| Title |
Kavalactone content and chemotype of kava beverages prepared from roots and rhizomes of Isa and Mahakea varieties and extraction efficiency of kavalactones using different solvents
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Food Science and Technology, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13197-013-1047-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jun Wang, Weiyue Qu, Harry C. Bittenbender, Qing X. Li |
| Abstract |
The South Pacific islanders have consumed kava beverage for thousands of years. The quality of kava and kava beverage is evaluated through determination of the content of six major kavalactones including methysticin, dihydromethysticin, kavain, dihydrokavain, yangonin and desmethoxyyangonin. In this study, we determined contents of kavalactones in and chemotype of kava beverages prepared from roots and rhizomes of Isa and Mahakea varieties and extraction efficiency of five different solvents including hexane, acetone, methanol, ethanol and ethyl acetate. The six major kavalactones were detected in all kava beverages with these five solvents. Different solvents had different extraction efficiencies for kavalactones from the lyophilized kava preparations. The contents of kavalactones in the extracts with acetone, ethanol, and methanol did not differ significantly. Ethanol had the highest extraction efficiency for the six major kavalactones whereas hexane gave the lowest extraction efficiency. |
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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 17% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 9 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. 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 21 September 2023.
All research outputs
#969,785
of 25,523,622 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Food Science and Technology
#55
of 1,614 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,813
of 209,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Food Science and Technology
#2
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,523,622 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,614 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 209,273 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.