4.7 Article

Estimating bergamot juice adulteration of lemon juice by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analysis of flavanone glycosides

Journal

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
Volume 56, Issue 13, Pages 5407-5414

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jf8006823

Keywords

bergamot juice; bitter orange; chinotto; lemon juice; flavanone glycosides; fruit juice adulteration

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The chemical composition of 30 samples of juices obtained from,bergamot (Citrus bergamia Risso and Poit.) fruits is reported and compared to the genuineness parameters adopted by Association of the Industry of Juice and Nectars (AIJN) for lemon juice. It was found that the compositional differences between the two juices are distinguishable, although with difficulty. However, these differences are not strong enough to detect the fraudulent addition of bergamot,juice to lemon juice. Instead, we found the high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analysis of the flavanones naringin, neohesperidin, and neoeriocitrin, which are present in bergamot juice and practically absent in the lemon juice, is a convenient way to detect and quantify the fraudulent addition of bergamot juice. The method has been validated by calculating the detection and quantification limits according to Eurachem procedures. Employing neoeriocitrin (detection limit = 0.7 mg/L) and naringin (detection limit = 1 mg/L) as markers, it is possible to detect the addition of bergamot juice to lemon juice at the 1% level. When using neohesperidin as a marker (detection limit = 1 mg/L), the minimal percentage of detectable addition of bergamot juice was about 2%. Finally, it is reported that the pattern of flavonoid content of the bergamot juice is similar to those of chinotto (Citrus myrtifolia Raf) and bitter orange (Citrus aurantium L.) juices and that it is possible to distinguish the three kinds of juices by HPLC analysis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available