Antioxidant activity and phenolic profile of commercial and wild roots of Fragaria vesca L.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fragaria vesca L (Rosaceae), wild strawberry, is commonly found in forests, slopes and roadsides. Widely spread across Europe, it can be also found in Korea, Japan, North America and Canada [1 ]. The roots are traditionally used as decoction and infusion to treat cough symptoms, urinary tract infections, haemorrhoids, diarrhoea, and gout, but also for their tonic, stimulant and diuretic properties. Those bioactive properties have been mainly related with the composition in various phenolic compounds such as anthocyanins, proanthocyanidins, flavonols, and derivatives of hydroxycinnamic and ellagic acids [2, 3]. As far as we know, there are no reports on the phenolic profile and antioxidant activity of F. vesca roots. In the present study, commercial and wild roots of this species were submitted to different extraction procedures, aqueous (by infusion or decoction) and hydromethanolic, in order to compare their antioxidant potential and to establish the individual phenolic profile of each one. Commercial and wild samples showed similarities in terms of flavan 3-ols (TF30), with catechin derivatives, mainly procyanidins, as major compounds in both samples. The commercial sample presented ellagic acid glycosides, whereas the wild sample presented flavonols (TF) and dihydroflavonols (taxifolin derivatives). The infusion of wild sample gave the highest content of total phenolic compounds (TPC, 253.42 mg/g, dw) and the highest DPPH scavenging activity, reducing power and lipid peroxidation inhibition (TSARS assay) (EC50 = 50.56, 44.78 and 4.76 1-Jg/ml, respectively). The antioxidant capacity (mainly ~-carotene bleaching and TSARS assays) observed for the wild sample is correlated with TF30 , TF and TPC. Overall, the antioxidant activity of F. vesca roots could be directly obtained by consumption of infusions/decoctions or by incorporating hydromethanolic extracts in antioxidant formulations for cosmetic, pharmaceutical or food industries.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".