Extraction, Purification and Characterization of Antioxidant Fractions from Zizyphus spina-christi Fruits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, in vitro antioxidant activity, total phenolic content and concentration of flavonoids of five different extracts from the Zizyphus spina- christi fruits were determined using spectrophotometric methods. Antioxidant activity of extracts were expressed as percentage of DPPH radical inhibition and values were ranged from 31.76% - 90.23% which indicated that zizyphus manifested the strongest capacity for neutralization of DPPH radicals. The total phenolic content ranged from 11.04 - 56.44 mg/g expressed as quercitin equivalent. The concentration of flavonoids in the zizyphus extracts varied from 16.66 - 58.32 mg/g expressed in terms of rutin equivalent (mg of RU/g extract). Methanolic extract of zizyphus showed the highest phenolic and flavonoid concentration and strong antioxidant activity. The significant linear correlation was confirmed between the values for the total phenolic content and antioxidant activity of plant extracts. The high contents of phenolic compounds indicated that these compounds contribute to the antioxidant activity. The zizyphus fruit can be regarded as a promising candidates for natural plant sources of antioxidant with high value.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".