# Effect of acidity/alkalinity of deep eutectic solvents on the extraction profiles of phenolics and biomolecules in defatted rice bran extract

Piraporn Sombutsuwan, Erwann Durand, Kornkanok Aryusuk

► To cite this version:

Piraporn Sombutsuwan, Erwann Durand, Kornkanok Aryusuk. Effect of acidity/alkalinity of deep eutectic solvents on the extraction profiles of phenolics and biomolecules in defatted rice bran extract. PeerJ Analytical Chemistry, 2024, 6, pp.e29. 10.7717/peerj-achem.29. hal-05181464

HAL Id: hal-05181464

https://hal.science/hal-05181464v1

Submitted on 23 Jul 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Effect of acidity/alkalinity of deep eutectic solvents on the extraction profiles of phenolics and biomolecules in defatted rice bran extract

Piraporn Sombutsuwan<fnref n="1" />, Erwann Durand<fnref n="2" />,<fnref n="3" /> and Kornkanok Aryusuk<fnref n="1" />,<fnref n="4" />

Submitted 7 September 2023
Accepted 30 November 2023
Published 3 January 2024

Corresponding authors
Erwann Durand,
erwann.durand@cirad.fr
Kornkanok Aryusuk,
kornkanok.ary@kmutt.ac.th

Academic editor
Timothy Omara

Additional Information and
Declarations can be found on
page 16

DOI 10.7717/peerj-achem.29

cc Copyright
2024 Sombutsuwan et al.

Distributed under
Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0

OPEN ACCESS

## ABSTRACT

This study investigated the influence of deep eutectic solvent (DES) acidity/alkalinity on the extraction profiles of phenolics and other biomolecules (phytic acid, reducing sugar, and protein) in defatted rice bran (DFRB). The DES with varying pH levels were prepared using different hydrogen bond acceptors (choline chloride (ChCl) and potassium carbonate (K₂CO₃)) and hydrogen bond donors (lactic acid, urea, and glycerol). The results reveal that the acidic DES (ChCl-lactic acid; pH 0.42) demonstrated superior extraction efficiency for total phenolic acids (4.33 mg/g), phytic acid (50.30 mg/g), and reducing sugar (57.05 mg/g) while having the lowest protein content (5.96 mg/g). The alkaline DES (K₂CO₃-glycerol; pH 11.21) showed the highest levels of total phenolic acid (5.49 mg/g) and protein content (12.81 mg/g), with lower quantities of phytic acid (1.04 mg/g) and reducing sugar (2.28 mg/g). The weakly acidic DES (ChCl-glycerol; pH 4.72) exhibited predominantly total phenolics (3.46 mg/g) with lower content of protein (6.22 mg/g), reducing sugar (1.68 mg/g) and phytic acid (0.20 mg/g). The weakly alkaline DES (ChCl-urea; pH 8.41) resulted in lower extraction yields for total phenolics (2.81 mg/g), protein (7.45 mg/g), phytic acid (0.10 mg/g), and reducing sugar (7.36 mg/g). The study also explored the distribution of phenolics among various DESs, with the alkaline DES (K₂CO₃-glycerol) containing the highest concentration of free phenolics. Notably, ChCl-based DESs predominantly contained soluble esterified bound phenolics and soluble glycosylated bound phenolics. Furthermore, a significant correlation between antioxidant activities and phenolic contents was observed. In conclusion, this study has revealed that the acidity and alkalinity of a DES significantly impact the extraction of phenolics and other value-added biomolecules in DFRB. These findings highlight the potential for manipulating the properties of DESs through pH variation, making them versatile solvents for extracting and isolating valuable compounds from agricultural by-products like DFRB and offering opportunities for sustainable utilization and value addition in various industries.

<footnote n="1">¹ Lipid Technology Research Laboratory, Pilot Plant Development and Training Institute (PDTI), King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT), Bangkok, Thailand</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Qualisud, Univ Montpellier, Avignon Université, CIRAD, Institut Agro, IRD, Université de la Réunion, Montpellier, France</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ CIRAD, UMR QualiSud, Montpellier, France</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Division of Biochemical Technology, School of Bioresources and Technology, King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT), Bangkok, Thailand</footnote>
**Subjects** Analytical Chemistry (other), UV-Visible Spectroscopy

**Keywords** Deep eutectic solvents, Acidity, Alkalinity, Extraction, Extracts, Rice bran, Phenolics, Biomolecules, By-products, Antioxidants

## INTRODUCTION

Rice bran, a coproduct derived from the milling process of husked rice (Oryza sativa L.), constitutes approximately 10 wt% of the rice grain (Gul et al., 2015). Remarkably, rice bran plays a crucial role in the food industry, serving as a valuable source of rice bran oil and contributing to a global market valued at $1.23 billion in 2018. This surging demand for rice bran oil has led to the substantial production of defatted rice bran (DFRB), a primary byproduct of the oil extraction process (Alexandri et al., 2020). Despite the inherent nutritional richness and presence of bioactive compounds, the utilization of DFRB remains predominantly limited to low-value applications such as animal feed or disposal in landfills (Alexandri et al., 2019; Gul et al., 2015). It is important to note that DFRB contains bioactive phenolics, which have exhibited a range of properties, including antioxidative effects (Zhao et al., 2018), anti-inflammatory effects (Yin et al., 2019), and the potential for preventing chronic conditions like cancer (Dokkaew et al., 2019) and cardiovascular diseases (Zhang et al., 2020).

In addition, DFRB contains a notable content of myo-inositol-1,2,3,4,5,6-hexakisphosphoric acid (IP6), commonly known as phytic acid (ranging from 5.90% to 6.48% on a dry basis). This compound has been associated with various health advantages, including antimicrobial effects (Nassar et al., 2021), antioxidative properties (Canan et al., 2021), and the potential to prevent colon cancer (Kaur et al., 2020). DFRB is a rich source of proteins with distinctive attributes, encompassing emulsion, foaming, gel-forming, and hypoallergenic properties (Zhuang et al., 2019). Moreover, there have been reports on the conversion of DFRB into reducing sugars through fermentation for applications in both food and bioenergy sectors (Alexandri et al., 2020). Incorporating DFRB into value-added products offers opportunities to increase market value and develop innovative strategies that can influence the broader economic landscape.

However, the bioactive compounds within DFRB are predominantly bound to the cell wall as insoluble macromolecules, or within cell wall components like cellulose and structural proteins (Zhao et al., 2018). The release of bioactive compounds and biomolecules from the cell wall, followed by their dissolution in solvents, represents an important and critical step in obtaining extracts enriched with value-added biomolecules. Conventional methods involving strong alkaline or strong acid treatments for release (Shahidi & Hossain, 2023) encounter challenges due to their corrosive nature and potential environmental impacts. These issues are at odds with the prevailing emphasis on green chemistry and sustainable processes.

Deep eutectic solvents (DESs) have recently emerged as novel and promising solvents (Abbott et al., 2003). They are comprised of a halide salt or a hydrogen bond acceptor (HBA) and a hydrogen bond donor (HBD) (Zhang et al., 2012). DESs offer numerous advantages over conventional organic solvents. They are cost-effective, easy to prepare, require
minimal energy for high-purity compound production, and exhibit biodegradability and biocompatibility (Hayyan et al., 2013; Yang, 2019; Zhang et al., 2012). Additionally, DESs are well-suited for extraction and separation processes due to their low volatility and non-toxic nature. They are characterized by non-flammability, non-corrosiveness, and high selectivity and solubility (Hizaddin et al., 2022). Extensive research has been conducted on using DESs for extracting valuable compounds from agricultural waste, including phenolic compounds (PCs) (Jablonsky et al., 2020; Ruesgas-Ramón, Figueroa-Espinoza & Durand, 2017; Ruesgas-Ramón et al., 2020), and proteins (Olalere & Gan, 2023), and for the pretreatment of lignin and cellulose (Mnasri et al., 2023; Zhu et al., 2023). However, their high viscosity presents a significant challenge, impacting the extraction process and subsequent procedures such as filtration, decantation, and dissolution, potentially limiting their industrial applications (Boateng, 2023). Nevertheless, the strategic addition of water to DESs reduces viscosity while maintaining their structure, providing the potential to enhance extraction yields (Ali Redha, 2021).

