↓ Skip to main content

Fruit Pod Extracts as a Source of Nutraceuticals and Pharmaceuticals

Overview of attention for article published in Molecules, October 2012
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
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
175 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Fruit Pod Extracts as a Source of Nutraceuticals and Pharmaceuticals
Published in
Molecules, October 2012
DOI 10.3390/molecules171011931
Pubmed ID
Authors

Azila Abdul Karim, Azrina Azlan

Abstract

Fruit pods contain various beneficial compounds that have biological activities and can be used as a source of pharmaceutical and nutraceutical products. Although pods or pericarps are usually discarded when consuming the edible parts of fruits, they contain some compounds that exhibit biological activities after extraction. Most fruit pods included in this review contain polyphenolic components that can promote antioxidant effects on human health. Additionally, anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, antifungal and chemopreventive effects are associated with these fruit pod extracts. Besides polyphenolics, other compounds such as xanthones, carotenoids and saponins also exhibit health effects and can be potential sources of nutraceutical and pharmaceutical components. In this review, information on fruit pods or pericarp of Garcinia mangostana, Ceratonia siliqua, Moringa oleifera, Acacia nilotica, Sapindus rarak and Prosopis cineraria is presented and discussed with regard to their biological activity of the major compounds existing in them. The fruit pods of other ethno- botanical plants have also been reviewed. It can be concluded that although fruit pods are considered as being of no practical use and are often being thrown away, they nevertheless contain compounds that might be useful sources of nutraceutical and other pharmaceutical components.

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 175 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Croatia 1 <1%
Unknown 173 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 32 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 12%
Student > Master 20 11%
Researcher 15 9%
Other 11 6%
Other 33 19%
Unknown 43 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 16 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 9%
Chemistry 11 6%
Other 30 17%
Unknown 47 27%
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 13 July 2015.
All research outputs
#15,352,618
of 25,655,374 outputs
Outputs from Molecules
#7,802
of 23,996 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,251
of 192,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecules
#53
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,655,374 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 23,996 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 192,040 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.