4.6 Article

Identification and quantification of flavonoid aglycones in rape bee pollen from Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau by HPLC-DAD-APCI/MS

Journal

JOURNAL OF FOOD COMPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Volume 38, Issue -, Pages 49-54

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfca.2014.10.011

Keywords

Rape bee pollen (RBP); Flavonoid aglycone; Quercetin; Kaempferol; Food analysis; Food composition; HPLC-DAD-APCI/MS; Microwave-assisted extraction (MAE); Traditional foods

Funding

  1. Qinghai Provincial Natural Science Foundation [2012-Z-923Q]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

For identification and quantification of flavonoid aglycones in rape bee pollen (RBP) collected from the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, a high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) separation method with diode array detector (DAD) and atmospheric pressure chemical ionization/mass spectrometric (APCI/MS) detection and four extraction methods (i.e. microwave-assisted extraction, Soxhlet extraction, cold-soaked extraction, and heat reflux extraction) were developed in this study. The identification of flavonoid aglycones was based on retention time and mass spectra by comparison with standards. Results demonstrated that this method showed excellent reproducibility and correlation coefficient, and offered the detection limits of 0.77-15.50 pmol at signal-to-noise ratio of 3. Quercetin and kaempferol were presented in RBP, and microwave-assisted extraction (MAE) was superior to the other three methods in terms of efficiency, convenience and high content of quercetin (1.37 +/- 0.059 mg/g) and kaempferol (23.44 +/- 0.544 mg/g). Our work indicated that: 1) the proposed HPLC-DAD-APCl/MS was an accurate and precise analysis method to identify and quantify the flavonoid aglycones in RBP; and 2) MAE was efficient to extract flavonoids from RBP with short extraction time, low solvent consumption, and homogeneous extraction conditions. (C) 2014 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