The pH of a DES in the extraction process has been recognized as a key factor influencing efficacy due to its substantial impact on the interaction between the DES and the target solute, particularly with respect to cell wall breakdown. Certain DES mixtures, such as choline chloride:lactic acid (ChCl:La) and potassium carbonate:glycerol (K:Gly), have demonstrated enhanced efficiency in dissolving biopolymers compared to DES with a near-neutral pH (Tan, Ngoh & Chua, 2018). Furthermore, both acidic (ChCl:La) and alkaline (K:Gly) DESs have effectively facilitated the delignification of various plant residues (Suopajärvi et al., 2020). Based on this theory, the cell wall of DFRB would have a high possibility of breaking down and releasing the bioactive molecules.

Previous studies have primarily concentrated on the output, composition, and bioactive attributes of free phenolic compounds (FPC) or individual value-added biomolecules. This has created a gap in our understanding of how DESs impact profiles, quantities, and functional qualities, including esterified-bound and glycosylated-bound PCs. These forms of PCs are solubilized and interact with macromolecules through covalent, ester, ether, or C–C bonds (Wang et al., 2020). They have gained growing attention due to their health-promoting attributes in food (Arruda et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2022; Zhong et al., 2022).

Therefore, the present study aims to investigate how the acidity and alkalinity of DES influence the phenolic and biomolecule compositions within extracts from DFRB. Moreover, the investigation aims to identify distinct phenolic profiles and evaluate their potential as antioxidants. These efforts offer valuable insights into the promising applications of these compounds as ingredients for promoting health and well-being.

# MATERIALS & METHODS

## Chemicals

Phenolic acid standards, including 4-hydroxybenzoic acid (99% purity), vanillic acid (≥ 97% purity), *p*-coumaric acid (≥ 98% purity), ferulic acid (99% purity), syringic acid (≥ 95% purity), sinapic acid (≥ 98% purity), and caffeic acid (≥ 98% purity), along with
<table><caption>**Table 1** Composition of DES.</caption><thead><tr><th>Hydrogen bond acceptor</th><th>Hydrogen bound donor</th><th>Molar ratio</th><th>Abbreviations</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Choline chloride</td><td>Lactic acid</td><td>1:2</td><td>ChCl:La</td></tr><tr><td>Choline chloride</td><td>Glycerol</td><td>1:2</td><td>ChCl:Gly</td></tr><tr><td>Choline chloride</td><td>Urea</td><td>1:2</td><td>ChCl:U</td></tr><tr><td>Potassium carbonate</td><td>Glycerol</td><td>1:7</td><td>K:Gly</td></tr></tbody></table>

phytic acid, bovine serum albumin (≥ 98% purity), and glucose, were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA). Analytical grade chemicals such as potassium persulfate ($K_2S_2O_8$), 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), 2,2'-azino-bis (3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid (ABTS), choline chloride (ChCl), Folin Ciocalteu reagent (2 M), glycerol, lactic acid, and potassium carbonate ($K_2CO_3$) were also obtained from Sigma-Aldrich (Saint Louis, MO, USA). High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) grade ethyl acetate, hexane, and acetic acid were obtained from RCI Lab Scan Co. Ltd., Bangkok, Thailand. All other chemicals used were analytical grade and used without further purification.

## Preparation of DES

Four types of DES compositions (detailed in Table 1) were selected based on variations in their pH levels. These compositions were prepared by mixing, stirring, and heating the HBA and HBD constituents in Erlenmeyer flasks. The mixture was continuously stirred and heated at 70 °C until it became a clear, homogeneous liquid. The duration of this process ranged from approximately 30 to 180 min, depending on the specific DES type.

## DES properties

The pH values of freshly prepared DES samples, which contained 20% (w/v) water, were measured using a Mettler pH meter. The solvatochromic characteristics were evaluated employing Nile Red dye as a probe. Nile Red was introduced into each DES to act as a solvatochromic probe, and the wavelength of maximum visible light absorption ($λ_{max}$) was determined by following previously established methods (Laokuldilok et al., 2011; Mulia, Fauzia & Krisanti, 2019). Subsequently, the DES-dye mixtures were scanned in the 400–700 nm range using a UV-vis spectrophotometer, and the Nile Red polar parameter ($E_{NR}$) was then calculated using Eq. (1):

$$E_{NR}(\text{kcal/mol}) = 28,591/\lambda_{\text{abs.max}}(\text{nm}). \qquad (1)$$

## Extraction procedure

### Plant material

Defatted rice bran (DFRB) was obtained from Surin Rice Bran Oil Co., Ltd. (Surin Province, Thailand). Proximate analyses of DFRB were determined according to the Association of Official Analytical Chemists guidelines (AOAC, 2005) and the Van Soest sequential analytical method (Van Soest, Robertson & Lewis, 1991).
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1** Overview of the DFRB extraction process, along with the characterization of phenolic compounds and value-added biomolecules.</figcaption></figure>

Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerjachem.29/fig-1

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

## Extraction of biomolecules in DFRB using DES

An outline depicting the process of DFRB extraction, and the characterization of PC and value-added biomolecules is illustrated in Fig. 1. The extraction process was initiated by adding 6.25 mL (20% w/w) of distilled water to 25 g of each hydrated DES in an Erlenmeyer flask with a stopper. The mixture was then heated to 70 °C for 10 min to reduce viscosity and ensure the homogeneity of the DES. Next, 2.5 g of DFRB was added to the DES mixture and subjected to agitation in a water bath shaker at 150 rpm and a temperature of 70 °C for 5 h. Upon completion of the extraction, the sample was subjected to centrifugation at 1,780 × g for 15 min, resulting in the collection of the supernatant. The supernatant was then adjusted to a volume of 50 mL by adding distilled water using a volumetric flask. Subsequently, it was stored in a 100 mL polypropylene (PP) reagent bottle wrapped with aluminum foil to protect it from light. This stored sample was maintained at −20 °C for further analysis of PC and biomolecules.

## Phenolic compounds determinations

### Identification of phenolic compound types

The types of PCs in the DES supernatant extracts were established based on the work of Lou et al. (2020) with some modifications detailed below.

### Free Phenolic Compounds (FPC)

The DES supernatant extracts (five mL) were acidified to a pH of 2 using 6 M HCl. The resulting supernatant underwent three successive extractions with ethyl acetate (EtAc) at a 1:1 (v/v) ratio. The EtAc phases were then combined, dehydrated using anhydrous Na₂SO₄, filtered, and subsequently dried with N₂ gas. The resulting dry residues were reconstituted in five mL of ethanol, yielding the fraction containing free PCs (FPCs).
## Soluble Esterified Bound Phenolic Compounds (SEBPC)

After extracting of FPCs, the residual aqueous phase underwent hydrolysis with five mL of 4 M NaOH containing 10 mM EDTA and 1% ascorbic acid (to protect the PC) for 4 h. at room temperature. The sample was then acidified to a pH of 2 using 6 M HCl. The PC liberated from soluble esters were subjected to triple extractions using EtAc, following a procedure similar to that used for the FPCs. This process resulted in the fraction of soluble esterified bound phenolic acid compounds (SBEPC).

## Soluble Glycosylated Bound Phenolic Compounds (SGBPC)

The residual aqueous phase left after the extraction of SEBPC was subjected to additional hydrolysis using 1.25 mL of 6 M HCl at 75 °C for 60 min. The PCs released from soluble-bound glycosides were subsequently extracted three times using EtAc, following a similar methodology to that used for the extraction of FPCs. This process yielded the fraction containing soluble glycosylated bound phenolic acid compounds (SGBPC).

## Determination of Total Phenolic Content (TPC)

The total phenolic content of the extracted fractions, namely FPCs, SBEPCs, and SBGPCs in DFRB, was determined utilizing the Folin-Ciocalteu method described by Kim & Lim (2016) with some modifications. Twenty microliters of the sample were combined with freshly prepared Folin-Ciocalteu reagent (80 µl) and 7.5% (w/v) Na₂CO₃ (200 µl). The resulting mixture was diluted with 700 µl of distilled water and then placed in a dark environment at room temperature for 2 h. to allow the reaction to proceed. The total phenolic content was assessed using a microplate reader set to a wavelength of 765 nm (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), using gallic acid as a standard. The quantity of total PC present in the sample was computed as gallic acid equivalents.

