JPS61193665A - Deodorant - Google Patents

Abstract

(57) [Summary] This bulletin contains application data before electronic filing, so abstract data is not recorded.

Description

[Detailed Description of the Invention] [Technical Field] This invention relates to a deodorant that eliminates bad odors and strange odors. [Background Art] Generally, bad odors and strange odors are caused by exhaust smoke and waste liquid from factories, cigarettes and deep floors, and The source is kitchen waste, etc., and there are a wide variety of types of foul odors and strange odors. especially,
In homes, rooms are often kept closed when heating and cooling equipment is in operation, so countermeasures against these foul odors have become a major problem.

There are four ways to eliminate these bad odors and strange odors:
There are two ways.

■ Sensory deodorization method: A method of masking bad odors and foreign odors using aromatic substances (fragrances, etc.).

■ Physical deodorization method: Diluting and removing off-odors through ventilation and diffusion, adsorbing odors using silica gel or activated carbon, or enclosing odorous substances with clathrate compounds such as cyclodextrin. How to interact.

■ Chemical deodorization method: A method of chemically reacting (neutralization, addition, condensation, oxidation, etc.) with malodor and off-flavor components to make them odorless.

For example, oxidation using direct flame combustion methods or oxidizing agents such as ozone or potassium permanganate.

■ Biological deodorization method: A method that reduces and kills bacteria that cause spoilage, prevents spoilage, and prevents the occurrence of bad odors.

The sensory deodorizing method (2) is a method that is mainly practiced in households, and is a method that uses the fragrance of the deodorant itself to deodorize bad odors and foreign odors. However, with this method, it is difficult to balance the fragrance and odor, and people have different tastes in the scent of deodorants, which can sometimes make them feel disgusted. It's hard to say. The physical method (2) is widely used, but it has problems such as the need for equipment, fluctuations in room temperature, and the lack of sustainability in the adsorption effect of malodor and off-odor components using activated and activated charcoal. be. In addition, with chemical deodorization method ■, it is extremely difficult to select substances that effectively react with a wide variety of malodorous components.
It is not common, partly because the drugs used must be handled with care. Furthermore, the biological deodorizing method described in (2) also requires equipment, and has the disadvantage of slow onset of effects. At present, each deodorizing method has its own advantages and disadvantages. On the other hand, it has been devised to use active ingredients found in plants as deodorants that are odorless and do not require large-scale equipment. There is a deodorant that uses the extract heat-extracted with water (Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 53-66434.56-10006
0). Therefore, the inventors repeatedly considered various plants other than those mentioned above, but the deodorizing effect varied depending on the target odor.

[Purpose of the invention]

This invention was made in view of the above circumstances, and aims to provide a deodorizing agent that is odorless itself and has a high deodorizing effect against sulfur-based malodorous components. .

[Disclosure of the invention]

The present invention is a deodorizing agent against sulfur-based odors, characterized in that at least a part of the medium for dissolving the active ingredient is one in which the hydrogen ion concentration of the solution is changed from neutral to weakly alkaline. Its gist is the agent. That is, the deodorant according to the present invention is effective in deodorizing sulfur-based odors such as mercaptan and hydrogen sulfide, and at least a part of the solvent can change the hydrogen ion concentration of the solution from neutral to weakly alkaline. Therefore, the effects of deodorizing active ingredients such as phenolic compounds are brought out even more.

The method for making the solution weakly alkaline rather than neutral is not particularly limited as long as it can be made weakly alkaline rather than neutral by adding the solution to the active ingredient. Na1l
, KOH, NaJPO-b, and other alkaline solutions or buffering solutions.The higher the hydrogen ion concentration of the solution, the more effective it is at deodorizing, but care must be taken when handling it. About 8.5 is preferable.

Active ingredients include extracts from leaves, fruits, bark, etc. of plants, and are not limited to those that have the slightest deodorizing effect on sulfur-based odors; Particularly preferred are extracts obtained from , chestnut, and alder.

The extraction solvent used in this invention includes water or a hydrophilic organic solvent, and examples of the hydrophilic organic solvent include methanol, ethanol, acetone, and the like.

The extraction method is not limited as long as it is an extraction method for removing odor components of the deodorant itself. For example, water, a hydrophilic organic solvent such as alcohols such as ethanol and methanol, and ketones such as methyl ethyl ketone and acetone are added to the raw material plant, and the active ingredients are thermally extracted using a Soxhlet extractor or the like. This extraction operation may be performed using a mixed solvent of these hydrophilic organic solvents and water. The extract obtained in this manner is subjected to a low cryo-evaporator or a vacuum dryer to remove water or a hydrophilic organic solvent, and the deodorizing active ingredient is obtained as a solid. Therefore, this may be used as a deodorizer as it is, or it may be used after being concentrated. The obtained deodorants may be used alone or in combination. Note that the extraction is not a single-stage extraction as described above, and if necessary, odor components of the raw material plant may be eluted and removed in advance using a hydrophobic organic solvent. Alternatively, a steam distillation method may be used.

Since the product obtained in this way is used as an active ingredient, a deodorant that is itself odorless and poses no danger to the human body can be obtained.

Hereinafter, the present invention will be explained in detail based on examples thereof.

(Example 1) After collecting the leaves of thorn, holly osmanthus, trumpet, Japanese butterbur, lilac, and chinensis, they were dried in the shade for 10 days, and the leaves were crushed. Take 20 g of each pulverized product, apply it to a Soxhlet extractor with 120 ml of a mixed solvent of water:methanol=9:1, and reflux for 5 hours. The extract was filtered to obtain a filtrate, the solvent was removed under reduced pressure, and the mixture was dried to obtain a solid. This water-ethanol mixed solvent (
It was dissolved in water:ethanol=4:1) to obtain a 0.1 t% deodorant solution. The pH of each solution is as shown in Table 1. Separately, a 0.1 & 4t% deodorant solution (water:
Ethanol=4:1) was obtained.

