ArticleScientific reports2025
Biochemical, nutritional, and nutraceutical properties of cactus pear accessions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization of Bioactive Composition and Structural Properties of Epidermis and Cortex Tissues in Edible Cactus [Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cactus pear (Opuntia ficus-indica Mill.) is a resilient fruit species gaining importance due to its nutritional and health-promoting properties, especially in arid and semi-arid regions like Türkiye. Despite its growing significance, limited comprehensive research exists on the variability in its biochemical and nutraceutical traits. This study aimed to assess 100 wild cactus pear accessions collected from Hatay province, Türkiye evaluating a broad range of traits, including biochemical properties, antioxidant activities, fatty acid profiles, organic acid, mineral compositions, and sensory characteristics. Extensive variability was observed among the accessions. Total phenolics ranged from 68.17 to 109.92 mg GAE 100 g⁻¹ FW, antioxidant activity (ABTS) from 13.74 to 35.40 mmol Trolox kg⁻¹ DW, and β-carotene from 3.11 to 6.87 µg β-CE 100 g⁻¹ FW. Notably, linoleic acid, oleic acid, and palmitic acid were the predominant fatty acids, while citric acid was the major organic acid. High levels of essential minerals such as potassium (1473.21-2113.57 mg kg⁻¹ DW) and calcium (201.77-325.91 mg kg⁻¹ DW) were found. Sensory evaluations revealed accessions with high aroma, sweet taste, and juiciness. Significant positive correlations were detected between total phenolics and antioxidant activity (DPPH, r = 0.45, p ≤ 0.01) and β-carotene and antioxidant activity (ABTS, r = 0.55, p ≤ 0.01). A total of 20 superior genotypes were identified based on their exceptional biochemical and organoleptic traits. The first five of these genotypes are 'CP53', 'CP61', 'CP6', 'CP44', and 'CP15'. Principal component analysis (PCA) results showed that the first three components explained 26.40% of the total variation, with PC1 and PC2 being key for distinguishing cactus pear genotypes based on nutritional and sensory traits relevant to breeding programs. Within the framework of hierarchical cluster analysis, the similarity index ranged from 0.59 to 0.94, with the highest similarity observed between the genotypes 'CP50' and 'CP56'. The cactus pear accessions studied demonstrated significant potential for use in breeding programs aimed at enhancing fruit quality for nutritional and industrial purposes. These findings contribute valuable insights for the conservation and utilization of wild cactus pear genetic resources, supporting the development of functional food products and sustainable cultivation strategies in Mediterranean climates.
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.