Keywords:

Feed

Secondary metabolites

Tannins

Flavonoids

Antioxidant activity

Assessment of phenolic compounds and antioxidant activity in dierent plants parts of sorghum

landraces

Evaluación de compuestos fenólicos y actividad antioxidante en diferentes partes de plantas de

variedades de sorgo

Avaliação dos compostos fenolicos e atividade antioxidante em diferentes partes da planta de

variedades de sorgo

Mohamed Zaitri

Badreddine Belhadi

1,2

Mohamed Benalia

Redha Ouldkiar

2,3

Rachid Souilah

1,2,4

Djaar Djabali

Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(2): e264324

ISSN 2477-9407

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47280/RevFacAgron(LUZ).v43.n2.VI

Food technology

Associate editor: Dra. Gretty R. Ettiene Rojas

University of Zulia, Faculty of Agronomy

Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

Laboratoire des Sciences Fondamentales, Université Amar

Telidji, BP 37, G 03000, Laghouat, Algeria.

Laboratoire d’Etudes et Développement des Techniques

d’Epuration et de Traitement des Eaux et Gestion

Environnementale (LEDTEGE), Département des sciences

physiques, Ecole Normale Supérieure Cheikh Mohamed El-

Bachir El-Ibrahimi, ENS-KOUBA, B.P N° 92 16308 Vieux

Kouba, Algiers, Algeria.

Laboratory of Nutrition, Biodiversity and Environment,

Faculty of Science, University of Yahia Fares, Medea,

Algeria.

Département de physique, Ecole Normale Supérieure Taleb

Abderrahmane, ENSL, B.P 4033 Laghouat, Algeria.

Received: 05-12-2025

Accepted: 14-04-2026

Published: 27-04-2026

Abstract

The eld of animal feed production it is consider one of the

most important areas in livestock production. Given that the

livestock sector in Algeria faced many problems, such as water

scarcity and the high cost of traditional feed, it is important to nd

other local sources to overcome those diculties. This study aimed

to determine the content of secondary metabolites, including total

phenolic compounds, tannins, and avonoids, and the antioxidant

activity in dierent parts (leaves, stems, and panicle residues) of ten

landraces of sorghum found in the Algerian desert and cultivated

in the Bordj Bou Arreridj region of Algeria. The results showed

signicant dierences between the contents of the studied samples,

as well as among the three dierent parts of the plant, namely the

leaves, stems, and panicle residues. The total phenolic content

ranged from 122.33 to 1344.44 mg EAG.100 g

-1

, with tannin levels

from 4.84 to 927.78 mg EAG.100 g

-1

, while the avonoid values

ranged from 0.24 to 558.25 mg EQ.100 g

-1

. The antioxidant activitie

also showed a signicant variation, with DPPH values between

46.10 and 1481.68 mg AAE.100 g

-1

, FRAP from 31.76 to 1145.92

mg AAE.100 g

-1

, and ABTS values ranging from 28.89 to 459.92

mg AAE.100 g

-1

. These results conrmed that the sorghum plants

not only represented a source of primary metabolic compounds

such as bers, starch, proteins, and energy materials used as animal

feed, but they could also be utilized as a rich source of phenolic

compounds with eective value in the health eld.

This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.

Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(2): e264321 April-June ISSN 2477-9409.

2-8 |

Resumen

El campo de la producción de piensos para animales se considera

una de las áreas más importantes en la producción ganadera. Dado

que el sector ganadero en Argelia ha enfrentado muchos problemas,

como la escasez de agua y el alto costo de los piensos tradicionales,

es importante encontrar otras fuentes locales para superar esas

dicultades. Este estudio tuvo como objetivo determinar el contenido

de metabolitos secundarios, incluyendo compuestos fenólicos totales,

taninos y avonoides, y la actividad antioxidante en diferentes partes

(hojas, tallos y residuos de panículas) de diez variedades de sorgo

encontradas en el desierto argelino y cultivadas en la región de

Bordj Bou Arreridj de Argelia. Los resultados mostraron diferencias

signicativas entre los contenidos de las muestras estudiadas, así

como entre las tres partes diferentes de la planta, a saber, las hojas,

los tallos y los residuos de las panojas. El contenido total de fenoles

osciló entre 122,33 y 1.344,44 mg EAG.100 g

-1

, con niveles de

taninos de 4,84 a 927,78 mg EAG.100 g

-1

, mientras que los valores

de avonoides variaron de 0,24 a 558,25 mg EQ.100 g

-1

. La actividad

antioxidante también mostró una variación signicativa, con valores

de DPPH entre 46,10 y 1.481,68 mg AAE.100 g

-1

, FRAP de 31,76

a 1.145,92 mg AAE.100 g

-1

, y valores de ABTS que oscilaron entre

28,89 y 459,92 mg AAE.100 g

-1

. Estos resultados conrmaron que

las plantas de sorgo no solo representan una fuente de compuestos

metabólicos primarios como bras, almidón, proteínas y materiales

energéticos utilizados como alimento para animales, sino que también

podrían ser utilizadas como una rica fuente de compuestos fenólicos

con un valor efectivo en la salud humana.

