A kinetic approach in the evaluation of radical-scavenging efficiency of sinapic acid and its derivatives

Article abstract of DOI:10.3390/molecules22030375

A kinetic approach was used to determine the radical scavenging activities of sinapic acid and its derivatives: sinapine, 4-vinylsyringol, syringic acid, syringaldehyde, and ethyl, propyl and butyl sinapate. The responses were expressed as rates of 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl radical (DPPH) scavenging (RS), superoxide radical (O₂^-) scavenging (RFF), and β-carotene bleaching in the emulsion system (RB). For RS and RB, the esters of sinapic acid showed the highest responses while, for R_FF, this was seen for syringic acid. The effectiveness of the selected compounds for scavenging these free radicals was also determined at a fixed endpoint. The early response parameters were demonstrated to be good discriminators in assessing differences for antioxidants with comparable fixed endpoint activity. The primary feature that ranks the kinetic data and the endpoint determinations is interpreted in terms of the mechanisms of the reactions involved in each of the assays conducted.

Full text of DOI:10.3390/molecules22030375

molecules
Article
A Kinetic Approach in the Evaluation of
Radical-Scavenging Efficiency of Sinapic
Acid and Its Derivatives
1
Neda Nic´iforovic´ , Tomaž Polak 1, Damjan Makuc 2, Nataša Poklar Ulrih 1 and
1,
Helena Abramovicˇ
*
1
Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, SI-1111 Ljubljana, Slovenia; neda.neca@hotmail.com (N.N.);
tomaz.polak@bf.uni-lj.si (T.P.); natasa.poklar@bf.uni-lj.si (N.P.U.)
Slovenian NMR Centre, National Institute of Chemistry, SI-1001 Ljubljana, Slovenia; damjan.makuc@ki.si
Correspondence: helena.abramovic@bf.uni-lj.si; Tel.: +386-1-320-37-82; Fax: +386-1-256-62-96
2
*
Academic Editor: Derek J. McPhee
Received: 19 January 2017; Accepted: 22 February 2017; Published: 28 February 2017
Abstract: A kinetic approach was used to determine the radical scavenging activities of sinapic
acid and its derivatives: sinapine, 4-vinylsyringol, syringic acid, syringaldehyde, and ethyl, propyl
and butyl sinapate. The responses were expressed as rates of 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl radical
(DPPH·) scavenging (RS), superoxide radical (O2·−) scavenging (RFF), and
β-carotene bleaching in
the emulsion system (RB). For RS and RB, the esters of sinapic acid showed the highest responses
while, for RFF, this was seen for syringic acid. The effectiveness of the selected compounds
for scavenging these free radicals was also determined at a fixed endpoint. The early response
parameters were demonstrated to be good discriminators in assessing differences for antioxidants
with comparable fixed endpoint activity. The primary feature that ranks the kinetic data and the
endpoint determinations is interpreted in terms of the mechanisms of the reactions involved in each
of the assays conducted.
Keywords: sinapic acid; antioxidant activity; radical scavenging kinetics; radical scavenging
mechanisms
1. Introduction
Phenolic compounds are considered to be great contributors to the health effects of plant-based
diets mostly due to their ability to scavenge free radicals. For that reason they are extensively
investigated for their antioxidant activity. Most of the in vitro methods for characterization of the
radical scavenging properties of phenolic compounds concentrate on stoichiometric aspects at a fixed
reaction time when steady-state is reached and, thus, they do not define the early responses of an
antioxidant in a particular system [
hydroperoxyl (HOO·) and lipid (RO(O)·) radicals are short-lived in foods and tissues, long-term
incubations can ignore the initial fast reactions, and instead give weight to the slower side reactions [ ].
A significant aspect in the determination of antioxidant activity of phenolic compounds would also be
the reactivity in terms of the response of an antioxidant at the early steps of the process [ ], which is
related to the kinetics of the free radical quenching [ ] and is conditioned by the reaction mechanism.
1
]. Bearing in mind that free radicals such as hydroxyl (HO·),
2
3
4
The scavenging of free radicals by antioxidants can occur by two major mechanisms: hydrogen
atom transfer (HAT) and electron transfer (ET). In addition, transitional mechanisms are also possible,
which include proton-coupled electron transfer (PCET), electron transfer-proton transfer, (ET-PT), and
sequential proton loss electron transfer (SPLET) [
5–7]. According to Wright et al. [8] HAT and ET
mechanisms must always occur in parallel, but with different rates. Which mechanism is going to be
Molecules 2017, 22, 375; doi:10.3390/molecules22030375
www.mdpi.com/journal/molecules

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
2 of 17
primary (i.e., with a higher rate) depends on the molecular properties of the antioxidant, the radical
species involved, and the nature of the solvent, and while the end result is the same, the kinetics and
the prospective for side reactions differ [5].
As far as the molecular properties of an antioxidant are concerned, thermodynamic parameters,
such as bond dissociation energy (BDE), ionisation potential (IP), proton affinity (PA), and electron
transfer enthalpy (ETE) are of specific importance in the determination of which mechanism is the
favoured one in the scavenging of free radicals [9–11]. With the HAT mechanism, which involves
quenching of free radicals by the donation of a hydrogen atom, the BDE of the O–H bond is a
major factor for the scavenging activity, as it is related to the stability of the phenoxyl radical (ArO·).
In the ET mechanism, the IP is the most significant parameter in the evaluation of scavenging activity,
as it implicates single electron transfer from an antioxidant to a free radical, and the stability of the
·+
thus-formed radical cation (ArOH ). The lower the IP, the easier the electron abstraction is. Extended
delocalisation and conjugation of the
lower IP values and strongly influence the ability of phenolic antioxidants to donate a single electron [
π
-electrons enhanced by resonance effects and planarity favour
].
9
The SPLET mechanism, a two-step process, includes deprotonation of an –OH group of a phenol,
with formation of a phenox·ide anion (ArO−), which can be characterised by the PA [12]. This then
undergoes oxidation to ArO as the second step of the reaction, which is related to the ETE [11]. These
thermodynamics parameters are affected by the inductive effects of the substituents attached to the
phenolic ring. BDE, IP, and ETE are lower with electron-donating groups (i.e., with positive inductive
effects, +I), and increased with electron-withdrawing groups (i.e., with negative inductive effects,
−
I). The opposite effect can be noted in the case of the PA. Electron-withdrawing groups facilitate
deprotonation of an –OH group, and electron-donating groups have the opposite effect [10].
In addition, the nature of the reaction medium also influences the mechanism through which the
reaction would take place. For example, hydrogen bond accepting solvents (e.g., methanol, ethanol)
strongly influence the rate of hydrogen abstraction from a phenolic compound, by decreasing it and,
thus, favouring electron transfer processes [13].
In recent years, sinapic acid (SA; i.e., 3,5-dimethoxy-4-hydroxycinnamic acid), and some of
its derivatives, have been investigated because of their various biological activities, as reviewed by
Nic´iforovic´ and Abramovicˇ [14]. The aim of the present study was to investigate the radical-scavenging
efficiency of SA and its derivatives: sinapine (SI; i.e., 3,5-dimethoxy-4-hydroxy-cinnamoyl choline),
4-vinylsyringol (VS; 3,5-dimethoxy-4-hydroxystyrene, also known as canolol), sinapoyl esters
(e.g., ethyl [SE], propyl [SP], butyl [SB] sinapates), syringic acid (SY), and syringaldehyde (SYA;
4-hydroxy-3,5-dimethoxybenzaldehyde) (Figure 1) from the kinetics perspective. For this purpose,
the scavenging activities of the selected phenolic compounds were analysed in terms of the
2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH·) radical, the superoxide radical (O2·−), and lipid radicals
generated in the
β
-carotene-linoleic acid emulsion ·s−ystem. The results obtained by this kinetics
·
approach which provides the early rates of DPPH , O2 and lipid radical scavenging for these selected
compounds were compared to the conventional stoichiometry calculations obtained at a fixed endpoint.
The ranking of these data is interpreted in terms of the reaction mechanisms of each assay, according
to the structure and chemical properties of SA and its derivatives.

