CAJ | 학술논문

目的以熊果酸提取得率为指标,研究对比水浴提取法、超声波提取法以及微波提取法提取枇杷叶中熊果酸的提取效果.方法比较提取时间、温度、乙醇体积分数及料液比四个因素下三种方法的提起效果,并在电子显微镜下进行比较研究.结果在相同条件下,微波法和超声波法提取率较接近,均比水浴法高.在提取时间上,当采用控温措施时,超声波法比微波法和水浴法缩短提取时间至少20%,当不采用控温措施时,微波法比水浴法缩短时间至少92%,比超声波法缩短90%;在提取温度上,微波提取法比超声波法降低提取温度14.3%,比水浴法降低至少25%;在乙醇体积分数上,微波法和超声波法提取率均在乙醇体积分数85%时达到最高点,比水浴法的高6.25%;在料液比上,超声波法和微波法提取率达到最高点所需的料液比均比水浴法低,微波法比超声波多消耗溶剂16.7%,超声波法比水浴法减少消耗至少25%.结论相比于水浴提取法,超声波辅助提取法和微波辅助提取法在提取得率和效率上具有明显的优势,超声波辅助提取法操作简便,而微波辅助提取法效率更高,但溶剂消耗更多.
목적이웅과산제취득솔위지표,연구대비수욕제취법、초성파제취법이급미파제취법제취비파협중웅과산적제취효과.방법비교제취시간、온도、을순체적분수급료액비사개인소하삼충방법적제기효과,병재전자현미경하진행비교연구.결과재상동조건하,미파법화초성파법제취솔교접근,균비수욕법고.재제취시간상,당채용공온조시시,초성파법비미파법화수욕법축단제취시간지소20%,당불채용공온조시시,미파법비수욕법축단시간지소92%,비초성파법축단90%;재제취온도상,미파제취법비초성파법강저제취온도14.3%,비수욕법강저지소25%;재을순체적분수상,미파법화초성파법제취솔균재을순체적분수85%시체도최고점,비수욕법적고6.25%;재료액비상,초성파법화미파법제취솔체도최고점소수적료액비균비수욕법저,미파법비초성파다소모용제16.7%,초성파법비수욕법감소소모지소25%.결론상비우수욕제취법,초성파보조제취법화미파보조제취법재제취득솔화효솔상구유명현적우세,초성파보조제취법조작간편,이미파보조제취법효솔경고,단용제소모경다.
@@@@Objective To compare the extraction effects of ursolic acid from loquat leaves by water bath extraction(WBE), ultrasonic assisted extraction (UAE) and microwave assisted extraction(MAE) taking the ex-traction rate of ursolic acid as the index. Methods The extraction effects of these three methods were com-pared on the factors such as extraction time, temperature, ethanol concentration and solid-to-liquid ratio. The comparison was performed with its electron microscopy image. Results In the same condition, extraction yields of MAE’s and UAE’s were similar, which were both higher than that of WBE. For the extraction time, when temperature control measures were used, UAE shortened the extraction time by at least 20% than MAE and WBE; when temperature control measures were not adopted, MAE shortened the extraction time by at least 92% than WBE and 90% than UAE. For the temperature, MAE reduced the extraction temperature by 14.3%than UAE and at least 25% than WBE. For the ethanol volume fraction, MAE’s and UAE’s extraction yields were peaked at a volume fraction of 85% ethanol which was 6.25% higher than that of WBE. For the sol-id-liquid ratio, MAE and UAE consumed less solvent than WBE when the yield of ursolic acid was peaked;MAE consumed solvent 16.7% more than UAE and UAE reduced solvent consumption by at least 25% than WBE. Conclusion Compared with WBE, UAE and MAE have the obvious advantages of higher extraction yields and efficiency. The operation of UAE is more simple, while MAE is more efficient but consumes more solvent.