The fruits were collected in the locality of Bignona (12˚45'0'' North and 16˚30'0'' West), Senegal. A voucher specimen are stored and referenced under a specified identification number. The pulped seeds were washed and then dried at 65˚C for 24 hours in an oven. After drying, the seeds were crushed with a pestle and a mortar and then crushed with a hammer mill (Moulinex, AR 11). The ground product thus obtained was also sieved using a 600 μm mesh sieve to obtain a finer particle size used for the extraction procedures. All analyses such as extraction and chemical parameters were made in duplicate during this work.

The extraction of the oil was carried out using a mechanical press (DD85G, IBG MonfortsOekotec GmbH, Mönchenglabach, Germany). The 10 mm die was used throughout the extraction and the rotational speed of 25 rpm was maintained. The outlet head temperature was also maintained at 105˚C throughout the operation. Beforehand, the exit head was brought to this temperature for about 25 minutes before the start of the extraction operation. At the end of the extraction, the obtained crude baobab oil is a mixture of oil with gummy impurities. This crude oil was immediately packaged in bottles for two days for decantation. The oil was transferred to new bottles and centrifuged (centrifuge Hettich, Zentrifugen, Germany) at 4500 rpm for 10 minutes. The obtained oil was stored at 4˚C for later analyzes.

In this part, the baobab oil was extracted with Soxhlet on particles with particle sizes of less than 600 μm using acetone, chloroform or n-hexane. These solvents were purchased from Prolabo (VWR Chemicals, USA). During extraction of the oil, the temperature of 70˚C ± 2˚C, the extraction time of six (6) hours and the ratio of 1:8 (g/mL) were used based on the optimum parameters obtained on different seeds [22] [23] [24] [25] . In order to remove traces of solvents, the extracted oil was evaporated by means of a rotary evaporator (Heidolph, Germany) at 45˚C and then put in an oven for 24 hours at 40˚C.

The physicochemical characteristics of extraction oils such as density, acidity, peroxide value, acid value, refractive index, iodine value, saponification value and color index of the extracted oils were determined. The saponification value was determined according to the French standard NF T60-206; The acid value according to standard NF T60-204. The acidity which corresponds to the percentage expression of oleic acid was calculated from the acid value. The iodine value is determined according to the French standard NF T60-203; The peroxide value according to the French standard NF T60-220; The extraction yield according to the standard soxhlet extraction method (NF V03-905). The density was measured by the NF T60-214 method at 25˚C. The polyphenols were assayed according to the method of Georgé et al. [26] . The extinction coefficients at 232 nm and 270 nm (k₂₃₂ and k₂₇₀) were determined according to the French standard NF T60-223 with a UV spectrophotometer (SPECORD 200 PLUS). The refractive index was measured with a refractometer (EXACTA-OPTECH, Mod-RMT, München, Germany). A colorimeter (CM-5, Konica Minolta Sensing Americas Inc., US) was used to determine the L*, a*, b*, Y1, c* and h color parameters of the various oils. The component L* indicating the clarity or luminance varies from black to white. The component a* corresponds to the green-red antagonist couple. The component b* corresponds to the blue-yellow antagonistic couple; Y1, c* and h correspond respectively to the yellowingindex, chromaticity and chromatic tone.

The antioxidant activity was evaluated with 2.2-diphenyl-1-pyridyrazyl (DPPH) according to the method described by Adaramola et al. [27] . In addition, some adjustments were made to its protocol. Thus, 2 mL of DPPH (0.1 mM) prepared in methanol was introduced into a test tube containing 0.5 mL of baobab oil. The mixture was stirred for five (5) minutes and then incubated in the dark and at room temperature for 30 minutes. After this incubation period, the absorbance was read at 517 nm against a blank (0.5 mL of baobab oil and 2 mL of methanol) using a UV spectrophotometer (SPECORD 200 PLUS). The absorbance of the control (0.5 mL of DPPH and 2 mL of methanol) is determined at this wavelength. This activity is compared to a control antioxidant (quercetin). The antiradical activity is expressed as a percentage of DPPH reduced according to this relation:

Inhibition   of   DPPH ( % ) = Absorbance control − -Absorbance sample Absorbance control × 100

A principal component analysis (PCA) and a hierarchical classification were carried out on the physicochemical data of the oils in order to find the best correlations between the random variables. The results obtained have been studied by correlation analyzes (Pearson correlation coefficients) between the physicochemical properties and the antioxidant potential of the extracted oils. To compare the averages, this analyzes of variance with the Fisher LSD test at the significance level of 5% were also performed. Thus, all analyzes were carried out with software R (version 3.2.4, 2016).

