extracts. The effects of in vitro digestions on the CAA of all three
extracts (hydrophilic, lipophilic and mixture of the two) were
similar to those on the chemical-based antioxidant activities, i.e.
a significant reduction (17–34%) by the digestion process (Fig. 4).
Nevertheless, the reduction in CAA of the lipophilic extract (27%
and 34% after gastric and intestinal digestions, respectively) was
less significant as compared to those in the TCC (70% and 72%)
and the chemical-based antioxidant activities DPPH (63% and
64%) and ORAC-L (67% and 69%), suggesting that the available
carotenoid concentration was high enough to scavenge the cellular
radicals. It may also suggest that some degradation products might
be available to the cellular antioxidant action. Overall, the relatively
well retained cellular antioxidant activity of all extracts indicates
that the phytochemicals in V118 are able to be transported
across the MCF cell barrier and function as antioxidants inside
the live cells.
Using data from Fig. 4 and the TCC and TPC in the lipophilic and
hydrophilic extracts, or the sum of the two in the mixed extract,
good correlations (Pearson’s correlation coefficients: 0.83–0.92)
were found between these contents and CAA, suggesting the carotenoid
or phenolic contents or the mixture of the two phytochemical
groups can be good indicators for the cellular antioxidant