## Characterization of phenolic acids using HPLC

Samples of FPC, SEBPC, and SGBPC derived from various types of DES were subjected to analysis of their phenolic acid profiles using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The HPLC system consisted of a pump model 515 (Water Associates, Milford, MA, USA), a Rheodyne 7125 six-port valve injector with a 10 µL loop, and a photodiode array detector (PDA; Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan). The samples were prepared using the designated mobile phase and subsequently subjected to analysis on a Mightysil Si60 column (250 × 4.6 mm ID., 5 µm) protected with a Mightysil Si60 guard column (10 × 4.6 mm ID., 5µm) (Kanto Chemical Co. Inc., Tokyo, Japan). The mobile phase consisted of hexane/ethyl acetate/acetic acid (70:30:0.2, v/v/v) with a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min. UV absorbance was monitored in the 257-320 nm range (Sombutsuwan et al., 2021). HPLC control and data collection were performed using LC Solution Software (version 1.24; Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan). Quantification of 4-hydroxybenzoic acid, vanillic acid, *p*-coumaric acid, ferulic acid, syringic acid, sinapic acid, and caffeic acid in the samples was performed using the external standard curve method.
## Anti-radical activity assays

### DPPH radical-scavenging activity

The DPPH assay was determined according to Laokuldilok et al. (2011) with some modifications. Briefly, a 20 µl sample was mixed with 20 µl of ethanol, and the resulting mixture was added to 560 µl of 0.1 M DPPH in ethanol. This mixture was then incubated in darkness at 25 °C for 30 min. Afterward, the absorbance at 517 nm was measured. The DPPH radical scavenging capacity of the sample was calculated using Eq. (2)

$$ \% \text{DPPH radical-scavenging capacity} = \left[ \frac{(A_c - A_s)}{A_c} \right] \times 100 \quad (2) $$

where A_c represents the absorbance of the control at 517 nm, and A_s represents the absorbance of the sample at 517 nm. The DPPH radical scavenging capacity was expressed as mmol gallic acid/g DFRB.

### ABTS assay

The methodology described previously (Sombutsuwan et al., 2021) was used to determine antioxidant capacity against ABTS with some modifications. Briefly, a stock solution comprising 7 mM ABTS solution and 2.45 mM potassium persulfate solution was prepared. After mixing the two stock solutions, the resulting solution was kept in the dark at room temperature for 12 h. The solution was then diluted with ethanol to achieve an absorbance of 0.7 ± 0.05 units at 734 nm using a spectrophotometer. A DFRB sample (20 µl) was mixed with 180 µl of ABTS•+ solution and allowed to react for 6 min. The absorbance was measured at 734 nm using spectrophotometry. The ABTS•+ scavenging effect was calculated according to Eq. (3):

$$ \text{ABTS\text{\textbullet\text{+}} radical scavenging activity}(\%) = \left[ \frac{(A_c - A_s)}{A_c} \right] \times 100 \quad (3) $$

where A_c was the absorbance of diluted ABTS•+ solution at 734 nm at the beginning of the analysis and A_s was the absorbance of the mixture at 734 nm after 6 min. The ABTS radical scavenging capacity was expressed as mmol gallic acid/g DFRB.

## Determination of value-added biomolecules

### Phytic acid

The phytic acid content in the DES supernatant of DFRB extract was carried out using the Wade reagent method as described by Gao et al. (2007). A five mL aliquot of the DES extract supernatant was passed through a Dowex anion exchange column (0.25 g). Inorganic phosphorous and interfering compounds were eluted with 7.5 ml of 0.1 M NaCl, followed by elution of phytate with 7.5 ml of 0.7 M NaCl. The eluted sample (three mL) was mixed with one mL of the Wade reagent for 10 min. Measurement was conducted using a microplate reader at 500 nm. The DES solution served as the blank control. The phytic acid content in the samples was calculated based on a phytic acid standard curve.

### Protein

The protein content within the DFRB extract, derived from the DES supernatant, was quantified using the Bradford assay (Bio-Rad Protein Assay Cat# 500-0006; Bio-Rad Laboratories Ltd., Bangkok, Thailand). The quantification procedure adhered to
the manufacturer's guidelines. Briefly, 10 µl of the sample was mixed with 200 µl of Bradford reagent for 5 min. Subsequently, measurement was conducted utilizing a spectrophotometer set to 595 nm. The DES solution was employed as the blank control for reference. The protein content in the DFRB extract was calculated based on a Bovine serum albumin standard curve.

### Reducing sugar

Reducing sugar content was determined using the dinitrosalicylic acid (DNS) assay (Miller, 1959). A 100 µl sample of the DES supernatant of a DFRB extract was mixed with 100 µl of DNS reagent. The mixture was incubated in a water bath at 80 °C for 30 min. After cooling to room temperature, the sample was measured using a spectrophotometer at 575 nm. The DES solution was used as the blank control. The reduced sugar content in the DFRB extract was calculated based on a glucose standard curve.

### Statistical analysis

All analyses were carried out in triplicate, and the results are reported as means with corresponding standard deviations. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 17 for Windows (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY, USA). Statistical differences between individual groups were evaluated using Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

## RESULTS

### Analysis of the DFRB compositions and DES properties

Table 2 summarizes the proximate analysis of DFRB, highlighting its primary constituents as hemicellulose (23.22%) and protein (18.00%), with minor components comprising 11.74% ash, 8.20% cellulose, 4.27% lignin, and 5.11% moisture. In addition to the proximate analysis, the study examined the pH and polarity of different DESs. These DES types were categorized based on their pH properties, including strongly acidic (ChCl:La), weakly acid (ChCl:Gly), weakly alkaline (ChCl:U), and highly alkaline (K:Gly) as outlined in Table 3. While our initial selection of DES was guided by pH considerations, it is imperative to acknowledge the significant influence of solvent polarity on biomolecule extraction. Solvents with lower polarity tend to yield fewer phenolic compounds (Gil-Martín et al., 2022). Therefore, our study aimed to evaluate whether DES extraction efficiency is affected by polarity, analogous to conventional solvents. Table 3 indicated slight polarity decreases among the DES types, measured by E<sub>NR</sub> values where higher values indicated lower polarity. ChCl:La had the highest polarity (E<sub>NR</sub> 47.73 kcal/mol), while other DES types showed slightly varying polarities, measuring 49.04, 49.64, and 49.98 for ChCl:Gly, ChCl:U, and K:Gly, respectively.

### Effect of DES type on the extraction of phenolic compounds and value-added biomolecules

Table 4 displays the concentrations and biomolecule types obtained from DFRB extraction using the different DES. The findings indicate that the high alkaline DES (K:Gly) yielded the highest concentrations of total PC (5.49 mg/g DFRB) and protein (12.81 mg/g DFRB)
<table><caption>**Table 2** Proximate analysis of defatted rice bran (DFRB).</caption><thead><tr><th>Composition</th><th>Amount (% w/w)<sup>a</sup></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Protein</td><td>18.00 ± 0.00</td></tr><tr><td>Hemicellulose</td><td>23.22 ± 0.66</td></tr><tr><td>Cellulose</td><td>8.20 ± 0.05</td></tr><tr><td>Lignin</td><td>4.27 ± 0.18</td></tr><tr><td>Moisture</td><td>5.11 ± 0.01</td></tr><tr><td>Ash</td><td>11.74 ± 0.04</td></tr></tbody></table>

**Notes.**

<table><caption>**Table 3** Properties of DES.</caption><thead><tr><th>DES</th><th>pH<sup>a</sup></th><th>E<sub>NR</sub> (kcal/mol)<sup>a</sup></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>ChCl:La</td><td>0.42 ± 0.01</td><td>47.73 ± 0.00</td></tr><tr><td>ChCl:Gly</td><td>4.72 ± 0.01</td><td>49.04 ± 0.00</td></tr><tr><td>ChCl:U</td><td>8.41 ± 0.02</td><td>49.64 ± 0.00</td></tr><tr><td>K:Gly</td><td>11.21 ± 0.01</td><td>49.98 ± 0.00</td></tr></tbody></table>

**Notes.**

<table><caption>**Table 4** Effect of DES on total phenolic content and value-added biomolecules from DFRB.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">DES</th><th colspan="4">Content (mg/g DFRB)<sup>1,2</sup></th></tr><tr><th>Total phenolic compounds</th><th>Proteins</th><th>Phytic acids</th><th>Reducing sugars</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>ChCl:La</td><td>4.33 ± 0.33b</td><td>5.96 ± 0.12a</td><td>50.30 ± 5.23b</td><td>57.05 ± 2.87<sup>c</sup></td></tr><tr><td>ChCl:Gly</td><td>3.46 ± 0.23a</td><td>6.22 ± 0.31a</td><td>0.20 ± 0.07a</td><td>1.68 ± 0.21a</td></tr><tr><td>ChCl:U</td><td>2.81 ± 0.20a</td><td>7.45 ± 0.29b</td><td>0.10 ± 0.03a</td><td>7.36 ± 0.21b</td></tr><tr><td>K:Gly</td><td>5.49 ± 0.33<sup>c</sup></td><td>12.81 ± 0.15<sup>c</sup></td><td>1.14 ± 0.02a</td><td>2.28 ± 0.08a</td></tr></tbody></table>

**Notes.**

but lower levels of phytic acid (1.04 mg/g) and reducing sugar (2.28 mg/g DFRB). On the other hand, the strong acid DES (ChCl:La) yielded the highest concentrations of phytic acid and reducing sugar, along with a notable presence of total PC (4.33 mg/g DFRB). However, protein concentration from ChCl:La treatment (5.96 mg/g DFRB) was the lowest compared to other DES types. The weak acid DES (ChCl:Gly) and weak alkaline DES (ChCl:U) resulted in moderate protein concentrations (6.22 and 7.45 mg/g DFRB) and lower total PC (3.46 and 2.81 mg/g DFRB) compared to strong acid and high alkaline DES types.

