1. Introduction
The growing importance of physical appearance in the last century has led to an expansion of sophisticated beauty products purported to have high, almost pharmaceutical, efficacy, sensorial advantages, and safety. Such products, popularly called cosmeceuticals, are applied on the human skin, making it appear younger and healthier. Even though the word “cosmeceutical” is a marketing, rather than a legal term, it is often used in lay language because it reflects both the intended dual activity of such products, as well as the consumers’ expectations. Furthermore, the products that are derived from natural sources, such as plants, are in special demand, not only due to the consumers preferences for natural skincare, but also because of their numerous beneficial effects on human skin [
1].
Before being incorporated into cosmetic products, the bioactive principles of plants need to be extracted from crude plant material. The selection of an appropriate extraction method is one of the key steps to consider before proceeding to cosmeceutical formulation development. Failure to do so could lead to the loss of active compounds, hence resulting in the loss of biological activity. However, in addition to displaying the desired biological properties, the extracts used in modern cosmetic products have to fulfill other requirements. Besides stability, safety, and sensory properties, new concerns about environmental impact or animal welfare with respect to the cosmetic development, manufacturing, and quality control are constantly emerging, and new products are being developed in order to meet such needs [
2]. For example, the design of green and sustainable extraction methods for natural products is currently a hot research topic in the multidisciplinary area of applied chemistry, biology, and technology. Solvents used for extraction should ideally have a high dissolving power, be biodegradable, non-toxic, and non-flammable. Ethanol, due to its biodegradability and natural origin, fulfills some of the requirements for a green solvent, and it is still among the most used solvents for extraction of natural compounds. However, besides being a relatively good solvent for a wide range of natural products, ethanol is highly flammable and has skin-irritant properties. Thus, efforts are being made to replace ethanol with other solvents, preferably of natural origin [
3].
One of the solvents that could effectively replace ethanol is glycerol, a natural, non-toxic, biodegradable liquid, manufactured from renewable sources [
4]. Due to the hygroscopic nature of glycerol, it is already widely used for formulation of creams and lotions [
3]. Therefore, the glycerol extracts of medicinal plants have a dual role in cosmetic products—as humectants and active agents [
3]. Furthermore, the use of glycerol in the finished product means that the removal of the solvent from the cosmeceutical extract is redundant. This renders the glycerolic extraction of medicinal plants highly acceptable from an energy-saving point of view. Interestingly, in spite of all the aforementioned favorable characteristics of glycerol extraction, the use of this solvent for extraction of natural products is still under-researched. Relatively few examples include the use of glycerol for extraction of phenolic antioxidants from two
Artemisia species [
5], grapefruit peels [
6],
Hypericum perforatum, and olive (
Olea europaea) leaves [
7]; as well as stevioside from
Stevia rebaudiana [
8].
Licorice (
Glycyrrhiza glabra L., Fabaceae) is a perennial plant, well-known for its sweet-tasting root. It contains a wide array of bioactive natural products. Glycyrrhizin, the sweet principle of licorice root is a triterpene-type saponin that displays antiviral, anti-inflammatory, antitumor, and antimicrobial properties [
9]. Besides glycyrrhizin, phenolic components, such as chalcone isoliquiritigenin and isoflavonoid glabridin are also important for the observed biological activity of licorice root.
G. glabra has been traditionally used for promotion of wound healing. Licorice root extracts protect the skin against oxidative stress injuries [
10,
11], accelerate wound epithelization, ameliorate remodeling at the wound site [
12], and efficiently reduce the symptoms of atopic dermatitis (AD). Furthermore, isoliquiritigenin was also found to be beneficial for the treatment of AD-like skin lesions in mice, giving hope that it could be a potential therapeutic agent for the treatment of AD in humans [
13]. Glabridin has many properties potentially beneficial in cosmeceutical products. It acts as antioxidant, estrogenic, anti-inflammatory, and skin-whitening agent [
14]. It displays skin depigmentation activity and is being incorporated in topical products intended specifically for that purpose [
15].
G. glabra extracts and its constituents display a wide array of activities potentially useful in cosmetic and dermatologic products. The aim of this work was extraction optimization of phenolic compounds from licorice root using glycerol, a non-toxic and eco-friendly solvent. Skin-related biological activities (antioxidant, enzyme inhibiting and anti-inflammatory) of the prepared extracts were investigated with the aim of obtaining highly active extracts suitable for use in cosmeceutical products.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Chemicals
Reagents, standards and enzymes were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA). The purity of the standards was butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA, ≥98.5%), glycyrrhizic acid ammonium salt (≥95.0%), glabridin (Gla) (≥98.0%), and isoliquiritigenin (Iso) (≥98.0%). Methanol and acetonitrile were HPLC grade. Other reagents and chemicals were of analytical grade.
