2.4.2. DPPH and ABTS Radical Scavenging Activity and Ferric-Reducing Antioxidant Power (FRAP)

YP Yuthana Phimolsiripol
SB Srirana Buadoktoom
PL Pimporn Leelapornpisid
KJ Kittisak Jantanasakulwong
PS Phisit Seesuriyachan
TC Thanongsak Chaiyaso
NL Noppol Leksawasdi
PR Pornchai Rachtanapun
NC Nareekan Chaiwong
SS Sarana Rose Sommano
CB Charles S. Brennan
JR Joe M. Regenstein
ask Ask a question
Favorite

Free radical scavenging activity was determined using the DPPH radical assay of Surin et al. [25]. The sample solution (2 mL) was mixed with 2 mL of 0.2-mmol/L DPPH solution. After incubation in the dark at 30 °C for 30 min, the absorbance was measured at 517 nm. The percentage of inhibition of the DPPH radical (n = 3) was calculated. The results were expressed as IC50 values, the lowest concentration of the sample required to inhibit 50% of the radicals.

For the ABTS radical scavenging assay of Chaiwong et al. [26], 100 µL of the sample from 0.5–5.0 mg/mL was mixed with 900 µL of 7-mM ABTS reagent. After incubation in the dark at 30 °C for 6 min, the absorbance was measured at 734 nm. The percentage of inhibition of the ABTS radical was calculated. The results (n = 3) were expressed as the IC50 values.

The reducing power was determined using the FRAP assay of Surin et al. [27], with some modifications. Briefly, 100 µL of the sample (100 mg/mL) was mixed with 1900 µL of FRAP reagent, which consisted of 2.5 mL of 10-mM TPTZ in 40-mM HCl, 2.5 mL of 20-mM FeCl3 and 25 mL of 0.3-M acetate buffer (pH 3.6). The absorption was measured at 595 nm, and aqueous FeSO4 solutions were used to prepare the calibration curve. The measurements were done in triplicate (n = 3). The untreated ultrasonication sample was used as the control.

Do you have any questions about this protocol?

Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.

post Post a Question
0 Q&A