In order to examine the deodorizing effect of two deodorant solutions for each of the six types of plants obtained in this way, with and without adjusting the hydrogen ion concentration with NaOH solution, the following test was conducted. went.

Add 1 ml of each of the 12 solutions obtained to a test tube containing 20 μl of a 10 ppm ethyl mercaptan solution (ethanol solvent), seal it tightly, and leave it at 30°C for 20 minutes.The amount of ethyl mercaptan in the test tube was determined by gas chromatography. was measured.

The detector used was FPD (Flame Photometric Detector).

As a blank test, use water without adding deodorant solution.
Ethanol solution (water:ethanol = 4:1)! , ml was added to a test tube containing 20 μm of a 10 ppm ethyl mercaptan solution, and the amount of ethyl mercaptan was measured in the same manner. The deodorizing rate was determined according to the following formula, and the deodorizing effect was examined.

Xo: Amount of odor when no deodorant solution is added. The pH value of each solution and the test results are shown in Table 1.

(Left below in margin) Table 1 (bottom margin) As can be seen from the table, extracts from any plant exhibit a deodorizing effect, but increasing the pH to 7.0 further increases the deodorizing effect. did.

(Example 2) The pH of the dried Chinese forrest leaves obtained in Example 1 was adjusted from 6.5 to 8.0 in 0.5 increments of 0 and 1.
Prepare a weak t% solution (water: ethanol = 4:1) and
A deodorant solution of Chinese forrest without adjusting the pH (, pH
5 and 8), and the deodorization rate against ethyl mercaptan was compared in the same manner as in Example 1. The test method was based on the above example. The results are shown in Table 2.

As can be seen from Table 2, as the pH value increases, the deodorizing rate increases, so the deodorizing effect improves.

(Example 3) 40 g of leaves of tung ash, holly osmanthus, and butterbur are each placed in a Soxhlet extractor with 120 ml of methanol and refluxed at 80° C. for 5 hours. The extract was filtered to obtain a filtrate, methanol was removed under reduced pressure, and a solid was obtained by vacuum drying. This was dissolved in a water-ethanol mixed solvent (water:ethanol=4:1) to obtain a 0.1 wt% deodorant solution A. pl (respectively 5.8. 5.7.6.2
Met. On the other hand, a NaOH solution was added to obtain each 001wt% deodorant solution B, which was adjusted to pH 7.0, and compared with deodorant solution A.

The test method was based on Example 1. The results are shown in Table 3.

(Margin below) Table 3 (Margin below) As seen from the table, no matter what material is used, p)l is 7°0.
Deodorant solution B showed higher deodorizing effect.

(Example 4) 40 g of chestnut leaves are placed in an Erlenmeyer flask with 200 ml of water and refluxed at 90° C. for 3 hours. The solution was filtered to obtain a filtrate, which was concentrated to dryness to obtain a solid. This was dissolved in water to obtain a 0.1 wt% aqueous deodorant solution A. pH is 5
．． It was 1. Meanwhile, 1M potassium phosphate buffer was added to this to pH 6.5 (B).

Deodorant solutions with pH 7.0 (C) and pH 7.5 (D) were prepared. The deodorizing efficiency of deodorant solutions with different pH values for ethyl mercaptan and hydrogen sulfide was compared.

The test method was the same as in Example 1 above. As a blank test, a buffer solution having a pH equal to that of deodorant solutions A-D was used.

The results are shown in Table 4.

(Margin below) As can be seen from Table 4, the higher the pH value, the higher the deodorization rate.

(Example 5) 40 g of alder leaves were placed in an Erlenmeyer flask with 200 ml of a water-methanol mixed solvent (water:methanol=1:4), and the mixture was refluxed at 90° C. for 5 hours. The liquid was filtered to obtain a filtrate, methanol was removed under reduced pressure, and the mixture was dried to obtain a solid. This was dissolved in a water-ethanol mixed solvent (water:ethanol=4:1) to obtain a 0.1 wt% deodorant solution A. pH was 5.8. On the other hand, in the same manner as in Example 4, pH 6.5 (B), pH 7.0
(C), a deodorant solution with pH 7.5 (D) was prepared. The deodorizing efficiency of each pt+ deodorant solution for ethyl mercaptan and methyl sulfide was compared. The test method was based on Example 4.

The results are shown in Table 5.

As can be seen from Table 5, the higher the pH value, the higher the deodorizing rate and the better the deodorizing effect.

〔Effect of the invention〕

As seen above, in this invention, the deodorizing solution is made to have a pH range from neutral to weakly alkaline, so it is possible to obtain a deodorizing agent that has an even higher deodorizing effect, is odorless in itself, and poses no danger to the human body. It will be done. That is, since this deodorant itself is odorless, it does not cause disgust in people due to its own odor unlike conventional deodorants, and does not require large-scale equipment. Moreover, a deodorizing agent that exhibits a high deodorizing effect against sulfur-based odors can be obtained.

Claims (3)

[Claims] (1) A deodorizer against sulfur-based odors, characterized in that at least a part of the medium in which the active ingredient is dissolved has a solution with a hydrogen ion concentration ranging from neutral to weakly alkaline. . (2) The deodorant according to claim 1, wherein the active ingredient is an extracted ingredient from a plant. (3) The deodorizing agent according to claim 2, wherein the plant is at least one selected from the group consisting of thorn, holly osmanthus, aspenia, butterbur, lilac, Chinese forsythia, chestnut, and alder.