Extraction, optimisation and characterisation of phenolics from <i><scp>T</scp>hymus vulgaris </i><scp>L</scp>.: phenolic content and profiles in relation to antioxidant, antidiabetic and antihypertensive properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The objectives of this study were to examine varying extraction conditions of T hymus vulgaris L . as related to phenolic content and profiles of the extracts and their antioxidant, antihypertensive and antidiabetic properties. Phenolics were extracted under various conditions pertaining to free and bound phenolics, solvent type and combination of extraction time and temperature, and these extracts were evaluated in terms of their antioxidant activities and inhibitory activities of angiotensin‐converting enzyme ( ACE ), α‐glucosidase and α‐amylase. The acetone–water solvent mixture (1:1; v/v) produced the extract with the greatest phenolic content, antioxidant activity and inhibitory activities of ACE and α‐glucosidase. The optimal extraction temperature for maximum phenolic content and antioxidant activity associated with methanol extraction was 60 °C, whereas a lower temperature at 40 °C was required to maximise inhibitory activities for ACE , α‐glucosidase and α‐amylase. An inverse relationship was seen between antioxidant and glucosidase inhibitory activities vs. the ACE and α‐amylase inhibitory activities, which suggests the need for extractions to be directed to specific bioactivities of thyme extracts. Generally, the results indicate major differences in phenolic profiles among the tested extraction conditions with thymol as the predominant phenolic seen in most extractions, while gallic acid, rosmarinic acid or diosmin also predominated in other extracts. Extracts with the same predominant phenolic compound and similar phenolic content showed major disparities in their ACE , glucosidase and α‐amylase inhibitory activities, indicating that the major phenolic profiles of thyme extracts may not be necessarily related to the degree of inhibition of ACE , glucosidase and α‐amylase enzymes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".