## 3 Results and Discussion
### Analysis of the Optimal Extracts
[45] determined 4-hydroxybenzoic acid and caffe acid in _Oynthia robusta_ and _Oynthia focus-barbraica_. They also determined syringic acid in _O. robusta_, with a value of 0.46 mg/kg, significantly lower than OM in our study. Finally, the relationship between the identified polyphenols and antioxidant capacity could not be fully declared since we quantified \(\sim\)30-40% of total polyphenols in both OM peels and pulp. A possible future study quantifying most of the polyphenols could shed more light on the relationship between antioxidant capacity and the structure of polyphenols. The scatter plot (Figure 5) described is a classic visualization in discriminant analysis, effectively showing the separation of groups based on their distinct characteristics. Plotting the data points in color-coded clusters makes it visually apparent how well the different groups (TPC, BC, DPPH, FRAP, and AAC) are distinguished from each other based on their characteristics. Canonical axes serve as a reference for the linear separation, and minimal overlap between clusters strongly suggests the efficiency of the method. This plot is a graphical representation of the results concerning both the bioactive compounds \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameters**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Pulp**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Peel**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **UAE** & **STE** & **UAE** & **STE** \\ \hline TPC (mg GAE/g dw) & 12.43 \(\pm\) 0.26 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 10.27 \(\pm\) 0.33 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 13.07 \(\pm\) 0.78 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 11.11 \(\pm\) 0.52 \({}^{\text{b,c}}\) \\ BC (\(\mu\)g/g dw) & 1076 \(\pm\) 62 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 1090 \(\pm\) 51 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 974 \(\pm\) 41 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 1099 \(\pm\) 81 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ FRAP (\(\mu\)mol AAE/g dw) & 50.79 \(\pm\) 2.44 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 54.61 \(\pm\) 1.97 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 45.56 \(\pm\) 3.24 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 48.76 \(\pm\) 2.44 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) \\ DPPH (\(\mu\)mol AAE/g dw) & 51.32 \(\pm\) 2.05 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 49.49 \(\pm\) 3.22 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 49.25 \(\pm\) 1.38 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 48.53 \(\pm\) 2.09 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ AAC (mg/g dw) & 5.07 \(\pm\) 0.10 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 4.45 \(\pm\) 0.33 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 3.57 \(\pm\) 0.11 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 2.15 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\text{d}}\) \\ \(L^{\star}\) & 50.1 \(\pm\) 1.7 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 45.6 \(\pm\) 0.8 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 50.7 \(\pm\) 1.9 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 46.8 \(\pm\) 0.5 \({}^{\text{b,c}}\) \\ \(a^{\star}\) & 47.7 \(\pm\) 2.0 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 46.7 \(\pm\) 2.1 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 46.2 \(\pm\) 2.3 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 45.4 \(\pm\) 0.5 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ \(b^{\star}\) & \(-\)7.5 \(\pm\) 0.8 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 1.1 \(\pm\) 0.1 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(-\)7.0 \(\pm\) 0.9 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.5 \(\pm\) 0.1 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ Color \({}^{1}\) & & & & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Various parameters were evaluated under optimal extraction conditions for both the pulp and peel of _Oynthia macrohiza_ extracts. The study compared the ultrasound probe-assisted extraction (UPAE) technique with the stirring extraction (STE) technique.