Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38928798›Full record

ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Comparative Analysis of Black Chokeberry (

Mihaela Saracila, Arabela Elena Untea, Alexandra Gabriela Oancea, Iulia Varzaru, Petru Alexandru Vlaicu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Cranberry Pomace Valorization: Composition, Extraction, Bioactivity, and Food Applications.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Antidiabetic Potential ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  7. A Review ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  8. Bromatological Profile of Fruits fromAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Comparative Evaluation of Wild Plum (Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Polyphenols, Polysaccharides, and Their Complexes fromMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Mihaela SaracilaFeed and Food Quality Department, National Research and Development Institute for Animal Biology and Nutrition, Balotesti, 077015 Ilfov, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-3878-8433
Arabela Elena UnteaFeed and Food Quality Department, National Research and Development Institute for Animal Biology and Nutrition, Balotesti, 077015 Ilfov, Romania.ORCID 0000-0003-3000-5024
Alexandra Gabriela OanceaFeed and Food Quality Department, National Research and Development Institute for Animal Biology and Nutrition, Balotesti, 077015 Ilfov, Romania.
Iulia VarzaruFeed and Food Quality Department, National Research and Development Institute for Animal Biology and Nutrition, Balotesti, 077015 Ilfov, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-0647-4464
Petru Alexandru VlaicuFeed and Food Quality Department, National Research and Development Institute for Animal Biology and Nutrition, Balotesti, 077015 Ilfov, Romania.ORCID 0000-0003-4156-8244

Funding

National Research Development Project to Finance Excellence (PFE) 8/2021.Romanian Ministry of Research and Digitalization project PED 631/2022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study aims to compare the nutrient composition, antioxidant potential, and polyphenol bioaccessibility of the fruit, leaves, and pomace of black chokeberry. Phytochemical characterization, antioxidant activity, and the effect of in vitro gastrointestinal digestion on the individual phenolic compounds of fruit, leaves, and pomace of black chokeberry were assessed. Results showed that leaves had a higher content of polyphenols (61.06 mg GAE/g dw), flavonoids (8.47 mg QE/g), and tocopherols (1172.20 mg/kg) than fruit (27.99 mg GAE/g dw polyphenols, 5.23 mg QE/g flavonoids, 38.48 mg/kg tocopherols) and pomace (22.94 mg GAE/g dw polyphenols, 1.89 mg QE/g flavonoids and 157.19 mg/kg tocopherols), with superior in vitro antioxidant activity. Chlorogenic acids were the dominant phenolic compounds in black chokeberry undigested samples (2.713 mg/g in fruit, 17.954 mg/g in leaves, and 1.415 mg/g in pomace) but are poorly absorbed (bioaccessibility index in intestinal phase of 28.84% for fruit, 8.81% for leaves, and 31.90% for pomace). Hydroxybenzoic acids were highly stable in leaves and fruit during simulated digestion and had high bioaccessibility. In conclusion, residues from black chokeberry processing are also valuable sources of bioactive compounds, but the pomace had higher polyphenol bioaccessibility than leaves and might be a promising supplement for the food industry.

Indexed as

antioxidant potentialblack chokeberryin vitro gastrointestinal digestionphytochemicalspolyphenols bioaccessibility

Identifiers

PMID38928798
PMCPMC11202527

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.