## Effect of DES type on the selectivity of extraction of phenolic compounds

Figure 2 displays the contents and profiles of PC in various DES extracts, as analyzed using the Folin-Ciocalteu assay. The observed PC types include free form (FPC), soluble

<footnote>ᵃValues are means of independent triplicate determinations ± standard deviation.</footnote>

<footnote>ᵃValues are means of independent triplicate determinations ± standard deviation.</footnote>

<footnote n="1">¹Values are means of independent triplicate determinations ± standard deviation.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²Values with the same superscript letter in the same column are not significantly different (p > 0.05).</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2** Impact of DES type on phenolic compounds contribution: FPC (free phenolic compounds), SEBPC (soluble esterified bound phenolic compounds), SGBPC (soluble glycosylated bound phenolic compounds), and TPC (total phenolic compounds). Values with the same letter in the same PC types are not significantly different (*p* < 0.05).</figcaption></figure>

Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerjachem.29/fig-2

esterified bound (SEBPC), and soluble glycosylated bound (SGBPC). The K:Gly treatment showed the highest FPC at 1.81 mg/g DFRB. Moreover, the K:Gly treatment exhibited substantial SEBPC and SGBPC contents, approximately 1.67 mg/g DFRB and 2.27 mg/g DFRB, respectively. Distinct patterns were observed in the PC profiles between potassium (K)- and ChCl-based DESs. In the K:Gly treatment, there were similar contents of the three PC types (FPC, SEBPC, and SGBPC). On the other hand, ChCl-based DES showed dominance of SEBPC and SGBPC, with lower amounts of FPC. For instance, in ChCl:La, ChCl:Gly, and ChCl:U treatments, SEBPC contents were 1.61, 1.30, and 1.01 mg/g DFRB, respectively, while SGBPC contents were 2.27, 1.91, and 1.60 mg/g DFRB, respectively. ChCl-based DES exhibited lower FPC contents, ranging from 0.19 to 0.46 mg/g DFRB.

## Compositions of phenolic compounds

The composition of phenolic acids within various PC fractions under different DES treatments was analyzed by HPLC. The primary phenolic acid identified across all DES types was ferulic acid, constituting a substantial portion (42.6 – 76.5%, w/w) of both free and bound PC (Figs. 3A–3C). However, the different DES treatments yielded distinct compositions of PC in both free and bound forms. In particular, the FPC was predominantly composed of ferulic acid, ranging from 42.5% to 76.5%, and *p*-coumaric acid, ranging from 22.4% to 54.1%. It is noteworthy that the FPC obtained from the K:Gly extraction exclusively exhibited dominance of ferulic acid and *p*-coumaric acid at 76.21% and 22.63%, respectively. While, the FPC derived from ChCl:U extraction exhibited fairly similar amounts of ferulic acid and *p*-coumaric acid. Sinapic acid in extracts was significantly more abundant in bound form(ranging from 11.37% in SGBPC extracted with K:Gly to 46.84% in SEBPC extracted with ChCl:Gly. Notably, SGBPC consistently exhibited a higher
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3** Compositions of phenolic compounds extracted from DFRB using different types of DES: ChCl:La (choline chloride :lactic acid), ChCl:Gly (choline chloride:glycerol), ChCl:U (choline chloride:urea), and K:Gly (potassium carbonate:glycerol).</figcaption></figure>

Full-size DOI: 10.7717/peerjachem.29/fig-3

vanillic acid content compared to FPC and SEBPC fractions across most DES extractions. A similar trend was seen for 4-hydroxybenzoic acid, albeit with lower concentrations.

## Antioxidant activities of free- and bound-form phenolic compounds

The potential antioxidant activities of free- and bound-form PCs were evaluated using the DPPH and ABTS assays, as presented in Table 5. Similar patterns for radical scavenging activities were observed using both assays. Among the treatments, the PC derived from K:Gly treatments exhibited the highest overall activities, with values of 15.69 mmol
<table><caption>Table 5 Antioxidant activities of DES extracts of free and bound form phenolic compounds evaluated using the DPPH and ABTS assays.</caption><caption>Anti-radical activity (mmol GAE/g)<sup>a</sup></caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">DES</th><th colspan="4">DPPH</th><th colspan="4">ABTS</th></tr><tr><th>FPC</th><th>SEBPC</th><th>SGBPC</th><th>Total</th><th>FPC</th><th>SEBPC</th><th>SGBPC</th><th>Total</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>ChCl:La</td><td>0.57 ± 0.17</td><td>2.66 ± 0.45</td><td>4.71 ± 0.12</td><td>7.94 ± 0.24</td><td>1.09 ± 0.03</td><td>3.53 ± 1.02</td><td>17.91 ± 2.00</td><td>22.57 ± 1.49</td></tr><tr><td>ChCl:Gly</td><td>0.11 ± 0.06</td><td>1.08 ± 0.43</td><td>3.63 ± 0.53</td><td>4.83 ± 0.86</td><td>1.16 ± 0.20</td><td>8.41 ± 2.03</td><td>9.72 ± 1.32</td><td>19.29 ± 1.54</td></tr><tr><td>ChCl:U</td><td>0.09 ± 0.04</td><td>0.52 ± 0.53</td><td>1.96 ± 0.29</td><td>2.57 ± 0.70</td><td>1.17 ± 0.23</td><td>4.01 ± 1.07</td><td>5.42 ± 0.36</td><td>10.60 ± 1.38</td></tr><tr><td>K:Gly</td><td>4.02 ± 0.37</td><td>4.77 ± 0.87</td><td>6.90 ± 0.87</td><td>15.69 ± 1.43</td><td>12.47 ± 0.99</td><td>6.58 ± 1.51</td><td>8.95 ± 1.22</td><td>27.99 ± 0.87</td></tr></tbody></table>

Notes.

(expressed as gallic acid equivalents per gram (GAE/g)) for DPPH and 27.99 mmol GAE/g for ABTS assays. Notably, the total antioxidant activities of PCs extracted from ChCl-based DES were comparatively lower than those from potassium-based DES (K:Gly). The weakest antioxidant activities were found in PCs obtained from ChCl:U treatment, measuring 1.96 mmol GAE/g for DPPH and 10.61 mmol GAE/g for ABTS assays. Analyzing the total PC contents resulting from various treatments, the values were 5.55 mg/g for K:Gly, 4.33 mg/g for ChCl:La, 3.46 mg/g for ChCl:G, and 2.81 mg/g for ChCl:U (refer to Table 4). The ranking of antioxidant activities determined by both assays followed the order: K:Gly >ChCl:La >ChCl:G >ChCl:U, consistent with the total PC contents.

