Ure. Determined by Bragg’s equation for 4.39 nm, 4.35 nm, four.42 nm, = n), nm at n = 1 spacing of HEO, UEO, EEO and MEO were crystal diffraction (2d sin and four.37 the lattice spacing of 1.54 The outcomes showed that EOs obtained by hot-water, and 4.37 and = HEO, UEO, EEO and MEO were 4.39 nm, 4.35 nm, 4.42 nm, ultrasound-assisted, nm at n = 1 and = 1.54 The outcomes showed that EOs obtained by had comparable effects around the internal enzyme-assisted, and microwave-assisted techniques hot-water, ultrasoundcrystallinity, which led to related powder states of the 4 oligosaccharide samples. Whilst the two in the diffraction peak of MEO was similar to that of other samples, the peak intensity was considerably reduce, indicating that microwave-assisted extraction is much more most likely to influence the properties of the crystals.Antioxidants 2021, 10,assisted, enzyme-assisted, and microwave-assisted techniques had comparable effects around the internal crystallinity, which led to related powder states in the four oligosaccharide samples. While the 2 on the diffraction peak of MEO was equivalent to that of other samples, the peak 12 of 18 intensity was substantially lower, indicating that microwave-assisted extraction is more likely to affect the properties of the crystals.Figure five. XRD (X-ray diffraction) pattern evaluation of EOs. Figure 5. XRD (X-ray diffraction) pattern analysis3.8. SEM Evaluation three.8. SEM Analysis SEM is an vital method to characterize the microscopic morphological charSEM is definitely an critical approach to characterize the microscopic morphological Pirarubicin Biological Activity characteristics of of polymer components. investigate whether or not different extraction solutions could acteristics polymer materials. To To investigate regardless of whether different extraction methods influence the morphology of your the resulted EOs, SEM pictures the 4 EO samples have been could impact the morphology of resulted EOs, SEM photos ofof the fourEO samples were obtained (Figure six). The results showed that HEO formed a flake-shaped with cracks and obtained (Figure 6). The results showed that HEO formed a flake-shaped with cracks and holes on holes on the surface. UEO presented aa porous sheet shape with smaller sized holes on the surthe surface. UEO presented porous sheet shape with smaller holes around the surface in comparison to HEO. EEO had a flat sheet shape with no holes. MEO includes a porous and wavy face in comparison with HEO. EEO had a flat sheet shape without the need of holes. MEO has a porous and surface. In contrast to EEO, the surface of UEO and MEO has numerous pores, which may possibly be wavy surface. In contrast to EEO, the surface of UEO and MEO has a lot of pores, which resulting from ultrasonic cavitation or microwave radiation acting on AM251 Neuronal Signaling glycosidic bonds, respectively. might be as a consequence of ultrasonic cavitation or microwave radiation acting on glycosidic bonds, Below the help of ultrasounds, enzymes, or microwaves, the intermolecular hydrorespectively. Below the help of ultrasounds, enzymes, or microwaves, the intermogen bonds in HEO may perhaps be broken, resulting in decreased chain conformational stability lecular Antioxidants 2021, 10, x FOR PEER Critique hydrogen bonds in HEO could be broken, resulting in decreased chain conforma13 of 19 and intermolecular cross-linking [38]. This could result in a decrease of surface flatness and tional stability and intermolecular cross-linking [38]. This could lead to a lower of surhole diameter. face flatness and hole diameter.Figure 6. SEM (scanning electron microscopy) image evaluation of EOs. Figure 6. SEM (scanning electron microscopy) imag.
