Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 842

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

Assessment of Antioxidant Activity by Using Different In Vitro Methods

Schlesier, K., Harwat, M., Böhm, V., Bitsch, R.·2002·Free Radical Research

Abstract

In this study, six common tests for measuring antioxidant activity were evaluated by comparing four antioxidants and applying them to beverages (tea and juices): Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity assay (TEAC I-III assay), Total radical-trapping antioxidant parameter assay (TRAP assay), 2,2-diphenyl-l-picrylhydrazyl assay (DPPH assay), N,N-dimethyl-p-phenylendiamine assay (DMPD assay), Photochemiluminescence assay (PCL assay) and Ferric reducing ability of plasma assay (FRAP assay). The antioxidants included gallic acid representing the group of polyphenols, uric acid as the main antioxidant in human plasma, ascorbic acid as a vitamin widely spread in fruits and Trolox as water soluble vitamin E analogue. The six methods presented can be divided into two groups depending on the oxidising reagent. Five methods use organic radical producers (TEAC I-III, TRAP, DPPH, DMPD, PCL) and one method works with metal ions for oxidation (FRAP). Another difference between these tests is the reaction procedure. Three assays use the delay in oxidation and determine the lag phase as parameter for the antioxidant activity (TEAC I, TRAP, PCL). They determine the delay of radical generation as well as the ability to scavenge the radical. In contrast, the assays TEAC II and III, DPPH, DMPD and FRAP analyse the ability to reduce the radical cation (TEAC II and III, DPPH, DMPD) or the ferric ion (FRAP). The three tests acting by radical reduction use preformed radicals and determine the decrease in absorbance while the FRAP assay measures the formed ferrous ions by increased absorbance. Gallic acid was the strongest antioxidant in all tests with exception of the DMPD assay. In contrast, uric acid and ascorbic acid showed low activity in some assays. Most of the assays determine the antioxidant activity in the micromolar range needing minutes to hours. Only one assay (PCL) is able to analyse the antioxidant activity in the nanomolar range. Black currant juice showed highest antioxidant activity in all tests compared to tea, apple juice and tomato juice. Despite these differences, results of these in vitro assays give an idea of the protective efficacy of secondary plant products. It is strongly recommended to use at least two methods due to the differences between the test systems investigated.

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 · 10.1080/10715760290006411

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

Cited by

See all 842

Metadata

Authors
Schlesier, K., Harwat, M., Böhm, V., & Bitsch, R.
Venue
Free Radical Research
Published
2002-01
Volume
36
Issue
2
Pages
177-187
ISSN
  • 1029-2470 (ISSN-L)
  • 1071-5762
OpenAlex
W1986254796
Cited by
842
References
1
FWCI
12.47
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.