Comparative Phenolic Contents and Antioxidant Activities of Myristica and Pimenta Extracts
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antioxidant activities of two commercial spices, Myristica fragrans (HOUTT, nutmeg) and Pimenta dioica (L., allspice), were analyzed for the first time in a hemin-enhanced oxidation (HET) assay. Hemin is a potentially cytotoxic factor that can act as an efficient prooxidant. Relative activities of the two spices were compared in HET and other assays. When standardized for total phenolic content (mg gallic acid equivalents, GAE), ethanolic and aqueous Myristica extracts had 4- and 10-fold greater activity relative to Pimenta (p < 0.05). Myristica also had a 3-fold greater aqueous:ethanolic activity ratio compared to Pimenta. Our results (a) provide novel evidence for potent Myristica antioxidants, especially water- soluble ones, in HET assays, and (b) provide a basis for further testing of Myristica phytochemicals in heme-related pathological models. Most other reported protocols also indicate a higher Myristica potency relative to Pimenta, with standardized relative antioxidant activity variations up to 27-fold. Such variation, as well as the distinct reactive species implicated in some pathologies, emphasize the importance of comparing multiple assays to evaluate antioxidant activities. Keywords: Antioxidant activities, food spices, hemin, Myristica fragrans, Pimenta dioica, total phenolic content.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 it