4.6 Article

Sugars Profiles of Different Chestnut (Castanea sativa Mill.) and Almond (Prunus dulcis) Cultivars by HPLC-RI

Journal

PLANT FOODS FOR HUMAN NUTRITION
Volume 65, Issue 1, Pages 38-43

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11130-009-0147-7

Keywords

Castanea sativa Mill.; HPLC-RI; Prunus dulcis; Sugars profiles

Funding

  1. Foundation for Science and Technology (Portugal) [SFRH/BD/29060/2006]
  2. INTERREG IIIA project PIREFI
  3. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/29060/2006] Funding Source: FCT

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sugar profiles of different almond and chestnut cultivars were obtained by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), by means of a refractive index (RI) detector. A solid-liquid extraction procedure was used in defatted and dried samples. The chromatographic separation was achieved using a Eurospher 100-5 NH2 column using an isocratic elution with acetonitrile/water (70:30, v/v) at a flow rate of 1.0 ml/min. All the compounds were separated in 16 min. The method was optimized and proved to be reproducible and accurate. Generally, more than 95% of sugars were identified for both matrixes. Sugars profiles were quite homogeneous for almond cultivars; sucrose was the main sugar (11.46 +/- 0.14 in Marcona to 22.23 +/- 0.59 in Ferragnes g/100 g of dried weight), followed by raffinose (0.71 +/- 0.05 in Ferraduel to 2.11 +/- 0.29 in Duro Italiano), glucose (0.42 +/- 0.12 in Pegarinhos two seeded to 1.47 +/- 0.19 in Ferragnes) and fructose (0.11 +/- 0.02 in Pegarinhos two seeded to 0.59 +/- 0.05 in Gloriette). Commercial cultivars proved to have higher sucrose contents, except in the case of Marcona. Nevertheless, chestnut cultivars revealed a high heterogeneity. Sucrose was the main sugar in Aveleira (22.05 +/- 1.48), Judia (23.30 +/- 0.83) and Longal (9.56 +/- 0.91), while glucose was slightly prevalent in Boa Ventura (6.63 +/- 0.49). The observed variance could serve for inter-cultivar discrimination.

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