journal article·2020-07-02

Comparison of chemical composition, antioxidant and antibacterial activity of Callistemon citrinus skeels (bottlebrush) essential oil obtained by conventional and microwave-assisted hydrodistillation

Prashant Mande, Nagaiyan Sekar

Publisher page

Abstract

Prashant Mande & Nagaiyan Sekar* Department of Dyestuff Technology, Institute of Chemical Technology (formerly UDCT), Mumbai, IndiaPrashant Mande is a Senior Research Fellow pursuing PhD Tech in perfume and flavor Technology at Institute of Chemical Technology, India. His research interests mainly focuses on extraction of essential oil and formulation.Nagaiyan Sekar is Professor in Dyestuff technology at Institute of Chemical Technology, India. He has a vast experience in Synthesis of multistep Heterocyclic and Fused Heterocyclic compounds, Fluorescent compounds for biosensors, NIR absorbing, fluorescing and reflecting colorants.Supplemental material can be accessed here.CONTACT Nagaiyan Sekar n.sekar@ictmumbai.edu.in Department of Dyestuff Technology, Institute of Chemical Technology (formerly UDCT), Mumbai, IndiaAbstractMicrowave-assisted hydrodistillation and conventional hydrodistillation (MAHD and HD) were used for a comparative study of extraction Callistemon citrinus Skeels leaf essential oils. The time required for a MAHD method is 75 minutes that for HD method is 3.5 hours, so MAHD requires lesser time. The increases in yield of extracted oil by MAHD (0.84%) is found compared oil extracted by HD (0.6%). Essential oils were examined by GC–MS. MAHD extracted essential oils were wealthier in oxygenated molecules. The main constituent was 1, 8-cineole, followed by α-pinene in the case of MAHD. Percentage of the major component increases from 80% to 90% as compared to HD. Their antibacterial activity was examined on ‘Gram-negative’ and ‘Gram-positive bacteria’. In the case of both bacteria, MAHD extracted oil shows better activity than HD extracted one. Antioxidant action was studied by using 2, 2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH•) radical scavenging and β-carotene/linoleic acid assay it is shown that MAHD extract has better activity than HD extract. Surface morphology of Callistemon leaves was studied with scanning electronic microscopy (SEM) which reveals that the MAHD leaves surface undergo major damage to the conventional HD.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity · Phytochemistry and Biological Activities · Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Dyestuff Technology, Institute of Chemical Technology (formerly UDCT), Mumbai, India

Funding

University Grant Commission (UGC-SAP), New Delhi, India.

References (49)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.5530/ax.2012.2.810.5530/ax.2012.2.8 ↗
2. 10.4236/ajps.2011.2610010.4236/ajps.2011.26100 ↗
3. 10.1080/08327823.2019.157045010.1080/08327823.2019.1570450 ↗
4. Akolade JO · J Nat Prod Plant Resour · 2012 · 2 · 1
5. Babu KGD · J Sci Ind Res · 2002 · 61 · 952
6. 10.1080/0972060X.2013.76421510.1080/0972060X.2013.764215 ↗
7. Bale A S · Int J Recent Sci Res · 2013 · 4 · 1414
8. Baser KHC · 2010
9. Bener M · Rec Nat Prod · 2016 · 10 · 542
10. 10.1039/C6RA00588H10.1039/C6RA00588H ↗
11. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2008.09.10610.1016/j.foodchem.2008.09.106 ↗
12. 10.2478/s11532-014-0532-410.2478/s11532-014-0532-4 ↗
13. Darbandi T · Pelagia Res Lib · 2013 · 3 · 687
14. 10.1080/01496395.2012.65978510.1080/01496395.2012.659785 ↗
15. 10.1002/ptr.207210.1002/ptr.2072 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2008.01.05810.1016/j.foodchem.2008.01.058 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.chroma.2007.01.03110.1016/j.chroma.2007.01.031 ↗
18. 10.1002/1097-0010(200010)80:13<1925::AID-JSFA714>3.0.CO;2-410.1002/1097-0010(200010)80:13<1925::AID-JSFA714>3.0.CO;2-4 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.supflu.2009.02.00610.1016/j.supflu.2009.02.006 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.12.08410.1016/j.foodchem.2007.12.084 ↗
21. Kapoor IPS · Int J Essen Oil Ther · 2008 · 2 · 29
22. 10.1016/j.seppur.2015.11.03510.1016/j.seppur.2015.11.035 ↗
23. 10.1371/journal.pone.013382310.1371/journal.pone.0133823 ↗
24. 10.1063/1.495848410.1063/1.4958484 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2012.01.05610.1016/j.foodchem.2012.01.056 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.trac.2013.02.00710.1016/j.trac.2013.02.007 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.03.02910.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.03.029 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.apcbee.2012.06.05710.1016/j.apcbee.2012.06.057 ↗
29. Mandal V · Pharmacogy Rev · 2007 · 1 · 7
30. Mazumder J · IOSR J Pharm Biol Sci · 2014 · 9 · 87
31. 10.1016/j.indcrop.2019.01.06710.1016/j.indcrop.2019.01.067 ↗
32. Moradi S · Avicenna J Med Biotechnol · 2018 · 10 · 22
33. Nur Ain AH · Int Food Res J · 2013 · 20 · 451
34. 10.3390/molecules1406199010.3390/molecules14061990 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.arabjc.2013.02.00710.1016/j.arabjc.2013.02.007 ↗
36. 10.15623/ijret.2014.030400210.15623/ijret.2014.0304002 ↗
37. 10.1080/10412905.1990.969789110.1080/10412905.1990.9697891 ↗
38. 10.1016/S1995-7645(13)60139-X10.1016/S1995-7645(13)60139-X ↗
39. 10.3844/ajassp.2010.13.1610.3844/ajassp.2010.13.16 ↗
40. 10.1002/ffj.156410.1002/ffj.1564 ↗
41. Shekhar TC · . Am J Ethnomed · 2014 · 1 · 244
42. 10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.10.01010.1016/j.foodcont.2011.10.010 ↗
43. Shukla R · J Sci Food Agric · 2011 · 91 · 2277
44. Singh S · World J Pharm Pharm Sci · 2014 · 3 · 291
45. 10.1007/s13197-014-1286-x10.1007/s13197-014-1286-x ↗
46. 10.1080/10412905.2001.971223310.1080/10412905.2001.9712233 ↗
47. 10.1002/ffj.114310.1002/ffj.1143 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.indcrop.2016.03.05510.1016/j.indcrop.2016.03.055 ↗
49. 10.1155/2013/48907110.1155/2013/489071 ↗