ArticlePloS one2025
Antioxidant potential of tree bark extracts: Insight from the multi-level output of the Antioxidant Power 1 assay.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Tart Cherry (International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tree bark is a complex protective tissue that serves both physiological and defensive functions and is particularly rich in phenolic compounds bearing antioxidant, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory and wound healing properties. The aim of this study was to investigate the antioxidant activity of aqueous bark extracts from 6 European tree species, namely black alder, common beech, silver birch, bird cherry, oak and scots pine using the antioxidant assay Antioxidant Power 1 (AOP1) on a keratinocyte cell line in the light of dermatological applications. The AOP1 assay relies on light-induced intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) production that disrupts efflux transport, enabling the accumulation of fluorescent cyanine dyes which can be quantitatively detected by increased fluorescence. Particular attention was placed on the multi-level output provided by AOP1, which includes information on the intracellular antioxidant as well as prooxidative effects of specific compounds and insight into the ground stress level of cells. The results showed that tree bark extracts exhibit a different antioxidant mechanism compared to the well-known antioxidative substance resveratrol. Bark extracts limit the total amount of ROS produced over the duration of the assay, with oak, beech and pine bark extracts showing the highest antioxidant capacity. In contrast, resveratrol delays ROS production over several illumination cycles before levels reach those of untreated cells. Cellular ground stress level was elevated by alder and birch whereas oak, beech and pine reduced the ground stress level similar to that of resveratrol. Results of AOP1 were linked to the constituents of the tree bark extracts derived by Soxhlet extraction, determined by HPLC-DAD analysis. The results highlight the potential of AOP1 as a screening tool with multi-level output and demonstrate the antioxidative potential of six European tree bark extracts, underscoring their promise as sustainable, value-added resources for the development of dermatological therapies targeting oxidative stress-related skin disorders.
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.