Quality of limes juices based on the aroma and antioxidant properties

Quality of limes juices based on the aroma and antioxidant properties Kaffir (Citrus hystrix) and Key (Citrus aurantifolia) limes juices were investigated and compared. Two dimensional gas chromatography coupled with time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GC×GC-TOF-MS) was applied to assess the botanical origin of Kaffir and Key limes juices, based on volatile substances. The biggest differences in the contents of selected terpenes in Kaffir and Key limes occur in chemical compounds such as Limonene, Citral, Terpinen-4-ol. Limonene concentration is almost 8 times higher in the Key lime volatile fraction than in Kaffir lime. The difference in concentration of Citral in Kaffir lime is almost 20 mg/kg lower than in Key lime. Higher concentration of Terpinen-4-ol was noted in Kaffir lime samples and the content was almost 20 times higher. The concentrations of α-Pinene, Citronellal, Camphene, Nerol, trans-Geraniol and β-Pinene are at similar levels in the volatile fraction of both fruits. Bioactive substances (polyphenols, flavonoids, tannins and flavanols) and the values of antioxidant capacities by four radical scavenging assays (DPPH, CUPRAC FRAP, ABTS) were determined and compared in water and methanol extracts in Kaffir and Key limes juices. The bioactivity of Kaffir lime differ significantly in water extracts in comparison with Key lime juices. The 1H NMR shifts in methanol and chloroform extracts showed some differences in aromatic region between the two varieties of lime juices. Terpinen-4-ol for Kaffir lime and Citral for Key lime were used as potential markers. The GC×GC-TOF-MS allows better separation of substances originating from complex matrices than one-dimensional chromatography, based on improved resolution, increased peak capacity and unique selectivity. The possible falsification of mentioned juices can be detected by the use of GC×GC-TOF-MS, antioxidant assays and NMR shifts. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Food Control Elsevier

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/quality-of-limes-juices-based-on-the-aroma-and-antioxidant-properties-ERf0O9OlUj
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd
ISSN
0956-7135
eISSN
1873-7129
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.02.005
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Kaffir (Citrus hystrix) and Key (Citrus aurantifolia) limes juices were investigated and compared. Two dimensional gas chromatography coupled with time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GC×GC-TOF-MS) was applied to assess the botanical origin of Kaffir and Key limes juices, based on volatile substances. The biggest differences in the contents of selected terpenes in Kaffir and Key limes occur in chemical compounds such as Limonene, Citral, Terpinen-4-ol. Limonene concentration is almost 8 times higher in the Key lime volatile fraction than in Kaffir lime. The difference in concentration of Citral in Kaffir lime is almost 20 mg/kg lower than in Key lime. Higher concentration of Terpinen-4-ol was noted in Kaffir lime samples and the content was almost 20 times higher. The concentrations of α-Pinene, Citronellal, Camphene, Nerol, trans-Geraniol and β-Pinene are at similar levels in the volatile fraction of both fruits. Bioactive substances (polyphenols, flavonoids, tannins and flavanols) and the values of antioxidant capacities by four radical scavenging assays (DPPH, CUPRAC FRAP, ABTS) were determined and compared in water and methanol extracts in Kaffir and Key limes juices. The bioactivity of Kaffir lime differ significantly in water extracts in comparison with Key lime juices. The 1H NMR shifts in methanol and chloroform extracts showed some differences in aromatic region between the two varieties of lime juices. Terpinen-4-ol for Kaffir lime and Citral for Key lime were used as potential markers. The GC×GC-TOF-MS allows better separation of substances originating from complex matrices than one-dimensional chromatography, based on improved resolution, increased peak capacity and unique selectivity. The possible falsification of mentioned juices can be detected by the use of GC×GC-TOF-MS, antioxidant assays and NMR shifts.

Journal

Food ControlElsevier

Published: Jul 1, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off