Table 4.
Methods of piperine extraction from black and white pepper
| Methods | Apparatus used | Extraction yield & (extraction time) | Solvent used | Advantage | Disadvantage | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHE | Soxhlet apparatus |
3.2% 2 h |
95% Ethanol,10% aq. Potassium hydroxide | Simple, low cost, no filtration is required after leaching | A long time of extraction and a large amount of extractant is required | Luque de Castro and Priego-Capote [175], Shingate et al. [25] |
| Reflux Extraction |
RBF, condenser, Buchner funnel, etc. |
5% 20 min |
Dichloro-methane, Acetone and Hexane |
More efficient than percolation or maceration and requires less extraction time and solvent | Cannot be used for thermolabile natural products | Shingate et al. [25], Zhang et al. [176] |
| Cold Maceration | Separating funnel, Rota evaporator, etc. |
4.6% – |
GAA, chloroform, 10% sodium bicarbonate, toluene, ethyl acetate, sodium hydroxide, diethyl ether |
Yield is high, pure, and crystallizable as compared to the above two methods | Complex and time-consuming | Shingate et al. [25] |
|
EASC-CO2 Extraction |
SPEED SFE 2, Ice-bath |
0.88–1.38 mg/g dry black pepper 2.25 h |
α-Amylase, CO2, methanol | Efficient | Expensive | Dutta and Bhattacharjee [177, 178] |
|
ILUA Extraction |
KQ-100DA and KQ-500 ultrasonic water baths (Kunshan, Jiangsu, China), Acquity™ UPLC (Waters, Milford, MA, USA) |
3.57% 30 min |
1-Alkyl-3-methylimidazolium ionic liquids, deionized water, methanol | High extraction efficiency, and less extraction time | Expensive | Cao et al. [179] |
| SLDE | Naviglio Extractor® |
317.7 mg/g 3 h |
96% Ethanol | Simple application, exhaustion in a short period, production of high-quality extracts | Expensive | Gigliarelli et al. [180], Naviglio et al. [181] |
| SMUAE |
Microwave oven (CQ4250, Samsung) Ultrasonic bath (Elmasonic S10H) |
46.6 mg/g 31 min |
Ethanol, Methanol, Acetone, Dichloromethane Potassium hydroxide, Hexane, Acetonitrile |
Increased extraction efficiency | Not suitable for thermolabile natural products | Gorgani et al. [1, 182], Zhang et al. [176] |
| MAE | IFB domestic microwave oven (model Neutron) |
45% 4 h |
Petroleum ether, water | Simple, rapid, and reliable | Not suitable for thermolabile natural products | Raman and Gaikar [30] |
| UAE | – |
0.58% w/w 18 min |
Ethanol, hexane, and acetone | Short running time, higher extractive yield, controllable parameters | Small particle size, more filtration steps | Shityakov et al. [183] |
| SFE | – |
90–96% w/w 2–5 h |
Liquid carbon dioxide | Efficient, selective, clean, fast | High cost, less pressure-resistant | Shityakov et al. [183] |