4.0 Article

Chemometric characterization of peach, nectarine and plum cultivars according to fruit phenolic content and antioxidant activity

期刊

FRUITS
卷 71, 期 1, 页码 57-66

出版社

INT SOC HORTICULTURAL SCIENCE-ISHS
DOI: 10.1051/fruits/2015042

关键词

Serbia; peach; plum; nectarine; Prunus spp.; antioxidant activity; phenolics

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia [172047]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction. Deciduous tree fruits like peach (Prunus persica (L.) Batsch var. persica), nectarine (Prunus persica (L.) Batsch var. nucipersica (Suckow) C.K. Schneid), and especialy plum (Prunus domestica L. ssp. domestica) are very common in Serbia. These fruits are known for their nutritional value and therapeutic properties and are valuable sources of antioxidants. Materials and methods. The goal of this work was to evaluate fruit tissue antioxidant activity using methanol extracts of 9 peach, 3 nectarine and 7 plum cultivars. The following parameters were measured: total phenolic content (TPC); antioxidant activity as estimated by radical scavenging activity of (2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl, DPPH); cation decolorization activity (2,2-azinobis-3 ethylbenxothiazoline-6-sulphonic acid, ABTS); ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP); cupric reducing antioxidant capacity (CUPRAC); and total reducing power (TRP). Results and discussion. Total phenolic contents of the plum cultivars were higher than those of peach and nectarine and significant positive correlations were recorded between all antioxidant activity assays and total phenolic contents. Results obtained by principal component analysis (PCA) are in agreement with those obtained by cluster analysis (CA). Conclusion. The selected methods revealed antioxidant activities for all plum cultivars significantly higher than in the peach and nectarine cultivars. PCA and CA allow grouping the different fruit species based on TPC, DPPH, ABTS, TRP, FRAP and CUPRAC values.

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