Palabras clave: piensos, metabolitos secundarios, taninos,

avonoides, actividad antioxidante.

Resumo

O campo da produção de ração animal é considerado uma das

áreas mais importantes na produção pecuária. Dado que o setor

pecuário na Argélia enfrentou muitos problemas, como a escassez de

água e o alto custo dos alimentos tradicionais, é importante encontrar

outras fontes locais para superar essas diculdades. Este estudo teve

como objetivo determinar o conteúdo de metabólitos secundários,

incluindo compostos fenólicos totais, taninos e avonoides, e a

atividade antioxidante em diferentes partes (folhas, caules e resíduos

de panícula) de dez variedades de sorgo encontradas no deserto

argelino e cultivadas na região de Bordj Bou Arreridj, na Argélia.

Os resultados mostraram diferenças signicativas entre os conteúdos

das amostras estudadas, bem como entre as três partes diferentes

da planta, a saber, as folhas, os caules e os resíduos da panícula. O

conteúdo total de fenólicos variou de 122,33 a 1.344,44 mg EAG.100

-1

, com níveis de taninos de 4,84 a 927,78 mg EAG.100 g

-1

, enquanto

os valores de avonoides variaram de 0,24 a 558,25 mg EQ.100 g

-1

. A

atividade antioxidante também mostrou uma variação signicativa,

com valores de DPPH entre 46,10 e 1481,68 mg AAE.100 g

-1

, FRAP

de 31,76 a 1.145,92 mg AAE.100 g

-1

, e valores de ABTS variando de

28,89 a 459,92 mg AAE.100 g

-1

. Esses resultados conrmaram que as

plantas de sorgo não apenas representavam uma fonte de compostos

metabólicos primários, como bras, amido, proteínas e materiais

energéticos usados como ração animal, mas também poderiam ser

utilizadas como uma rica fonte de compostos fenólicos com um valor

efetivo na saúde humana.

Palavras-chave: ração, metabólitos secundários, taninos, avonoides,

atividade antioxidante.

Introduction

The sorghum plant (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) is a rich

source of phenolic compounds, avonoids and tannins. It is a plant

known for its ability to adapt to harsh environmental conditions

such as low rainfall, saline soil, and high temperatures, and others

(Hossain et al., 2022). These characteristics make sorghum an

ideal crop for sustainable agricultural practices in areas with water

scarcity or poor soils quality (Chauhan et al., 2025), or for use as an

additional crop alongside grasses and fodder during the summer after

harvesting wheat, barley, and other crops. In light of the Algerian

government’s commitment to environmental sustainability and its

search for alternatives to traditional fodder, national research projects

are focusing on investing in food, health, and energy security. This

research contributes to providing food resources for human nutrition

and animal feed (Taylor et al., 2006), particularly during the hottest

and driest periods of the year.

Sorghum is mostly cultivated in the dry and semi-arid tropical

regions of Asia and Africa (Charyulu et al., 2024), while it is grown

in marginal environments in the Algerian desert by some local

farmers in small areas for self-consumption or as barriers to protect

summer crops from winds and sandstorms. The grasses of these

plants are exploited as a main fodder crop for animal feed due to

their signicant nutritional and functional capabilities. The vegetative

part of sorghum is characterized by its density and mainly consists

of stems, leaves, and panicles. Panicles include parts like the rachis,

glumes, and grains. During the harvesting process, the panicles

undergo threshing, winnowing, and grain cleaning. Their residues are

then either randomly discarded in nature or disposed of by burning

(Estrada-Angulo et al., 2019). They are also used as low-value animal

feed (Duke et al., 2024).

Sorghum plants produce active compounds during their growth

stages, that are benecial for treating various diseases (Dykes and

Rooney, 2006). They contain a very large number of medically active

compounds, particularly those produced in primary and secondary

metabolic processes (More et al., 2024). Phenolic compounds are

produced in small quantities, which depending on the plant organ

and growth stage. While these compounds do not have directly aect

basic plant activity such as growth, development and reproduction,

they help the plant adapt to its external environment. Various

scientic studies and recent statistical analyses have conrmed the

eectiveness of phenolic compounds in preventing and resisting

diseases due to their antioxidant capabilities and structural diversity

(Mérillon and Ramawat, 2025). They also exhibit various biological

activity, including anti-inammatory, antibacterial, antiviral,

vasodilatory, anti-cardiovascular, immunomodulatory, and anticancer

activity properties, which may be associated with their antioxidant

activity (Mérillon and Ramawat, 2025).