The physical parameters studied on the various oils of baobab include the extraction yield, the density, the refractive index, the extinction coefficients and the color indices. The results obtained are listed in Table 1.

On the same line, averages with the same letter are not significantly different from the 5% threshold.

The extraction yield was higher with chloroform than with hexane or acetone. Indeed, these yields were 6.28%; 23.05%; 30.29% and 40.12% respectively with pressing, acetone, n-hexane and chloroform. Therefore, the lower polar solvents (n-hexane and chloroform) exhibited the highest oil extraction efficiencies. This difference noted between the hot extraction yields can be explained reasonably by the physicochemical properties of the solvents used [22] [28] . However, n-hexane is mentioned in the literature as the most appropriate solvent for lipid extraction [29] . It is known that, n-hexane usually extracts only non-polar lipids and very little polar lipids. Acetone, a renewable organic solvent with a very low boiling point, would be miscible with all oils except palm [30] . Moreover, the results obtained are in agreement with those reported by Mani et al. [23] when optimizing the extraction of oil from Moringa oleifera seeds which were 33.47% and 30.33%, respectively with hexane and acetone. On the other hand, Tir et al. [28] obtained sesame oil extraction yields of 43.75% and 37.23% respectively with hexane and acetone. The differences in extraction yields would be due to the operating parameters used such as temperature, particle size, extraction time and the ratio (solvent/particle size) [22] [23] [24] [25] [31] . In addition, we find that the extraction yield was 6.28% and 40.12% with pressing and chloroform, respectively. This notorious difference in performance indicates the large amount of residual oil still contained in the cakes after extraction by pressing.

With regard to density, a significant difference was noted on the extracted oils. Density is an important physical feature in the classification of oils. It depends on the fatty acid composition, the minor compounds and the temperature [32] . For the pressing oil, the density is 0.911. Also, it is 0.882 ± 0.016; 0.902 ± 0.020 and 0.945 ± 0.013 respectively for acetone, hexane and chloroform. Indeed, the density of the extracted oils varied with the evolution of the molar mass of the solvents used. These results also suggest a difference in the composition of the extracted oils. However, the results obtained are consistent with those of 0.880 and 0.943 reported on baobab seed oils by Buhari et al. [33] and Chindo et al. [18] , respectively. These values are close to those of the oils of Moringa oleifera (0.9032 ± 0.03) and argan (0.9158 - 0.9170) widely used in the cosmetic and pharmaceutical fields [34] [35] .

The refractive index for assessing the purity of the oils is between 1.457 and 1.465. The analysis of the variance indicates that there is a significant difference at the 5% threshold for the measured refractive indexes. The refractive index is also affected by the polarity of the extraction solvents. In fact, the oils extracted with the two most polar solvents (chloroform and acetone) had the lowest refractive index. As a result, these two oils would have more long chain fatty acids than other oils. According to Shahidi [32] , the lipid refractive index varies according to the molecular weight, the chain length of the fatty acids, the degree of unsaturation and the degree of conjugation. The determined values are in agreement with those obtained by Chadare et al. [36] and Nkafamiya et al. [17] . These refractive index obtained are comparable with those of Nigella spseed oil (1.46 - 1.47), Jatropha curcus (1.468 - 1.469), olive (Olea europaea L.) (1.468) and argan (Argania spinosa L.) (1.468 - 1.471) [37] [38] [39] [40] . In addition, the refractive index is an important property that can detect adulteration of vegetable oils. Based on the iodine and refractive indices, we can say that baobab oil is non-drying.

