↓ Skip to main content

Antioxidant in Mango (Mangifera indica L.) Pulp

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, January 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
8 Wikipedia pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
194 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
335 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Antioxidant in Mango (Mangifera indica L.) Pulp
Published in
Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, January 2007
DOI 10.1007/s11130-006-0035-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sônia Machado Rocha Ribeiro, José Humberto Queiroz, Maria Eliana Lopes Ribeiro de Queiroz, Flávia Milagres Campos, Helena Maria Pinheiro Sant’Ana

Abstract

This work was carried out to investigate the pulp composition of four mango cultivars (Haden, Tommy Atkins and Ubá) at the ripening stage in relation to three components with antioxidant potential (total phenolics, carotenoids and ascorbic acid). Total phenolic compound content was estimated by the Folin-Ciocalteu reagent and total carotenoid content by spectrophotometry at 450 nm. The contents of beta-carotene and total vitamin C (ascorbic acid and dehydroascorbic acid) were quantified by high performance liquid chromatography. Differences were found among the four mango cultivars in all the components analyzed. The content of phenolic compounds ranged from 48.40 (Haden) to 208.70 mg/100 g (Ubá); total carotenoid from 1.91 (Haden) to 2.63 mg/100 g (Palmer); beta-carotene from 661.27 (Palmer) to 2,220 microg/100 g (Ubá) and total ascorbic acid ranged from 9.79 (Tommy Atkins) to 77.71 mg/100 g (Ubá). These results corroborated previous information that mangoes are a good source of antioxidants in human diet.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 335 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Bangladesh 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 325 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 64 19%
Student > Bachelor 57 17%
Researcher 27 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 7%
Other 59 18%
Unknown 80 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 102 30%
Chemistry 34 10%
Engineering 30 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 4%
Other 43 13%
Unknown 94 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 May 2023.
All research outputs
#7,583,594
of 23,775,451 outputs
Outputs from Plant Foods for Human Nutrition
#255
of 713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,333
of 164,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Foods for Human Nutrition
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,775,451 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 713 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 164,951 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.