## 3 Results and Discussion
### The Antioxidant Activity (AA) of Medicinal Plant Extracts  
Figure 4 shows the AA, expressed as FRAP, for the CS/FG samples extracted by CES, UAE, and MWE. Figure 3(a,c,e present the FRAP values (mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g) using CES, UAE, and UWE, and Figure 3(b,d,f present the increasing/decreasing FRAP values (%) after different preparations of samples (FG/CS) calculated according to (3). Figure 4: AA expressed as FRAP for CS/FG samples extracted by the CES, UAE, and MWE methods. According to the \(t-\)test, the different lower-case letters (a–k represent the significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) between samples obtained by the same shredding method. The different capital letters (A, B) represent the significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) between samples from the same plant obtained by different shredding methods. From the results obtained regarding the extraction by the conventional method (Figure 4a), it can be observed that the highest antioxidant value was found in the OV extract, both in the case of the crushed sample (22.66 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g) and the powder sample (81.36 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g), followed by MO (20.59 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g in the CS sample and 62.38 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g in the FG sample. The lowest FRAP value for the FG sample was recorded in the CO extract (17.51 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g) and for the CS sample in the LA extract (5.99 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g). In the case of the samples processed by fine grinding into powder form, the AA is higher than the coarse grinding extract for all analyzed extracts. The highest difference was observed in the cases of OV (58.70 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g) and MO (41.79 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g), and the smallest in the case of CO extract (11.19 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g). Expressed in percentages (Figure 4b), the highest increase in AA was recorded for LA extract (430.87%), followed by SO (395.98%), and the lowest in the case of TS (172.28%). Regarding the AA of the samples extracted by UAE (Figure 4c), it was observed that the highest FRAP value was obtained for OV extract, both in CS form (43.64 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g) and FG form (71.62 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g) followed by HP extract, crushed (31.02 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g), and powder (68.21 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g). The lowest variation was observed in the cases of CO extract through both processing procedures: CS (2.50 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g) or FG (22.04 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g). The highest difference between the AA of the two forms of processing was observed in the case of SO extract (41.15 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g), followed by HP (37.19 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g), and the smallest for EP extract (2.70 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g). Regarding the percentage evaluation (Figure 4d), the highest increase was observed in the cases of CO extract (781.54%) and HO (544.93%) and the lowest in the case of EP extract (15.19%). The results obtained agree with those reported by other authors, who reported the AA of medicinal plant extracts expressed as FRAP between 64 and 220 (mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100g extract) [51]. Concerning the MWE (Figure 4e), the increase of AA was also observed in the samples processed in powder form compared to the crushed samples. The highest FRAP value was identified in the OV sample (141.42 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g), followed by LA (118.12 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g), and the lowest for CO extract (32.72 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g). The difference between the two procedures is maximum in OV extract (82.72 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g) and minimum in CO extract (6.48 mM Fe\({}^{2+}\)/100 g). The highest FRAP increase (Figure 4f) was observed for SO1 (167.96%) and the smallest for SO2 extract (18.7%). Between the processing in the form of powder (FG) and coarse shredding (CS), significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) were recorded for all plants extracted using the three procedures (CES, UAE, and MWE). Figure 5 shows that the maximum AA of the extracts was obtained, both for CS and FG samples, for most of the medicinal plants studied in the MWE process, followed by UAE and CES.