This study aims to extract and estimate the phenolic compounds

and antioxidant activity present in the leaves, stems, and panicle

residues of ten sorghum landraces cultivated in Algeria’s Bordj Bou

Arreridj province during the 2022 agricultural season. This approach

highlights the importance of the phenolic compounds found in

sorghum weeds and encourages stakeholders in the agricultural sector,

including farmers and growers, to recognise thiss. It also highlights

This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.

Zaitri et al. Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(2): e264321

3-8 |

the importance of these compounds to government bodies, such as

research centers, agricultural institutes and pharmaceutical institutes

specialising in the cultivation of such promising crops.

Materials and methods

Study location

The study was carried out in sorghum plants in the Algerian

desert. All the plants were cultivated in El Hamadia (35°59’59”N,

4°46’59”E, 874m) wilaya of Bordj Bou Arreridj in the year 2022.

Bordj Bou Arreridj is a high plateau region located in the northeastern

part of Algeria. The area is characterized by hilly terrain and vast

plains, and is a signicant agricultural and economic hub for the

region as a whole. After planting, we observed the growth stages of

the plants until owering and seed formation occurred

Sample preparation

The study samples consisted of nine landraces of sorghum that

originated in the Algerian desert, specically in the Tidikelt, Touat,

and Ahaggar regions. The tenth sample was a hybrid from Niger

(Table 1).

Table 1. List of common name sorghum accessions, origin and

their status.

Code Common name Origin and status

T01

Tafsout Beida In Salah – Landrace

T02

Tafsout Beida In Salah – Landrace

T03

Tafsout Beida Tamanrasset – Landrace

T04

Tafsout Hamra In Salah – Landrace

T05

Tafsout Beida In Salah – Landrace

T06

Tafsout Beida Adrar – Landrace

T07

Sorgho Khortal Niger – Hybridvarity

T08

Tafsout Beida In Salah – Landrace

T09

Tafsout Beida In Salah – Landrace

T10

Tafsout Hamra Tamanrasset – Landrace

Once the plants had completed their vegetative growth stages,

were harvested three from each landrace. Each plant was divided into

three main parts: leaves, stems, and panicle residues. Was then dried

all of these parts in a dark, dry room, away from sunlight. After several

days, was ground all the materials using an electric grinder (CRAFT

Electronics grinder (Model BT9100), P.R.C) and stored them in paper

bags, assigning them appropriate codes: LeaT: for leaves, SteT: for

stems, and PanT: for panicle residues.

Extraction

Phenolic compounds were extracted from various samples using

0.25 g of powder in 20 mL of an acetone–distilled water mixture

(70:30 % v/v) under the same experimental conditions, relying on a

digital ultrasonic cleaner (DAIHAN Scientic (Model WUC-D06H),

South Korea) device for 45 minutes with a temperature set at 30 °C

in closed reactors. After extraction, the various extracts were dried

from the solvent in a laboratory drying oven (Memmert, UM400,

Germany) at a temperature of 40 °C. After complete drying, they

were re-dissolved in 5 mL of pure methanol.

Determination of active compounds

Determination of total phenolic compounds (TPC)

The total phenolic compounds (TPC) were determined according

to the method of Singleton et al. (1999) using the Folin-Ciocalteu

reagent. The gallic acid was used as a standard solution. Was express

the phenolic compounds in milligrams of gallic acid equivalents per

100 grams (mg EAG.100 g

-1

) of dry weight.

Determination of tannin compounds (TC)

To determine tannins, we adopted the polyvinyl poly pyrrolidone

(PVPP) method (Silanikove et al., 2001). The tannins were determined

by calculating the dierence between the total phenolic compounds

and the phenolic compounds remaining after treatment with PVPP.

We express tannins as milligrams of gallic acid equivalents per 100

grams (mg EAG.100 g

-1

) of dry weight.

Determination of avonoid compounds (FC)

To determine avonoids, the colorimetric aluminum chloride

method described by Chang et al. (2002) and the Woisky and Salatino

(1998) method were adopted. Was express the avonoid compounds

in milligram equivalents of quercetin (mg EQ.100 g

-1

) per 100 grams

of the sample dry weight.

Determination of antioxidant capacity

Determination of the free radical scavenging activity (DPPH)

To determine the DPPH free radical scavenging activity

(2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl), the method by Sánchez-Moreno

et al. (1998) was adopted. The value contained in 100 g of the dry

weight equivalent to one gram of ascorbic acid for DPPH free radical

inhibition was calculated.

Determination of the ferric reducing antioxidant power

(FRAP)

The principle of this test involves reducing the ferric iron (Fe

)

to the ferrous iron (Fe

) by antioxidants in the presence of the TPTZ

(2,2,6 Tri (2-pyridyl)-s-triazine) in an acidic medium (Benzie and

Strain, 1996). The reducing power of iron is calculated by the value

contained in 100 g of the dry weight equivalent to the inhibition of

one gram of ascorbic acid.

Determination of the radical scavenging activity (ABTS)

The ABTS (2,2′-azino-bis 3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic

acid) radical scavenging capacity was also determined using the

ABTS radical cation decolorization method described by Yous et

al. (2009). The value contained in 100 g of the dry weight equivalent

to the inhibition of one gram of ascorbic acid is calculated using the

cationic radical ABTS.

Experimental design and statistical analysis

Sorghum landraces were raised in a randomized complete block

design with three replicates. The experiment site dimension was

13,5 m length and 5,8 m width (75.6 m

in total) with 0.5 m spacing

between micro-plots and 1m between blocks. Micro-plot area was

1.08 m

(1.2 m x 0.9 m), row and plant spacing were 30 cm to get 12

plants per micro-plot (Figure 1).

The results were processed utilizing SPSS statistical software,

version 26 (SPSS, 2019). The univariate statistical analysis method

was employed to estimate the mean, standard deviation, maximum

value, minimum value, and variance. Data were subjected to

multivariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) using Tukey’s signicant

dierences (p < 0.05). The various results were represented using

superimposed bar diagrams. Pearson’s correlation matrix between

phenolic compounds and their antioxidant activity was examined.

T08

T04

T05T10T09T01T06T02T03T07

120 cm

90 cm

50 cm

This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.

Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(2): e264321 April-June ISSN 2477-9409.

4-8 |

Figure 1. Experimental design.

Table 2. Total Phenolic compound contents and antioxidant activity of leaves, stems, and panicles of sorghum plant samples.

Phenolic Compounds (mg.100 g

-1

) Antioxidant Activity (mg.100 g

-1

)

TPC TC FC DPPH FRAP ABTS

LeaT01

830.48

441.42

i-k

121.72

b-g

500.84

ghi

413.10

c-f

162.23

a-f

LeaT02

668.65

462.88

jkl

96.68

a-f

584.04

e-j

393.44

c-f

160.38

a-f

LeaT03

425.81

b-g

225.96

b-g

153.50

c-g

502.48

c-i

475.49

d-g

204.5

def

LeaT04

1197.28

808.21

464.83

1265.47

724.85

253.29

LeaT05

463.22

d-i

246.82

b-h

195.28

888.62

ijk

419.36

c-f

223.86

d-g

LeaT06

622.09

g-j

392.13

g-k

174.73

efg

878.97

ijk

588.72

253.95

LeaT07

448.15

c-g

294.25

f-j

73.40

a-d

340.15

a-g

254.06

a-d

196.43

c-f

LeaT08

610.18

f-j

437.51

i-k

152.84

c-g

771.85

hij

503.86e

264.16

LeaT09

507.36

d-i

288.47

e-j

218.86

661.69

g-j

587.11f

233.54

efg

LeaT10

786.47

629.02

156.81

d-g

629.68

f-j

558.70f

313.33

SteT01

612.60

f-j

517.82

95.56

a-f

99.55

274.67

a-e

126.71

a-e

SteT02

423.01

a-h

257.25

b-i

22.63

243.41

a-f

196.04

abc

119.95

a-e

SteT03

239.97

a-d

139.90

a-f

58.44

a-d

99.55

143.60

125.65

a-e

SteT04

268.62

a-e

173.94

a-f

32.95

109.80

abc

74.01

68.92

SteT05

188.81

101.54

a-d

23.78

83.53

136.49

62.16

SteT06

167.75

84.18

14.91

77.21

85.03

76.48

SteT07

409.93

a-h

273.53

c-i

54.93

abc

217.41

a-e

234.47

a-d

227.97

efg

SteT08

495.38

e-i

422.11

h-l

34.13

509.66

d-i

222.82

abc

193.25

c-f

SteT09

237.87

a-d

121.32

a-f

15.17

162.28

a-d

133.74

83.10

abc

SteT10

369.69

a-f

286.92

d-j

30.25

178.62

a-d

282.06

a-e

171.38

b-f

PanT01

209.74

abc

36.94

17.47

142.22

a-d

90.84

73.56

PanT02

182.22

102.01

a-b

15.01

73.93

82.95

49.97

PanT03

281.74

a-e

141.98

a-f

27.82

142.22

a-d

177.88

abc

167.14

b-f

PanT04

282.88

a-e

142.79

a-f

29.18

280.67

a-g

189.24

abc

109.21

a-d

PanT05

212.70

abc

94.07

abc

9.33

81.75

103.96

88.27

abc

PanT06

169.03

91.01

abc

14.76

70.96

84.47

71.31

PanT07

182.08

102.55

a-e

11.71

70.46

103.49

68.52

PanT08

509.34

e-i

381.73

g-k

49.19

472.88

b-h

352.83

b-f

177.87

b-f

PanT09

383.35

a-g

216.37

a-g

92.96

a-e

324.64

a-g

303.82

a-e

129.36

a-e

PanT10

639.11

h-j

539.89

16.67

949.45

231.08

a-d

234.73

efg

Minimum 122.33 4.84 0.24 46.10 31.76 28.89

Maximum 1,344.44 927.78 558.25 1,481.68 1,145.92 459.92

Moyenne 433.86 281.82 82.52 380.47 280.74 156.38

Variance 70,255.09 42,600.74 11,364.34 145,929.44 48,925.03 8,936.49

LeaT: leaves, SteT: stems, PanT: panicle residues.

The Ward method was employed as a multivariate statistical

technique for hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA). All experiments

were conducted in triplicate, when signicant dierences were

detected (p < 0.05).

Results and discussion

The results obtained in the determination the active compounds

are show in table 2.

Table 2 indicates that the studied samples contain total phenolic

compounds ranging from 122.33 to 1,344.44 mg EAG.100 g

-1

, with

a mean value estimated at 433.86 mg EAG.100 g

-1

and a very high

dispersion with a signicant variance of 70,255.09. The tannin content

ranges from 4.84 to 927.78 mg EAG.100 g

-1

, with a mean value of

281.82 mg EAG.100 g

-1

and a substantial variance of 42,600.74.

Flavonoid content varied from 0.24 to 558.25 mg EQ.100 g

-1

, with

a mean value of 82.52 mg EQ.100 g

-1

and a variance of 11,364.34.

This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.

Zaitri et al. Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(2): e264321

5-8 |

Table 3. Homogeneous subsets of phenolic compounds and their antioxidant activity by dierent sorghum plant parts.

Part of the plant

Phenolic Compounds Antioxidant Activity

(mg.100 g

-1

)

TPC TC FC DPPH FRAP ABTS

Leaves

656.0±26.9

422.7±22.6

180.9±13.8

702.4±36.3

491.9±22.4

226.6±8.2

Panicle residues

305.2±19.2

184.9±17.4

28.4±4.3

260.9±39.4

172.1±15.7

117.0±8.2

Stems

340.4±20.7

237.9±18.8

38.3±3.2

178.1±15.8

178.3±11.9

125.6±9.0

TPC: total phenolic compounds, TC: tannin compounds, FC: avonoid compounds,DPPH: radical scavenging activity, FRAP: ferric reducing antioxidant power, ABTS: radical scavenging

activity. Dierent letters indicate statistically Tukey’s signicant dierences (p< 0.05).

The highest values were recorded for the leaves compared to

the stems and panicle residues, especially the leaves of the LeaT04

sample. These results revealed the richness of sorghum plants in

phenolic compounds and the clear diversity among the dierent

studied samples and their parts. These ndings are considered low

compared to the results obtained by (Abugri et al., 2015; Tugli et al.,

2019; Yi et al., 2025) for the red and brown sorghum leaves.

With regard to antioxidant activity, the results shown in Table

2 also indicated that the highest antioxidant activity was in the leaf

samples (LeaT), where the samples LeaT04, LeaT05, and LeaT06

recorded very high values, while the stem samples (SteT) and panicle

residue samples (PanT) had relatively lower values. We observed that

the ability to inhibit the DPPH ranges between 46.10 and 1,481.68

mg.100 g

-1

, with a mean value estimated at 380.47 mg.100 g

-1

and a

very strong dispersion with 145,929.44 of variance.

The values of FRAP ranged between 31.76 and 1,145.92 mg.100 g

-1

, with

a mean value of 280.74 mg.100 g

-1

and a large dispersion measure of

48,925.03. The values of the ABTS ranged between 28.89 and 459.92

mg.100 g

-1

, with an average value of 156.38 mg.100 g

-1

, which is

considered weak compared to the DPPH and FRAP activity values.

The ABTS test also exhibited a low dispersion measure compared to

the previous values, estimated at 8,936.49.

Due to the variation in the levels of phenolic compounds and their

antioxidant activity, signicant dierences were observed among

the various samples studied. This enable us to conduct a study to

determine whether there were statistically signicant dierences

among the various parts of the plant (leaves, stems, and panicle

residues), and among the sorghum samples sources.

ANOVA variance analysis showed signicant statistical

dierences at a signicance level of less than 0.05 among the three

parts of the plant (Table 3).

This indicates signicant dierence in the distribution of phenolic

compounds and variations in antioxidant activity between dierent

parts of sorghum plants.

Figure (2) shows a comparison of the average phenolic content

and its antioxidant activity for leaves, stems, and panicle residues

using superimposed bar diagrams.

Figure (2a) shows that the highest total phenolic compound

content is found in the leaves, followed by the stems and then the

panicle residues with similar values. Phenolic compounds are

distributed in dierent parts in the same pattern, with total phenolic

compound content being the highest, followed by tannin content, and

nally avonoid content.

Figure (2b) illustrates the distribution of antioxidant activity in

the three parts of plants. It is evident that the antioxidant activity of

the phenolic compounds are more closely related to the DPPH than to

the FRAP activity, followed by the ABTS scavenging.

These compounds are usually found in high concentrations

in the leaves, as they play an important role in defending against

environmental stresses such as drought, salinity, among others

(Kumar et al., 2023).

These results are consistent with those reported in many other

studies. The active compounds present in sweet sorghum stems

play an important role in inhibiting the growth of certain pathogenic

bacteria (Chen et al., 2022). The compounds found in the panicle

residues also help to maintain grain quality and improve resistance to

insects and fungi (Awika and Rooney, 2004).

The results of the ANOVA analysis indicated signicant statistical

dierences between the dierent sorghum landraces at a signicance

level of less than 0.05 (Table 4). This suggests that there is biochemical

diversity among the sorghum landraces studied.

Figure 3 illustrates the distribution of mean values for phenolic

compounds and their antioxidant activity from ten sorghum landraces.

Figure 2. A bar diagram superimposed with phenolic compounds (a) and antioxidant activity (b) among leaves, stems, and panicles.

This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.

Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(2): e264321 April-June ISSN 2477-9409.

6-8 |

Table 4. Homogeneous subsets of phenolic compounds and their antioxidant activity by sorghum plant landraces.

Landraces

Phenolic Compounds Antioxidant Activity

(mg.100 g

-1

)

TPC TC FC DPPH FRAP ABTS

T01

550.9±56.9

bcd

332.1±47.3

b-e

78.3±12.2

247.5±44.3

259.5±35.6

120.9±9.9

T02

419.2±46.3

a-d

274.1±36.2

a-d

44.8±8.5

300.45±46.6

abc

224.1±26.0

110.1±12.6

T03

318.0±21.8

169.3±11.9

79.9±12.6

248.1±44.7

265.7±36.1

165.8±14.9

abc

T04

582.9±86.7

375.0±61.5

cde

175.7±41.4

552.0±100.4

329.4±56.2

143.81±16.3

T05

288.2±25.2

147.5±14.6

76.1±17.2

351.3±76.4

abc

219.9±30.7

124.7±14.6

T06

319.6±42.5

189.1±28.5

68.1±14.9

342.4±74.5

abc

252.7±46.9

133.9±17.5

T07

346.7±30.0

223.4±23.1

abc

46.7±7.1

209.3±34.7

197.3±19.2

164.3±19.5

abc

T08

538.3±42.9

bcd

413.8±32.3

78.7±11.9

584.8±65.9

359.8±42.5

211.8±21.6

T09

376.2±44.1

abc

208.7±28.3

109.0±30.2

382.9±81.0

abc

341.6±67.3

148.6±21.4

T10

598.4±36.3

485.3±30.1

67.9±12.4

585.9±95.2

357.3±34.9

239.8±16.3

TPC: total phenolic compounds, TC: tannin compounds, FC: avonoid compounds, DPPH: radical cavenging activity, FRAP: ferric reducing antioxidant power, ABTS: radical scavenging activity.

Dierent letters indicate statistically Tukey’s signicant dierences (p< 0.05).

The graph shows that the distribution of phenolic compounds in

landraces matches their distribution in the dierent parts of the plant.

The results indicate a signicant variation between the landraces. It

can be observed that the landraces (T01, T04, T08, T10) have the

highest mean values for total phenolic content (Figure 3.a). While

the landraces (T04, T08, T10) have the highest values in DPPH

scavenging (Figure 3.b), the eect of ABTS scavenging remains

relatively limited compared to DPPH and FRAP activity. Generally,

this variation may be due to the inuence of genetic dierences or the

impact of environmental factors and climatic conditions.

Table 5 presents a correlation matrix of the relationships between

phenolic compounds and their antioxidant activity.

The matrix indicates a positive correlation between all the

variables. A very strong correlation is observed between total phenolic

content and tannin content with a correlation coecient of 0.963.

There are also other strong correlations between total phenolic

content and the following variables: avonoid content (0.747).

Table 5. Correlation matrix among total phenols, tannins,

avonoids, and antioxidant activity.

TPC TC FC DPPH FRAP

0.963**

0.747* 0.645

DPPH

0.778* 0.721* 0.736*

FRAP

0.806* 0.727* 0.842* 0.812*

ABTS

0.728* 0.720* 0.587 0.723* 0.794*

DPPH (0.778). and FRAP (0.806). The FRAP is strongly correlated

with avonoid content (0.842) and ABTS (0.794). A moderate

correlation is observed between ABTS and avonoid content (0.587).

which may explain the relatively weak cationic radical scavenging

TPC: total phenolic compounds, TC: tannin compounds, FC: avonoid compounds, DPPH:

radical scavenging activity, FRAP: ferric reducing antioxidant power, ABTS: radical

scavenging activity. *: strong correlation, **: very strong correlation.

Figure 3. A bar diagram superimposed with phenolic compounds (a) and antioxidant activity (b) among sorghum landrace samples

This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.

Zaitri et al. Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(2): e264321

7-8 |

eect exhibited by these compounds. In general, these results indicate

that antioxidant activity is directly related to DPPH and FRAP

activity. Additionally, we cannot overlook the ABTS scavenging,

which serves as an additional indicator of the ability of these plants to

perform antioxidant activity. These characteristics make the phenolic

compounds of sorghum grasses of health and nutritional value when

oered as animal feed, as they can contribute to combating oxidative

stress associated with many diseases (Mawouma et al., 2022).

The diagram (Figure 4) represents the results of hierarchical

cluster analysis (HCA) using the Ward method.

Figure 4. Dendrogram of sorghum samples (Leaves, Stems,

Panicle residues) based on Ward’s distance.

Was observed the presence of two main clusters originating

from a distance of 7. The rst cluster includes the most stem and

panicle residue samples. except for the sample of the Nigerian leaves

(LeaT07). While the second cluster gathers the majority of leaf

samples. except for the red panicle sample from the Tamanrasset region

(PanT10). These exceptions indicate the presence of both genetic and

environmental factors among the studied samples (D’almeida et al.,

2025). It can be observed that the distance between the distribution

of samples within each cluster is very close. indicating a signicant

similarity in phenolic content and antioxidant activity between leaf

samples. on one hand. and stem and panicle residue samples. on the

other

Conclusion

The study results indicated a diversity among dierent sorghum

grasses in their secondary metabolite content and antioxidant activity,

suggesting a signicant biodiversity among sorghum plant landraces

found in the Algerian desert. The importance of these results lies in

supporting the national economic strategies pursued by the Algerian

government to ensure food security, health, and energy sustainability.

The study results are promising, and it is recommended to support

them with further future studies, such as developing techniques

for extracting active compounds and studying some antibacterial,

antifungal, and anticancer compounds. In addition to conducting

some chromatographic analyses and identied the active compounds,

as well as some applications in the nutrition of both humans and

animals.

Literature cited

Abugri, D. A., Akudago, J. A., Pritchett, G., Russell, A. E., & McElhenney, W. H.

(2015). Comparison of phytochemical compositions of Sorghum bicolor

(L) Moench red our and pale brown leaves. Journal of Food Science and

Nutrition,1, 003. https://doi.org/10.24966/FSN-1076/100003

Awika, J. M., & Rooney, L. W. (2004). Sorghum phytochemicals and their

potential impact on human health. Phytochemistry, 65(9), 1199-1221.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2004.04.001

Benzie, I. F. F., & Strain, J. J. (1996). The Ferric Reducing Ability of Plasma

(FRAP) as a Measure of “Antioxidant Power”: The FRAP Assay.

Analytical Biochemistry, 239(1), 70-76. https://doi.org/10.1006/

ABIO.1996.0292

Chang, C.-C., Yang, M.-H., Wen, H.-M., & Chern, J.-C. (2002). Estimation of

totl avonoid content in propolis by two complementary colorimetric

methods. Journal of Food and Drug Analysis, 10(3), 178-182. https://doi.

org/https://doi.org/10.38212/2224-6614.2748

Charyulu, D. K., Afari-Sefa, V., & Gumma, M. K. (2024). Trends in global sorghum

production: Perspectives and limitations. In E. Habyarimana, M. A.

Nadeem, F. S. Baloch, & N. Zencirci (Eds.), Omics and Biotechnological

Approaches for Product Prole-Driven Sorghum Improvement (pp. 1-19).

Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-4347-

6_1

Chauhan, J., Solanki, S., Singh, A., & Singh, M. (2025). Forage Sorghum:

Potential feedstock for bioenergy. In R. K. Singhal, Indu, A. El Sabagh, &

K. K. Dwivedi (Eds.), Forage Crops in the Bioenergy Revolution: From

Fields to Fuel (pp. 183-193). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.

org/10.1007/978-981-96-2536-9_9

Chen, H., Xu, Y., Chen, H., Liu, H., Yu, Q., & Han, L. (2022). Isolation and

identication of polyphenols from fresh sweet sorghum stems and their

antibacterial mechanism against foodborne pathogens. Frontiers in

Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 9, 770726. https://doi.org/10.3389/

fbioe.2021.770726

D’almeida, C. T. D. S., Morel, M.-H., Terrier, N., Mameri, H., & Ferreira S. L.,

M. (2025). Dynamic metabolomic changes in the phenolic compound

prole and antioxidant activity in developmental sorghum grains. Journal

of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 73(2), 1725-1738. https://doi.

org/10.1021/acs.jafc.4c08975

Duke, K., Syeunda, C., Brantsen, J. F., Nindawat, S., & Awika, J. M. (2024).

