Table 3. The ellagic acid content of black raspberry extracts as affected by ethanol concentration
| Name of the extract | Ellagic acid (mg/g) |
| water | 5% EtOH | 30% EtOH | 70% EtOH |
| uRo1) | Sample 1 | 12.40±0.212) | 16.56±0.19***3) | 9.31±0.21### | 10.03±0.66### |
| Sample 2 | 11.44±0.12 | 15.57±0.58*** | 10.51 0.63# | 11.67 0.52N.S. |
| Sample 3 | 12.01±0.18 | 15.24±1.02*** | 10.02±1.40# | 11.96±0.18N.S. |
| Mean±SD | 11.95±0.48 | 15.79±0.68*** | 9.95±0.60# | 11.22±1.04N.S. |
| uRc | Sample 4 | 11.35±0.24 | 16.77±0.48*** | 9.01±0.77### | 11.13±0.38N.S. |
| Sample 5 | 9.78±0.57 | 17.27±0.27*** | 9.42±0.09N.S. | 11.05±0.14** |
| Sample 6 | 12.07±0.42 | 16.48±0.16*** | 9.87±0.45### | 10.98±0.28## |
| Mean±SD | 11.07±1.17 | 16.84±0.40*** | 9.43±0.43## | 11.05±0.08N.S. |
| Ro | Sample 7 | 0.54±0.02 | 0.91±0.01*** | 0.67±0.05*** | 1.03±0.07*** |
1) uRo, unripe Rubus occidentalis L.; uRc, unripe Rubus chingii Hu; Ro; ripe Rubus occidentalis L..
2) Data are presented as the mean±SD.
3) The dat were statistically evaluated using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Dunnett’s Multiple Comparison test to compare significant differences between the groups at */#p<0.05, **/##p<0.01 and ***/###p<0.001. */#Statistically significant from the water extract group.