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
3 of 17
Figure 1. Structures of sinapic acid (SA) and its selected derivatives: ethyl sinapate (SE), propyl
sinapate (SP), butyl sinapate (SB), sinapine (SI), 4-vinylsyringol (VS), syringaldehyde (SYA), and
syringic acid (SY).
2. Results and Discussion
2.1. DPPH· Radical Scavenging Activity
DPPH· radical undergoes a colour change from purple to yellow upon receiving an electron or
hydrogen from an antioxidant, and the effects of the investigated antioxidant can be estimated by
measurement of the decrease in its absorbance at 517 nm. To determine the early responses of the
selected antioxidants towards DPPH· radicals, the change in absorbance at 517 nm (Ac517nm
−
(t=0)
refers
As517nm(t=x)) was plotted as a function of time (Figure 2A). The value Ac517nm
−
As517nm
(t=0)
(t=x)
As517nm
to the content of the DPPH· radical scavenged at t = x. The dependence of Ac517nm
−
(t=0)
(t=x)
on t was quantified for the first 100 s of each incubation, and is described by the power function given
in Equation (1):
1
y = 1 −
(1)
(1 + a·t)b
where y is Ac517nm(t=0) − As517nm
.
(t=x)
The curves in Figure 2 were plotted on the basis of parameters
a
and
b
of Equation (1), which
were obtained by non-linear regression analysis. The corresponding determination coefficients (r2) are
·
presented in Table 1. The kinetics of the scavenging DPPH radicals were quantified by the estimation
of the rate of DPPH scavenging (RS), as the first derivative of the power function given in Equation (2),
·
with the results from these data given in Table 1.
ab
R =
(2)
(1 + a·t)b+1
·−
The same principle was applied for the kinetics of the scavenging of O2 and lipid radicals by
the investigated SA derivatives.

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
4 of 17
Figure 2.
of each tested compound; (
of each tested compound; and (
at 2
10−4 mol/L of each tested compound. (
(
A
) Dependence of Ac517nm
−
As517nm
on time of incubation at 6.67
on time of incubation at 5
×
×
10−5 mol/L
10−3 mol/L
(t=0)
(t=x)
B
) dependence of As560nm
(t=x)
C
) dependence of As470nm
−
As470nm
on time of incubation
), syringic acid—SY; (
(t=0)
(t=x)
×
ꢀ
), sinapic acid—SA; (
#
N
),
),
syringaldehyde—SYA; ( ), ethyl sinapate—SE; (
∗
), propyl sinapate—SP; (
♦
), butyl sinapate—SB; (/
4-vinylsyringol—VS; (H), and sinapine—SI.

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
5 of 17
·
Table 1. The rates of DPPH radical scavenging (RS) at 0.1 s, the formazan formation (RFF) at 10 s, and
·
the β-carotene bleaching (RB) at 10 s, and the determination coefficients for the kinetics of the DPPH
·−
radical scavenging (r2 (DPPH·)), the O2 scavenging (r2 (O2·−)), and the
β
-carotene bleaching (r2
·
(
β
-carotene)). The data for the DPPH scavenging activity (IDPPH) estimated at 30 min, the superoxide
radical scavenging activity coefficient (CSASA) estimated at 5 min, and the antioxidant activity coefficient
in emulsion (CAA) estimated at 60 min. Chromatographic partition values (CPV) are also given.
Selected
Compound
RS
10 (s
×
RFF
10 (s
×
RB
10 (s
×
r2
r2·
r2
IDPPH
CSASA
CAA
CPV
(%) a
(%) a
(%) a
−2 −1
−3 −1
−4 −1
·
−
(O2 )
)
)
)
(DPPH )
(β-Carotene)
Sinapic acid
(SA)
15.40
0.27
1.57
14.21
2.31
0.92
6.37
9.88
ND
10.54
7.62
7.33
4.78
3.37
6.46
2.79
1.99
0.946
0.967
0.996
0.965
0.953
0.981
0.988
ND
0.978
0.967
0.984
0.975
0.968
0.987
0.984
0.980
86 ± 0.4
23 ± 0.5
74 ± 0.6
80 ± 1
66 ± 4
0
29 ± 2 0.46
2 ± 0.5 0.20
60 ± 1 0.73
Sinapine
(SI)
0.967
0.967
0.962
0.447
0.901
0.969
0.875
Vinyl syringol
(VS)
34.83
1.21
26 ± 1
75 ± 0.1
23 ± 3
5 ± 1
ND
Syringic acid
(SY)
6 ± 1
0.34
Syringaldehyde
(SYA)
0.05
6 ± 0.6
69 ± 1
1 ± 0.2 0.40
62 ± 2 0.90
73 ± 1 1.13
75 ± 1 1.38
Ethyl sinapate
(SE)
46.27
81.44
35.93
Propyl
sinapate (SP)
67 ± 1
Butyl sinapate
(SB)
ND
ND
67 ± 0.8
ND
a
Means of two replicates ± standard deviation; ND, not determined.
As the rate of radical scavenging is related to the slope of the curve at a specific time point,
and as can be seen, the highest response occurs within the first few seconds, RS was calculated
at t = 0.1 s. Among all of the investigated compounds, the highest responses for scavenging of the
DPPH· radicals were shown by the sinapate esters (SE, SP, SB) and VS, which caused sharp rise in
Ac517nm
−
As517nm
in the first 5 s of incubation (Figure 2A). This was especially the case for SP,
(t=x)
(t=0)
where the increase in Ac517nm
−
As517nm
occurred almost instantly, after which the reaction
(t=x)
(t=0)
·
slowed down. In a study on the kinetics of DPPH scavenging, Foti et al. [13] showed, on the example
of methyl sinapate, that the introduction of alkyl moiety increases the reactivity of SA, which is in
agreement with our results. On the other hand, for SA and SY, the increase in Ac517nm
−
As517nm
(t=0)
(t=x)
was more gradual.
The amount of DPPH· scavenged by the same concentration of the selected compounds as used
in the kinetics study was also determined at the fixed endpoint at 30 min, and expressed as percentage
of scavenged DPPH· (Table 1, IDPPH). No correlation was found between RS and IDPPH (Figure 3A).
When the fixed endpoint was reached, the order of activity was clearly different, with SA and SY
scavenging most of the DPPH· radicals. The same tendency for the data obtained at a fixed endpoint
for SA and its esters were also reported by Teixeira et al. [15].
The generally accepted mechanism of oxidation of phenols in a reaction with DPPH· in·protic
solvents, such as methanol or ethanol, is considered as SPLET based. Slower response to DPPH at the
early step of the reaction for SA than seen for its esters is ascribed to the suppressive influence of the
carboxylate group (–COO−) on the deprotonation of ArOH (Equation (3)). By its electron-donating
effects, –COO− increases PA, which decreases RS of SA versus its esters, where the deprotonation
of ArOH is supported by the electron-withdrawing effect of the −ester moiety (–COOR). This is in
·
accordance with Foti et al. [13]. This suppressive influence of –COO on the rate of DPPH scavenging
was reported by Ordoudi et al. [16], who observed notably higher kinetics determined in ethanol for
catechol than for its derivative bearing the –COO− group, protocatechuic acid. On the other hand, at
the second step of the process (Equation (4)), where the ETE is the major influencing factor, the effects
−
−
·
of the –COO and –COOR functional groups are opposite. The electron transfer from ArO to DPPH
of esters is surpassed by SA, as it is supported by the +I of –COO−, which stabilises ArO· and results

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
6 of 17
in greater activity (i.e., higher IDPPH) of SA than its esters at the fixed endpoint. Based on the PA and
ETE given by Chen et al. [11], which were obtained using density functional theory calculations, in the
example of ferulic acid and its ethyl ester, where lower PA and higher ETE were calculated for ferulic
acid than for ethyl ferulate, it can be expected that SA has a better early response and its ester SE has a
greater fixed endpoint DPPH· scavenging activity. However, our experimental data, as shown above,
indicates the importance of considering the ionic forms of these phenolic acids in polar solvents under
pH conditions above pKa values for their –COOH group.
ArOH ꢁ ArO− + H+
ArO− + DPPH. → ArO. + DPPH−
DPPH− + H+ → DPPH2
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
ArO. + DPPH. → products
ArO. + ArO. → dimer
Figure 3.
(
A
) Dependence of the 30-min endpoint for the DPPH· scavenging activity (IDPPH) on rate
of DPPH· radical scavenging (RS) at 6.67
×
10−5 mol/L of each tested compound; (
B
) dependence
of the superoxide radical scavenging activity coefficient (CSASA) on rate of formazan formation (RFF
)
at 5
×
10−3 mol/L of each tested compound. (
ꢀ
), sinapic acid—SA; (
), propyl sinapate—SP; (
#
), syringic acid—SY; (
N
),
),
syringaldehyde—SYA; ( ), ethyl sinapate—SE; (
∗
♦
), butyl sinapate—SB; (/
4-vinylsyringol—VS; (H), and sinapine—SI.
Sinapic acid esters showed the highest Rs of all of the tested compounds, while at the fixed
endpoint, their activities were moderate where the presence of an electron-withdrawing –COOR group
destabilises their ArO·, which leads to a possible reversible reaction with DPPH· (Equation (4)). This
was shown in a study by Foti and Daquino [17], and was confirmed by the flat curves that followed the

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
7 of 17
·
(Figure 2A). On the other hand, the ArO of SA and
(t=x)
initial rapid increase in Ac517nm
−
As517nm
(t=0)
SY might be involved in the subsequent slower reactions before equilibrium is reached, which results
in a high IDPPH. Namely, as well as the previously-described key reactions of SPLET (Equations (3)
and (4)), ArO· can undergo the latter slower process to the secondary reactions of the phenol-derived
radicals with the remaining DPPH·, as well as to further chemical reactions among ArO· themselves,
such as polymerisation or disproportionation (Equations (6) and (7)) [15]. Indeed, it is known that
hydroxycinnamic acids can undergo oxidative cross-coupling, which leads to the formation of dimers,
some of which have radical scavenging activities themselves [18]. Considering the ranking of the ester
early responses towards the DPPH· radicals in rel·ation to the alkyl chain length in the –COOR, steric
accessibility to the hindered reaction site in DPPH radical has been recognized as an important factor
that limits the reaction rate [19
SE and SP.
,20], and that probably results in the lower Rs of SB than observed for
The absence of an unsaturated ethylenic side chain and the closeness of the –COO− group to
the –OH group in the molecule of SY increase its suppressive effects on the deprotonation of ArOH,
which results in the particularly lowered early rate of the reaction of SY in comparison to SA. This is
in accordance to data reported by Ordoudi et al. [16] and Terpinc et al. [4], where the insertion of an
ethylenic chain and the formation of a hydroxycinnamic derivative, caffeic acid, resulted in a profound
increase in the reaction kinetics as compared to protocatechuic acid. The stabilizing effect of –COO−
on ArO· due to its proximity to the –OH in SY would be expected to lead to higher activity of SY than
SA at the fixed endpoint. However, it appears that this phenomenon in SY is overcome by the absence
of the ethylenic side chain, which leads to lower resonance delocalisation (i.e., lower stabilisation of
ArO·), and resulted in a slightly lower antioxidant activity for SY than for SA at the fixed endpoint
(i.e., lower IDPPH).
−
The elimination of the –COO group in SA results in the formation of VS. The vinyl group in the
molecule of VS has high electron density (+I effect), which would also have similar effects to –COO−
for deprotonation of ArOH and stabilisation of ArO·, but would be less effective. This resulted in
lower Rs for VS compared to Rs of the esters, although it remained higher than Rs of SA and SY. At the
fixed endpoint, the activity of VS with the more stabilised ArO· was higher than that of the esters,
but lower than for SA and SY, which reveals a less established effect of the vinyl group than –COO−.
·
SYA showed low activity in scavenging DPPH radicals. The strong electron-withdrawing influence of
–CHO in the molecule of SYA decreases its overall activity by destabilising ArO·.
The interrelationship between Rs and IDPPH confirms that the Rs is more affected by the nature of
−
·
p-substituent on the formation of ArO , while IDPPH is dependent on the stability of ArO and possible
secondary reactions. In Figure 3A. it can be seen that Rs is more sensitive to the differences in inductive
effect of the p-substituent since its values significantly differ between compounds with comparable
I
DPPH. This suggests that Rs is a better discriminator than IDPPH in characterisation of antioxidants
with similar activity at the fixed endpoint, such as in the case of SE, SP, SB and VS or SA and SY.
2.2. Superoxide Anion Scavenging Activity
Superoxide anion radicals are continuously produced in aerobic cells [21], and although they
are not a highly reactive short-lived free radical species, their over-production can lead to cell
·−
damage and mutagenesis [22]. In the present study, O2 were generated in the aerobic phenazine
methosulphate (PMS)—β-nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NADH) system and monitored by
following the reduction of nitroblue tetrazolium (NBT) (i.e., blue formazan formation). In the presence
·−
of an antioxidant, the reduction in NBT is suppressed due to the O2 radical scavenging activity of
·−
the antioxidant [23]. To follow the kinetics of O2 radical scavenging by the selected SA derivatives,
the changes in absorbance at 560 nm were monitored for 300 s. The data are plotted as the dependence
of As560nm
on t, where As560nm
represents the content of formazan at t = x (Figure ·2−B.).
(t=x)
(t=x)
A slower increase in As560nm
denotes more suppressed formazan formation (whereby O2 is
(t=x)
·−
more successfully scavenged). The kinetics of O2 scavenging of the selected compounds were

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
8 of 17
determined by calculation of the rates of formazan formation (RFF), through the power function model
presented in Equation (1), where y denotes As560nm(t=x) (the corresponding parameters
and were
a
b
obtained by non-linear regression), and with the use of Equation (2) at t = 10 s (Table 1). The activities
of the investigated compounds were also determined at the fixed endpoint, and these are expressed as
·−
the coefficient of O2 radical scavenging activity (CSASA), calculated as in Terpinc and Abramovicˇ [
4].
·
·−
Contrary to the DPPH scavenging assay, the O2 scavenging assay is a competition assay, where
the antioxidant (i.e., the SA derivatives) and detector (i.e., NBT) compete for the radical reactive
species (O2·−), as stressed by Balk et al. [24]. This is not the case for the DPPH· scavenging assay,
because DPPH· is both a radical and a detector [
5]. Therefore, for the O2 scavenging assay, the
·−
shapes of the curves cannot be interpreted in the same way as for the DPPH assay, and lower RFF
·−
indicates better response of an antioxidant for the scavenging of O2 radicals. SY and SA showed the
·−
greatest reactivities towards O2 radicals among these tested compounds (Table 1). It appears that
any modification to the side chain in the p-position to an –OH group in the selected SA derivatives
·−
resulted in lower O2 radical scavenging. This activity was indeed minor for SE. Due to the low
solubilities of SP and SB, these RFF were not determined. The interrelationships between RFF and
·−
CSASA (Figure 3B) show good agreement between the determination of O2 scavenging activity of
these antioxidants at the early stage and at the fixed point of the reaction (i.e., at 5 min). However, in
the same way as in the DPPH· scavenging assay, a kinetic perspective offers the possibility to find a
distinction between two compounds which show corresponding activities at the fixed endpoint, as in
the case of VS and SYA. This again shows the greater influence of the nature of the p-substituent on the
·−
early response than on the endpoint activity of O2 scavenging.
·−
The O2 scavenging assay has not been classified into any of the mechanistic models mentioned
in the litera·t−ure. The order of activity here suggests that the reactivity of the investigated compounds
towards O2 scavenging does not depend on the acid-base equilibrium of the –OH group, which was
seen for the DPPH· scavenging. In addition, as noted by Halliwell and Gutteridge [25], in aqueous
·−
solutions, the proton affinity of O2 is low, as its charge density is decreased due to solvation.
·−
On this basis, it is reasonable to exclude SPLET as the mechanism of O2 quenching in an aqueous
environment. The compounds with the greatest activities are those that contained groups with
electron-donating properties (e.g., SA, SY, VS), which lowered both BDE and IP and, thus, both of
the HAT and ET mechanisms are considered for discussion. However, as explained by Nenadis and
Siskos [12], the BDE is affected by local electronic phenomena and not by the whole structure of
the compound, while on the other hand, the whole structures influence the IP. There is considerable
difference in the reactivities between compounds with electron-donating and electron-withdrawing
groups in the p-position to –OH. The·+−I effect of –COO− of SY and SA, and of the vinyl group in V·S+,
increases their reactivities towards O2 by decreasing the IP of the –OH group and stabilising ArOH
(Equation (8)), as opposed to the
as previously noted, that hydrogen bond accepting solvents (in this case the aqueous environment)
favour electron transfer processes, it might be expected that O2 scavenging would occur through
−
I effect of –CHO in SYA and of –COOR in SE. Bearing in mind,
·−
ET mechanism, and the data in the present study support this. Although in this mechanism electron
transfer is followed by deprotonation of the radical cation, which leads to the c−orresponding ArO·
(Equation (9)), which would be hindered by electron donating groups (e.g., –COO in SY and SA), the
rate-determining step is the electron donation [12]. In agreement with this, no influence of the second
step (Equation (9)) on the RFF was noted in the present study.
ArOH + O.2− → ArOH.+ + O22−
ArOH.+ ꢁ ArO. + H+
(8)
(9)
2.3. Lipid Radical Scavenging Activity
Lipid peroxidation is a crucial step in the pathogenesis of several diseases, as well as a major
mechanism that can lead to deterioration of food quality. This process involves the generation of

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
9 of 17
different lipid radical species, which include the highly reactive peroxyl (ROO·) and alkoxyl (RO·)
radicals [26]. The lipid radical scavenging activities of the investigated SA derivatives were estimated
using a
catalysed by heat, and the lipid radicals that are formed react with
-carotene radical; this results in decreased absorbance at 470 nm. Figure 2C. shows the relationship
between As470nm – As470nm and time, where As470nm – As470nm
refers to the -carotene
-carotene bleaching (RB) was calculated as for the previous two methods,
β-carotene bleaching assay in a linoleic acid emulsion system. Linoleic acid oxidation is
β-carotene to form a stable
β
β
(t=0)
(t=x)
(t=0)
(t=x)
bleached at t = x. The rate of
β
with y in Equation (1) denoting As470nm(t=0) – As470nm(t=x) (Table 1). A stronger response in lipid radical
scavenging in the linoleic acid emulsion system is seen by lower RB. The lipid-radical scavenging
efficiencies were also determined at a fixed endpoint (60 min), and are expressed as the antioxidant
activity coefficients (CAA) [4].
Whether we consider a food or a biological antioxidant, a notable factor that affects its efficacy
and function is its partitioning properties between the lipid and aqueous phases [27]. Due to their
hydrophilic nature, hydroxycinnamic acids cannot be used in oil-based environment, which is an
important issue in industrial applications, or to be effective as antioxidants in biological systems.
Various studies have shown that antioxidants with higher lipophilicity show improved activities in
emulsion systems due to their better partitioning properties [28,29]. This allows such antioxidants to
be positioned at the water-lipid interface and, thus, to prevent any initial reactions between aqueous
radicals and lipids. Nevertheless, the aim here of the present study was to investigate whether the same
·
·
principle can be applied to the early response of an antioxidant towards lipid radicals (ROO , RO ) in an
oil-in-water emulsion system. The interrelationship between RB, CAA and chromatographic partition
values (CPV) is given in Figure 4. The majority of the investigated compounds that showed good
early responses towards lipid radicals also showed good scavenging activities at the 60 min endpoint,
except for SYA, SY, and SI, where the RB values do not commensurate with the CAA values. Among the
selected compounds, SB together with SP showed the strongest early response towards lipid radical
scavenging. These two compounds also showed the highest CAA, and the highest lipophilicity. It can
be seen that the early response is less dependent on lipophilicity, while CAA is well correlated with
the CPV.
Figure 4. Interrelationship of the rate of
(CAA) and chromatographic partition value (CPV) for the tested compounds ( ), with projections
of individual correlations ( ), RB vs. CAA; ( ), RB vs. CPV; (+), CAA vs. CPV. Sinapic acid (SA),
β-carotene bleaching (RB), antioxidant activity coefficient
∗
×
syringic acid (SY), syringaldehyde (SYA), ethyl sinapate (SE), propyl sinapate (SP), butyl sinapate (SB),
4-vinylsyringol (VS), and sinapine (SI).

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
10 of 17
The reaction of such phenolic compounds with lipid radicals is noted as the HAT mechanism [
5
].
RO(O)· radicals are highly reactive, and the reaction (Equation (10)) is essentially irreversible [30
,
31].
Therefore, considering the mechanism, as the inhibition of lipid peroxidation by an antioxidant is
usually correlated to the BDE, it would be expected that the reactivity towards lipid radicals in
hete·rogeneous systems−, such as emulsions, should be increased by functional groups that stabilise
ArO , such as the –COO in the molecules of SY and SA. However, in these systems, the distribution of
the antioxidant between the oil, interfacial, and aqueous regions becomes a major factor for its activity.
Esterification of SA clearly leads to increased lipophilicity, and to both greater early responses and
activities at the fixed endpoint, despite the mildly destabilising
−
I effect of –COOR on the stability of
their ArO·. In addition, as noted by Burton and Ingold [32], the ArO· formed according to Equation
(10) eventually reacts with a second radical (Equation (11)), and the molecular products thereby formed
move the reaction forward. Although SYA, SY, and SI might be reactive towards lipid radicals and be
able to scavenge those that are distributed on the surface of lipid droplets, thus showing a moderate
early response, they will not distribute themselves within the lipid–water interface resulting in low
CAA. In Figure 4 it can be seen that, again, the kinetic parameter RB can assist in differentiation between
two compounds with similar CAA, as in the cases of SB and SP or SE and VS.
ArOH + RO(O). → ArO. + RO(O)H
ArO. + RO(O). → molecular products
(10)
(11)
The reports on the antioxidant activity of SI in the literature are somewhat contradictory [33–36],
while the data from the present study show little or no activities in any of the assays carried out.
Esterification of SA with choline evidently reduces its radical-scavenging ability, as introduction of the
positive-charged choline contributes to destabilisation of the corresponding ArO·, which prevents it
from donating a hydrogen atom or electron to the free radical species.
3. Methods
3.1. Materials and Reagents
Chloroform and ethanol (96%) were from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany). SA, SY, SYA,
β
-carotene,
·
DPPH reagent, linoleic acid (95%), Tween 20, NBT, NADH, and PMS were from Sigma (Sigma-Aldrich
GmbH, Taufkirchen, Germany). Potassium dihydrogen phosphate (KH2PO4) and di-sodium
hydrogen phosphate (Na2HPO4) were from Kemika (Zagreb, Croatia). All of the reagents were
of analytical quality.
3.2. Isolation of Sinapine
SI was isolated from kale (Brassica oleracea) seeds according to the procedure described by Terpinc
et al. [37]. Ground seeds were mixed with boiling water for 5 min, with the mixture shaken at room
temperature for 2 h, and then filtered. This water extract was appropriately diluted with carbonate
buffer to obtain a neutral pH, and the resulting mixture was filtered through a 0.45-µm membrane
filter. SI isolation was carried out by solid phase extraction using Strata-X-CW cartridges (Phenomenex,
Torrance, CA, USA), by consecutive passing of methanol, carbonate buffer (pH 7), and then the
water extract through the cartridges. SI was captured on the solid phase by the weak cation-exchange
mechanism, with the cartridges then washed using water and methanol. The SI fraction was eluted with
4 mL 2% formic acid in 70% methanol (v/v). The final purity of the isolated product was determined by
liquid chromatography using photodiode array detection (LC-DAD, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara,
CA, USA), with its structure confirmed by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC-MS, Agilent
Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA and Quatro micro API, Waters, Milford, MA, USA) and nuclear
magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA).

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
11 of 17
3.3. Synthesis of 4-Vinylsyringol
VS was prepared by thermal decarboxylation of SA according to the method of Terpinc et al. [38].
Briefly, SA was dissolved in dimethylformamide, and sodium acetate was added as a catalyst for the
decarboxylation. The reaction mixture was heated in an oil bath at 130 ◦C for 1 h. Milli-Q water was
then added, and the product was extracted using diethyl ether. The organic phase was collected and
further washed with carbonate buffer at pH 7. After drying with anhydrous Na2SO4, the organic
solvent was removed under reduced pressure, and the precipitate was dissolved in methanol.
The product was passed into 500-mg Strata-X cartridges (Phenomenex, Torrance, CA, USA)
that had been previously conditioned with methanol. This was followed by a 50% (v/v) methanol
wash, and the product eluted with 50%, 60%, and 70% (v/v) methanol, in this order. The less polar
compounds that remained were eluted with 100% methanol. The purity of the individual fractions was
determined by LC-DAD. In the next step, the eluates that contained more than 95% VS were combined,
adequately diluted, and loaded onto Strata-X cartridges previously conditioned with methanol. This
was followed by 25% (v/v) methanol, and elution with 100% methanol. These eluates were filtered
◦
through 0.20-
µ
m filters and evaporated to dryness under a vacuum, at 30 C. The product was weighed
and re-dissolved in methanol. The final purity of the synthesised product was determined by LC-DAD.
For confirmation of the structure of the synthesised product, LC-MS and NMR analysis were used.
3.4. Synthesis of Sinapoyl Esters
The alkyl esters of SA were synthesised by acid catalysed esterification, using the method of
Gaspar et al. [39]. SA (1.0 g) was dissolved in 75 mL of the corresponding alcohol (i.e., ethanol,
n-propanol, or n-butanol) containing 1 mL H2SO4, and the solutions were stirred at room temperature
for 5 days. The solvents were partially evaporated under reduced pressure, and the mixtures were then
extracted with diethyl ether (3
×
75 mL). The organic phases were combined, washed with 10% Na2CO3
solution, and dried over anhydrous Na2SO4. The solvent was evaporated under reduced pressure, and
the crude products were purified by recrystallization. The final purities of these synthesised products
were determined by LC-DAD, and their structures confirmed by LC-MS and NMR analysis.
3.5. Liquid Chromatography with Photodiode Array Detection
The purities of the synthesised/isolated products were determined using LC-DAD (Agilent 1100
binary pump [G1312A], autosampler [G1330B] and a DAD [G]) as follows: the samples (10
µ
L) were
m) that was protected by a
2.0 mm) (Phenomenex, USA). The column
injected onto a reversed-phase C18 column (Gemini; 100
guard column (Gemini C18 Security Guard cartridge; 4.0
×
2.00 mm; 2.6 µ
×
thermostat was set at 25 ◦C. The solvent system used was 0.1% (v/v) aqueous formic acid (solvent A),
and acetonitrile (solvent B). A binary gradient was used at a flow rate of 0.25 mL/min, as follows (as %
B in A): 0–4 min, 10% B; 4–40 min, 10%–60% B; 40–41 min, 60%–80% B; 41–47 min, 80% B; 47–50 min,
80%–10% B; 50–60 min, 10% B. The chromatograms were recorded from 240 nm to 650 nm.
3.6. Liquid Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry
The mass spectra of the synthesised/isolated products were recorded using a mass selective
detector (Quattro micro API; Waters, Milford, MA, USA) equipped with electrospray ionization (ESI),
using a cone voltage of 30 V and a capillary voltage of 3.0 kV for positive/ negative ionisation of the
analytes (i.e., ESI+ or ESI
−
modes). The dry nitrogen for the detector was heated to 300 ◦C, and the
drying gas flow was 400 L/h. The cone gas (nitrogen) flow was 70 L/h. The data were acquired in
positive or negative ESI scan modes (in mass range 100–615). The mass spectra for the synthesised and
isolated compounds are given in Figure 5.

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
12 of 17
Figure 5.
(SI), m/z 310.36; 4-vinylsyringol (VS), m/z 181.17. ESI
sinapate (SP), m/z 265.32; butyl sinapate (SB), m/z 279.31; (
(
A
) Mass spectra of the synthesized/isolated sinapic acid derivatives. ESI+: sinapine
: ethyl sinapate (SE), m/z 251.27; propyl
) Photodiode array detection
−
B
chromatograms (240–650 nm) of sinapic acid (SA), syringic acid (SY), and syringaldehyde (SYA),
and the synthetised/isolated sinapic acid derivatives ethyl sinapate (SE), propyl sinapate (SP), butyl
sinapate (SB), sinapine (SI), and 4-vinylsyringol (VS).
3.7. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy was performed on an NMR spectrometer (DD2; Agilent
Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) at frequencies of 297.80 MHz (1H) and 74.89 MHz (13C) at 25 ◦C.
The samples were solubilised in deuterated dimethyl sulphoxide (DMSO-d6). The chemical shifts (δ)
are referenced to the residual solvent signal of DMSO-d6 and reported in ppm, while the coupling
1
constants (J) are given in Hz (Table 2). The H- and 13C-NMR chemical shifts and H–H coupling
constants for compounds SI, VS, SE, SP, and SB are given in the Table 2.

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
13 of 17
Table 2. 1H- and 13C-NMR chemical shifts (in ppm) and H–H coupling constants (in Hz) for the synthesized/isolated compounds. s, singlet; b, broad; d, doublet;
m, multiplet.
Compound
1H- and 13C-NMR Spectroscopic Data
δH (297.80 MHz, DMSO-d6): 7.61 (d, J = 15.9, 1H, –CH=), 7.03 (s, 2H, Ar–H), 6.55 (d, J = 15.9, 1H, =CH–), 4.58 (s,
2H, –OCH2), 3.80 (s, 6H, –OCH3), 3.72 (m, 2H, CH2) 3.17 (s, 9H, –NCH3); δC (74.89 MHz, DMSO-d6): 165.93
(C=O), 148.07 (C(3), C(5)), 146.25 (C(β)), 138.82 (C–OH), 124.05 (C(1)), 113.97 (C(α)), 106.45 (C(2), C(6)), 63.97
(CH2), 57.65 (CH2), 56.13 (2× OCH3), 52.99 (N(CH3)3)
Sinapine (SI)
δH (297.80 MHz, DMSO-d6): 8.44 (s, 1H, OH), 6.73 (s, 2H, Ar–H), 6.60 (d, J = 17.6, 10.8, 1H, –CH=), 5.67 (d, J = 17.6,
1.1, 1H, =CH2), 5.08 (d, J = 10.8, 1.1, 1H, =CH2), 3.77 (s, 6H, –OCH3); δC (74.89 MHz, DMSO-d6): C(6)), 147.97
(C(3), C(5)), 136.94 (C–OH), 135.73 (=CH), 127.66 (C(1)), 111.34 (=CH2), 103.77 (C(2), C(6)), 55.94 (2× OCH3)
δH (297.80 MHz, DMSO-d6): 8.94 (s, 1H, OH), 7.55 (d, J = 15.9, 1H, –CH=), 7.03 (s, 2H, Ar–H), 6.53 (d, J = 15.9, 1H,
=CH–), 4.16 (q, J = 7.1, 2H, –OCH2), 3.80 (s, 6H, –OCH3), 1.25 (t, J = 7.1, 3H, CH3); δC (74.89 MHz, DMSO-d6):
166.55 (C=O), 147.98 (C(3), C(5)), 145.19 (C(β)), 138.23 (C–OH), 124.36 (C(1)), 114.96 (C(α)), 106.19 (C(2), C(6)),
59.66 (CH2), 56.06 (2× OCH3), 14.23 (CH3)
4-Vinylsyringol (VS)
Ethyl sinapate (SE)
δH (297.80 MHz, DMSO-d6): 8.93 (s, 1H, OH), 7.55 (d, J = 15.9, 1H, –CH=), 7.03 (s, 2H, Ar–H), 6.53 (d, J = 15.9, 1H,
=CH–), 4.08 (t, J = 6.6, 2H, –OCH2), 3.80 (s, 6H, –OCH3), 1.65 (t, J = 7.4, 6.6, 2H, CH2), 0.93 (t, J = 7.4, 3H, CH3); δC
(74.89 MHz, DMSO-d6): 166.65 (C=O), 147.98 (C(3), C(5)), 145.22 (C(β)), 138.23 (C–OH), 124.36 (C(1)), 114.91
(C(α)), 106.20 (C(2), C(6)), 65.18 (CH2), 56.06 (2× OCH3), 21.66 (CH2), 10.33(CH3)
δH (297.80 MHz, DMSO-d6): 8.94 (s, 1H, OH), 7.54 (d, J = 15.9, 1H, –CH=), 7.03 (s, 2H, Ar–H), 6.53 (d, J = 15.9, 1H,
=CH–), 4.12 (t, J = 6.6, 2H, –OCH2), 3.80 (s, 6H, –OCH3), 1.61 (m, 2H, CH2), 1.38 (m, 2H, CH2), 0.92 (t, J = 7.3, 3H,
CH3); δC (74.89 MHz, DMSO-d6): 166.65 (C=O), 147.98 (C(3), C(5)), 145.21 (C(β)), 138.23 (C–OH), 124.36 (C(1)),
114.92 (C(α)), 106.20 (C(2), C(6)), 63.38 (CH2), 56.06 (2× OCH3), 30.33 (CH2), 18.67 (CH2), 13.57 (CH3)
Propyl sinapate (SP)
Butyl sinapate (SB)

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
14 of 17
3.8. DPPH· Radical Scavenging Activity
The DPPH· radical scavenging for SA and its derivatives was determined according to
Brand-Williams et al. [40]. A solution of the DPPH· radical in ethanol was added to ethanolic
solutions of these compounds (with ethanol alone as the control), to their final concentration in
the reaction mixtures of 6.67
×
10−5 mol/L. The absorbances of the samples (As517nm(t=x)) and the
control (Ac517nm(t=0)) were monitored continuously at 517 nm at regular time intervals (5 s) over 30 min,
against ethanol as a blank on a UV-VIS spectrophotometer (model 8453; Hewlett Packard, Waldbronn,
◦
Germany). The measurements were performed at room temperature (25 C), with the analyses carried
out from two consecutive runs.
3.9. Superoxide Anion Scavenging Activity
Measurements of the superoxide anion scavenging activities of the selected compounds were
carried out by the method described by Roback and Gryglewski [41]. All of the reagents were prepared
in 0.1 M phosphate buffer, pH 7.4. An aliquot of each compound (with ethanol alone as the control)
was mixed with the 150
tested compounds was 5
solution to the mixture. The absorbances of the samples (As560nm(t=x)) and of the controls (Ac560nm
µ
M NBT and 468
×
µ
M NADH solutions, where the final concentration of the
10−3 mol/L. The reactions were started by addition of the 60
µM PMS
)
(t=x)
were monitored at 560 nm, against a blank sample (without PMS) at 5 s time intervals over a period
of 5 min at room temperature. All of these analyses were carried out in duplicate and the results are
given as the means.
3.10. Antioxidant Activity in the β-Carotene-linoleic Acid Emulsion System
The antioxidant activities of the selected compounds in an aqueous emulsion system of linoleic
acid and β-carotene were determined according to Moure et al. [30]. β-Carotene in chloroform (1 mL,
0.2 mg/mL) was mixed with 20 mg of linoleic acid and 200 mg of Tween 20. After evaporation of
the chloroform, 50 mL Milli-Q water was added and mixed thoroughly. The selected compounds
were added to 2.5 mL of this emulsion to the final concentration of 2
mixed thoroughly. The samples were immediately placed in a water bath at 50 C and incubated
for 2 h. A control was prepared using ethanol instead of the selected compounds. Oxidation of
×
10−4 mol/L, and then
◦
the β-carotene emulsion was monitored spectrophotometrically by recording the absorbance of the
samples (As470nm(t=x)) and the control (Ac470nm(t=x)) at 470 nm over 2 h, at regular time intervals of
1 min during the first 5 min, and then every 5 min for the remaining time, against a blank consisting
of the emulsion without β
-carotene. This was carried out at 50 ◦C on a UV-VIS spectrophotometer
(model Varian Cary 100 Bio; Varian Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA). Duplicate analyses were run for each
selected compound.
3.11. Lipophilicity Determination
The lipophilicity of the selected SA derivatives was determined using CPV, as described by
Terpinc et al. [15], and these are given in Table 1. CPVs were calculated as the volume ratio between the
acetonitrile and aqueous formic acid mobile phases at the moment of elution. A higher CPV indicates
higher content of acetonitrile in the mobile phase and slower elution of the analyte from the column,
and consequently lower polarity of the compound.
4. Conclusions
In this investigation a kinetic approach was used in combination with standard fixed endpoint
radical scavenging analysis to examine the·s−cavenging activities and reaction mechanisms of sinapic
acid and its derivatives against DPPH·, O2 and lipid radicals. The results were in accordance with
proposed mechanisms of free radical scavenging and differences in reactivity were interpreted as a
function of BDE, IP, PA, and ETE molecular descriptors, acid-base properties, steric effects, and the

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
15 of 17
lipophilicity of the selected compounds. On the other hand, it has been demonstrated that the kinetics
response of an antioxidant is dependent also on the radical species and the nature of the medium.
Accordingly, the important considerations in the selection of the appropriate antioxidant for any kind
of system (e.g., food matrix) are the properties of the system itself.
Our results suggest that the measurements of early response parameters (Rs, RFF, RB) can be used
to differentiate between antioxidants with comparable fixed endpoint parameters (IDPPH, CSASA, CAA).
This combined approach allows more comprehensive characterization of antioxidants compared to the
standard methodology which focuses on measurements at the fixed endpoint. In addition, analysis of
·−
our results suggests that O2 scavenging follows ET mechanism which has not yet been classified
into any of the mechanistic models in the literature.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the Erasmus Mundus Action 2 Project (Basileus III Project)
and the Slovenian Research Agency for financial support through the research programme P4-0121.
Author Contributions: N.N. and H.A. conceived and designed the experiments; N.N. performed the experiments;
N.N. and H.A. analysed the data and wrote the paper; N.P.U. contributed to the writing of the manuscript; T.P.
and D.M. contributed materials and analysis tools.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
Mishra, K.; Ojha, H.; Chaudhury, N.K. Estimation of antiradical properties of antioxidants using DPPH
assay: A critical review and results. Food Chem. 2012, 130, 1036–1043. [CrossRef]
Apak, R.; Gorinstein, S.; Böhm, V.; Schaich, K.M.; Özyürek, M.; Güçlü, K. Methods of measurement and
evaluation of natural antioxidant capacity/activity (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure Appl. Chem. 2013, 85,
957–998. [CrossRef]
2.
3.
Villano, D.; Fernandez-Pachon, M.S.; Moya, M.L.; Troncoso, A.M.; Garcia-Parrilla, M.C. Radical scavenging
ability of polyphenolic compounds towards DPPH free radical. Talanta 2007, 71, 230–235. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
4.
5.
6.
7.
Terpinc, P.; Abramovicˇ, H. A kinetic approach for evaluation of the antioxidant activity of selected phenolic
acids. Food Chem. 2010, 121, 366–371. [CrossRef]
Prior, R.L.; Wu, X.; Schaich, K. Standardized methods for the determination of antioxidant capacity and
phenolics in foods and dietary supplements. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 4290–4302. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Shang, Y.J.; Liu, B.Y.; Zhao, M.M. Details of the antioxidant mechanism of hydroxycinnamic acids. Czech J.
Food Sci. 2015, 33, 210–216. [CrossRef]
Apak, R.; Güçlü, K.; Demirata, B.; Özyürek, M.; Çelik, S.E.; Bektas¸og˘lu, B.; Berker, K.I.; Özyurt, D.
Comparative evaluation of various total antioxidant capacity assays applied to phenolic compounds with
the CUPRAC assay. Molecules 2007, 12, 1496–1547. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
8.
9.
Wright, J.S.; Johnson, E.R.; Dilabio, G.A. Predicting the activity of phenolic antioxidants: Theoretical method,
analysis of substituent effects, and application to major families of antioxidants. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123,
1173–1183. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Leopoldini, M.; Marino, T.; Russo, N.; Toscano, M. Antioxidant properties of phenolic compounds: H-atom
versus electron transfer mechanism. J. Phys. Chem. A 2004, 108, 4916–4922. [CrossRef]
10. Najafi, M. On the antioxidant activity of the Ortho and Meta substituted Daidzein derivatives in the gas
phase and solvent environment. J. Mex. Chem. Soc. 2014, 58, 36–45.
11. Chen, Y.; Xiao, H.; Zheng, J.; Liang, G. Structure-thermodynamics-antioxidant activity relationships of
selected natural phenolic acids and derivatives: An experimental and theoretical evaluation. PLoS ONE
2015, 10, e0121276. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12. Nenadis, N.; Siskos, D. Radical scavenging activity characterization of synthetic isochroman-derivatives of
hydroxytyrosol: A gas-phase DFT approach. Food Res. Int. 2015, 76, 506–510. [CrossRef]
13. Foti, M.C.; Daquino, C.; Geraci, C. Electron-transfer reaction of cinnamic acids and their methyl esters with
·
the DPPH radical in alcoholic solutions. J. Org. Chem. 2004, 69, 2309–2314. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. Nic´iforovic´, N.; Abramovicˇ, H. Sinapic acid and its derivatives: Natural sources and bioactivity. Compr. Rev.
Food Sci. Food Saf. 2014, 13, 34–51. [CrossRef]