Polyphenol recovery from sorghum bran waste by microwave assisted

extraction: Structural transformations as aected by grain phenolic

prole. Food Chemistry, 444, 138645. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.

FOODCHEM.2024.138645

Dykes, L., & Rooney, L. W. (2006). Sorghum and millet phenols and antioxidants.

Journal of Cereal Science, 44(3), 236-251. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.

JCS.2006.06.007

Estrada-Angulo, A., Coronel-Burgos, F., Castro-Pérez, B. I., Barreras, A.,

Zinn, R. A., Corona-Gochi, L., & Plascencia, A. (2019). Evaluation of

panicle residue from broom sorghum as a feed ingredient in nishing

diets for lambs. Animal, 13(1), 106-111. https://doi.org/10.1017/

S1751731118001015

Hossain, M. S., Islam, M. N., Rahman, M. M., Mostofa, M. G., & Khan, M. A.

R. (2022). Sorghum: A prospective crop for climatic vulnerability, food

and nutritional security. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 8,

100300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2022.100300

Kumar, K., Debnath, P., Singh, S., & Kumar, N. (2023). An overview of plant

phenolics and their involvement in abiotic stress tolerance. Stresses, 3(3),

570-585. https://doi.org/10.3390/stresses3030040

Mawouma, S., Condurache, N. N., Turturică, M., Constantin, O. E., Croitoru, C.,

& Rapeanu, G. (2022). Chemical composition and antioxidant prole of

sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) and pearl millet (Pennisetum

glaucum (L.) R.Br.) grains cultivated in the far-north region of Cameroon.

Foods, 11(14), 2026. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11142026

Mérillon, J. M., & Ramawat, K. G. (2025). Reference Series in Phytochemistry

Series Editors: Plant Specialized Metabolites Phytochemistry, Ecology

and Biotechnology (J. M. Mérillon & K. G. Ramawat, Eds.). Springer

Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-

031-51158-5

More, A., Morya, S., & Iyiola, A. O. (2024). Sorghum and Millets. In J. Singh,

S. Kaur, P. Rasane, & J. Singh (Eds.), Cereals and Nutraceuticals (pp.

121-144). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-

97-2542-7_6

Sánchez-Moreno, C., Larrauri, J. A., & Saura-Calixto, F. (1998). A procedure

This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.

Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(2): e264321 April-June ISSN 2477-9409.

8-8 |

to measure the antiradical eciency of polyphenols. Journal of the

Science of Food and Agriculture, 76(2), 270-276. https://doi.org/10.1002/

(SICI)1097-0010(199802)76:2<270::AID-JSFA945>3.0.CO;2-9

Silanikove, N., Perevolotsky, A., & Provenza, F. D. (2001). Use of tannin-binding

chemicals to assay for tannins and their negative postingestive eects in

ruminants. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 91(1-2), 69-81. https://

doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(01)00234-6

Singleton, V. L., Orthofer, R., & Lamuela-Raventós, R. M. (1999). Analysis of

total phenols and other oxidation substrates and antioxidants by means

of folin-ciocalteu reagent. Methods in Enzymology, 299, 152-178. https://

doi.org/10.1016/S0076-6879(99)99017-1

Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS). (2019). IBM SPSS Statistics for

Windows, Versión 26.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp. https://www.ibm.com/analytics/

spss-statistics-software.

Taylor, J. R. N., Schober, T. J., & Bean, S. R. (2006). Novel food and non-food

uses for sorghum and millets. Journal of Cereal Science, 44(3), 252-271.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCS.2006.06.009

Tugli, L. S., Essuman, E. K., Kortei, N. K., Nsor-Atindana, J., Nartey, E. B.,

& Ofori-Amoah, J. (2019). Bioactive constituents of waakye; a local

Ghanaian dish prepared with Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench leaf sheaths.

Scientic African, 3, e00049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2019.e00049

Woisky, R. G., & Salatino, A. (1998). Analysis of propolis: some parameters and

procedures for chemical quality control. Journal of Apicultural Research,

37(2), 99-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.1998.11100961

Yi, R., García-Vaquero, M., Vigors, S., Wang, Y. H., Xu, J. C., Yu, Z. T., Ma, L.,

& Bu, D. P. (2025). Phytochemical extracts from the leaves and stem of

red sorghum (Sorghum bicolor, L. Moench) potentially improve in vitro

fermentation by modulating rumen protozoa. Journal of Dairy Science,

108(10), 10939-10955. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2025-26727

Yous, M., Djeridane, A., Bombarda, I., Duhem, B., & Gaydou, E. M. (2009).

Isolation and characterization of a new hispolone derivative from

antioxidant extracts of Pistacia atlantica. Phytotherapy Research, 23(9),

1237-1242. https://doi.org/10.1002/ptr.2543