4.5 Article

Comparative studies on phenolic, anti-oxidative, biochemical and GC-MS analysis of crude and refined edible oils

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jksus.2022.102432

关键词

Phytochemicals GC-MS; Analysis; Oils; Saponification; Measurement

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compared the biological activity of refined and crude oils, analyzed their physiochemical and quantitative properties. The results showed that crude oils have more health benefits compared to refined oils.
Fats and oils play a very important role in everyday life. Many oils are available in the market with poten-tial health benefits. Some of these oils if taken in excess are harmful too. Oils can be saturated or unsat-urated depending on the nature of fatty acid present in them. The current study was carried out to compare the biological activity of refined and crude oils to understand and analyze their physiochemical analysis and quantitative properties of oils. Three types of oils were selected in this project which are sunflower oil, almond oil and sesame oil. The seeds of the oils were obtained from the local market and the oil were extracted using the Soxhlet extraction method. Three refined oils of the same variety were obtained from the market. Different analytical procedures like measuring the moisture content of oils, total phenolic activity of oils, anti-oxidative properties of oils, iodine number, saponification number of oils, Reichert meisel number, total sterol content, Gas chromatography mass spectroscopy(GC-MS) analysis was performed on all categories of oils. The main purpose of this analysis is to suggest which of the oils crude or refined are good for health and metabolism. From the studies carried out and the results obtained, it was found that the crude oils of all the three varieties have more health benefits than the refined oils.(c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据