# DISCUSSION

## DFRB compositions and DES properties

The components of DFRB showed the following order: hemicellulose >protein >ash >cellulose >moisture >lignin. These findings deviate from the results reported by Moreira et al. (2022), except for the ash content. In their investigation, DFRB displayed different proportions, comprising 27.81% cellulose, 12.4% ash, 11.56% hemicellulose, 10.60% moisture, and 8.63% lignin. On the other hand, protein content closely aligned with prior studies, indicating approximately 17% protein content in DFRB, consistent with the observations made by Sairam, Gopala Krishna & Urooj (2011) and Zhuang et al. (2019). According to Wancura et al. (2023), the typical composition of rice bran demonstrates ranges of 23–28% cellulose, 11–18% hemicellulose, 12–20% protein, 8.5–16% ash, 8.5–12.5% moisture, and 3–9% lignin. These variations can be attributed to diverse factors, including cultivation conditions, rice species diversity, and soil agronomic nuances, as well as differences in analysis methodology and sample pretreatment (Wancura et al., 2023). Based on pH measurements, the DESs used in this study can be categorized into four groups: strongly acidic (ChCl:La), weakly acidic (ChCl:Gly), highly alkaline(K:Gly), and weakly alkaline (ChCl:U). The pH values for these DES types in a 1:2 molar ratio were consistent with previous research. Sazali et al. (2023) and Ruesgas-Ramón et al. (2020) reported pH values of 0–1.0 and 0.78 for ChCl:La and 4.0–5.0 and 4.34 for ChCl:Gly, respectively. Zhu et al. (2023) reported a pH of 5.86 for ChCl:Gly (1:2 molar ratio), while Thi & Lee (2019) reported a pH of 9.0 for the 1:2 molar ratio of ChCl:U DES. Additionally, the pH value of K:Gly in a 1:7 molar ratio was reported as 12.3 in a prior study (Lim et al., 2019),

<footnote>ᵃValues are means of independent triplicate determinations ± standard deviation.</footnote>
consistent with the value of 11.21 found in this study. It is noteworthy that DES pH values vary based on the molar ratios used. For instance, as the amount of glycerol increased in K:Gly DES, the pH value gradually decreased (Lim et al., 2019). However, for ChCl-based DESs, pH is significantly affected by molecular-level interactions between the HBA and HBD components (Sazali et al., 2023). In terms of E<sub>NR</sub> assessment among the DES options, ChCl:La demonstrated the highest polarity and exhibited efficient extraction of primary components, including PC, phytic acids, and reducing sugars. The polar characteristics of K:Gly closely resembled those of ChCl:U and ChCl:Gly. Notably, a prior study reported an E<sub>NR</sub> value of 49.55 kcal/mol for ChCl:Gly:water with a molar ratio of 1:2:1 (Dai et al., 2013), aligning with our findings, which measured 49.04 kcal/mol for the 1:2 molar ratio of ChCl:Gly with 20% water (0.35 mol). A study by Pandey & Pandey (2014) used solvatochromic probes to quantitatively measure the polarity of various DES formulations. These DESs were prepared by combining ChCl with glycerol, urea, malic acid, and ethylene glycol in a 1:2 molar ratio. Their findings suggested that the high polarity of these DESs primarily arose from the inherent HBD characteristics in their components. Another investigation revealed that natural deep eutectic solvents (NADES) based on organic acids exhibited greater polarity than those composed of alcohols and sugar-based components (Dai et al., 2013).

## Effect of DES type on the extraction of phenolic compounds and value-added biomolecules

More than 70% of the total PC present in RB are insoluble and covalently linked to cell wall components such as cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin, pectin, and structural proteins. Extracting these bound PCs from plants using conventional aqueous or organic solvents is challenging. Typically, chemical methods involving acid or base hydrolysis are utilized to enhance the extractability of PCs (Kim & Lim, 2016). Recent research indicates that DESs offer higher PC extractability compared to traditional solvents, with ChCl-DES exhibiting exceptional solubility and selectivity for PCs. The efficacy of DESs as extraction solvents is attributed to the ability of the HBD component to form hydrogen bonds with macromolecules present in plant cell walls. Mechanisms of PC extraction using ChCl-DES solvents have been proposed by Alam et al. (2021). In this study, we utilized four distinct DES formulations with pH levels ranging from acidic (pH 0.42) to alkaline (pH 11.21) to extract PCs and value-added biomolecules from DFRB, eliminating the need for traditional acid or base chemical hydrolysis. The results presented in Table 4 depict unique profiles of bioactive compounds extracted by these DES variants. The results revealed that the highly alkaline K:Gly demonstrated remarkable efficiency in extracting PCs and protein, while it did not exhibit the same proficiency in extracting phytic acid and sugars. Conversely, the potent acid, ChCl:La, exhibited excellent extraction capabilities for phytic acid, reducing sugars, and phenolic content. ChCl:gly and ChCl:U, representing weak acid and weak alkaline types, respectively, showed moderate efficacy in extracting a range of bioactive compounds. The pH of DES emerged as a key factor influencing the extraction efficiency of PC and value-added biomolecules. DESs with either low or high pH values exhibited the potential to disrupt plant cell walls more effectively, thereby facilitating the release
of bioactive molecules into the DES solution. *Tan, Ngoh & Chua* (2018) reported that DES types with harsh pH conditions, such as ChCl:La and K:Gly, demonstrated enhanced efficiency in dissolving biopolymers compared to DESs with pH levels closer to neutral. Moreover, the acidic ChCl:La and alkaline K:Gly have been shown to effectively delignify wheat, corn, and rapeseed stem residues (*Suopajärvi et al.*, 2020).

The primary ChCl-based DES commonly used for PC extraction incorporates polyalcohols (e.g., glycerol) as the HBD, followed by carboxylic acids (e.g., lactic acid) and amides (e.g., urea) serving as HBD. However, research indicates that the PC extractability of carboxylic acid-based ChCl-DES surpasses that of amide-based ChCl-DES due to the presence of free H+ ions in carboxylic acids. These ions play a crucial role in catalyzing the hydrolysis of cellulose, hemicellulose, and pectin within the cell walls of biomass. Consequently, this catalytic process promotes the diffusion of PCs from the biomass matrix to the ChCl-DES (Alam et al., 2021), aligning with the findings of our study. ChCl:La has been reported as an effective solvent for extracting PCs from rice bran and other agricultural waste sources (Jablonsky et al., 2020; Ruesgas-Ramón et al., 2020; Santos et al., 2021).

The higher content of reducing sugars under strongly acidic DES conditions can be attributed to the hydrolysis of β-glycosidic bonds in cellulose and hemicellulose to release reducing sugars. Ren et al. (2020) proposed a detailed mechanism for the conversion of cellulose into total reducing sugar using acidic DES, shedding light on this process. It is worth noting that corn stover treated with ChCl:La exhibited the presence of reducing sugars, as observed by Liang et al. (2021). Additionally, a higher quantity of reducing sugars in the liquid fraction of ChCl:La-treated samples was obtained when compared to K:Gly, ChCl:U, and ChCl:Gly treatments, as reported by Tan et al. (2021).

Protein extraction from rice bran is typically achieved through a two-step process involving alkaline extraction followed by acid precipitation. The use of alkaline conditions enhances protein extraction yield by breaking down the protein matrix, which, in turn, increases the surface charge and solubility of proteins in an aqueous extraction medium (Abd Rahim et al., 2023). The suggested pH range for extracting rice bran protein typically falls within the range of pH 7.5 to pH 11 (Zheng et al., 2019). In this study, ChCl:U (pH 8.41) and ChCl:Gly (pH 11.21) exhibited high protein content at 7.45 and 12.81 mg/g DFRB, respectively, aligning with a previous study that employed K:Gly as medium for the extraction of protein from defatted wheat germ (Olalere & Gan, 2023). Unfolding and denaturation of proteins are strongly pH-dependent, with acid-induced unfolding often occurring between pH 2 and 5 and base-induced unfolding at pH 10 or higher (Konermann, 2012). Therefore, if protein extraction is the primary objective, ChCl:La DES may not be the ideal choice as an extraction solvent. On the other hand, low pH values between 0 and 1 are required to dissociate phytate from iron and protein complexes (Gifford & Clydesdale, 1990). Results obtained by Saad et al. (2011) also showed that an acidic solution containing 5% H₂SO₄ at pH 0.6 yielded the highest amount of phytic acid extracted from rice bran. Thus, the pronounced acidic characteristics of ChCl:La played a substantial role in the increased phytic acid content observed in this study.
Similar to traditional extraction methods involving aqueous or organic solvents, various extraction parameters such as temperature, time, and solid-to-liquid ratio significantly influence extract yields and stability. Optimal temperatures for ChCl-based DESs in extracting phenolic PC from biomass typically range between room temperature and 80 °C. Elevated temperatures, over 40 °C, are often utilized to reduce the viscosity of ChCl-based DESs, facilitating enhanced solute transfer from solid to liquid phases (Alam et al., 2021). Our study maintained an extraction temperature of 70 °C, well within the optimal range. However, it is important to note that higher temperatures may cause thermal degradation of PCs. For example, research by Xiao, Han & Shi (2008) highlighted the significant impact of extraction temperature on flavonoid concentration. Their findings revealed that a range between 70 to 110 °C did not decrease the flavonoid content from Radix Astragal. The optimal extraction time for phenolic compounds using ChCl-DESs, as summarized by Alam et al. (2021), typically ranges from 30 to 240 min and is dependent on the specific characteristics of the biomass and ChCl-DESs used. For instance, (Suopajärvi et al., 2020) employed 8 h for PC extraction from wheat straw, corn stalk, and rapeseed stem at 100 °C using ChCl:La and K:Gly DES. In our study, we employed a 7 h extraction time.

