4.7 Article

Screening of the polyphenol content of tomato-based products through accurate-mass spectrometry (HPLC-ESI-QTOF)

期刊

FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 129, 期 3, 页码 877-883

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.05.038

关键词

Ketchups; Gazpachos; Tomato juices; HPLC; QTOF; Polyphenols

资金

  1. CICYT [AGL2007-66638-C02, AGL2009-13906-C02-01, AGL2010-22319-C03]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (MICINN) [RETICS RD06/0045/0003]
  3. Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spain [PI070240]
  4. MICINN [FUN-C-FOOD CSD2007-063]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tomatoes, the second most important vegetable crop worldwide, are a key component in the so-called Mediterranean diet and its consumption has greatly increased worldwide over the past 2 decades, mostly due to a growing demand for tomato-based products such as ketchups, gazpachos and tomato juices. In this work, tomato-based products were analysed after a suitable work-up extraction procedure using liquid chromatography/electrospray ionisation-time of flight-mass spectrometry (HPLC-ESI-QTOF) with negative ion detection using information-dependent acquisition (IDA) to determine their phenolic composition. The compounds were confirmed by accurate mass measurements in MS and MS2 modes. The elemental composition was selected according to the accurate masses and isotopic pattern. In this way, 47 compounds (simple phenolic and hydroxycinnamoylquinic acids and flavone, flavonol, flavanone and dihydrochalcone derivatives) were identified in tomato-based products, five of them, as far as was known, were previously unreported in tomatoes. The phenolic fingerprint showed that tomato-based products differ in phenolic composition, principally in protocatechuic acid-O-hexoside, apigenin and its glycosylated forms, quercetin-O-dihexoside, kaempferol-C-hexoside and eriodictyol-O-dihexoside. Gazpacho showed the highest number of phenolic compounds due to the vegetables added for its production. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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