Comparative analysis of

Sabrina Kassouar, Dalila Mecellem, Samia Djellal, Nourelimane Benzitoune

Abstract readComparative Study

In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biosciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Sabrina KassouarLaboratoire de Gestion et Valorisation des Ressources Naturelles et Assurances Qualite (LGVRNAQ), Faculte´ des sciences de la Nature et de la Vie et Sciences de la Terre, Universite´ de Bouira, 10000 Bouira, Algeria.

Dalila Mecellem

Samia Djellal

Nourelimane Benzitoune

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study aims to investigate the differences between cork oak acorns from natural and semi-natural stands in terms of morphology, insect attack rate, and acorn chemical composition. Moreover, it examines the metabolic responses induced by insect attacks. The results show that acorns from the semi-natural stand in our study are larger than those from the natural stand. In addition, the insect attack rate was higher in the natural stand (8.25%) than in the semi-natural stand (6.25%). Furthermore, acorns in the semi-natural stand exhibit high total flavonoid content (TFC), whereas those in the natural stand are rich in total phenolic content (TPC). In terms of biochemical changes in acorns, the study revealed a remarkably significant difference in TPC, TFC, and antioxidant activity subsequent to infestation by

Indexed as

AntioxidantsFlavonoidsPhenolsQuercusAnimalsInsectaWeevilsAntioxidantsFlavonoidsPhenols

Identifiers

PMID39311034

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

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.