Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 339

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Extraction of phenolic compounds from olive pomace by using natural deep eutectic solvents and innovative extraction techniques

Chanioti, Sofia, Tzia, Constantina·2018·Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies

Abstract

Abstract Natural deep eutectic solvents (NADESs) [choline chloride with citric acid (DES-CA), lactic acid (DES-LA), maltose (DES-MA) and glycerol (DES-GLY) and an addition of 20% v/v water in the NADES solutions] combined with homogenate – (HAE), microwave – (MAE), ultrasound – (UAE) or high hydrostatic pressure – (HHPAE) assisted extractions were first successfully applied to phenolic compounds recovery from olive pomace. DES-CA and DES-LA showed the best extraction efficiency in terms of the total phenolic content and the antioxidant activity of the extracts obtained by HAE and UAE and by MAE and HHPAE, respectively. HAE proved to be the best method with extraction efficiency superior to MAE, UAE and HHPAE. HPLC analysis revealed that almost all NADESs obtained extracts were more enriched in phenolic compounds than those with conventional solvents. The results confirmed that the proposed combined methods could provide an excellent alternative for sustainable and green extraction of phenolic compounds from plant sources leading to novel industrial applications.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ifset.2018.07.001

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Chanioti, S., & Tzia, C.
Venue
Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-08
Volume
48
Pages
228-239
ISSN
1466-8564 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2810928482
Cited by
339
References
8
FWCI
7.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.