The specific absorption at 232 nm for oils extracted by pressing and solvents (n-hexane, acetone and chloroform) are below the limit values set by the International Oleic Council (IOC) [41] and the Codex Alimentarius [42] for oils from virgin olives which are respectively 2.60 and 3.5. Indeed, it allows, at 232 nm, to evaluate the presence of the primary products of oxidation of fatty acids (linoleic hydroperoxides, oxidized fatty acids) while at 270 nm are detected the secondary oxidation products (alcohols, ketones…) [43] . The specific extinction at 232 nm of the oil extracted with hexane is consistent with the value of 1.73 reported by Gharby et al. [44] for sesame oil. Also, the extinction coefficient at 232 nm of oil extracted with acetone (0.862 ± 0.162) is lower than those extracted with chloroform (1.284 ± 0.029), n-hexane (1.737 ± 0.292) and pressing (1.492 ± 0.177). These results indicate that the extinction coefficient k₂₃₂ increases with the polarity of the solvents. In addition, the primary oxidation products are lower for the oil extracted with acetone than with those extracted with chloroform, n-hexane or pressing. The oil obtained with acetone is less oxidized than those obtained with chloroform, n-hexane and pressing. This trend was also reflected by the lower peroxide value with the oil extracted with acetone. Ultimately, baobab oil extracted with acetone would be more resistant to oxidation compared to other oils. On the other hand, the specific extinction at 270 nm between 0.883 and 1.571 remains above the limit value allowed for virgin olive oils [42] . The results obtained show that the oil extracted with the most polar solvent (acetone) had the lowest extinction coefficient k₂₇₀. Therefore, the secondary oxidation products would be less important in the oil extracted with acetone than in the other oils. Also, the extinction coefficients k₂₇₀ nm measured have significantly varied with the polarity of the solvents used and the boiling temperature of the extraction solvents. The results recorded also suggest that these secondary oxidation products would be lower in the pressed oil than in those derived from n-hexane or chloroform. However, the specific extinction at 270 nm of the oil extracted with chloroform remains similar to that of 1.54 ± 0.07 reported by Azhari et al. [45] for breast milk oil (Cucumis melo vartibis).

The color parameters (L*, a*, b*, Y1, c* and h) of the extracted oils are given in Table 1. The lowest and highest luminosity L* were respectively noted on the acetone (85.15 ± 0.13) and hexane (96.16 ± 0.01). This parameter L* characterizing the ability of a sample to reflect light more or less shows that the oil extracted with n-hexane is brighter than those extracted with pressing, acetone and chloroform. However, the brightness L* of oils extracted by pressing and acetone are similar. Similarly, the color parameter a* indicating the color hue between green and red is −12.22 ± 0.01; −7.74 ± 0.367; −6.96 ± 0.05 and −4.27 ± 0.10 respectively for the oils obtained with n-hexane, pressing, chloroform and acetone. Indeed, the oil extracted with hexane draws more towards the red coloring than those extracted with chloroform, acetone and pressing. Also, the parameter b* corresponding to the color shade between blue and yellow varies according to the different oils extracted. The highest value of b* was obtained with acetone which is 95.68 ± 0.04. This value indicates that the oil extracted with acetone is more yellow than those obtained with chloroform, hexane and pressing.

This value indicates that the oil extracted with acetone is more yellow than those obtained with chloroform, n-hexane and pressing. The b* parameter of the oil obtained by pressing is also similar to that obtained with chloroform. The yellowness index Y1 of the oil extracted with acetone (90.79 ± 0.03) confirms the accentuated coloration of the yolk. On the other hand, Y1 yellowing index values of the oil extracted by pressing and acetone are very close. As a result, the latter two would contain a larger amount of carotenoids [46] [47] . The difference in color observed between the oils obtained at high temperature could be attributed to the polarity of the solvents. Thus, the physicochemical characteristics of the oils extracted differ according to the properties of the solvents used. In addition, Al-farga et al. [48] reported with the oil of alhydwan seeds (Boerhawia elegana Choisy) the values 65.44 (L*), 1.11 (a*) and 28.33 (b*). In contrast, Shao et al. [47] had obtained 39.26 (L*), 30.56 (a*) and 50.40 (b*) values with tomato seed oil. Data processing by variance analysis shows that there are significant differences at the 5% level.

Table 2 contains the chemical properties of cold-pressed baobab oils and organic solvents. The acid value reports the degradation state of oil by evaluating the amount of free fatty acids formed during extraction or storage. The acid values were between 5.568 and 18.827 mgKOH・g⁻¹ respectively with chloroform and pressing method. The acid value noted varies significantly with the polarity of the solvents. In fact, the oils extracted with organic solvents revealed the weakest acid level. Consequently, the hydrolysis of the ester bonds of the triglycerides is greater in the oil resulting from pressing than in those resulting from solvents. At the same time, the increase in the acid value causes a change in the content of glycerol and of free fatty acids in the oil [49] . From these results, we can say that the quality of hot-extracted baobab oils is less altered than that of cold pressure. The latter is therefore less sensitive to rancidity during extraction. In addition, these values are very high compared to those reported by Nkafamiya et al. [17] (0.33 mgKOH・g⁻¹) and Birnin-Yauri and Garba [19] (3.14 mgKOH・g⁻¹). However, the acid value of the oil extracted with chloroform is close to those obtained by Ajayi [50] (5.19 mgKOH・g⁻¹) and Oyeleke et al. [51] (6.52 mgKOH・g⁻¹). The acid values obtained are also higher than the limit value recommended by the European Pharmacopoeia [52] . These recorded results could be reasonably explained by the pretreatment applied to baobab seeds and/or the presence of a highly active lipase which would lead to rapid acidification of baobab oil during extractions [53] . Also, these important values can be attributed to the heating temperature of the screw head or boiling solvents. According to Tchiégang et al. [54] , the temperature would cause the hydrolysis of one or two of the ester bonds of triglycerides favoring the formation of free fatty acids. In contrast, Brevedan et al. [55] reported a higher acid value for sunflower with n-hexane than with pressing.

On the same line, averages with the same letter are not significantly different from the 5%.

The iodine value is used to determine the degree of unsaturation of a vegetable oil and to assess stability during storage [56] . The registered iodine value varies significantly with the extraction process. Indeed, this index was between 56.266 and 99.113 mgI₂・100g⁻¹ and seems to be affected by the polarity of the extraction solvents. Also, the oil extracted with chloroform showed the lowest iodine value (56.266 ± 1.092 mgI₂・100g⁻¹). Therefore, this high quality oil would be more resistant to oxidation and have a longer shelf life. This iodine valueindicates the low percentage of acidity (2.80% ± 0.054%) of this oil. In other words, the oil extracted with chloroform would contain the lowest amounts of oleic and linoleic acids. The iodine values below 100 mgI₂・100g⁻¹ make it possible to classify baobab oil as non-drying oils [57] . The oils extracted by pressing, n-hexane and acetone showed the highest iodine values. These high iodine levels suggest the high unsaturated fatty acid content of these oils. Ultimately, baobab oil is comparable to olive oil (75 - 94 mgI₂・100g⁻¹) widely used by the cosmetics and pharmaceutical industries [38] . The results obtained are in agreement with those indicated by Nkafamiya et al. [17] and Danbature et al. [21] . The iodine value seems to decrease with the polarity of the solvents.

