ArticleFood science of animal resources2026
Antioxidant activity of ultrasound-assisted extracts of elephant garlic and their effects on the quality of pork patties during refrigerated storage.
Article in Food science of animal resources, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigated the antioxidant activity of elephant-garlic (Allium ampeloprasum var. ampeloprasum) ultrasound-assisted extracts obtained with water (APW), 50% ethanol (APE50) and 100% ethanol (APE), and evaluated their effects on the physicochemical properties and microbial counts of pork patties during 14 d of refrigerated storage (4 °C). Total phenolic contents are followed APE > APE50 > APW > unextracted powder (AP) (p < 0.05). APE exhibited the highest 2,2-Diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical scavenging activity and reducing power, but the lowest iron-chelating ability relative to AP. Pork patties were prepared by incorporating 0.5% AP, APW, APE50, or APE, while patties without any additive served as the control and those containing 0.1% ascorbic acid (AA) served as the reference treatment. pH and lightness (L*) values did not differ among treatments. APE50 maintained redness (a*), whereas APE reduced it (p < 0.05). During storage, patties containing AP, APW, APE50 or APE had lower thiobarbituric acid reactive substance (TBARS) and peroxide values than control, with APE showing the greatest inhibition of lipid oxidation (p < 0.05). Volatile basic nitrogen (VBN) decreased with APW, APE50 and APE, while APE50 or APE also suppressed total plate counts and Enterobacteriaceae (p < 0.05). These results indicated that APE50 and APE effectively retard lipid oxidation and microbial growth in pork patties which might be better than the typical drying powder.
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.