Randomized trial evaluates antioxidant potential and microbial effects of extraction methods in buriti pulp, suggesting high-intensity ultrasound is most effective.
Buriti (Mauritia flexuosa L.) is a native Brazilian fruit recognized for its high content of carotenoids and phenolic compounds, which confer considerable nutraceutical value. This study investigated the effects of pulsed electric field (PEF) and ultrasound (US), applied separately and in combination, on the recovery of bioactive compounds from freeze-dried buriti pulp. The resulting extracts were evaluated for colorimetric characteristics, total phenolic content (TPC), β-carotene, pro-vitamin A, and antioxidant activity by ABTS, DPPH, and FRAP assays, with β-carotene additionally quantified by UHPLC. Ultrasound at 100% intensity promoted the highest TPC recovery (301.28 mg GAE L−1) and enhanced β-carotene extraction, reaching 13.2 mg g−1 dry mass, compared with 9.9 mg g−1 dry mass in the agitation control. FRAP values ranged from 7.7 to 10.1 μmol Fe2+E g−1 dry mass, with PEF treatments generally showing lower antioxidant capacity, whereas ultrasound maintained values comparable to the control. In contrast, isolated and combined PEF treatments reduced β-carotene recovery (2.7–7.3 mg g−1 dry mass), particularly at higher field intensity, suggesting degradation of carotenoids. Most treatments preserved the characteristic orange coloration of buriti extracts, with ΔE* values below 5, indicating no visually perceptible color changes. The extracts did not inhibit probiotic or pathogenic bacteria at the tested concentration, although stimulation of Lactobacillus acidophilus growth was observed. Cytotoxicity assays demonstrated low toxicity toward HDFa cells, with viability values generally above 80%. The results indicate that high-intensity ultrasound is a promising strategy for recovering bioactive compounds from buriti pulp, while PEF application requires optimization to prevent degradation of sensitive phytochemicals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bieler et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: