Extraction of polyphenols from processed black currant (Ribes nigrum L.) residues

The total phenol and anthocyanin contents of black currant pomace and black currant press residue (BPR) extracts, extracted with formic acid in methanol or with methanol/water/acetic acid, were studied. Anthocyanins and other phenols were identified by means of reversed phase HPLC, and differences between the two plant materials were monitored. In all BPR extracts, phenol levels, determined by the Folin-Ciocalteu method, were 8-9 times higher than in the pomace extracts. Acid hydrolysis liberated a much higher concentration of phenols from the pomace than from the black currant press residue. HPLC analysis revealed that delphinidin-3-O-glucoside, delphinidin-3-O-rutinoside, cyanidin-3-O-glucoside, and cyanidin-3-O-rutinoside were the major anthocyanins and constituted the main phenol class (approximate to 90%) in both types of black currant tissues tested. However, anthocyanins were present in considerably lower amounts in the pomace than in the BPR. In accordance with the total phenol content, the antioxidant activity determined by scavenging of 2,2'-azinobis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6- sulfonic acid) radical cation, the ABTS(center dot+) assay, showed that BPR extracts prepared by solvent extraction exhibited significantly higher (7-10 times) radical scavenging activity than the pomace extracts, and BPR anthocyanins contributed significantly (74 and 77%) to the observed high radical scavenging capacity of the corresponding extracts.

The technocratic totalitarianism of construction process improvement: a critical perspective

The current research agenda for construction process improvement is heavily influenced by the rhetoric of business process re-engineering (BPR). In contrast to the wider literature on BPR, there is little evidence of critical thought within the construction management research community. A postmodernist interpretation is advocated whereby the reality of management practice is defined by the dominant management discourse. The persuasiveness of BPR rhetoric is analysed with particular reference to the way in which it plays on the insecurity of modern managers. Despite the lip service given to ‘empowerment’ and ‘teamwork’, the dominant theme of the re-engineering movement is that of technocratic totalitarianism. From a critical perspective, it is suggested that BPR is imposed on construction organizations to ensure continued control by the industry's dominant power groups. Whilst industry leaders are fond of calling for ‘attitudinal and cultural improvement’, the language of the accepted research agenda continually reinforces the industry's dominant culture of ‘control and command’. Therefore, current research directions in process improvement perpetuate existing attitudes rather than facilitating cultural change. The concept of lean construction is seen to be the latest manifestation of this phenomenon.