## Effect of DES type on the selectivity of phenolic compound extraction and the resulting potential in antioxidant activities

In this section, we investigate the influence of different types of DES on phenolic composition and anti-radical activities. It is worth highlighting that the K:Gly treatment demonstrated the highest concentration of FPC. Additionally, among the ChCl-based DES, ChCl:La stood out for its significant presence of soluble-bound PC (Fig. 2).

The impact of pH on the liberation of bioactive compounds was discussed in the previous Section. It was evident that relatively weaker acidic and basic conditions yielded a reduced release of bioactive compounds, likely due to a less efficient degradation of the cell wall, consequently affecting the total release of PCs. Phenolic compounds bound to the cell wall components (such as cellulose, hemicellulose, pectin, lignin, and structural proteins) were found to be more abundant than their free counterparts (Harukaze, Murata & Homma, 1999; Zhou et al., 2004).

Alkaline hydrolysis demonstrated greater effectiveness in liberating PCs from their bound state in comparison to acid hydrolysis (Nenadis, Kyriakoudi & Tsimidou, 2013; Vadivel & Brindha, 2015). The soluble-bound forms, consisting of SEBPC and SGBPC, were observable in both acid and alkaline DES treatments. This could be attributed to the capability of DES to dissolve and modify constituents of the cell wall, such as lignin, cellulose, hemicellulose, and protein, thereby leading to their degradation into smaller molecules. It has been reported that acidic DESs can cleave lignin-carbohydrate linkages and lignin ether bonds. In contrast, alkaline DESs have shown a more pronounced effect on lignin removal compared to hemicellulose (Guo et al., 2022). Additionally, studies have documented the successful extraction of oligosaccharide hydroxycinnamates from wild rice through the application of acid hydrolysis (Bunzel et al., 2002), and the extraction of
feruloylated arabinoxylans from nixtamalized maize bran achieved *via* alkaline hydrolysis (Herrera-Balandrano et al., 2020).

Ferulic acid and *p*-coumaric acid emerged as the prominent PCs in DFRB. These compounds were detected across all types of DESs and in all forms of PCs (as illustrated in Fig. 3). Furthermore, additional minor PCs, including *p*-hydroxybenzoic acid, vanillic acid, and sinapic acid, were also identified. These observations are in line with a study by Kim et al. (2006), who identified *p*-hydroxybenzoic and vanillic acids in both free and bound forms of red and white wheat bran. Additionally, Qiu, Liu & Beta (2010) identified monomeric phenolic acids in wild rice, including *p*-coumaric, vanillic, syringic, and *p*-hydroxybenzoic acids, as well as phenolic acid aldehydes, which were found in both soluble and insoluble forms. Similar outcomes were reported by Laokuldilok et al. (2011), who highlighted the prevalence of ferulic acid in rice bran, accompanied by lower quantities of gallic, protocatechuic, hydroxybenzoic, *p*-coumaric, and sinapic acids in the bound form.

Furthermore, the PCs extracted using different types of DESs displayed distinct variations in radical scavenging activities, as indicated in Tables 4 and 5. A clear correlation was observed between the overall efficiency and the total phenolic contents, suggesting that the extracted PCs remained stable within these DESs. Previous research has highlighted the remarkable stability of polyphenolic compounds in DESs based on sugars, glycerol, betaine, and lactic acid (Gómez-Urios et al., 2023). Notably, the ABTS assay revealed a stronger trend in antioxidant activity when compared to the DPPH assay. This difference can be attributed to varying mechanisms, primarily involving hydrogen atom transfer (to scavenge free radicals through hydrogen donation) and electron transfer (to reduce compounds by transferring electrons) (Apak, 2019).

## CONCLUSIONS

This study investigated the influence of acidity and alkalinity within DESs on the extraction of PCs and other value-added biomolecules from DFRB. The outcomes highlight the potential of adjusting DES properties by controlling pH levels, thus making them adaptable solvents that effectively extract and isolate valuable compounds from agricultural by-products such as DFRB. These findings open up promising opportunities for sustainable utilization and value enhancement across various industries. Further work is ongoing to implement a strategy where pH-tuned DES may be used to drive the optimum composition of the natural extract, especially with the aim of promoting its application as an antioxidant ingredient.

## ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DECLARATIONS

### Funding

This work was supported by the King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi through funding for the KMUTT Research Center of Excellence Project to Lipid Technology Research Group and the KMUTT Postdoctoral Fellowship to Piraporn Sombutsuwan. The
funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

**Grant Disclosures**

The following grant information was disclosed by the authors:
King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi through funding for the KMUTT Research Center of Excellence Project to Lipid Technology Research Group.
KMUTT Postdoctoral Fellowship to Piraporn Sombutsuwan.

**Competing Interests**

The authors declare there are no competing interests.

**Author Contributions**

* Piraporn Sombutsuwan conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, performed the computation work, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft.

* Erwann Durand conceived and designed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft.

* Kornkanok Aryusuk conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, performed the computation work, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft.

**Data Availability**

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:
The raw data are available in the *Supplemental Files*.

**Supplemental Information**

Supplemental information for this article can be found online at http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj-achem.29#supplemental-information.

**REFERENCES**

**Abbott AP, Capper G, Davies DL, Rasheed RK, Tambyrajah V. 2003.** Novel solvent properties of choline chloride/urea mixtures. *Chemical Communications* 70–71 DOI 10.1039/B210714G.

**Abd Rahim FN, Wan Ibadullah WZ, Saari N, Brishti FH, Mustapha NA, Ahmad N, Arulrajah B. 2023.** The effect of alkaline extraction and drying techniques on the physicochemical, structural properties and functionality of rice bran protein concentrates. *International Journal of Biological Macromolecules* 242:124908 DOI 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.124908.

**Alam MA, Muhammad G, Khan MN, Mofijur M, Lv Y, Xiong W, Xu J. 2021.** Choline chloride-based deep eutectic solvents as green extractants for the isolation of phenolic compounds from biomass. *Journal of Cleaner Production* 309:127445 DOI 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127445.
**Alexandri M, López-Gómez JP, Olszewska-Widdrat A, Venus J. 2020.** Valorising agro-industrial wastes within the circular bioeconomy concept: the case of defatted rice bran with emphasis on bioconversion strategies. *Fermentation* **6**(2):42 DOI 10.3390/fermentation6020042.

**Alexandri M, Neu A-K, Schneider R, López-Gómez JP, Venus J. 2019.** Evaluation of various Bacillus coagulans isolates for the production of high purity L-lactic acid using defatted rice bran hydrolysates. *International Journal of Food Science & Technology* **54**(4):1321–1329 DOI 10.1111/ijfs.14086.

**Ali Redha A. 2021.** Review on extraction of phenolic compounds from natural sources using green deep eutectic solvents. *Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry* **69**(3):878–912 DOI 10.1021/acs.jafc.0c06641.

**Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC). 2005.** *Official methods of analysis of AOAC international*. Washington, D.C.: AOACs.

**Apak R. 2019.** Current issues in antioxidant measurement. *Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry* **67**(33):9187–9202 DOI 10.1021/acs.jafc.9b03657.

**Arruda HS, Pereira GA, De Morais DR, Eberlin MN, Pastore GM. 2018.** Determination of free, esterified, glycosylated and insoluble-bound phenolics composition in the edible part of araticum fruit (Annona crassiflora Mart.) and its by-products by HPLC-ESI-MS/MS. *Food Chemistry* **245**:738–749 DOI 10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.11.120.

**Boateng ID. 2023.** Evaluating the status quo of deep eutectic solvent in food chemistry. *Potentials and limitations*. *Food Chemistry* **406**:135079 DOI 10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.135079.

**Bunzel M, Allerdings E, Sinwell V, Ralph J, Steinhart H. 2002.** Cell wall hydroxycinnamates in wild rice (Zizania aquatica L.) insoluble dietary fibre. *European Food Research and Technology* **214**(6):482–488 DOI 10.1007/s00217-002-0512-3.

**Canan C, Kalschne DL, Ongaratto GC, Leite OD, Cursino ACT, Flores ELDM, Ida EI. 2021.** Antioxidant effect of rice bran purified phytic acid on mechanically deboned chicken meat. *Journal of Food Processing and Preservation* **45**(9):e15716 DOI 10.1111/jfpp.15716.

**Dai Y, Van Spronsen J, Witkamp GJ, Verpoorte R, Choi YH. 2013.** Natural deep eutectic solvents as new potential media for green technology. *Analytica Chimica Acta* **766**:61–68 DOI 10.1016/j.aca.2012.12.019.

