Cargando…
Common Trends and Differences in Antioxidant Activity Analysis of Phenolic Substances Using Single Electron Transfer Based Assays
Numerous assays were developed to measure the antioxidant activity, but each has limitations and the results obtained by different methods are not always comparable. Popular examples are the DPPH and ABTS assay. Our aim was to study similarities and differences of these two assay regarding the measu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7956415/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33669139 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules26051244 |
_version_ | 1783664430065647616 |
---|---|
author | Platzer, Melanie Kiese, Sandra Herfellner, Thomas Schweiggert-Weisz, Ute Miesbauer, Oliver Eisner, Peter |
author_facet | Platzer, Melanie Kiese, Sandra Herfellner, Thomas Schweiggert-Weisz, Ute Miesbauer, Oliver Eisner, Peter |
author_sort | Platzer, Melanie |
collection | PubMed |
description | Numerous assays were developed to measure the antioxidant activity, but each has limitations and the results obtained by different methods are not always comparable. Popular examples are the DPPH and ABTS assay. Our aim was to study similarities and differences of these two assay regarding the measured antioxidant potentials of 24 phenolic compounds using the same measurement and evaluation methods. This should allow conclusions to be drawn as to whether one of the assays is more suitable for measuring specific subgroups like phenolic acids, flavonols, flavanones, dihydrochalcones or flavanols. The assays showed common trends for the mean values of most of the subgroups. Some dihydrochalcones and flavanones did not react with the DPPH radical in contrast to the ABTS radical, leading to significant differences. Therefore, to determine the antioxidant potential of dihydrochalcone or flavanone-rich extracts, the ABTS assay should be preferred. We found that the results of the flavonoids in the DPPH assay were dependent on the Bors criteria, whereas the structure–activity relationship in the ABTS assay was not clear. For the phenolic acids, the results in the ABTS assay were only high for pyrogallol structures, while the DPPH assay was mainly determined by the number of OH groups. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7956415 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79564152021-03-16 Common Trends and Differences in Antioxidant Activity Analysis of Phenolic Substances Using Single Electron Transfer Based Assays Platzer, Melanie Kiese, Sandra Herfellner, Thomas Schweiggert-Weisz, Ute Miesbauer, Oliver Eisner, Peter Molecules Article Numerous assays were developed to measure the antioxidant activity, but each has limitations and the results obtained by different methods are not always comparable. Popular examples are the DPPH and ABTS assay. Our aim was to study similarities and differences of these two assay regarding the measured antioxidant potentials of 24 phenolic compounds using the same measurement and evaluation methods. This should allow conclusions to be drawn as to whether one of the assays is more suitable for measuring specific subgroups like phenolic acids, flavonols, flavanones, dihydrochalcones or flavanols. The assays showed common trends for the mean values of most of the subgroups. Some dihydrochalcones and flavanones did not react with the DPPH radical in contrast to the ABTS radical, leading to significant differences. Therefore, to determine the antioxidant potential of dihydrochalcone or flavanone-rich extracts, the ABTS assay should be preferred. We found that the results of the flavonoids in the DPPH assay were dependent on the Bors criteria, whereas the structure–activity relationship in the ABTS assay was not clear. For the phenolic acids, the results in the ABTS assay were only high for pyrogallol structures, while the DPPH assay was mainly determined by the number of OH groups. MDPI 2021-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7956415/ /pubmed/33669139 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules26051244 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Platzer, Melanie Kiese, Sandra Herfellner, Thomas Schweiggert-Weisz, Ute Miesbauer, Oliver Eisner, Peter Common Trends and Differences in Antioxidant Activity Analysis of Phenolic Substances Using Single Electron Transfer Based Assays |
title | Common Trends and Differences in Antioxidant Activity Analysis of Phenolic Substances Using Single Electron Transfer Based Assays |
title_full | Common Trends and Differences in Antioxidant Activity Analysis of Phenolic Substances Using Single Electron Transfer Based Assays |
title_fullStr | Common Trends and Differences in Antioxidant Activity Analysis of Phenolic Substances Using Single Electron Transfer Based Assays |
title_full_unstemmed | Common Trends and Differences in Antioxidant Activity Analysis of Phenolic Substances Using Single Electron Transfer Based Assays |
title_short | Common Trends and Differences in Antioxidant Activity Analysis of Phenolic Substances Using Single Electron Transfer Based Assays |
title_sort | common trends and differences in antioxidant activity analysis of phenolic substances using single electron transfer based assays |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7956415/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33669139 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules26051244 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT platzermelanie commontrendsanddifferencesinantioxidantactivityanalysisofphenolicsubstancesusingsingleelectrontransferbasedassays AT kiesesandra commontrendsanddifferencesinantioxidantactivityanalysisofphenolicsubstancesusingsingleelectrontransferbasedassays AT herfellnerthomas commontrendsanddifferencesinantioxidantactivityanalysisofphenolicsubstancesusingsingleelectrontransferbasedassays AT schweiggertweiszute commontrendsanddifferencesinantioxidantactivityanalysisofphenolicsubstancesusingsingleelectrontransferbasedassays AT miesbaueroliver commontrendsanddifferencesinantioxidantactivityanalysisofphenolicsubstancesusingsingleelectrontransferbasedassays AT eisnerpeter commontrendsanddifferencesinantioxidantactivityanalysisofphenolicsubstancesusingsingleelectrontransferbasedassays |