Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33473295›Full record

ArticleFood science & nutrition2021

Chinese Propolis: Ultrasound-assisted enhanced ethanolic extraction, volatile components analysis, antioxidant and antibacterial activity comparison.

Qingzhi Ding, Arooj Rehman Sheikh, Xiangyue Gu, Juan Li, Kaihui Xia, Nianzhen Sun, Ricardo A Wu, Lin Luo, Yong Zhang, Haile Ma

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Food science & nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Potential Antidiabetic Activity ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Chemical Composition of Volatile Compounds inMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Qingzhi DingSchool of Food and Biological Engineering Jiangsu University Zhenjiang China.
Arooj Rehman SheikhSchool of Food and Biological Engineering Jiangsu University Zhenjiang China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3088-2502
Xiangyue GuSchool of Food and Biological Engineering Jiangsu University Zhenjiang China.
Juan LiSchool of Food and Biological Engineering Jiangsu University Zhenjiang China.
Kaihui XiaSchool of Food and Biological Engineering Jiangsu University Zhenjiang China.
Nianzhen SunSchool of Food and Biological Engineering Jiangsu University Zhenjiang China.
Ricardo A WuSchool of Food and Biological Engineering Jiangsu University Zhenjiang China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6553-8659
Lin LuoSchool of Food and Biological Engineering Jiangsu University Zhenjiang China.
Yong ZhangSchool of Food and Biological Engineering Jiangsu University Zhenjiang China.
Haile MaSchool of Food and Biological Engineering Jiangsu University Zhenjiang China.
Jiangsu University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study was aimed to enhance the extraction yield of propolis samples using ultrasound technology, analyze the volatile compounds, and compare the antioxidant and antimicrobial effect of propolis extracts of different areas. Four propolis samples were collected from different regions of China, namely: Linqing, Shandong Province (LSP); Yingchun, Heilongjiang Province (YHP); Changge, Henan Province (CHP); and Raohe, Heilongjiang Province (RHP). The ultrasound extracts of CHP and RHP showed a higher total phenolic content (TPC) of 201.78 ± 4.60 mgGAE/g and 166.071 ± 1.53 mgGAE/g, total flavonoid content (TFC) of 519.77 ± 29.90 and 341.227 ± 10.82 mg quercetin/g respectively, as well as high antioxidant and antibacterial activity. Conventional extraction showed 15%-20% lower yield for TPC ranging from 72.02 ± 1.99 to 155.95 ± 3.69 mg GAE/g, TFC ranges from 129.675 ± 6.82 to 412.83 ± 12.14 mg quercetin/g, with lower antibacterial activity. The antioxidant activity of propolis extracts was determined by assays of reducing power, DPPH*, FRAP*, TEAC*, hydroxyl radical scavenging activity and superoxide anion scavenging activity. Collectively, the antioxidant activities of extracts from CHP and RHP were higher than those of the other two extracts(YHP and LSP). All the extracts showed high antimicrobial activity on

Indexed as

antibacterial activityantioxidant activityHS‐SPME‐GC‐MSpropolisultrasound‐assisted extraction

Identifiers

PMID33473295
PMCPMC7802561
OpenAlexW3106876556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.