**Dokkaew A, Punvittayagul C, Insuan O, Limtrakul P, Wongpoomchai R. 2019.** Protective effects of defatted sticky rice bran extracts on the early stages of hepatocarcinogenesis in rats. *Molecules* **24**(11):2142 DOI 10.3390/molecules24112142.

**Gao Y, Shang C, Maroof MAS, Biyashev RM, Grabau EA, Kwanyuen P, Burton JW, Buss GR. 2007.** A modified colorimetric method for phytic acid analysis in soybean. *Crop Science* **47**(5):1797–1803 DOI 10.2135/cropsci2007.03.0122.

**Gifford SR, Clydesdale FM. 1990.** Interactions among calcium, zinc and phytate with three protein sources. *Journal of Food Science* **55**(6):1720–1724 DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1990.tb03608.x.
Gil-Martín E, Forbes-Hernández T, Romero A, Cianciosi D, Giampieri F, Battino M. 2022. Influence of the extraction method on the recovery of bioactive phenolic compounds from food industry by-products. *Food Chemistry* 378:131918 DOI 10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.131918.

Gómez-Urios C, Viñas Ospino A, Puchades-Colera P, Blesa J, López-Malo D, Frígola A, Esteve MJ. 2023. Choline chloride-based natural deep eutectic solvents for the extraction and stability of phenolic compounds, ascorbic acid, and antioxidant capacity from Citrus sinensis peel. *LWT* 177:114595 DOI 10.1016/j.lwt.2023.114595.

Gul K, Yousuf B, Singh AK, Singh P, Wani AA. 2015. Rice bran: nutritional values and its emerging potential for development of functional food—a review. *Bioactive Carbohydrates and Dietary Fibre* 6(1):24–30 DOI 10.1016/j.bcdf.2015.06.002.

Guo Y, Xu L, Shen F, Hu J, Huang M, He J, Zhang Y, Deng S, Li Q, Tian D. 2022. Insights into lignocellulosic waste fractionation for lignin nanospheres fabrication using acidic/alkaline deep eutectic solvents. *Chemosphere* 286:131798 DOI 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.131798.

Harukaze A, Murata M, Homma S. 1999. Analyses of free and bound phenolics in rice. *Food Science and Technology Research* 5(1):74–79 DOI 10.3136/fstr.5.74.

Hayyan M, Hashim MA, Hayyan A, Al-Saadi MA, AlNashef IM, Mirghani MES, Saheed OK. 2013. Are deep eutectic solvents benign or toxic? *Chemosphere* 90(7):2193–2195 DOI 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.11.004.

Herrera-Balandrano DD, Báez-González JG, Carvajal-Millán E, Muy-Rangel D, Urías-Orona V, Martínez-López AL, Márquez-Escalante JA, Heredia JB, Beta T, Niño Medina G. 2020. Alkali-extracted feruloylated arabinoxylans from nixtamalized maize bran byproduct: a synonymous with soluble antioxidant dietary fiber. *Waste and Biomass Valorization* 11(2):403–409 DOI 10.1007/s12649-018-0462-z.

Hizaddin HF, Wazeer I, Huzaimi NAM, El Blidi L, Hashim MA, Lévéque J-M, Hadj-Kali MK. 2022. Extraction of phenolic compound from model pyrolysis oil using deep eutectic solvents: computational screening and experimental validation. *Separations* 9(11):336 DOI 10.3390/separations9110336.

Jablonsky M, Majova V, Strizincova P, Sima J, Jablonsky J. 2020. Investigation of total phenolic content and antioxidant activities of spruce bark extracts isolated by deep eutectic solvents. *Crystals* 10(5):402 DOI 10.3390/cryst10050402.

Kaur V, Goyal AK, Ghosh G, Chandra Si S, Rath G. 2020. Development and characterization of pellets for targeted delivery of 5-fluorouracil and phytic acid for treatment of colon cancer in Wistar rat. *Heliyon* 6(1):e03125 DOI 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e03125.

Kim KH, Tsao R, Yang R, Cui SW. 2006. Phenolic acid profiles and antioxidant activities of wheat bran extracts and the effect of hydrolysis conditions. *Food Chemistry* 95(3):466–473 DOI 10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.01.032.

Kim S-M, Lim S-T. 2016. Enhanced antioxidant activity of rice bran extract by carboxydase treatment. *Journal of Cereal Science* 68:116–121 DOI 10.1016/j.jcs.2016.01.006.

Konermann L. 2012. Protein unfolding and denaturants. In: eLS, ed. *Encyclopedia of life sciences*. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd DOI 10.1002/9780470015902.a0003004.pub2.
**Laokuldilok T, Shoemaker CF, Jongkaewwattana S, Tulyathan V. 2011.** Antioxidants and antioxidant activity of several pigmented rice brans. *Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry* **59**(1):193–199 DOI 10.1021/jf103649q.

**Liang X, Zhu Y, Qi B, Li S, Luo J, Wan Y. 2021.** Structure-property-performance relationships of lactic acid-based deep eutectic solvents with different hydrogen bond acceptors for corn stover pretreatment. *Bioresource Technology* **336**:125312 DOI 10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125312.

**Lim WL, Gunny AAN, Kasim FH, AlNashef IM, Arbain D. 2019.** Alkaline deep eutectic solvent: a novel green solvent for lignocellulose pulping. *Cellulose* **26**(6):4085–4098 DOI 10.1007/s10570-019-02346-8.

**Lou X, Xu H, Hanna M, Yuan L. 2020.** Identification and quantification of free, esterified, glycosylated and insoluble-bound phenolic compounds in hawthorn berry fruit (Crataegus pinnatifida) and antioxidant activity evaluation. *LWT* **130**:109643 DOI 10.1016/j.lwt.2020.109643.

**Miller GL. 1959.** Use of dinitrosalicylic acid reagent for determination of reducing sugar. *Analytical Chemistry* **31**(3):426–428 DOI 10.1021/ac60147a030.

**Mnasri A, Khiari R, Dhaouadi H, Halila S, Mauret E. 2023.** Acidic and alkaline deep eutectic solvents pre-treatment to produce high aspect ratio microfibrillated cellulose. *Bioresource Technology* **368**:128312 DOI 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.128312.

**Moreira BP, Draszewski CP, Celante D, Brondani L, Lachos-Perez D, Mayer FD, Abaide ER, Castilhos F. 2022.** Defatted rice bran pretreated with deep eutectic solvents and sequential use as feedstock for subcritical water hydrolysis. *Bioresource Technology* **351**:127063 DOI 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.127063.

**Mulia K, Fauzia F, Krisanti EA. 2019.** Polyalcohols as hydrogen-bonding donors in choline chloride-based deep eutectic solvents for extraction of xanthones from the pericarp of garcinia mangostana L. *Molecules* **24**(3):636 DOI 10.3390/molecules24030636.

**Nassar R, Nassar M, Vianna ME, Naidoo N, Alqutami F, Kaklamanos EG, Senok A, Williams D. 2021.** Antimicrobial Activity of Phytic Acid: An Emerging Agent in Endodontics. *Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology* **11**:753649 DOI 10.3389/fcimb.2021.753649.

**Nenadis N, Kyriakoudi A, Tsimidou MZ. 2013.** Impact of alkaline or acid digestion to antioxidant activity, phenolic content and composition of rice hull extracts. *LWT*—*Food Science and Technology* **54**(1):207–215 DOI 10.1016/j.lwt.2013.05.005.

**Olalere OA, Gan CY. 2023.** Process optimisation of defatted wheat germ protein extraction in a novel alkaline-based deep eutectic solvent (DES) via Box-Behnken experimental design (BBD). *Food Chemistry* **409**:135224 DOI 10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.135224.

**Pandey A, Pandey S. 2014.** Solvatochromic probe behavior within choline chloride-based deep eutectic solvents: effect of temperature and water. *The Journal of Physical Chemistry B* **118**(50):14652–14661 DOI 10.1021/jp510420h.
Qiu Y, Liu Q, Beta T. 2010. Antioxidant properties of commercial wild rice and analysis of soluble and insoluble phenolic acids. *Food Chemistry* **121**(1):140–147 DOI 10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.12.021.

Ren H, Gong R, Li M, Liu Y, Zhu H, Wang C, Duan E. 2020. Natural deep eutectic solvents efficient catalytic conversion of cellulose to total reducing sugars (TRS). *Journal of Molecular Liquids* **312**:113282 DOI 10.1016/j.molliq.2020.113282.

