IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i11p6864-d831552.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Extraction of Polyphenolic Antioxidants from Red Grape Pomace and Olive Leaves: Process Optimization Using a Tailor-Made Tertiary Deep Eutectic Solvent

Author

Listed:
  • Vassilis Athanasiadis

    (Department of Food Science & Nutrition, University of Thessaly, N. Temponera Street, 43100 Karditsa, Greece)

  • Dimitrios Palaiogiannis

    (Department of Food Science & Nutrition, University of Thessaly, N. Temponera Street, 43100 Karditsa, Greece)

  • Konstantina Poulianiti

    (Department of Food Science & Nutrition, University of Thessaly, N. Temponera Street, 43100 Karditsa, Greece)

  • Eleni Bozinou

    (Department of Food Science & Nutrition, University of Thessaly, N. Temponera Street, 43100 Karditsa, Greece)

  • Stavros I. Lalas

    (Department of Food Science & Nutrition, University of Thessaly, N. Temponera Street, 43100 Karditsa, Greece)

  • Dimitris P. Makris

    (Department of Food Science & Nutrition, University of Thessaly, N. Temponera Street, 43100 Karditsa, Greece)

Abstract

In the framework of introducing green strategies for food processing, the industrial orientation has shifted towards the replacement of conventional petroleum-based solvents with alternative eco-friendly ones. On this basis, the objective of this study was to synthesize a novel, tertiary, food-grade deep eutectic solvent, composed of glycerol, citric acid, and L-proline (GL-CA-Pro), and to test it as a solvent for the extraction of polyphenols from agri-food waste biomass. After an initial screening on various common residual materials (apple peels, lemon peels, orange peels, red grape pomace, olive leaves), evidence emerged that indicated GL-CA-Pro was more effective than other DESs commonly used for polyphenol extraction. Furthermore, extracts from red grape pomace (RGP) and olive leaves (OLL) were shown to contain higher level of total polyphenols and increased antioxidant activity. Process optimization for those two materials with the response surface methodology revealed that the major difference pertained to the extraction time. In addition, for both materials, GL-CA-Pro was shown to provide higher total polyphenol yields (53.25 and 42.48 mg gallic acid equivalents per g of dry mass, respectively) compared to water and 60% aqueous ethanol. However, the chromatographic analyses for OLL suggested aqueous ethanol was a more suitable solvent for some principal polyphenolic constituents. The RGP extract produced with GL-CA-Pro exhibited significantly stronger antioxidant effects compared to the aqueous and hydroethanolic extracts, but the outcome for the OLL extracts was diversified. It was concluded that GL-CA-Pro is a very efficient solvent for RGP polyphenols, but its efficiency regarding OLL was comparable to that of aqueous ethanol.

Suggested Citation

  • Vassilis Athanasiadis & Dimitrios Palaiogiannis & Konstantina Poulianiti & Eleni Bozinou & Stavros I. Lalas & Dimitris P. Makris, 2022. "Extraction of Polyphenolic Antioxidants from Red Grape Pomace and Olive Leaves: Process Optimization Using a Tailor-Made Tertiary Deep Eutectic Solvent," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-15, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:11:p:6864-:d:831552
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/11/6864/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/11/6864/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vassilis Athanasiadis & Theodoros Chatzimitakos & Konstantina Kotsou & Dimitrios Palaiogiannis & Eleni Bozinou & Stavros I. Lalas, 2022. "Optimization of the Extraction Parameters for the Isolation of Bioactive Compounds from Orange Peel Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-14, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:11:p:6864-:d:831552. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.