4.6 Article

An improved HPLC method for simultaneous determination of phenolic compounds, purine alkaloids and theanine in Camellia species

Journal

JOURNAL OF FOOD COMPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Volume 21, Issue 7, Pages 559-563

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfca.2008.05.002

Keywords

Camellia species; HPLC; phenolic compounds; purine alkaloids; theanine; Camellia sinensis; C. assamica; C. ptilophylla; C. assamica var. kucha

Funding

  1. Department of Science and Technology of Guangdong Province, China [20051320801001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A simple and fast HPLC analysis method for phenolic compounds, purine alkaloids and theanine in various Camellia species was developed. Using an amide-C16 column, catechins, gallic acid, caffeine, theobromine, theacrine, theophyline and theanine could be rapidly separated within 45 min with a gradient elution system. Excellent linearity was observed for all 14 compounds in the range studied, with correlation coefficients between 0.9994 and 0.9999. Limit of detection and limit of quantification of the 14 compounds varied from 0.0001 to 0.072 ng/mu L and 0.0004 to 0.24 ng/mu L, respectively. Four kinds of Camellia species were analyzed using this method. In traditional cultivated tea trees, Camellia sinensis and Camellia assamica, the main purine alkaloid was caffeine and main phenolic compound was (-)-epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG). The main purine alkaloids in Camellia ptilophylla and C. assamica var. kucha were theobromine and theacrine; their contents were 4.001 +/- 0.1184% dry weight and 2.116 +/- 0.0270% dry weight, respectively. The main phenolic compounds in C. ptilophylla and C. assamica var. kucha were (-)-gallocatechin gallate (GCG) and EGCG respectively. The content of theanine in the four Camellia species samples ranged from 0.136 +/- 0.0026% to 1.485 +/- 0.0491% dry weight, Crown Copyright (c) 2008 Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available