Amangeldinova Madina, Ersatır Mehmet, Necip Adem, Yilmaz Mustafa Abdullah, Cimentepe Mehmet, Kudrina Nataliya, Terletskaya Nina V, Ozturk Cimentepe Ozge, Yildirim Metin
Faculty of Biology and Biotechnology, Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Almaty, Kazakhstan.
Institute of Genetics and Physiology, Almaty, Kazakhstan.
Front Plant Sci. 2024 Dec 6;15:1513875. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1513875. eCollection 2024.
In this study, L. extracts were obtained using various green extraction techniques, including supercritical CO, subcritical ethanol, and ultrasound-assisted extraction, each performed under optimized parameters. The phytochemical content of the extracts was analyzed using the LC-MS/MS technique, quantifying 53 phytochemicals. Additionally, the antioxidant properties and antibacterial activities of the extracts were evaluated against and as gram-positive bacteria, and and sa as gram-negative bacteria. According to the results, the extracts were rich in catechin, epicatechin, cyranoside, and chlorogenic acid. Extracts obtained via ultrasonic extraction demonstrated stronger antioxidant properties. The IC values for the DPPH radical scavenging activity of obtained extracts ranged between 0.0173 mg/mL and 0.0400 mg/mL. The highest total phenolic content was found in the UAE-M-4h extract (213.44 mg GAE/mL). The extracts prepared with UAE-MeOH-2h-4h, UAE-EtOH-2h-4h, Sbc-EtOH-E-140-60-80, Sc-90 atm, and Sc-400 atm showed antibacterial activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria at varying rates (MIC range: 31.25 to 250 μg/mL). Based on the all results, the ultrasound assisted extraction proved superior to the other techniques. This study, utilizing three different extraction methods with varying variables such as temperature, pressure, and extraction time, has provided significant insights into which extraction method should be employed for isolating specific phytochemicals or for therapeutic purposes, based on the differing antibacterial results observed. The findings highlight the importance of selecting the appropriate extraction method depending on the target phytochemical or desired antibacterial effect in treatment applications.
在本研究中，采用各种绿色提取技术获得了L.提取物，包括超临界CO、亚临界乙醇和超声辅助提取，每种技术均在优化参数下进行。使用LC-MS/MS技术分析提取物的植物化学成分，定量了53种植物化学物质。此外，评估了提取物对作为革兰氏阳性菌的 和 ，以及作为革兰氏阴性菌的 和 的抗氧化性能和抗菌活性。根据结果，提取物富含儿茶素、表儿茶素、花青素和绿原酸。通过超声提取获得的提取物表现出更强的抗氧化性能。所获提取物的DPPH自由基清除活性的IC值在0.0173 mg/mL至0.0400 mg/mL之间。在UAE-M-4h提取物中发现总酚含量最高（213.44 mg GAE/mL）。用UAE-MeOH-2h-4h、UAE-EtOH-2h-4h、Sbc-EtOH-E-140-60-80、Sc-90 atm和Sc-400 atm制备的提取物对革兰氏阳性菌和革兰氏阴性菌均表现出不同程度的抗菌活性（MIC范围：31.25至250 μg/mL）。基于所有结果，超声辅助提取被证明优于其他技术。本研究利用三种不同的提取方法，这些方法具有不同的变量，如温度、压力和提取时间，基于观察到的不同抗菌结果，为分离特定植物化学物质或用于治疗目的应采用哪种提取方法提供了重要见解。研究结果突出了在治疗应用中根据目标植物化学物质或期望的抗菌效果选择合适提取方法的重要性。
