4.7 Article

Discrimination of conventional and organic white cabbage from a long-term field trial study using untargeted LC-MS-based metabolomics

Journal

ANALYTICAL AND BIOANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 406, Issue 12, Pages 2885-2897

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00216-014-7704-0

Keywords

Conventional agriculture; Long-termfield trial; Metabolomics; Organic agriculture; White cabbage

Funding

  1. Ekhagastiftelsen, Stockholm, Sweden [2008-33]
  2. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, Denmark through the International Centre for Research in Organic Food Systems (ICROFS) via the VegQure project [3304-FOJO-05-45-07]
  3. OrgTrace project [3304-FOJO-05-45-01]
  4. CORE Organic II EU project, AuthenticFood

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The influence of organic and conventional farming practices on the content of single nutrients in plants is disputed in the scientific literature. Here, large-scale untargeted LC-MS-based metabolomics was used to compare the composition of white cabbage from organic and conventional agriculture, measuring 1,600 compounds. Cabbage was sampled in 2 years from one conventional and two organic farming systems in a rigidly controlled long-term field trial in Denmark. Using Orthogonal Projection to Latent Structures-Discriminant Analysis (OPLS-DA), we found that the production system leaves a significant (p = 0.013) imprint in the white cabbage metabolome that is retained between production years. We externally validated this finding by predicting the production system of samples from one year using a classification model built on samples from the other year, with a correct classification in 83 % of cases. Thus, it was concluded that the investigated conventional and organic management practices have a systematic impact on the metabolome of white cabbage. This emphasizes the potential of untargeted metabolomics for authenticity testing of organic plant products.

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