4.5 Article

Biochemical and molecular profiling of unknown olive genotypes from central Italy: determination of major and minor components

期刊

EUROPEAN FOOD RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 245, 期 1, 页码 83-94

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00217-018-3142-0

关键词

Fatty acids; Food composition; Genetic diversity; Phenols; Tocopherols; Squalene

资金

  1. Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Perugia
  2. European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program Marie Sklodowska-CurieBefore Project [645595]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The phenotypic and genetic variability of local olives in a perspective of diversity conservation should be maintained and preserved. Fourteen unknown olive genotypes were selected from abandoned and isolated plants in Umbria region and characterized by ten SSR markers. The molecular analysis led to identify ten previously unknown genotypes within the patrimony of the region, made up by about 10 main cultivars and more than 100 minor ones. Fruit samples were randomly collected from the selected plants during two growing seasons and oil was extracted from each sample. Analyses of fatty acid composition, phenolic profile (flavonoids, phenolic acids, phenolic alcohols and lignans), tocopherols, squalene and sterols were performed on these oils. Significant differences were observed in terms of main fatty acids (e.g. oleic acid from 71.83 to 76.73%), but not for the minor ones. The important differences were instead obtained on the amount of -tocopherol, ranging from 149 to 583mgkg(-1), and on squalene, spanning from 1059 to 5447mgkg(-1). Evaluation of major and minor compounds with the principal component analysis of the main oil quality parameters revealed differentiation according to the genotypes. The analysis of neglected olive genotypes from a small area of cultivation has led to the identification of a promising source of variability for most sought-after traits, which could be exploited for new olive plantations and to magnify the spectrum of local olive oils.

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