Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/6601
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBudiarto, Rahmaten_US
dc.contributor.authorKhalisha, Anaen_US
dc.contributor.authorSari, Dwi Novandaen_US
dc.contributor.authorUjilestari, Trien_US
dc.contributor.authorWahyono, Teguhen_US
dc.contributor.authorAmirul Faiz Mohd Azmien_US
dc.contributor.authorAdli, Danung Nuren_US
dc.contributor.authorLusiana, Evellin Dewien_US
dc.contributor.authorSitaresmi, Pradita Iustitiaen_US
dc.contributor.authorSholikin, Mohammad Miftakhusen_US
dc.date.accessioned2024-11-17T08:41:24Z-
dc.date.available2024-11-17T08:41:24Z-
dc.date.issued2024-
dc.identifier.issn21965641-
dc.descriptionWeb of Science / Scopusen_US
dc.description.abstractRecent studies have explored the antioxidant properties of lemon essential oil (LEO), taking considering factors like plant part, extraction methods, and antioxidant assay. However, due to varied results and limited precision in individual studies, our meta-analysis aims to offer a comprehensive understanding across different experiments, irrespective of location or time. Out of 109 scientific articles published between 1947 and 2024, only 28 successfully validated their data on differences in antioxidant capacity and IC50, using weighted averages of Hedges’ d in meta-analysis. A meta-analysis revealed several key findings: (i) lemon leaf and peel extracts have higher IC50 compared to controls, whereas whole plant extracts show lower values (p < 0.001); (ii) the maceration preserves antioxidant properties better than hydro-distillation and Soxhlet extraction (p < 0.001); (iii) LEO require higher concentrations to achieve comparable free radical inhibition as the standard controls such as AsA, BHT, and quercetin, suggesting lower antioxidant efficiency. This was supported by IC50 result, which showed no significant difference between LEO and other compounds like thymol, Thymus vulgaris EO, and Citrus aurantium EO. However, compared to AsA, BHT, limonene, and trolox, the inhibition efficacy was significantly lower (p < 0.01). These findings consistently demonstrated significant antioxidant activity across multiple assays, including ABTS, β-carotene bleaching, DPPH, and FRAP (p < 0.01). Notably, the predominant components of LEO including α-linoleic acid, D-limonene, limonene, L-limonene, neryl acetate, sabinene, and Z-citral, which demonstrate significant potency as antioxidant agent (p < 0.01). Specifically, limonene and Z-citral make substantial contributions to its antioxidant capacity (p < 0.01). Despite variations in purity among LEO extractions, there is potential for future enhancement through nanoemulsion. In conclusion, LEO show promise as an alternative antioxidant, with emphasis to selecting samples based on leaves or peels and employing maceration extractions for various antioxidant assays. Active components rich in terpenoids, such as limonene and Z-citral, are particularly noteworthy. Graphical Abstract: (Figure presented.)en_US
dc.publisherSpringer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbHen_US
dc.relation.ispartofChemical and Biological Technologies in Agricultureen_US
dc.subjectBHTen_US
dc.subjectFree radicalen_US
dc.subjectLimoneneen_US
dc.titleAntioxidant properties of lemon essential oils: a meta-analysis of plant parts, extraction methods, dominant compounds, and antioxidant assay categoriesen_US
dc.typeInternationalen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s40538-024-00621-w-
dc.volume11(1)en_US
dc.description.articleno147en_US
dc.description.typeArticleen_US
dc.description.impactfactor5.2en_US
dc.description.quartileQ1en_US
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairetypeInternational-
item.grantfulltextnone-
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Veterinary Medicine - Journal (Scopus/WOS)
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.