Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/29829
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorde Oliveira, Izamara-
dc.contributor.authorChrysargyris, Antonios-
dc.contributor.authorHeleno, Sandrina A-
dc.contributor.authorCarocho, Márcio-
dc.contributor.authorCalhelha, Ricardo C.-
dc.contributor.authorDias, Maria Inês-
dc.contributor.authorPetrović, Jovana S.-
dc.contributor.authorSoković, Marina-
dc.contributor.authorPetropoulos, Spyridon A.-
dc.contributor.authorSantos-Buelga, Celestino-
dc.contributor.authorTzortzakis, Nikos G.-
dc.contributor.authorBarros, Lillian-
dc.date.accessioned2023-07-13T06:29:43Z-
dc.date.available2023-07-13T06:29:43Z-
dc.date.issued2023-08-
dc.identifier.citationFood Research International, 2023, vol. 170, pp. 1-13en_US
dc.identifier.issn09639969-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/29829-
dc.description.abstractThe present study aims to determine the combined effect of cropping system and irrigation regime on the chemical composition and bioactive properties of lemon balm aerial parts. For this purpose, lemon balm plants were grown under two farming systems (conventional farming vs organic farming) and two irrigation levels (full irrigation vs deficit irrigation) and harvested twice throughout the growing period. The collected aerial parts were subjected to three different methods of extractions, namely infusion, maceration and ultrasound-assisted extraction and the obtained extracts were evaluated in terms of chemical profile and bioactivities. Five organic acids with varied composition among the tested treatments were identified in all the tested samples for both harvests, namely, citric, malic, oxalic, shikimic and quinic acid. Regarding phenolic compounds composition, the most abundant ones were rosmarinic acid, lithospermic acid A isomer I and hydroxylsalvianolic E, especially for the maceration and infusion extraction methods. Full irrigation resulted in lower EC50 values than deficit irrigation only in the treatments of the second harvest, while variable cytotoxic and anti-inflammatory effects were recorded in both harvests. Finally, in most cases the lemon balm extracts has similar or better activity than the positive controls, while the antifungal activity of lemon balm extracts was stronger than the antibacterial effects. In conclusion, the results of the present study showed that the implemented agronomic practices, as well as the extraction protocol may significantly affect the chemical profile and bioactivities of lemon balm extracts, suggesting that both the farming system and the irrigation schedule may improve the quality of the extracts depending on the implemented extraction protocol.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofFood research international (Ottawa, Ont.)en_US
dc.rights© Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserveden_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/-
dc.subjectAntimicrobial activitiesen_US
dc.subjectBioactive potentialen_US
dc.subjectDeficit irrigationen_US
dc.subjectInfusionen_US
dc.subjectMacerationen_US
dc.subjectOrganic cultivationen_US
dc.subjectPhenolic compoundsen_US
dc.subjectUltrasound assisted extractionen_US
dc.titleEffects of the extraction techniques on the chemical composition and bioactive properties of lemon balm (Melissa officinalis L.) plants grown under different cropping and irrigation regimesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.collaborationCyprus University of Technologyen_US
dc.collaborationInstituto Politécnico de Bragançaen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Belgradeen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Thessalyen_US
dc.collaborationUniversidad de Salamancaen_US
dc.subject.categoryAGRICULTURAL SCIENCESen_US
dc.journalsHybrid Open Accessen_US
dc.countryCyprusen_US
dc.subject.fieldAgricultural Sciencesen_US
dc.publicationPeer Revieweden_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.foodres.2023.113044en_US
dc.identifier.pmid37316092-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85162025807-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85162025807-
dc.relation.volume170en_US
cut.common.academicyear2022-2023en_US
dc.identifier.spage1en_US
dc.identifier.epage13en_US
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501-
item.openairetypearticle-
item.languageiso639-1en-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Agricultural Sciences, Biotechnology and Food Science-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Agricultural Sciences, Biotechnology and Food Science-
crisitem.author.facultyFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
crisitem.author.facultyFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-1067-7977-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-2719-6627-
crisitem.author.parentorgFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
crisitem.author.parentorgFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
Appears in Collections:Άρθρα/Articles
CORE Recommender
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations 20

2
checked on May 8, 2024

Page view(s)

127
Last Week
5
Last month
13
checked on May 11, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons