Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A comparative study of flavonoid contents and antioxidant activities of supercritical CO2 extracted pine barks grown in different regions of Turkey and Germany

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
European Food Research and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Utilization of renewable resources is gaining more emphasis and large quantities of solid wastes are produced by the forestry industry. However, there is a significant lack of transformation of such wastes into potentially novel products. The barks of various Pinus species from different regions of Turkey (P. pinea, P. sylvestris, P. nigra) and Germany (P. parviflora, P. ponderosa, P. sylvestris, P. nigra) were extracted by supercritical CO2 extraction. Different sources of variability including location and species were evaluated for their active constituents, (−)-catechin, (−)-epiatechin, (−)-catechin gallate, and taxifolin, applying HPLC, radical scavenging activities (RSA), and total phenol analysis. The total amounts of flavan-3-ols (9.916 mg/g) were the highest in P. pinea extract harvested from Aydin, having the hottest climate and longest duration of sun (P < 0.01). In addition, P. pinea had the highest RSA (81.0 %) and total phenol value (83.0 mg GAE/g).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Turley DB, Chaudhry Q, Watkins RW, Clark JH, Deswarte FEI (2006) Ind Crops Prod 24(3):238–243

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Zulaica-Villagomez H, Peterson DM, Herrin L, Young RA (2005) Holzforschung 59(2):156–162

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Selga A, Torres JL (2005) J Agric Food Chem 53(20):7760–7765

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cui YY, Xie H, Wang JF (2005) Phytother Res 19(1):34–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Jung MJ, Chung Y, Choi JH, Choi JS (2003) Phytother Res 17(9):1064–1068

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Saleem A, Kivela H, Pihlaja K (2003) Z Naturforsch C 58(5–6):351–354

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hertog MGL (1996) Proc Nutr Soc 55(1B):385–397

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Romani A, Ieri F, Turchetti B, Mulinacci N, Vincieri FF, Buzzini P (2006) J Pharma Biomed Anal 41(2):415–420

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Sarikaki V, Rallis M, Tanojo H, Panteri I, Dotsikas Y, Loukas YL, Papaioannou G, Demetzos C, Weber S, Moini H, Maibach HI, Packer L (2004) J Toxic Cutaneous Ocul Toxic 23(3):149–158

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Rohdewald P (2002) Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 40(4):158–168

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Packer L, Rimbach G, Virgili F (1999) Free Radic Biol Med 27(5-6):704–724

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Jerez M, Selga A, Sineiro J, Torres JL, Nunez MJ (2007) Food Chem 100(2):439–444

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Jerez M, Tourino S, Sineiro J, Torres JL, Nunez MJ (2007) Food Chem 104(2):518–527

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Yu L, Zhao M, Wang JS, Yang B, Jiang Y, Zhao Q (2008) Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 9(1):122–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Guri A, Kefalas P, Roussis V (2006) Phytother Res 20(4):263–266

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hsu TY, Sheu SC, Liaw ET, Wang TC, Lin CC (2005) Phytomedicine 12(9):663–669

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Perva-Uzunalic A, Skerget M, Knez Z, Otto F, Gruner S (2006) Food Chem 96(4):597–605

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ritter DC, Campbell AG (1991) Wood Fiber Sci 23(1):98–113

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Braga MEM, Santos RMS, Seabra IJ, Facanali R, Marques MOM, de Sousa HC (2008) J Supercrit Fluids 47(1):37–48

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Yesil-Celiktas O, Otto F, Gruener S, Parlar H (2009) J Agric Food Chem 57:341–347

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Yesil-Celiktas O, Girgin G, Orhan H, Wichers HJ, Bedir E, Vardar-Sukan F (2007) Eur Food Res Technol 224:443–451

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Karonen M, Loponen J, Ossipov V, Pihlaja K (2004) Anal Chim Acta 522(1):105–112

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Turkish State Meteorological Service (2008) Climatic data between 1975 and 2006. http://www.meteor.gov.tr

  24. AGES – Gesellschaft für Energieplanung und Systemanalyse m. b. H. (2008) Climatic data between 1975 and 2008. http://klimadaten.ages-gmbh.de

  25. Elvira S, Alonso R, Castillo FJ, Gimeno BS (1998) New Phytol 138:419–432

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Yesil-Celiktas O, Bedir E, Vardar-Sukan F (2007) Food Chem 101:1457–1464

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The postdoctoral research grant provided by TUBITAK-BIDEB for performing this research is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Bioengineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ege University, 35100, Bornova, Izmir, Turkey

    O. Yesil-Celiktas

  2. Adalbert-Raps-Centre, Am Forum 2, 85350, Freising, Weihenstephan, Germany

    F. Otto

  3. Chemical-Technical Analysis and Chemical Food Technology, Technical University of Munich, Weihenstephaner Steig 23, 85350, Freising, Weihenstephan, Germany

    H. Parlar

Authors
  1. O. Yesil-Celiktas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. Otto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H. Parlar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to O. Yesil-Celiktas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yesil-Celiktas, O., Otto, F. & Parlar, H. A comparative study of flavonoid contents and antioxidant activities of supercritical CO2 extracted pine barks grown in different regions of Turkey and Germany. Eur Food Res Technol 229, 671–677 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-009-1101-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-009-1101-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation