Health and Wellness Product from Mangosteen (Garcinia mangostana L.) Rind: Bioactive Potentials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mangosteen rind (MSR) (Garcinia mangostana L.) is a predominant component of the fruit contributing to 62% of the whole fruit. However, utilization of the same for the preparation of health products was not explored due to its sensorially less acceptable parameters. Differential extraction in different polarity solvents of MSR was done and evaluated their acceptability for product preparation. Current study thus is a detailed investigation on bioactivity profiling of MSR fraction and utilization of the same for health product preparation. Among various extracts, 70% ethanol (70%AE) yielded the maximum (15g/100g). Xanthone:Phenolic ratio was 1: 2.8, in 70%AE as opposed to hot water extract -HWE and 50% AE, which contained Xanthone:Phenolic ratio of 1:1.4/5. Higher the phenolic content obviously reduces the bitterness of Xanthones. 70% AE contained phenolics 60.08 0.213 mg/g and xanthones 22.56 0.317 mg/g. HPLC analysis revealed a spectrum of phenolic acids such as gallic, chlorogenic, caffeic, epicatechin, catechin and ferulic acids at various levels. Potent Free Radical Scavenging (FRS) activity, cytoprotectivity, DNA protectivity, H + K + ATPase inhibitory (PPAI) activities were observed in 70% AE. Gallic/tannic acid appear to contribute to antioxidant activity; while ferulic acid was responsible for PPAI activity in 70%AE. Among xanthones, although -mangostin was the dominating component, gartanin, 8 deoxygartanin and 3-isomangostin contributed to FRS activity. The products were prepared from 70%AE which are sensorially acceptable. Data thus for the first time delineate the specific health beneficial role of both phenolic and xanthone constituents in MSR particularly with higher abundance of phenolics than xanthones.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".