| Title |
Phenolic constituents and antioxidant properties of five wild species of Physalis (Solanaceae)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Botanical Studies, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40529-015-0101-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
José Roberto Medina-Medrano, Norma Almaraz-Abarca, M. Socorro González-Elizondo, José Natividad Uribe-Soto, Laura Silvia González-Valdez, Yolanda Herrera-Arrieta |
| Abstract |
Fruits of wild species of the genus Physalis are consumed as food and calyces and leaves are used in traditional medicine. The phenolic composition of the species of this genus have been scarcely studied. To contribute to a better knowledge for the use of all the potential of these wild species of plants, leaves, fruits, and calyces of five wild species of the genus were analyzed for their phenolic composition and antioxidant properties. Important tissue- and species-dependent variations were found. Calyces of Physalis subulata showed the highest contents of phenolics (176.58 mg of gallic acid equivalents/g dry tissue), flavonoids (39.63 mg/g dry tissue), and phenolic acids (50.57 mg of quercitrin equivalents/g dry tissue), and its leaves displayed the highest total antioxidant capacity (3.59 mg of ascorbic acid equivalents/mL) and one of the highest reduction powers (0.54 µg of ascorbic acid equivalents/mL). A high performance liquid chromatography with photodiode array detection analysis revealed a total of 28 phenolic compounds in foliar tissues (mainly kaempferol-3-O-glycosides), 16 in fruits (mainly phenolic acids), and 16 in calyces (mainly kaempferol-3-O-glycosides); the profiles of these compounds in the three types of tissue were species-specific. The studied species of Physalis are important sources of phenolics with relevant antioxidant activity. The current results indicate that phenolic profiles are valuable specific chemical markers and can be relevant as food tracing and authenticity indicators for plant-based preparations involving species of Physalis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 96 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 14% |
| Researcher | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 20% |
| Unknown | 28 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 23% |
| Chemistry | 10 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 39 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 October 2019.
All research outputs
#4,100,655
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Botanical Studies
#22
of 188 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,531
of 284,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Botanical Studies
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 188 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,412 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.