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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Platzer, Melanie, Kiese, Sandra, Herfellner, Thomas, Schweiggert-Weisz, Ute, Miesbauer, Oliver, Eisner, Peter
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