Comparison of Common Analytical Methods for the Quantification of Total Polyphenols and Flavanols in Fruit Juices and Ciders

dc.contributor.authorMa, Sihuien
dc.contributor.authorKim, Cathleanen
dc.contributor.authorNeilson, Andrew P.en
dc.contributor.authorGriffin, Laura E.en
dc.contributor.authorPeck, Gregory M.en
dc.contributor.authorO'Keefe, Sean F.en
dc.contributor.authorStewart, Amanda C.en
dc.contributor.departmentBiochemistryen
dc.contributor.departmentFood Science and Technologyen
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-22T17:03:31Zen
dc.date.available2019-08-22T17:03:31Zen
dc.date.issued2019-07-17en
dc.description.abstractMultiple analytical methods are used for quantification of total polyphenols and total flavanols in fruit juices and beverages. Four methods were evaluated in this study: Folin-Ciocalteu (F-C), Lowenthal permanganate (L-P), 4-dimethylaminocinnamaldehyde (DMAC), and the bovine serum albumin (BSA) precipitation method. Method validation parameters, including working range, limit of detection, limit of quantitation, precision (repeatability), accuracy, and specificity, were assessed and compared. The F-C method was not specific to polyphenols, and the L-P method had the widest working range but lacked accuracy. The DMAC method was the most specific to flavanols, and the BSA method was not suitable for quantification of smaller flavanols, such as catechin and epicatechin. Quantitative performance was evaluated using commercial fruit juice samples (n = 14), apple juice samples of different cultivars (n = 22), and commercial ciders (n = 17). In general, the L-P titration method and DMAC method resulted in higher quantitative values than the F-C method and BSA precipitation method, respectively. However, ratios of results obtained by the L-P and F-C method ranged from 1 to 28, and ratios of results obtained by the DMAC and BSA precipitation method ranged from <1 to 280. This tremendous variation is likely due to variation in polyphenol composition and sample matrix. This information provides perspective for comparison of results obtained through these different methods, and a basis for choosing the most appropriate analytical method for quantification of polyphenols to address a specific research question when working with commercial fruit juice, apple juice from different apple cultivars, and commercial ciders. Practical Application This study compared results obtained when four common polyphenol quantification methods were applied to a diverse selection of fruit juices and beverages with distinct polyphenol composition and sample matrix. The matrix and polyphenol composition of the samples significantly influenced the results. Our findings can help manufacturers of fruit-based products choose the most appropriate analytical method for polyphenol quantification as part of a quality assurance program or to convey information on dietary polyphenol content to consumers. An assessment of analytical method validation parameters is provided for each of the four methods, which will help users of these methods to understand their limitations.en
dc.description.sponsorshipUnited States Association of Cidermakers; Virginia Tech College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Graduate Teaching Scholars Program; USDA-NIFA Hatch Programen
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.14713en
dc.identifier.eissn1750-3841en
dc.identifier.issn0022-1147en
dc.identifier.pmid31313833en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/93220en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en
dc.subjectBSA precipitationen
dc.subjectDMACen
dc.subjectflavanolsen
dc.subjectFolin-Ciocalteuen
dc.subjectLowenthal permanganate titrationen
dc.titleComparison of Common Analytical Methods for the Quantification of Total Polyphenols and Flavanols in Fruit Juices and Cidersen
dc.title.serialJournal of Food Scienceen
dc.typeArticle - Refereeden
dc.type.dcmitypeTexten
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
1750-3841.14713.pdf
Size:
654.7 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: