↓ Skip to main content

Effect of ultrasound pre-treatment of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) seed on supercritical CO2 extraction of oil

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Food Science and Technology, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
134 Mendeley
Title
Effect of ultrasound pre-treatment of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) seed on supercritical CO2 extraction of oil
Published in
Journal of Food Science and Technology, August 2013
DOI 10.1007/s13197-013-1143-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. Da Porto, A. Natolino, D. Decorti

Abstract

Ultrasound pre-treatment of intact hemp seeds without any solvent assistance was carried out for 10, 20 and 40 min prior to SCCO2 extraction at 40 °C, 300 bar and 45 kg CO2/kg feed. Sonication time effect on SC-CO2 extraction was investigated by the extraction kinetics. The maximum extraction yield was estimated to be 24.03 (% w/w) after 10 min of ultrasonic pre-treatment. The fatty acid compositions of the oils extracted by SC-CO2 without and with ultrasound pre-treatments was analyzed using gas chromatography. It was shown that the content of linoleic, α-linolenic and oleic acids (the most abundant unsaturated fatty acids) of the hemp seed oils were not affected significantly by the application of ultrasound. UV spectroscopy indices (K232 and K268) and antiradical capacity were used to follow the quality of oils. Significant were the changes in their antiradical capacity due to ultrasound treatment. A comparison with the oil extracted by Soxhlet was also given.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 133 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 20%
Student > Master 18 13%
Student > Bachelor 17 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Other 7 5%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 33 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 19%
Chemistry 17 13%
Chemical Engineering 16 12%
Engineering 10 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 5%
Other 21 16%
Unknown 37 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,087,955
of 25,257,066 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Food Science and Technology
#650
of 1,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,066
of 206,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Food Science and Technology
#19
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,257,066 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,589 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 206,825 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.