The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantification of Polyphenolics and Their Antioxidant Capacity in Fresh Plums
Abstract
Total phenolics, total flavonoids, and antioxidant capacity of 11 cultivars of fresh plums were determined using spectrophotometric methods. Identification and quantification of individual polyphenolics were performed using reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography equipped with a diode array detector. The total phenolic contents of various cultivars widely varied from 125.0 to 372.6 mg/100 g expressed as gallic acid equivalents. The level of total flavonoids in fresh plums ranged between 64.8 and 257.5 mg/100 g expressed as catechin equivalents. Antioxidant capacity, expressed as vitamin C equivalent antioxidant capacity (VCEAC), ranged from 204.9 to 567.0 mg/100 g with an average of 290.9 mg/100 g of fresh weight. Cv. Beltsville Elite B70197 showed the highest amounts of total phenolics and total flavonoids and the highest VCEAC. A positive relationship (correlation coefficient r (2)() = 0.977) was presented between total phenolics and VCEAC, suggesting polyphenolics would play an important role in free radical scavenging. The level of IC(50) value of superoxide radical anion scavenging activity of the plum cultivars ranged from 13.4 to 45.7 mg of VCEAC/100 g. Neochlorogenic acid was the predominant polyphenolic among fresh plums tested. Flavonols found in plum were commonly quercetin derivatives. Rutin was the most predominant flavonol in plums. Various anthocyanins containing cyanidin aglycon and peonidin aglycon were commonly found in all plums except for cv. Mirabellier and NY 101.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
An investigation of antioxidant capacity of fruits in Singapore markets
Leong, L. P., & Shui, G. (2002) · Food Chemistry · doi:10.1016/s0308-8146(01)00251-5 · Cited by 1,091
Cited by
Piluzza, G., & Bullitta, S. (2011) · Pharmaceutical Biology · doi:10.3109/13880209.2010.501083 · Cited by 334
Külen, O., Stushnoff, C., & Holm, D. G. (2013) · Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture · doi:10.1002/jsfa.6053 · Cited by 98
Neocleous, D., Koukounaras, A., Siomos, A. S., & Vasilakakis, M. (2014) · Journal of Food Quality · doi:10.1111/jfq.12066 · Cited by 68
Estimation of total antioxidant capacity from diet and supplements in US adults
Yang, M., Chung, S.-J., Chung, C. E., Kim, D.-O., Song, W. O., Koo, S. I., & Chun, O. K. (2011) · British Journal of Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s0007114511000109 · Cited by 65
Self-citationAbbasi, B. H., Khan, T., Khurshid, R., Nadeem, M., Drouet, S., & Hano, C. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-79896-6 · Cited by 32
Smiljanić, K., Prodić, I., Trifunovic, S., Krstić Ristivojević, M., Aćimović, M., Stanković Jeremić, J., Lončar, B., & Tešević, V. (2023) · Antioxidants · doi:10.3390/antiox12111988 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, D.-O., Chun, O. K., Kim, Y. J., Moon, H.-Y., & Lee, C. Y.
- Venue
- Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2003-09-24
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 22
- Pages
- 6509-6515
- ISSN
- 0021-8561 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5118
- OpenAlex
- W2022578673
- Cited by
- 913
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.50
- 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.