2.2. Plant Material
The plant material (licorice root) was donated by the Suban company (Samobor, Croatia). The exact licorice species was determined using HPLC. The material was confirmed to be
G. glabra based on the presence of Gla [
16]. The presence of other related species was excluded by the absence of quercetine (
G. uralensis) [
17] and licochalcone A [
16]. The identity was additionally confirmed using a pharmacopoeial monograph [
18]. A voucher specimen is deposited in the Department of Pharmacognosy, Faculty of Pharmacy and Biochemistry, University of Zagreb.
2.3. Preparation of the Extracts
The root was milled and passed through a sieve of 850 μm mesh size. Powdered plant material of differing weights (0.6–1 g) was suspended in 10 g of the appropriate solvent (10–90% glycerol in water, w/w) in a 50 mL Erlenmeyer flask. The extraction was performed in an ultrasonic bath (Bandelin SONOREX® Digital 10 P DK 156 BP, Berlin, Germany) at ultrasonication power of 360 W and frequency of 35 Hz during 20 min. The bath was temperature-controlled (20–70 °C). Upon the extraction, the mixtures were filtered. All the extracts were stored at −20 °C, in the dark.
2.4. Spectrophotometric Determination of Total Phenol Content
Total phenols (TP) content was determined using the modified Folin–Ciocalteu colorimetric method [
19], by mixing 80 μL extract solution, 80 μL of Folin–Ciocalteu reagent and 80 μL of 10% sodium carbonate solution. After 1 h, absorbance at 630 nm was measured (The FLUOstar
® Omega, BMG Labtech, Offenburg, Germany and Stat Fax 3200 reader, Awareness Technologies, Palm City, FL, USA). TP was expressed as mg/g of dry weight from calibration curve recorded for gallic acid.
2.5. Spectrophotometric Determination of Total Flavonoid Content
Total flavonoid (TF) content was determined using modified Folin–Ciocalteu colorimetric method [
20], by mixing 120 μL extract solution and 120 μL of 0.2% AlCl
3 solution. After 1 h, absorbance at 420 nm was measured. TF was expressed as mg/g of dry weight from calibration curve recorded for quercetin.
2.6. RP-HPLC-DAD Determinations of Glycyrrhizin, Glabridin and Isoliquiritigenin
Prior to the analysis, the extracts were filtered through a 0.45 μm PTFE syringe filter. Quantifications were performed using an HPLC instrument (Agilent 1200 series, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) equipped with an autosampler and a DAD detector. Injection volume was 10 μL. The peak assignment and identification was based on comparison of UV/VIS spectra and retention times of peaks in sample chromatogram with that of the standards. Quantification was performed using the respective standard calibration curve. The calibration curves, limit of detection (LD), and limit of quantification (LQ), were determined according to [
21] (
Table 1). For determination of glycyrrhizin, the modified European pharmacopoeia method [
18] was used. Separation was performed on a Nucleodur 100-5 C18 column (Macheray-Nagel, Düren, Germany) column. A mixture of glacial acetic acid, acetonitrile, and water (6:30:64 V/V/V) was used as mobile phase. Separation was performed at 25 °C using flow rate of 2 mL/min. Glycyrrhizic acid ammonium salt was used as a standard for construction of calibration curve. The content of Gla and Iso was determined by a modified method described by Tada et al. [
22] on the Zorbax Eclipse XDB-C18 (5 µm, 12.5 mm × 4.6 mm, Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Mobile phase (water:acetonitrile) was used according to the following protocol 0–3 min (7:3), 53-60 min (2:8). Flow rate was 1.0 mL/min. Gla and Iso were used as standards for the construction of calibration curves.
2.7. Extraction Optimization
The experiment was planned using Box-Behnken design (BBD) in Design Expert software v. 8.0.6 (Stat-Ease, Minneapolis, MN, USA). The ranges of design parameters (independent variables) were: glycerol concentration (X1, 10–90%, w/w), temperature (X2, 20–70°C), and drug weight (X3, 0.6–1g) used for the extraction. TP content, TP/X3 ratio (TPy), as well as the Gla and Iso content of the extracts were dependent variables. Response-surface methodology was used to find the relationship between dependent and independent variables. Experimental data was analyzed by multiple regression analysis and fitted to the appropriate polynomial models. The validity of the model was confirmed by the analysis of variance (ANOVA). p values < 0.1 were considered statistically significant.
2.8. Radical Scavenging Activity
Radical scavenging activity (RSA) was evaluated using the stable 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) free radical [
23]. In short, DPPH solution (0.21 mg/mL, 70 μL) was added to the extract solution (130 μL). After 30 min, the absorbance was recorded at 545 nm. DPPH solution with methanol instead of the extract served as the negative control. RSA was calculated according to the following equation:
where
Acontrol is the absorbance of the negative control and
Asample is the absorbance of the respective extract. Concentration of the extract, which scavenges 50% of free radicals present in the solution (RSA IC
50), was calculated. BHA was used as the standard radical scavenger.
