CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 36Genetic and Environmental Crop StudiesPhytochemicals and Antioxidant ActivitiesSeed and Plant Biochemistry

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Variation in Contents of Main Active Components and Antioxidant Activity in Leaves of Different Pigeon Pea Cultivars during Growth

Wei, Zuo-Fu, Jin, Shuang, Luo, Meng, Pan, You-Zhi, Li, Ting-Ting, Qi, Xiao-Lin, Efferth, Thomas, Fu, Yu-Jie, Zu, Yuan-Gang·2013·Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
DOI 10.1021/jf402455m
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Pigeon pea is an important and multiuse grain legume crop, and its leaves are a very valuable natural resource. To obtain a high-quality biological resource, it is necessary to choose the excellent cultivar and determine the appropriate harvest time. In this study, the variation in contents of main active components and antioxidant activity in leaves of six pigeon pea cultivars during growth were investigated. The level of each individual active component significantly varied during growth, but with a different pattern, and this variation was different among cultivars. Flavonoid glycosides orientin, vitexin, and apigenin-6,8-di-C-α-L-arabinopyranoside showed two peak values at mid-late and final stages of growth in most cases. Pinostrobin chalcone, longistyline C, and cajaninstilbene acid showed remarkablely higher values at the mid-late stage of growth than at other stages. Pinostrobin had an extremely different variation pattern compared to other active components. Its content was the highest at the earlier stage of growth. Principal component analysis (PCA) revealed that vitexin and apigenin-6,8-di-C-α-L-arabinopyranoside were mainly responsible for distinguishing cultivars analyzed. In a comprehensive consideration, the leaves should preferentially be harvested at the 135th day after sowing when the level of active components and antioxidant activity reached higher values. Cultivars ICP 13092, ICPL 87091, and ICPL 96053 were considered to be excellent cultivars with high…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/jf402455m

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. Salunkhe D. K., 1986, Crit. Rev. Food Sci., 23, 103, 10.1080/10408398609527422 · DOI
  2. Morton J. F., 1976, HortScience, 11, 11, 10.21273/HORTSCI.11.1.11 · DOI
  3. Grover J. K., 2002, J. Ethnopharmacol., 81, 81, 10.1016/S0378-8741(02)00059-4 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Duke, J. A.Handbook of Legumes of the World Economic Importance;Plenum Press:New York, 1981; pp33–37. · DOI
  5. Ashidi J. S., 2010, J. Ethnopharmacol., 128, 501, 10.1016/j.jep.2010.01.009 · DOI
  6. Cooksey C. J., 1982, Phytochemistry, 21, 2935, 10.1016/0031-9422(80)85072-2 · DOI
  7. Green P. W. C., 2003, J. Chem. Ecol., 29, 811, 10.1023/A:1022971430463 · DOI
  8. Duker-Eshun G., 2004, Phytother. Res., 18, 128, 10.1002/ptr.1375 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Wu N., 2009, Molecules, 14, 1032, 10.3390/molecules14031032 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Lin L., 1999, J. China Pharm. Univ., 30, 21
  11. Ingham J. L., 1976, Z. Naturforsch., C: J. Biosci., 31, 504, 10.1515/znc-1976-9-1005 · DOI
  12. Ohwaki Y., 1993, Soil Sci. Plant Nutr., 39, 55, 10.1080/00380768.1993.10416974 · DOI
  13. Kong Y., 2010, Food Chem., 121, 1150, 10.1016/j.foodchem.2010.01.062 · DOI
  14. Li Y. L., 2002, J. Ethnopharmacol., 79, 365, 10.1016/S0378-8741(01)00410-X · DOI
  15. Vrinda B., 2001, Mutat. Res., Genet. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen., 498, 39, 10.1016/S1383-5718(01)00263-7 · DOI
  16. Torres-Santos E. C., 1999, Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., 43, 1234, 10.1128/AAC.43.5.1234 · DOI
  17. Shido R. K., 2006, Biosci., Biotechnol., Biochem., 70, 2281, 10.1271/bbb.60086 · DOI
  18. Hwang T. L., 2006, Br. J. Pharmacol., 148, 78, 10.1038/sj.bjp.0706712 · DOI
  19. Mata R., 1997, Planta Med., 63, 31, 10.1055/s-2006-957598 · DOI
  20. Le Bail J. C., 2000, Cancer Lett., 156, 37, 10.1016/S0304-3835(00)00435-3 · DOI
  21. Wu N., 2011, Phytomedicine, 18, 110, 10.1016/j.phymed.2010.07.001 · DOI
  22. Luo Q. F., 2008, Phytomedicine, 15, 932, 10.1016/j.phymed.2008.03.002 · DOI
  23. Ruan C. J., 2009, Neurosci. Lett., 467, 159, 10.1016/j.neulet.2009.10.029 · DOI
  24. Wei Z. F., 2013, J. Agric. Food Chem., 61, 1165, 10.1021/jf304973f · DOI · Paper page
  25. Kevers C., 2011, J. Agric. Food Chem., 59, 6165, 10.1021/jf201013k · DOI
  26. Bernaert N., 2012, J. Agric. Food Chem., 60, 10910, 10.1021/jf302132a · DOI
  27. Pérez-Balibrea S., 2011, Food Chem., 125, 348, 10.1016/j.foodchem.2010.09.004 · DOI
  28. Bach V., 2012, Food Chem., 133, 82, 10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.12.075 · DOI
  29. Hu Y. M., 2006, Chin. J. Nat. Med., 4, 420
  30. Shimomura H., 1988, Phytochemistry, 27, 3937, 10.1016/0031-9422(88)83049-8 · DOI
  31. Cuong N. M., 1996, Pharmazie, 51, 128
  32. Green P. W., 2003, J. Chem. Ecol., 29, 811, 10.1023/A:1022971430463 · DOI
  33. Schaub P., 2005, Plant Physiol., 138, 441, 10.1104/pp.104.057927 · DOI
  34. Shu N., 2006, Biol. Pharm. Bull., 29, 608, 10.1248/bpb.29.608 · DOI
  35. Treutter D., 2001, Plant Growth Regul., 34, 71, 10.1023/A:1013378702940 · DOI
  36. Ma M., 2003, J. Agric. Food Chem., 51, 2390, 10.1021/jf021055i · DOI
  37. Chu X. L., 2011, J. Beijing For. Univ., 33, 130
  38. Zhang Y., 2002, Chem. Ind. For. Prod., 22, 65

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Wei, Z.-F., Jin, S., Luo, M., Pan, Y.-Z., Li, T.-T., Qi, X.-L., Efferth, T., Fu, Y.-J., & Zu, Y.-G.
Affiliations
  • Northeast Forestry University (CN)
  • Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Publisher
American Chemical Society (ACS)
Published
2013-10-14
Volume
61
Issue
42
Pages
10002-10009
ISSN
  • 0021-8561 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5118
DOI
10.1021/jf402455m
OpenAlex
W2319740464
Cited by
36
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3
FWCI
2.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetic and Environmental Crop Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Biochemistry (medical) › Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Seed and Plant Biochemistry
Keywords
Cajanus cajan, antioxidant activity, flavonoid glycosides, orientin, vitexin, pinostrobin, chalcones, cultivar differences, growth stages, harvest time, legume leaves
MeSH terms
Antioxidants, Flavonoids, Glycosides, Phenols, Plant Extracts, Plant Leaves, Cajanus

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