4.5 Article

Mono- and di-glucoside anthocyanins extraction during the skin contact fermentation in hybrid grape varieties

期刊

EUROPEAN FOOD RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 245, 期 11, 页码 2373-2383

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00217-019-03355-4

关键词

Mono; and di-glucoside anthocyanins; HPLC-DAD; Hybrid grape varieties; Anthocyanins extraction kinetic

资金

  1. Provincia Autonoma di Trento through the PROGETTO VEVIR (RDP 2014-2020)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this work, the anthocyanins' profile of two hybrid grape varieties-Cabernet Carbon and Prior-grown in two experimental plots in Trentino (Northern Italy) was investigated during 2016 and 2017 harvests. The focus was on the mono- and di-glycoside anthocyanins extraction during the fermentative maceration. It was optimized an HPLC-DAD method, which allows the separation and quantification of mono- and di-glucoside anthocyanin forms (non-esterified, acetylated, and p-coumaroylated) in a single chromatographic run. Furthermore, an HPLC-DAD/HQOMS approach was used to confirm the compound identification. The skin contact fermentation was conducted for 7 days at 24 degrees C, punching down manually the cap twice a day. Must samples were collected every 24 h. As expected, every anthocyanin showed an initial net extraction phase described by a first-order kinetic, followed by a decrease until the end of the maceration. The analysis of the accumulation rate showed a faster increase of the di-glucoside anthocyanins concentration compared to the corresponding mono-glucoside, due to their richness in the initial grapes. Moreover, the di-glucosides concentration at the end of the alcoholic fermentation underwent a three times minor percentage decrease with respect to the maximum reached. This paper intend to improve the knowledge of the kinetics of each anthocyanin form during the maceration step, providing information about the behavior of di-glucoside compounds, never investigated before in terms of accumulation and percentage decrease.

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

4.5
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