Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 176

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Changes during Storage in Conventional and Ecological Wine: Phenolic Content and Antioxidant Activity

Zafrilla, Pilar, Morillas, Juana, Mulero, Juana, Cayuela, José M., Martínez-Cachá, Adela, Pardo, Francisco, López Nicolás, José Manuel·2003·Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry

Abstract

Polyphenol content, free radical scavenging capacity, and changes during storage over 7 months in the dark were studied in ecological and conventional red and white wines. In red wines, the most changeable components during storage were the anthocyanins since during storage anthocyanins content decreased 88% in conventional wine and 91% in ecological wine. Initially, the total flavonol contents of the conventional and ecological red wines were 163.88 +/- 2.69 and 153.58 +/- 1.71 mg/L, respectively, and no significant variations occurred during storage. No differences in hydroxycinnamic acid derivatives content between conventional and ecological red and white wines were observed. The flavonol level in white wines was very low, as expected since these compounds are found in grape skin. The initial antioxidant activity was 5.37 +/- 0.14 and 5.82 +/- 0.31 mM equivalents Trolox for conventional and ecological red wines, respectively; no significant differences were observed (p = 0.2831), and these values were 7-8 times higher than the antioxidant activity observed in conventional and ecological white wine. In contrast with other studies, the total concentrations of phenolic compounds in conventional and ecological red and white wines were not related to antioxidant activity (p > 0.05). In red wines, no significant differences were observed in the antioxidant activity of ecological and conventional red wine (p = 0.28), while in white wine significant differences were observed in the antioxidant activity between conventional and ecological white wine (p = 0.006).

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 · 10.1021/jf021251p

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 176

Metadata

Authors
Zafrilla, P., Morillas, J., Mulero, J., Cayuela, J. M., Martínez-Cachá, A., Pardo, F., & López Nicolás, J. M.
Venue
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Published
2003-07-01
Volume
51
Issue
16
Pages
4694-4700
ISSN
  • 0021-8561 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5118
OpenAlex
W2054530855
Cited by
176
References
1
FWCI
3.68
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Changes during Storage in Conventional and Ecological Wine: Phenolic Content and Antioxidant Activity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/jf021251p
The paper
Zafrilla, P., Morillas, J., Mulero, J., Cayuela, J. M., Martínez-Cachá, A., Pardo, F., & López Nicolás, J. M. (2003). Changes during Storage in Conventional and Ecological Wine: Phenolic Content and Antioxidant Activity. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf021251p

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.