3.8 Article

Evaluation of the Antioxidant Capacity and Phenolic Content of Three Thymus Species

Journal

JOURNAL OF ACUPUNCTURE AND MERIDIAN STUDIES
Volume 5, Issue 3, Pages 119-125

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jams.2012.03.003

Keywords

antioxidant activity; free radical scavenging activity; Labiatae; Thymus; total flavonoid content; total phenolic content

Funding

  1. Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Thymus species are known to have significant amounts of phenolic and flavonoid compounds and exhibit strong antioxidant activities. This work was designed to evaluate the antioxidant activities of three endemic Iranian Thymus species (including T. daenensis, T. kotschyanus, and T. pubescens) in different test systems [namely DPPH center dot (2,2'-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl), ABTS(center dot+) [2,2'-azinobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid], and linoleic acid/beta-carotene bleaching assays] to determine the total phenolic and flavonoid contents of the species (assayed by colorimetric techniques) and to study the possible composition-activity relationship. All the tested plants exhibited concentration-dependent antioxidant and free radical scavenging activities. T. pubescens showed the highest free radical scavenging activities in both DPPH center dot and ABTS(center dot+) methods, while T. daenensis and T. kotschyanus were the most active species in the beta-carotene bleaching inhibition test. Alternatively, T. pubescens exhibited a significantly higher level of the total flavonoid content compared with those of the other species, while no significant statistically differences were found among the tested plants regarding the total phenolic content. In addition, significant correlations were found between the flavonoid content and DPPH center dot/ABTS(center dot+) radical scavenging activities, but not between the beta-carotene bleaching inhibition system and the flavonoid content.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available