4.0 Article

GC-MS-based metabolomics for the detection of adulteration in oregano samples

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE SERBIAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 86, 期 12, 页码 1195-1203

出版社

SERBIAN CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.2298/JSC210809089I

关键词

chromatography; PCA; OPLS; Origanum vulgare; Origanum onites; Olea europaea; Cotinus coggygria; Myrtus communis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study used GC-MS to identify and quantify metabolites in oregano samples adulterated with olive, venetian sumac, and myrtle leaves. The metabolomics profiles obtained were analyzed using multivariate data analysis to reveal markers of adulteration. Orthogonal partial least squares discriminant analysis was able to detect oregano adulterations and distinguish between different oregano samples.
Oregano is one of the most used culinary herb and it is often adult-erated with cheaper plants. In this study, GC-MS was used for identification and quantification of metabolites from 104 samples of oregano (Origanum vul-gare and O. onites) adulterated with olive (Olea europaea), venetian sumac (Cotinus coggygria) and myrtle (Myrtus communis) leaves, at five different concentration levels. The metabolomics profiles obtained after the two-step derivatization, involving methoxyamination and silanization, were subjected to multivariate data analysis to reveal markers of adulteration and to build the reg-ression models on the basis of the oregano-to-adulterants mixing ratio. Ortho-gonal partial least squares enabled detection of oregano adulterations with olive, Venetian sumac and myrtle leaves. Sorbitol levels distinguished oregano samples adulterated with olive leaves, while shikimic and quinic acids were recognized as discrimination factor for adulteration of oregano with venetian sumac. Fructose and quinic acid levels correlated with oregano adulteration with myrtle. Orthogonal partial least squares discriminant analysis enabled dis-crimination of O. vulgare and O. onites samples, where catechollactate was found to be discriminating metabolite.

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

4.0
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