마늘을 MAE 방법과 CE 방법에 의하여 각각 물과 에탄올로 추출하고 추출조건에 따른 올레오레진 수율과 기능성을 비교하였다. 추출조건을 달리하였을 때 추출방법에 따른 올레오레진 함량의 차이는 거의 없었으나 최적 추출시간이 CE의 경우 2시간인 반면 MAE에서는 5분 내외로 추출시간이 크게 단축되었다. 전자공여작용은 물 추출의 경우 두 가지 추출방법에서 모두 64% 이었고 에탄올 추출의 경우는 CE 및 MAE에서 각각 63%와 51%로 모든 추출물에서 비슷한 수준을 보였다. 아질산염 소거작용은 모든 추출물에서 PH 증가하면서 감소하는 경향을 보였고 특히, pH 1.2의 경우 90% 이상의 높은 소거작용을 보였으며 추출방법에 의한 차이는 없었다. Tyrosinase 저해작용은 물 추출물의 경우 CE 및 MAE에서 각각 47% 및 60%이었으며 에탄올 추출물은 이와 비슷하거나 낮은 45%와 39%의 저해작용을 나타내었다. ACE 저해작용은 CE보다 MAE 추출물의 경우 더욱 강한 활성을 나타냈으나 효소와의 반응시간에 따른 뚜렷한 증가현상은 없었다. 또한 pyruvic acid 함량에서는 물 추출물의 경우 CE와 MAE 각각 마늘 1 g당 44.8 및 $36.0{mu}moles$이었고 에탄올 추출물에서는 이보다 낮은 28.6과 $32.0{mu}moles$을 나타내어 추출방법에 따른 큰 차이를 보이지 않았다.
The yield of oleoresin content and functionality of fresh garlic were compared according to varying extraction conditions by microwave-assisted extraction (MAE) and conventional extraction (CE) methods. When different extracting conditions were applied, there was no significant difference of extraction methods in the oleoresin content. However, in the case of the CE, the optimum extraction time was two hours, while the other was about five minutes which meant that the extraction time was shortened drastically. The electron donating abilities showed a similar level which was 64% by both methods, using water. And, in the case of ethanol extraction, it resulted 63% and 51% by CE and MAE, respectively. The nitrite scavenging effect diminished while pH was increasing and especially, in the case of pH 1.2, it showed a high elimination effect of more than 90%. There was no difference of extraction methods. The tyrosinase inhibitory effect was 47% and 60% by CE and MAE, respectively in the case of the water extract. The ethanol extract showed similar or a slight lower inhibition of 45% and 39%. The angiotensin I-converting enzyme inhibitory effect showed more powerful activity in the case of MAE extract than CE extract, but there was not an increase relating to reaction time of enzyme. Also, pyruvic acid content was $44.8;and;36.0{mu}moles$ per one gram of a garlic by CE and MAE, respectively when water was used, and was $28.6;and;32.0{mu}moles$ by CE and MAE when ethanol was used. Again, there was no big difference between CE and MAE methods.
