Evaluation of the Antioxidant Activity and Phenolic Composition of Different Monofloral and Polyfloral Brazilian Honey Extracts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study aimed to evaluate the chemical composition and antioxidant activity of phenolic extracts from monofloral and polyfloral honey samples obtained from different Brazilian regions. The chemical composition (total content of phenolic compounds and flavonoids) of extracts were measured by using colorimetric assays and analyzed by high performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC‐DAD). The antioxidant activity was evaluated by chemical and biochemical assays (reducing power assay, 1,1‐diphenyl‐2‐picrylhydrazyl (DPPH⋅) and 2,2‐azino‐bis(3‐ethylbenzothiazoline‐6‐sulphonic) acid (ABTS⋅+) scavenger assays. It was also investigated the ability of extracts in attenuate lipid peroxidation induced by Fe2+ in phospholipids. The obtained results clearly demonstrated that the botanical origin and geographical region of honey collection influenced the chemical composition and antioxidant activity of extracts. Furthermore, the samples were constituted by phenolic acids and flavonoids, which p‐coumaric acid was predominant among the compounds identified. All samples were able to scavenge free radicals and inhibit lipid peroxidation, and good correlations were obtained between the flavonoid content and honey color. In conclusion, the obtained extracts were constituted by antioxidant compounds, which reinforce the usage of honey in human diets, and demonstrated that the region of honey collection strong influenced in the chemical composition and, consequently, its biological effect.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".