Antioxidant Capacity, Phenolic Constituents and Toxicity of Hot Water Extract from Red Maple Buds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study reports, for the first time, the results of the antioxidant capacity and the phenolic composition of a hot water extract from red maple buds (RMB), as well as its safety. In this regard and comparatively to antioxidant standards, this extract exhibits a significant antiradical capacity when tested by 2,2‐diphenyl‐1‐picrylhydrazyl (DPPH·) and anion superoxide trapping assays. High‐resolution mass spectrometric and nuclear magnetic resonance analyses permitted to determine for the first time, in red maple species, cyanidin‐3‐O‐glucoside, quercetin‐3‐O‐galactoside, quercetin‐3‐O‐arabinoside, and quercetin. Also, the quantification of individual phenolics by high‐performance liquid chromatography method revealed that ginnalin A at 117.0 mg/g is the major compound of RMB hot water extract. Finally, using flow cytometry evaluation, the extract of RMB was determined to have no toxicity neither to cause significant modification of apoptosis process, up to concentration of 100 μg/ml, on human peripheral blood neutrophils. These results allow anticipating various fields of application of RMB water extract.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".