4.7 Article

Application of metabolomics profiling in the analysis of metabolites and taste quality in different subtypes of white tea

期刊

FOOD RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
卷 106, 期 -, 页码 909-919

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2018.01.069

关键词

White tea; Subtypes; LC-MS; Taste quality; Metabolomics; Dose-over-threshold

资金

  1. Central Public Interest Scientific Institution Basal Research Fund [1610212016008]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31500561, 31501565]
  3. Earmarked Fund for China Agricultural Research System [CARS-23]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Three subtypes of white tea, Silver Needle (SN), White Peony (WP), and Shou Mei (SM), differ in their taste, aroma, bioactivity, and commercial value. Here, a metabolomics investigation on the chemical compositions combining taste equivalent-quantification and dose-over-threshold (DoT) determination on the taste qualities were applied to comprehensively characterize the white tea subtypes for the first time. Significant differences in the contents of catechins, dimeric catechins, amino acids, phenolic acids, flavonol/flavone glycosides, and aroma precursors were observed among these 3 white teas. Metabolite content comparison and partial least-squares (PLS) analysis suggest that theanine, aspartic acid, asparagine, and AMP were positively correlated with the umami taste in white tea, and flavan-3-ols, theasinensins, procyanidin B3, and theobromine had positive correlations with higher bitterness and astringency tastes. In addition, puckering astringent (-)-epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG), (-)-epicatechin gallate (ECG) and theogallin, bitter-tasting caffeine, and the mouth-drying/velvety-like astringent gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) were identified as key taste compounds of white tea infusion by absolute quantification and DoT factor calculations. This work provided systematic and comprehensive knowledge on the chemical components, taste qualities, and sensory active metabolites for the subtypes of white tea.

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