The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comparative Study on Phenolic Profiles and Antioxidant Activities of Legumes as Affected by Extraction Solvents
Open accessAbstract
ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to investigate how 6 commonly used solvent systems affected the yields of phenolic substances and the antioxidant capacity of extracts from 8 major classes of food legumes. Several antioxidant‐related phytochemical compositions, namely, total phenolic content (TPC), total flavonoids content (TFC), and condensed tannins content (CTC), were investigated. In addition, antioxidant activities were tested using 2,2‐diphenyl‐1‐picryhydrazyl (DPPH) free radical scavenging, ferric‐reducing antioxidant power (FRAP), and the oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC). The results showed that the 50% acetone extracts exhibited the highest TPC for yellow pea, green pea, chickpea, and yellow soybean. Acidic 70% acetone (+0.5% acetic acid) extracts exhibited the highest TPC, TFC, and FRAP values for black bean, lentil, black soybean, and red kidney bean. The 80% acetone extracts exhibited the highest TFC, CTC, and DPPH‐free radical scavenging activity for yellow pea, green pea, chickpea, and yellow soybean. The 70% ethanol extracts exhibited the greatest ORAC value for all selected legumes. These results indicated that solvents with different polarity had significant effects on total phenolic contents, extracted components, and antioxidant activities. High correlations between phenolic compositions and antioxidant activities of legume extracts were observed. The information is of interest to the nutraceutical food/ingredient industries since legumes are a rich source of antioxidants.
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
Colorimetry of Total Phenolics with Phosphomolybdic-Phosphotungstic Acid Reagents
Singleton, V. L., & Rossi, J. A. (1965) · American Journal of Enology and Viticulture · doi:10.5344/ajev.1965.16.3.144 · Cited by 24,852
The Chemistry behind Antioxidant Capacity Assays
Huang, D., Ou, B., & Prior, R. L. (2005) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jf030723c · Cited by 6,162
Cited by
Shahidi, F., & Ambigaipalan, P. (2015) · Journal of Functional Foods · doi:10.1016/j.jff.2015.06.018 · Cited by 3,081
Extraction of polyphenolic antioxidants from orange peel waste using deep eutectic solvents
Ozturk, B., Parkinson, C., & Gonzalez-Miquel, M. (2018) · Separation and Purification Technology · doi:10.1016/j.seppur.2018.05.052 · Cited by 542
Minor components of pulses and their potential impact on human health
Campos-Vega, R., Loarca-Piña, G., & Oomah, B. D. (2010) · Food Research International · doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2009.09.004 · Cited by 530
Antioxidant capacities of the selenium nanoparticles stabilized by chitosan
Zhai, X., Zhang, C., Zhao, G., Stoll, S., Ren, F., & Leng, X. (2017) · Journal of Nanobiotechnology · doi:10.1186/s12951-016-0243-4 · Cited by 312
Technological, processing and nutritional aspects of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) - A review
Kaur, R., & Prasad, K. (2021) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2021.01.044 · Cited by 275
Metadata
- Authors
- Xu, B. J., & Chang, S. K. C.
- Venue
- Journal of Food Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-03
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- S159-66
- ISSN
- 0022-1147 (ISSN-L)
- 1750-3841
- OpenAlex
- W1979755400
- Cited by
- 1,091
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 9.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: A Comparative Study on Phenolic Profiles and Antioxidant Activities of Legumes as Affected by Extraction Solvents. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2006.00260.x
- The paper
- Xu, B. J., & Chang, S. K. C. (2007). A Comparative Study on Phenolic Profiles and Antioxidant Activities of Legumes as Affected by Extraction Solvents. Journal of Food Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2006.00260.x
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.
