ArticlePloS one2018
From the Front or Back Door? Quantitative analysis of direct and indirect extractions of α-mangostin from mangosteen (Garcinia mangostana).
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sustainable UAE-HPLC Approach for the Multi-Analyte Profiling of Seven Bioactive Xanthones inACS omega · 2026Article
- Mangosteen (Nutrients · 2026Article
- A Two-Stage Method for Purifying Alpha-Mangostin: Sequential Solvent Extraction and Preparative Liquid Chromatography.ACS omega · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- A Review of the Influence of Various Extraction Techniques and the Biological Effects of the Xanthones from Mangosteen (Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pulp and pericarp of mangosteen (Garcinia mangostana) fruit are popular food, beverage and health products whereby 60% of the fruit consist of the pericarp. The major metabolite in the previously neglected or less economically significant part of the fruit, the pericarp, is the prenylated xanthone α-mangostin. This highly bioactive secondary metabolite is typically isolated using solvent extraction methods that involve large volumes of halogenated solvents either via direct or indirect extraction. In this study, we compared the quantities of α-mangostin extracted using three different extraction methods based on the environmentally friendly solvents methanol and ethyl acetate. The three solvent extractions methods used were direct extractions from methanol (DM) and ethyl acetate (DEA) as well as indirect extraction of ethyl acetate obtained via solvent partitioning from an initial methanol extract (IEA). Our results showed that direct extraction afforded similar and higher quantities of α-mangostin than indirect extraction (DM: 318 mg; DEA: 305 mg; IEA: 209 mg per 5 g total dried pericarp). Therefore, we suggest that the commonly used method of indirect solvent extraction using halogenated solvents for the isolation of α-mangostin is replaced by single solvent direct extraction using the environmentally friendly solvents methanol or ethyl acetate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.