plot of internally studentized residuals versus experimental runs, and (c) plot of predicted and actual values.
Figure 4. (a) The normal probability plot of residuals, (b) plot of internally studentized residuals versus experimental runs, and (c) plot of predicted and actual values.
Processes 08 01028 g004aProcesses 08 01028 g004b
Processes 08 01028 g005 550
Figure 5. Extraction yield (mg/g) per time.
Figure 5. Extraction yield (mg/g) per time.
Processes 08 01028 g005
Processes 08 01028 g006 550
Figure 6. ln ( Y m Y m − Y ) –T data from EGCG extraction at different condition.
Figure 6. ln ( Y m Y m − Y ) –T data from EGCG extraction at different condition.
Processes 08 01028 g006
Table
Table 1. Independent process variables, range, and levels used for Box–Behnken design.
Table 1. Independent process variables, range, and levels used for Box–Behnken design.
Independent Variable Factors Coded Levels
X −1 0 +1
Extraction temperature (°C) X1 80 100 120
Extraction time (min) X2 3 5 7
Solvent/sample ratio (mL/g) X3 40 50 60
Table
Table 2. Experimental results for the response variables, temperature, ratio, and time.
Table 2. Experimental results for the response variables, temperature, ratio, and time.
Std Run Factor 1A: Temperature Factor 2B: Ratio Factor 3C: Time Response 1: Yield
2 1 120 40 5 4.432
8 2 120 50 7 3.755
14 3 100 50 5 4.438
3 4 80 60 5 3.714
12 5 100 60 7 4.009
1 6 80 40 5 3.814
16 7 100 50 5 4.319
11 8 100 40 7 4.651
6 9 120 50 3 4.423
10 10 100 60 3 4.336
15 11 100 50 5 4.182
13 12 100 50 5 4.651
5 13 80 50 3 3.437
4 14 120 60 5 3.889
17 15 100 50 5 4.564
7 16 80 50 7 3.866
9 17 100 40 3 4.058
Table 3. ANOVA for quadratic model results. (A) Response 1: Yield; (B) Fit Statistics.
Table
(A)
(A)
Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-Value p-Value
Model 1.93 9 0.2146 8.24 0.0055 significant
A- Temperature 0.3520 1 0.3520 13.52 0.0079
B- Ratio 0.1243 1 0.1243 4.77 0.0652
C- Time 0.0001 1 0.0001 0.0035 0.9545
AB 0.0469 1 0.0469 1.80 0.2216
AC 0.3009 1 0.3009 11.56 0.0115
BC 0.2116 1 0.2216 8.13 0.0247
A2 0.7773 1 0.7773 29.85 0.0009
B2 0.0056 1 0.0056 0.2143 0.657
C2 0.0721 1 0.0721 2.77 0.1399
Residual 0.1823 7 0.0260
Lack of Fit 0.0416 3 0.0139 0.3940 0.7649 Not significant
Pure Error 0.1407 4 0.0352
Cor Total 2.11 16
Table
(B)
(B)
Std. Dev. 0.1614 R2 0.9138
Mean 4.15 Adjusted R2 0.8029
C.V. % 3.89 Predicted R2 0.5814
Adeq Precision 10.0086
Table
Table 4. Comparison of time and EGCG yield with reported extraction methods.
Table 4. Comparison of time and EGCG yield with reported extraction methods.
Extraction Method Extraction Time (min) EGCG Yield (%) Reference
Leaching extraction 60 0.09 Lee, K.J, et al., 2008
Ultrasonic extraction 52.49 4.81 Ayyildiz, S.S, et al., 2018
Microwave-assisted extraction 20 5.84 Nkhili, E, et al., 2009
Subcritical water extracation 6 4.67 This study
Table
Table 5. k and R2 obtained from model.
Table 5. k and R2 obtained from model.
Extraction Method Subcritical Water Extraction with Dionex ASE 350
k (1/min) 0.0479
R2 0.8358

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hiep, N.T.; Duong, H.T.; Anh, D.T.; Hoai Nguyen, N.; Thai, D.Q.; Linh, D.T.T.; Anh, V.T.H.; Khoi, N.M. Subcritical Water Extraction of Epigallocatechin Gallate from Camellia sinensis and Optimization Study Using Response Surface Methodology. Processes 2020, 8, 1028. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8091028

AMA Style

Hiep NT, Duong HT, Anh DT, Hoai Nguyen N, Thai DQ, Linh DTT, Anh VTH, Khoi NM. Subcritical Water Extraction of Epigallocatechin Gallate from Camellia sinensis and Optimization Study Using Response Surface Methodology. Processes. 2020; 8(9):1028. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8091028

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hiep, Nguyen Tuan, Hoang Thanh Duong, Dang Tuan Anh, Nguyen Hoai Nguyen, Do Quang Thai, Do Thi Thuy Linh, Vu Thi Huong Anh, and Nguyen Minh Khoi. 2020. "Subcritical Water Extraction of Epigallocatechin Gallate from Camellia sinensis and Optimization Study Using Response Surface Methodology" Processes 8, no. 9: 1028. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8091028

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop