4.0 Article

Optimization of pectin extraction using response surface methodology: A bibliometric analysis

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.carpta.2022.100229

关键词

Pectin; Optimization; Bibliometric; Co-citation; Optimization of methods for pectin; Extraction

资金

  1. CNPq [307429/2018-0, 408767/2021-9]
  2. Federal Institute of Piaui (IFPI)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzed 209 articles on pectin extraction via response surface methodology (RSM) collected from Web of Science(C) and Scopus(C), using Bibliometrix for science mapping analysis. The trends in optimization and extraction methods of pectin via RSM were identified. The results showed that China was the most active country in terms of local productions, while Iran, Brazil, India, and the United Kingdom contributed to international collaborative publications. Assisted extraction methods and the physical and functional properties of pectin have gained more relevance in recent years.
In this study, 209 articles have been surveyed on the Pectin Extraction via Response Surface Methodology (RSM) that have been collected from Web of Science(C) and Scopus(C), and analyzed by using Bibliometrix, an RStudio package for science mapping analysis. Trends in the optimization and extraction methods of pectin via RSM have been pointed out, which may be useful for further research. Results shown that publications on Pectin Extraction via RSM have started for more than 20 years, with a growing trend, more than triplicating in the last 10 years. Based on such set of papers, China has been the most active country in local productions, whereas Iran, Brazil, India, and the United Kingdom have contributed with international-wide collaborative publications in optimization pectin extraction through RSM. Assisted extraction categories, physical and functional properties of pectin have taken on more relevance by 2012, especially with consolidation of microwave-assisted and ultrasound-assisted extraction techniques.

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

4.0
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