comparing the biological properties of Calabian goji and Chinese goji, Ruffo et al. (2017) used a combination of techniques similar to Islam et al. (2017). The application of multiple strategies in the experiments helped Ruffo et al. (2017) in validating the findings, hence making rational conclusions. That is, the researchers used different procedures on the same experiment to ascertain strong justifications to their arguments. In the test of UV analysis and absorbance, Ruffo et al. (2017) used standard chemicals and reagents as earlier noted from the experiments of Donno et al. (2015) and Islam et al. (2017) with a few additions that suited the uniqueness of the research. These included; potassium hydrogen phosphate, phosphoric acid, potassium persulfate, ethylenediamine dihydrocholoride, and linoleic acid. In addition, test samples were extracted from the two varieties of goji berries being investigated and their absorbance was monitored using a high performance liquid chromatography. As noted in the previous experiments, Ruffo et al. (2017) also used dry goji berries which were ground and mixed with solvents. To this point it is evident that only Ruffo et al. (2017) have conducted UV analysis involving a control experiment while other studies by Islam et al. (2017) and Donno et al. (2015) did not have.