| Title |
Assessing the fatty acid, essential oil composition, their radical scavenging and antibacterial activities of Schinus terebinthifolius Raddi leaves and twigs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Food Science and Technology, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13197-018-3049-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Asma Ennigrou, Hervé Casabianca, Emmanuelle Vulliet, Belgacem Hanchi, Karim Hosni |
| Abstract |
The fatty acid, essential oil compositions and their respective antioxidant and antibacterial activities was determined inSchinus terebinthifoliusRaddi leaves and twigs. The lipid content ranged from 1.75 to 4.65% in twigs and leaves, respectively. Thirteen fatty acids were identified with α-linolenic (C18:3), palmitic (C16:0) and linoleic (C18:2) acids being the main components. The essential oils of both organs were characterized by a high amount of monoterpene hydrocarbons (68.91-74.88%) with α-phellandrene (33.06-36.18%), α-pinene (14.85-15.18%) and limonene (6.62-8.79%) being the chief components. The DPPH˙ radical scavenging assay revealed that both oils have a very weak antiradical activity. In contrast, they showed an appreciable antibacterial activity against the gram-positiveEnterococcus feacium(ATCC 19434) andStreptococcus agalactiae(ATCC 13813) bacteria. These results suggest that leaves and twigs ofS. terebinthifoliuscould be considered as an important dietary source of health promoting phytochemicals and has a good potential for use in food industry and pharmacy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Professor | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 17 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 17% |
| Chemistry | 6 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 22 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 April 2018.
All research outputs
#14,381,804
of 23,031,582 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Food Science and Technology
#554
of 1,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,729
of 438,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Food Science and Technology
#22
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,031,582 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,452 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 438,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.