Polyphenol Profiles and Antioxidant Properties of Ethanol Extracts from Osmanthus Fragrans (Thunb.) Lour. Flowers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Key words: ethanol extracts of Osmanthus fragrans fl owers, antioxidant, polyphenol profi les, cultured endothelial cells This study evaluated the antioxidant activity of ethanol extracts of Osmanthus fragrans (Thunb.) Lour. fl owers (EOF) and identifi ed phenolic compounds in EOF using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Nine compounds, 3-O-caffeoylquinic acid, caffeic acid 4-O-glucoside, salidroside, 5-O-coumaroylquinic acid, 4-O-coumaroylquinic acid, acteoside, ligustroside, fucosterol and arjunolic acid were identifi ed. To our knowledge, caffeic acid 4-O-glucoside, 5-O-coumaroylquinic acid and 4-O-coumaroylquinic acid have not been detected in EOF. In vitro antioxidant activity analysis demonstrated that EOF possessed strong DPPH and ABTS radicals scavenging activity with EC 50 values at 0.260.06 mg/mL and 0.360.01 mg/mL, respectively, and reducing power with Ab 0.5 value at 13.040.16 g/mL. The value of oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC) was 333.2313.39 mol Trolox/g. Antioxidant activity assay in human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC) showed that the activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD) was signifi cantly improved and the reactive oxygen species (ROS) was removed effectively from cells when treated with EOF of 300~3000 g/L.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".