The peroxide value permit to understand the degree of oxidation of the unsaturated fatty acids. Indeed, the oxidation of the oils leads to the formation of hydroperoxides, primary products of oxidation. Thus, the peroxide value corresponding to the hydroproxide content represents a very useful and very sensitive criterion for assessing the first stages of the oxidative deterioration of a fatty substance and an oil during production and storage [58] [59] . This standard method is included in the specifications for “fatty substances” with a threshold value of 10 meq O₂ per kg of material for a refined oil [58] [60] . In other words, all the peroxide values of the baobab oils obtained are lower than this limit value of 10 mEq・kg⁻¹ fixed by the Codex Alimentarius [52] . The quality of the oil extracted with acetone is better than other oils. Indeed, the combination of the peroxide value with the extinction coefficients (k₂₃₂ and k₂₇₀) shows that the oxidative stability of the oil extracted with acetone is relatively better, which could be explained by the presence of natural antioxidants such as tocopherols, sterols, carotenoids and phenolic compounds [30] [44] [61] . Moreover, these results suggest that the oil extracted with acetone would be less oxidized and less sensitive to deterioration than those extracted by pressing or with chloroform and n-hexane. Also, the peroxide value of the pressing oil could be explained by the temperature reached during the extraction. The results obtained are close to those reported by Adebayo et al. [62] with kariya seed oil (Hildergadia berteri). However, the peroxide values obtained are lower than those of palm oils (16.08 mEq・kg⁻¹) and sorrel (Hibicus sabdariffa) (5.00 ± 0.01 mEq・kg⁻¹) respectively reported by Birnin-Yauri and Garba [19] and Betiku and Adepoju [63] . The variance analysis indicates that there are significant differences at the 5% threshold of the peroxide values. The oxidative deterioration of oils during extraction and storage operations has been extensively studied and the titration method has been the most widely used [17] [19] [27] [40] [43] [44] [46] [55] . However, this method is complex and long [59] [64] . Also, Sahhidi and Zhong [59] pointed out the possible interference in the determination of light, oxygen and iodine uptake by unsaturated fatty acids. In addition, the peroxide value is a measure that can be used only for samples whose autoxidation is not too advanced [65] .

The saponification values measured are 233.587; 205.494; 205.371 and 209.198 mgKOH・g⁻¹ respectively for oils extracted with pressing, chloroform, acetone and n-hexane. This significant difference noted between the extracted oils can be attributed to the extraction time and/or the physicochemical properties of the solvents. The baobab seed-oil obtained by pressure reveals the highest saponification value. Therefore, this baling oil would contain more short-chain fatty acids for stability during storage. The baobab oils extracted with organic solvents showed the lowest saponification values. These indicate a predominance of long chain fatty acids in these oils [66] . Very important for the food and cosmetics industries, oils with high saponification values would be less sensitive to deterioration [67] . The results also indicate that the saponification values are higher than those of Persea americana oil (35.76 mgKOH/g) [27] , argan oil (190.88 mgKOH/g) [68] and olive oil (97.94 mgKOH/g) [46] . Thus, the high saponification value of baobab seed oil indicates the high potential for its use in the manufacture of soaps.

In order to estimate the quality of the oils extracted, the polyphenol content and the radical scavenging activitywere measured. The results obtained are listed in Table 2. These results indicate that the oil extracted by cold pressing was the richest sample of polyphenols with 0.047 ± 0.0024 mgEAG/g of oil followed by the oils extracted with the hexane (0.028 ± 0.004 mgEAG/g oil), acetone (0.026 ± 0.003 mgEAG/g oil) and chloroform (0.025 ± 0.002 mgEAG/g oil). In fact, according to Salih and Yahia [69] , baobab seeds (Adansonia digitata L.) contain a polyphenol content of 6.689 ± 0.086 mgEAG/g of seed. With the latter, we can also say that the amount of polyphenols found in oils remains very low. The oil resulting from pressing contains higher polyphenol content. Thus, the application of this oil on the dermatological level would be more beneficial. In addition, this difference in terms of phenolic compounds between the pressing oil and those obtained with solvents results from the extraction method [70] , the extraction time achieved and/or the physicochemical properties of the solvents used. Indeed, natural antioxidants (tocopherols, carotenoids, etc.) influence the lipid oxidation [71] . Therefore, oils extracted by pressing and with acetone will be less susceptible to oxidation during storage. However, the polyphenol contents of the various oils extracted are lower than that of Persea americana oil (8.27 ± 0.06 mgEAG/g of oil) reported by Adaramola et al. [27] . The treatment of the data by analysis of the variances shows that there is a significant difference at the threshold of 5%. The antioxidant activity of the extracted oils varied according to the extraction process.

The results obtained reveal that oils have variableradical scavenging activities. In other words, our results reveal that the pressing oil has the highest polyphenol content and radical scavenging activity. This antioxidant activity of the pressing oil could be explained by its high content of phenolic compounds. Indeed, some studies have reported a positive correlation between antioxidant activity and phenol content [72] [73] . For hot extraction, oil extracted with acetone was rated as the most active with antioxidant activity estimated at 26.38% ± 0.60%. This value remains comparable to that of olive oil (25.38% ± 0.64%) reported by Merouane et al. [74] .