↓ Skip to main content

Antioxidant Properties of Crude Extract, Partition Extract, and Fermented Medium of Dendrobium sabin Flower

Overview of attention for article published in Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM), January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
Antioxidant Properties of Crude Extract, Partition Extract, and Fermented Medium of Dendrobium sabin Flower
Published in
Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM), January 2017
DOI 10.1155/2017/2907219
Pubmed ID
Authors

Farahziela Abu, Che Norma Mat Taib, Mohamad Aris Mohd Moklas, Sobri Mohd Akhir

Abstract

Antioxidant properties of crude extract, partition extract, and fermented medium from Dendrobium sabin (DS) flower were investigated. The oven-dried DS flower was extracted using 100% methanol (w/v), 100% ethanol (w/v), and 100% water (w/v). The 100% methanolic crude extract showed the highest total phenolic content (40.33 ± mg GAE/g extract) and the best antioxidant properties as shown by DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP assays. A correlation relationship between antioxidant activity and total phenolic content showed that phenolic compounds were the dominant antioxidant components in this flower extract. The microbial fermentation on DS flower medium showed a potential in increasing the phenolic content and DPPH scavenging activity. The TPC of final fermented medium showed approximately 18% increment, while the DPPH of fermented medium increased significantly to approximately 80% at the end of the fermentation. Dendrobium sabin (DS) flower showed very good potential properties of antioxidant in crude extract and partition extract as well as better antioxidant activity in the flower fermented medium.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 113 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 31 27%
Student > Master 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Lecturer 5 4%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 25 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 15%
Chemistry 16 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 14 12%
Engineering 5 4%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 32 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 July 2017.
All research outputs
#9,203,788
of 11,498,428 outputs
Outputs from Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM)
#2,714
of 4,744 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,504
of 260,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM)
#74
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,498,428 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,744 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 260,423 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.