Free radical scavenging activities of phytochemical mixtures and aqueous methanolic extracts recovered from processed coffee leaves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary It is well known that the choice of extraction solvents greatly affects both phytochemical composition and related bioactivity of plant extract. Herein, we show that coffee leaf extracts derived from 80% methanol have no effect on basal nitric oxide production in Raw 264.7 cells, whereas, a different result was observed with a previous hot water extract. Phytochemical mixtures formulated to contain equivalent amounts of CQAs, mangiferin and rutin know to present in coffee leaves showed a relatively low (3.5–18.5%, TPC; 17.6–31.6%, ABTS; 7.9–13.6%, DPPH; and 8.5–29.7%, ORAC) contribution to antioxidant activities when compared to the coffee leaf extracts. We conclude that the solvent polarity is particularly important to the unique phytochemical mixture recovered, which in turn governs the bioactivity. This study also demonstrated that other phytochemicals in coffee leaves that were not measured in this study are important in assessing total antioxidant activity of this potential plant beverage.
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) | 0.001 | 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".