ArticleScientific reports2025
Development of molecular diagnostic methods to distinguish acerola species for quality assurance of food, dietary supplements and natural health products.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assembling an Expanded Metabolome for Camu-Camu (Myrciaria Dubia): Bioactive and Nutritional Compounds Relevant to Functional Food Research.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Acerola (Barbados cherries) has become a highly traded superfruit because it contains many phytonutrients and is a good source of vitamin C. The fruits of Malpighia glabra, and M. emarginata are utilized in food products, dietary supplements and natural health products. However, there are differences among the fruit of Malpighia species with respect to phytochemicals, nutrient value and clinical research. Furthermore, there is evidence of adulteration with other fruit such as cherries (Prunus spp.). Unfortunately, conventional morphological examination does not distinguish acerola fruit species. Furthermore, no published methods are available to distinguish the fruits of these species including chemical and DNA based techniques. This risk to quality assurance (QA) is increased when considering processed berries into juice or powdered ingredients of which are the most common source for manufactures. This lack of QA methods also increases the risk of adulteration with cheaper fruit from other species. The goal of this research is to provide orthogonal molecular methods to authenticate Acerola fruit ingredients and discuss the benefits and constraints of these two different methods. This research supports quality assurance (QA) programs with fit-for-purpose methods for verifying the authenticity of acerola species ingredients from suppliers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.