Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

In Vitro Inhibitory Effect on Digestive Enzymes and Antioxidant Potential of Commonly Consumed Fruits

Podsędek, Anna, Majewska, Iwona, Redzynia, Małgorzata, Sosnowska, Dorota, Koziołkiewicz, Maria·2014·Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry

Abstract

Dietary inhibitors of fats and carbohydrates degrading enzymes can reduce obesity and type 2 diabetes. In this study, we screened crude extracts from 30 commonly consumed fruits to test their in vitro inhibitory effect against key enzymes relevant for obesity (pancreatic lipase) and type 2 diabetes (α-glucosidase and α-amylase), total phenolic content (Folin-Ciocalteu method), and antioxidant capacity (ABTS and FRAP). The IC50 values of the fruits tested varied from 39.91 to >400 mg/mL, from 1.04 to >80 mg/mL, and from 0.72 to 135.07 mg/mL against α-glucosidase, α-amylase, and pancreatic lipase, respectively. Antioxidant capacity ranged from 0.66 to 124.66 μmol of TE/g of fruit and strongly correlated with phenolic content, while the enzyme inhibition was poorly correlated with total phenolic and antioxidant capacity. Among fruits tested, blue honeysuckle and red gooseberry exhibited the highest inhibitory activity with respect to the carbohydrate degrading enzymes, while lingonberry had the strongest anti-lipase activity.

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/jf5008264

Cites

50 of 50 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

Metadata

Authors
Podsędek, A., Majewska, I., Redzynia, M., Sosnowska, D., & Koziołkiewicz, M.
Venue
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Published
2014-05-12
Volume
62
Issue
20
Pages
4610-4617
ISSN
  • 0021-8561 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5118
OpenAlex
W2325036190
Cited by
266
References
50
FWCI
6.94
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.