2.9. Fe2+ Chelating Activity
The chelating activity (ChA) of the investigated substances toward ferrous ions was studied, as described in [
24]. To the solution of extract in methanol (150 μL), 0.25 mM FeCl
2 solution (50 μL) was added. After 5 min, 100 μL of 1.0 mM ferrozine solution was applied. Absorbance at 545 nm was recorded after 10 min. Reaction mixture containing methanol (150 μL) instead of extract served as a control. ChA was calculated using the following equation:
where
Acontrol is the absorbance of the negative control and
Asample is the absorbance of the respective extract. Concentration of the extract, which chelates 50% of Fe
2+ present in the solution (ChA IC
50), was calculated. EDTA was used as the chelating standards.
2.10. Antioxidant Activity in β-Carotene-Linoleic Acid Assay
AOA was evaluated using the β-carotene-linoleic acid system according to modified literature procedure [
25]. Aliquots (200 μL) of the emulsion containing β-carotene (6.7 μg/mL), linoleic acid (0.7 mg/mL), and Tween 40 (6.7 mg/mL) were added either to methanol (50 μL) (control) or to the solutions of the extract in methanol (50 μL). The reaction mixture was incubated at 50 °C. The antioxidant activity in β-carotene linoleic acid assay (AACL) was calculated based on the absorbances recorded after 60 min using the following equation:
where
Acontrol and
Asample are the absorbances of the water control and antioxidant, respectively. Concentration of the extract that protects 50% β-carotene present in the solution (AACL IC
50) was calculated. BHA was used as the standard antioxidant.
2.11. Tyrosinase Inhibitory Activity
Tyrosinase inhibition activity by the extracts was determined following a method described by [
19] with some minor modifications. In 80 μL extract solution, 40 μL of tyrosinase solution (in 16 mM pH 6,8 phosphate buffer) was added. The solution was incubated in dark at 25 °C. After 10 min, 80 μL of L-DOPA solution (0.19 mg/mL in phosphate buffer) was added. After an additional 10 min, the absorbance at 492 nm was measured. Negative control contained a buffer instead of the extract solution. Tyrosinase inhibitory activity (TyInh) was calculated as:
where
Acontrol is the absorbance of the negative control and
Asample is the absorbance of the respective extract. Concentration of the extract, which inhibits 50% of tyrosinase activity (TyInh IC
50), was calculated. Kojic acid was used as the standard inhibitor.
2.12. Elastase Inhibitory Activity
To 100 μL of plant extract solution, 1 mM
N-succinyl-(Ala)
3-nitroanilide in Tris-HCl buffer (0.1 M, pH 8.0) was added. After 10 min, 25 °C, 25 µl of porcine pancreatic elastase solution was added. The mixture was further incubated at 25 °C for 10 min and absorbance was measured at 410 nm. A reaction mixture containing buffer instead of extract served as the control. Elastase inhibitory activity (ElInh) was calculated as:
where
Acontrol is the absorbance of the negative control and
Asample is the absorbance of the respective extract. Concentration of the extract, which inhibits 50% of elastase activity (ElInh IC
50), was calculated. Ursolic acid was used as the standard inhibitor [
26].
2.13. Anti-Inflammatory Activity
Anti-inflammatory activity was evaluated by the heat-induced ovalbumin coagulation method [
27] using Perkin Elmer Lambda 25 spectrophotometer (Perkin Elmer, Waltham, MA, USA). The reaction mixture consisted of 0.4 mL of ovalbumin solution, 2.8 mL of phosphate buffered saline (pH 6.4), and 2 mL of the extract solution. The mixtures were incubated at 37 °C for 15 min and then heated at 70 °C for 5 min. After cooling, their absorbance was recorded at 660 nm. The percentage inhibition of ovalbumin denaturation (OvInh) was calculated using the following formula:
where
Acontrol is the absorbance of the negative control and
Asample is the absorbance of the respective extract. Concentration of the extract, which inhibits 50% of the ovalbumin coagulation (OvInh IC
50), was calculated. Diclofenac sodium was used as the standard inhibitor.
2.14. Statistical Analysis
The measurements were performed in triplicate and the results presented as mean ± standard deviation. In order to establish the IC50 values, the experiments were performed using different concentrations (4–7 concentrations, depending on the assay). Statistical comparisons were made using one-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test for multiple comparisons (GraphPad Prism, San Diego, CA, USA). p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
4. Conclusions
Licorice root contains numerous bioactive natural products, many of which are potent cosmeceutical ingredients. In this work, the UAE method for preparation of licorice root bioactive extracts was optimized. The extraction was performed using mixtures of water with glycerol, a biodegradable, safe, cosmetically active solvent. The prepared extracts displayed excellent radical scavenging, Fe2+ chelating, and antioxidant activity. In addition, tyrosinase and elastase inhibitory activity of the extracts, as well as their anti-inflammatory activity, indicated excellent anti-aging properties. Such attractive array of skin-related biological activities makes glycerolic licorice extracts promising constituents of specialized cosmeceutical formulations.