4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Impact of Six Typical Processing Methods on the Chemical Composition of Tea Leaves Using a Single Camellia sinensis Cultivar, Longjing 43

期刊

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 67, 期 19, 页码 5423-5436

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.8b05140

关键词

C. sinensis; tea; bioactives; postharvest processing; chemical composition

资金

  1. Key Research and Development Projects of Anhui Province [1804b06020367]
  2. Earmarked Fund for Anhui Featured Agricultural Development Project (Anhui Provincial Agriculture Commission) [2016-188]
  3. Earmarked Fund for China Agriculture Research System [CARS-19]
  4. Funds of Anhui Provincial Science and Technology Department [1408085MKL39]
  5. High-End Foreign Experts Recruitment Program [GDT20143400024]
  6. Anhui Major Demonstration Project for Leading Talent Team on Tea Chemistry and Health [1306c083018]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While the Camellia sinensis cultivar and processing method are key factors that affect tea flavor and aroma, the chemical changes in nonvolatile components associated with the tea processing method using a single cultivar of C. sinensis have not been reported. Fresh leaves from C. sinensis Longjing 43 were subjected to six tea processing methods and evaluated by targeted and untargeted chromatographic procedures. On the basis of targeted assessment of the total catechin content, three clusters were identified: yellow-green, oolong-white-dark, and black. However, principal component analysis of the total tea metabolome identified four chemical phenotypes: green yellow, oolong, black-white, and dark. Differences in the noncatechin components included amino acids and gamma-aminobutyric acid, which increased in white tea, and dihydroxyphenylalanine, valine, betaine, and theophylline, which increased in dark tea. Overall, this study identified a wide range of chemicals that are affected by commonly used tea processing methods and potentially affect the bioactivity of various tea types.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据