4.6 Article

An exploratory NMR nutri-metabonomic investigation reveals dimethyl sulfone as a dietary biomarker for onion intake

期刊

ANALYST
卷 134, 期 11, 页码 2344-2351

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/b918259d

关键词

-

资金

  1. Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries [3304-FVFP-060696-01]
  2. Urinary biomarkers for eating pattern using NMR spectroscopy and chemometrics [304-FVFP-060706-01]
  3. Spanish Ministry of Innovation and Science [AGL2003-09138-C04-01, 200670I081]
  4. Consolider-Ingenio 2010 Programme [FUN-C-FOOD CSD2007-00063, AGL2008-04798-C02-01/ALI]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The metabolome following intake of onion by-products is evaluated. Thirty-two rats were fed a diet containing an onion by-product or one of the two derived onion by-product fractions: an ethanol extract and the residue. A 24 hour urine sample was analyzed using H-1 NMR spectroscopy in order to investigate the effects of onion intake on the rat metabolism. Application of interval extended canonical variates analysis (ECVA) proved to be able to distinguish between the metabolomic profiles from rats consuming normal feed and rats fed with an onion diet. Two dietary biomarkers for onion intake were identified as dimethyl sulfone and 3-hydroxyphenylacetic acid. The same two dietary biomarkers were subsequently revealed by interval partial least squares regression (PLS) to be perfect quantitative markers for onion intake. The best PLS calibration model yielded a root mean square error of cross-validation (RMSECV) of 0.97% (w/w) with only 1 latent variable and a squared correlation coefficient of 0.94. This indicates that urine from rats on the by-product diet, the extract diet, and the residue diet all contain the same dietary biomarkers and it is concluded that dimethyl sulfone and 3-hydroxyphenylacetic acid are dietary biomarkers for onion intake. Being able to detect specific dietary biomarkers is highly beneficial in the control of nutritionally enhanced functional foods.

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

4.6
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