Ruesgas-Ramón M, Figueroa-Espinoza MC, Durand E. 2017. Application of Deep Eutectic Solvents (DES) for phenolic compounds extraction: overview, challenges, and opportunities. *Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry* **65**(18):3591–3601 DOI 10.1021/acs.jafc.7b01054.

Ruesgas-Ramón M, Suárez-Quiroz ML, González-Ríos O, Baréa B, Cazals G, Figueroa-Espinoza MC, Durand E. 2020. Biomolecules extraction from coffee and cocoa by- and co-products using deep eutectic solvents. *Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture* **100**(1):81–91 DOI 10.1002/jsfa.9996.

Saad N, Me N, Ithnin H, Shafie N. 2011. Optimization of optimum condition for phytic acid extraction from rice bran. *African Journal of Plant Science* **5**:168–176 DOI 10.1007/s13197-011-0521-y.

Sairam S, Gopala Krishna AG, Urooj A. 2011. Physico-chemical characteristics of defatted rice bran and its utilization in a bakery product. *Journal of Food Science and Technology* **48**(4):478–483 DOI 10.1007/s13197-011-0262-y.

Santos MCB, Barouh N, Durand E, Baréa B, Robert M, Micard V, Lullien-Pellerin V, Villeneuve P, Cameron LC, Ryan EP, Ferreira MSL, Bourlieu-Lacanal C. 2021. Metabolomics of pigmented rice coproducts applying conventional or deep eutectic extraction solvents reveal a potential antioxidant source for human nutrition. *Metabolites* **11**(2):110 DOI 10.3390/metabo11020110.

Sazali AL, AlMasoud N, Amran SK, Alomar TS, Pa'ee KF, El-Bahy ZM, Yong TLK, Dailin DJ, Chuah LF. 2023. Physicochemical and thermal characteristics of choline chloride-based deep eutectic solvents. *Chemosphere* **338**:139485 DOI 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.139485.

Shahidi F, Hossain A. 2023. Importance of insoluble-bound phenolics to the antioxidant potential is dictated by source material. *Antioxidants* **12**(1):203 DOI 10.3390/antiox12010203.

Sombutsuwan P, Jirattisakul A, Nakornsadet A, Akepratumchai S, Chumsantea S, Pojjanapornpun S, Lilitchan S, Krisnangkura K, Aryusuk K. 2021. A simple and efficient method for synthesis and extraction of ethyl ferulate from γ-oryzanol. *Journal of Oleo Science* **70**(6):757–767 DOI 10.5650/jos.ess20180.

Suopajärvi T, Ricci P, Karvonen V, Ottolina G, Liimatainen H. 2020. Acidic and alkaline deep eutectic solvents in delignification and nanofibrillation of corn stalk, wheat straw, and rapeseed stem residues. *Industrial Crops and Products* **145**:111956 DOI 10.1016/j.indcrop.2019.111956.

Tan JYB, Yoon BK, Cho N-J, Lovrić J, Jug M, Jackman JA. 2021. Lipid nanoparticle technology for delivering biologically active fatty acids and monoglycerides. *International Journal of Molecular Sciences* **22**(18):9664 DOI 10.3390/ijms22189664.
**Tan YT, Ngoh GC, Chua ASM. 2018.** Evaluation of fractionation and delignification efficiencies of deep eutectic solvents on oil palm empty fruit bunch. *Industrial Crops and Products* **123**:271–277 DOI 10.1016/j.indcrop.2018.06.091.

**Thi S, Lee KM. 2019.** Comparison of deep eutectic solvents (DES) on pretreatment of oil palm empty fruit bunch (OPEFB): cellulose digestibility, structural and morphology changes. *Biosource Technology* **282**:525–529 DOI 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.03.065.

**Vadivel V, Brindha P. 2015.** Antioxidant property of solvent extract and acid/alkali hydrolysates from rice hulls. *Food Bioscience* **11**:85–91 DOI 10.1016/j.fbio.2015.06.002.

**Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. 1991.** Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. *Journal of Dairy Science* **74**(10):3583–3597 DOI 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2.

**Wancura JHC, Brondani M, Vezaro FD, Martins-Vieira JC, Moreira BP, Dos Santos MSN, Abaide ER, De Castilhos F, Mayer FD. 2023.** Motivations to produce biofuels from rice bran: An overview involving a recent panorama. *Industrial Crops and Products* **203**:1171–1170 DOI 10.1016/j.indcrop.2023.117170.

**Wang Z, Chen X, Guo Z, Feng X, Huang P, Du M, Zalán Z, Kan J. 2022.** Distribution and natural variation of free, esterified, glycosylated, and insoluble-bound phenolic compounds in brocade orange (Citrus sinensis L. Osbeck) peel. *Food Research International* **153**:110958 DOI 10.1016/j.foodres.2022.110958.

**Wang Z, Li S, Ge S, Lin S. 2020.** Review of distribution, extraction methods, and health benefits of bound phenolics in food plants. *Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry* **68**(11):3330–3343 DOI 10.1021/acs.jafc.9b06574.

**Xiao W, Han L, Shi B. 2008.** Microwave-assisted extraction of flavonoids from Radix Astragali. *Separation and Purification Technology* **62**(3):614–618 DOI 10.1016/j.seppur.2008.03.025.

**Yang Z. 2019.** Chapter 3—Toxicity and biodegradability of deep eutectic solvents and natural deep eutectic solvents. In: Ramón DJ, Guillena G, eds. *Deep eutectic solvents: synthesis, properties, and applications*. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co, KGaA, 43–60 DOI 10.1002/9783527818488.ch3.

**Yin ZN, Wu WJ, Sun CZ, Liu HF, Chen WB, Zhan QP, Lei ZG, Xin X, Ma JJ, Yao K, Min T, Zhang MM, Wu H. 2019.** Antioxidant and anti-inflammatory capacity of ferulic acid released from wheat bran by solid-state fermentation of aspergillus niger. *Biomedical and Environmental Sciences* **32**(1):11–21 DOI 10.3967/bes2019.002.

**Zhang Q, De Oliveira Vigier K, Royer S, Jérôme F. 2012.** Deep eutectic solvents: syntheses, properties and applications. *Chemical Society Reviews* **41**(21):7108–7146 DOI 10.1039/C2CS35178A.

**Zhang R, Ma Q, Tong X, Liu L, Dong L, Huang F, Deng Y, Jia X, Chi J, Zhang M. 2020.** Rice bran phenolic extract supplementation ameliorates impaired lipid metabolism in high-fat-diet fed mice through AMPK activation in liver. *Journal of Functional Foods* **73**:104131 DOI 10.1016/j.jff.2020.104131.

**Zhao G, Zhang R, Dong L, Huang F, Liu L, Deng Y, Ma Y, Zhang Y, Wei Z, Xiao J, Zhang M. 2018.** A comparison of the chemical composition, in vitro bioaccessibility
and antioxidant activity of phenolic compounds from rice bran and its dietary fibres.
*Molecules* **23**(1):202 DOI 10.1021/jf025919b.

Zheng Y, Gao N, Wu J, Yin B. 2019. Chapter 11 - rice bran protein: extraction, nutraceutical properties, and potential applications. In: Cheong L-Z, Xu X, eds. *Rice bran and rice bran oil*. London, U.K: AOCS Press, 271–293
DOI 10.1016/B978-0-12-812828-2.00011-1.

Zhong J, Wang Y, Li C, Yu Q, Xie J, Dong R, Xie Y, Li B, Tian J, Chen Y. 2022. Natural variation on free, esterified, glycosylated and insoluble-bound phenolics of Rubus chingii Hu: correlation between phenolic constituents and antioxidant activities.
*Food Research International* **162**:112043 DOI 10.1016/j.foodres.2022.112043.

Zhou Z, Robards K, Helliwell S, Blanchard C. 2004. The distribution of phenolic acids in rice. *Food Chemistry* **87**(3):401–406 DOI 10.1016/j.foodchem.2003.12.015.

Zhu Y, Yang T-X, Qi B-K, Li H, Zhao Q-S, Zhao B. 2023. Acidic and alkaline deep eutectic solvents (DESs) pretreatment of grapevine: Component analysis, characterization, lignin structural analysis, and antioxidant properties. *International Journal of Biological Macromolecules* **236**:123977 DOI 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.123977.

Zhuang X, Yin T, Han W, Zhang X. 2019. Chapter 10 - nutritional ingredients and active compositions of defatted rice bran. In: Cheong L-Z, Xu X, eds. *Rice bran and rice bran oil*. London, U.K: AOCS Press, 247–270
DOI 10.1016/B978-0-12-812828-2.00010-X.