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
16 of 17
15. Teixeira, J.; Gaspar, A.; Garrido, E.M.; Garrido, J.; Borges, F. Hydroxycinnamic acid antioxidants: An
electrochemical overview. BioMed Res. Int. 2013, 2013, 251754. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16. Ordoudi, S.A.; Tsimidou, M.Z.; Vafiadis, A.P.; Bakalbassis, E.G. Structure-DPPH· scavenging activity
relationships: Parallel study of catechol and guaiacol acid derivatives. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006, 54,
5763–5768. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Foti, M.C.; Daquino, C. Kinetic and thermodynamic parameters for the equilibrium reactions of phenols
·
with the DPPH radical. Chem. Commun. 2006, 14, 3252–3254. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
18. Jin, J.X.L.; Yang, R.T.; Shang, Y.J.; Dai, F.; Qian, Y.P.; Cheng, L.X.; Zhou, B.; Liu, Z.L. Oxidative coupling
of cinnamic acid derivatives and their radical-scavenging activities. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2010, 55, 2885–2890.
[CrossRef]
19. Goupy, P.; Dufour, C.; Loonis, M.; Dangles, O. Quantitative kinetic analysis of hydrogen transfer reactions
from dietary polyphenols to the DPPH radical. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 615–622. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. Xie, J.; Schaich, K.M. Re-evaluation of the 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl free radical (DPPH) assay for
antioxidant activity. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 4251–4260. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
21. Valdez, L.B.; Lores Arnaiz, S.; Bustamante, J.; Alvarez, S.; Costa, L.E.; Boveris, A. Free radical chemistry in
biological systems. Biol. Res. 2000, 33, 65–70. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Nordberg, J.; Arnér, E.S. Reactive oxygen species, antioxidants, and the mammalian thioredoxin system.
Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2001, 31, 1287–1312. [CrossRef]
23. Ponti, V.; Dianzani, M.U.; Cheeseman, K.; Slater, T.F. Studies on the reduction of nitroblue tetrazolium
chloride mediated through the action of NADH and phenazine methosulphate. Chem. Boil. Interact. 1978, 23,
281–291. [CrossRef]
24. Balk, J.M.; Bast, A.; Haenen, G.R.M.M. Evaluation of the accuracy of antioxidant competition assays: Incorrect
assumptions with major impact. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2009, 47, 135–144. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
25. Halliwell, B.; Gutteridge, J.M.C. Free Radicals in Biology and Medicine, 3rd ed.; Oxford University Press:
New York, NY, USA, 1999; p. 67.
26. Lee, J.; Koo, N.; Min, D.B. Reactive oxygen species, aging, and antioxidative nutraceuticals. Compr. Rev. Food
Sci. Food Saf. 2004, 3, 21–33. [CrossRef]
27. Frankel, E.N.; Meyer, A.S. The problems of using one-dimensional methods to evaluate multifunctional food
and biological antioxidants. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2000, 80, 1925–1941. [CrossRef]
28. Frankel, E.N.; Huang, S.W.; Kanner, J.; German, J.B. Interfacial phenomena in the evaluation of antioxidants:
Bulk oils vs. emulsions. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1994, 42, 1054–1059. [CrossRef]
29. Asnaashari, M.; Farhoosh, R.; Sharif, A. Antioxidant activity of gallic acid and methyl gallate in
triacylglycerols of Kilka fish oil and its oil-in-water emulsion. Food Chem. 2014, 159, 439–444. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
30. Moure, A.; Franco, D.; Sineiro, J.; Dominguez, H.; Nunez, M.J.; Lema, J.M. Evaluation of extracts from
Gevuina avellana hulls as antioxidants. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2000, 48, 3890–3897. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
31. Craft, B.D.; Kerrihard, A.L.; Amarowicz, R.; Pegg, R.B. Phenol-based antioxidants and the in vitro methods
used for their assessment. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2012, 11, 148–173. [CrossRef]
32. Burton, G.W.; Ingold, K.U. Vitamin E: Application of the principles of physical organic chemistry to the
exploration of its structure and function. Acc. Chem. Res. 1986, 19, 194–201. [CrossRef]
33. Thiyam, U.; Stöckmann, H.; Zum Felde, T.; Schwarz, K. Antioxidative effect of the main sinapic acid
derivatives from rapeseed and mustard oil by-products. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 2006, 108, 239–248.
[CrossRef]
34. Obied, H.K.; Song, Y.; Foley, S.; Loughlin, M.; Rehman, A.; Mailer, R.; Masud, T.; Agboola, S. Biophenols
and antioxidant properties of Australian canola meal. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 9176–9184. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
35. Sørensen, A.D.M.; Friel, J.; Winkler-Moser, J.K.; Jacobsen, C.; Huidrom, D.; Reddy, N.; Thiyam-Holländer, U.
Impact of endogenous canola phenolics on the oxidative stability of oil-in-water emulsions. Eur. J. Lipid
Sci. Technol. 2013, 115, 501–512. [CrossRef]
36. Schmidt, Š.; Pokorný, J. Potential application of oilseeds as sources of antioxidants for food lipids—A review.
Czech J. Food Sci. 2005, 23, 93–102.
37. Terpinc, P.; Polak, T.; Makuc, D.; Poklar Ulrih, N.; Abramovicˇ, H. The occurrence and characterisation of
phenolic compounds in Camelina sativa seed, cake and oil. Food Chem. 2012, 131, 580–589. [CrossRef]

Molecules 2017, 22, 375
17 of 17
38. Terpinc, P.; Polak, T.; Šegatin, N.; Hanzlowsky, A.; Poklar Ulrih, N.; Abramovicˇ, H. Antioxidant properties of
4-vinyl derivatives of hydroxycinnamic acids. Food Chem. 2011, 128, 62–69. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
39. Gaspar, A.; Martins, M.; Silva, P.; Garrid, E.M.; Garrido, J.; Firuzi, O.; Miri, R.; Saso, L.; Borges, F. Dietary
phenolic acids and derivatives. Evaluation of the antioxidant activity of sinapic acid and its alkyl esters.
J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010, 58, 11273–11280. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
40. Brand-Williams, W.; Cuvelier, M.E.; Berset, C. Use of a free radical method to evaluate antioxidant activity.
Lebensm. Wiss. Technol. 1995, 28, 25–30. [CrossRef]
41. Roback, J.; Gryglewski, R.J. Flavonoids are scavengers of superoxides anions. Biochem. Pharmacol. 1988, 37,
837–841. [CrossRef]
Sample Availability: Samples of the compounds sinapine, 4-vinylsyringol, and ethyl, propyl and butyl sinapate
are available from the authors.
©
2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).