Cited by 66Ultrasound and Cavitation PhenomenaPhytochemicals and Antioxidant ActivitiesAgricultural and Biological Research

Multi-frequency power ultrasound green extraction of polyphenols from Pingyin rose: Optimization using the response surface methodology and exploration of the underlying mechanism

Open access
Xu, Baoguo, Feng, Min, Tiliwa, Essodézam Sylvain, Yan, Weiqiang, Wei, Benxi, Zhou, Cunshan, Ma, Haile, Wang, Bin +1 more·2022·LWT

Abstract

The effect of multi-frequency power ultrasound (MFPU) on the extraction of Pingyin rose polyphenols (PRP) and underlying mechanisms were studied. The MFPU included mono-, dual-, and tri-frequency ultrasound. Working modes for the dual- and tri-frequency were in sequential and simultaneous ways. The extraction parameter was firstly optimized by RSM (response surface methodology). It was found that the optimum conditions were 50% for ethanol concentration, 63 °C for extraction temperature, 31 min for extraction time, and 1:46 g/mL for solid-liquid ratio with a PRP extraction yield of 156.81 mg/g. The extraction yields of PRP assisted with ultrasound in different power levels and frequencies were further investigated. Compared to non-ultrasound, the extraction yields of PRP assisted with ultrasound were significantly (p < 0.05) increased. The tri-frequency ultrasound in sequential working mode (20/28/40 kHz) showed the most promising extraction efficiencies for PRP (187.13 mg/g), which was 19.33% higher than that of non-ultrasound. Besides, signal results of the MFPU field collected by a hydrophone and damage degree of aluminum foil paper showed that the ultrasonic fields with stronger noise signals, and more uniform broken holes had higher extraction yield of PRP. Conclusively, the MFPU is demonstrated as a green protocol for the valuable extraction of PRP.

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.lwt.2021.113037

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xu, B., Feng, M., Tiliwa, E. S., Yan, W., Wei, B., Zhou, C., Ma, H., Wang, B., & Chang, L.
Affiliations
  • Jiangsu University (CN)
  • Shanghai Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Xu, Baoguo
  • Zhou, Cunshan
Venue
LWT
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-02
Volume
156
Pages
113037
ISSN
0023-6438 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4200581134
Cited by
66
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 13
FWCI
2.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
LWT (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2020T130261, 2019T120401, SZ-HZ202002)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (31801561)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Ultrasound and Cavitation Phenomena
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Biochemistry › Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural and Biological Research
Keywords
ultrasound-assisted extraction, extraction optimization, dual-frequency ultrasound, ethanol concentration, extraction temperature, extraction time, solid-to-liquid ratio, green extraction, extraction yield

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