| Literature DB >> 23358325 |
Mario J Simirgiotis1, Guillermo Schmeda-Hirschmann, Jorge Bórquez, Edward J Kennelly.
Abstract
The banana passion fruit (Passiflora tripartita Breiter, Passifloraceae) known as "tumbo" is very appreciated in tropical and subtropical countries of South America. Methanolic extracts from peel and the fruit juice of P. tripartita growing in Chile were analyzed for antioxidant capacity as well as for flavonoid and phenolic content. A chromatographic method was developed for the rapid identification of the main phenolics in the samples by HPLC-DAD and HPLC-MS. The fast fingerprint analysis allowed the detection of eighteen flavonoid C-glycosides and four flavonoid O-glycoside derivatives which were characterized by UV spectra and ESI-MS-MS analysis. Several of the C-glycosides detected are structurally related to the orientin derivative 4'-methoxy-luteolin-8-C-(6"acetyl)-b-D-glucopyranoside (31), fully elucidated by spectroscopic methods. The antioxidant derivative 31 along with schaftoside, vicenin II, orientin and vitexin were isolated from the fruit extract by high-speed countercurrent chromatography (HSCCC). A suitable method for the preparative isolation of flavonol C-glycosides from "tumbo" extracts by HSCCC is reported. The pulp of the fruits showed good antioxidant capacity (12.89 ± 0.02 mg/mL in the DPPH assay). The peel presented the highest content of flavonoids (56.03 ± 4.34 mg quercetin/100 g dry weight) which is related to the highest antioxidant power (10.41 ± 0.01 mg/mL in the DPPH assay).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23358325 PMCID: PMC6270644 DOI: 10.3390/molecules18021672
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Antioxidant power as determined by the DPPH bleaching assay, ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP), total phenolic content (TPC), total flavonoid content (TFC) and yield of tumbo fruits extracts and isolated compounds.
| DPPH a | FRAP b | TPC c | TFC d | Yield e | Fruit part |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10.41 ± 0.01 | 462.47 ± 0.49 | 56.03 ± 4.34 | 140.17 ± 4.23 | 5.24 | Peel |
| 12.89 ± 0.02 | 85.78 ± 0.12 | 22.57 ± 1.43 | 77.16 ± 8.4 | 4.07 | Pulp and juice |
| Compound | |||||
| 65.40 ± 0.24 | 393.97 ± 0.31 | - | - | 0.06 | 11 |
| 44.86 ± 0.13 | 438.23 ± 0.28 | - | - | 0.07 | 13 |
| 24.24 ± 0.11 | 543.72 ± 0.43 | - | - | 0.04 | 16 |
| 1.62 ± 0.01 | 637.84 ±0.65 | - | - | 0.13 | 19 |
| 3.69 ± 0.04 | 586.48 ± 0.18 | - | - | 0.14 | 31 |
| 1.16 ± 0.01 | 729.37 ± 0.48 | - | - | - | f Gallic acid |
a Expressed as IC50 in µg/mL. b Expressed as mmol Trolox/100 g dry weight. c Expressed as mg gallic acid/100 g dry weight. d Expressed as mg quercetin/100 g dry weight. e Yield expressed as % w/w dry weight. All values are mean ± S.D. (n = 3). f Used as standard antioxidant. All values in the same column are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 1HPLC DAD chromatograms at 280 nm of Passiflora tripartita (“tumbo”) peel (upper) and juice-pulp (lower).
Figure 2HSCCC chromatogram at 254 nm of crude tumbo (Passiflora tripartita) peel extract.
Figure 3Proposed structures of luteolin and apigenin derivatives from Passiflora tripartita fruits identified by HPLC-DAD-ESI-MS.
Figure 4Structures, fragmentation, full ESI-MS and MS-MS spectra of peaks 1, 9, and 16.
Figure 5Structures, fragmentation, Full ESI-MS and MS-MS spectra of peaks 31, 21 and 24.
Identification of phenolic compounds in tumbo fruits by LC-DAD, LC–MS and MS/MS data.
| Peak | Rt(min) | λ max (nm) | [M−H]− | Fragment ions ( | Compound identification | Fruit part |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2.1 | 269, 340 | 725 | 665, 563, 443, 383, 353 | (6- | P, J |
| 2 | 2.8 | 288, 322 | 897 | 457, 451, 325, 305 | Feruloylated oligosaccharide | P, J |
| 3 | 9.4 | 270, 349 | 609 | 489, 369, 327 | Luteolin-(7- | P |
| 4 | 9.6 | 270, 349 | 645 | 447, 357, 327 | Luteolin-di-glycoside derivative | P |
| 5 | 9.9 | 269, 350 | 609 | 447, 357, 327 | Luteolin-6,8-di- | P |
| 6 | 10.2 | 269, 335 | 629 | 593 | Vicenin II derivative | P |
| 7 | 10.7 | - | 533 | 371 | 5′-Methoxy-demethylpiperitol-4- | P, J |
| 8 | 14.0 | 269, 349 | 579 | 489, 459, 399, 369 | Luteolin-(6- | P, J |
| 9 | 14.1 | 269, 337 | 563 | 503, 473, 443, 383, 353 | (6- | P |
| 10 | 14.3 | 271, 346 | 623 | 533, 503, 413, 383 | 4′-Methoxyluteolin -6,8-di- | P |
| 11 | 14.6 | 269, 337 | 563 | 473, 353 | Apigenin (6- | P, J |
| 12 | 14.7 | 270, 348 | 687 | 651,489, 327 | Luteolin-5- | P |
| 13 | 15.6 | 269, 335 | 593 | 503, 473, 413, 383 | Apigenin-6,8-di- | P, J |
| 14 | 16.2 | 269, 335 | 593 | 503, 473, 413, 383 | Vicenin II isomer | P, J |
| 15 | 16.8 | 270, 340 | 523 | 361 | Unknown di- glucosyl flavonoid | P, J |
| 16 | 17.5 | 269, 338 | 431 | 357, 311, 283 | Apigenin-8- | P |
| 17 | 18.0 | - | 611 | 593, 491, 429, 393, 369, 327 | Eriodictyol 6,8 di- | P |
| 18 | 18.3 | 270, 348 | 651 | 489, 327 | Luteolin-7- | P, J |
| 19 | 18.6 | 270, 349 | 447 | 285 | Luteolin-8- | P,J |
| 20 | 17.0 | 269, 338 | 635 | 473, 311 | Apigenin-5- | P, J |
| 21 | 20.2 | 270, 347 | 461 | 285, 216 | 4′-Methoxyluteolin-8- | P, J |
| 22 | 20.4 | 257, 361 | 317 | 300, 179, 151 | Myricetin * | P |
| 23 | 21.3 | 257, 361 | 631 | 479, 317 | Myricetin-3- | P |
| 24 | 24.5 | 270, 350 | 489 | 447, 327 | Luteolin-8- | P, J |
| 25 | 24.7 | 257, 361 | 691 | 631, 479, 335, 317, 273 | Myricetin-3- | P |
| 26 | 25.1 | 257, 361 | 331 | 315, 300, 179, 151 | Myricetin 3′ methyl ether | P |
| 27 | 25.7 | 269, 338 | 473 | 413, 311 | Apigenin-8- | P |
| 28 | 27.6 | 270, 335 | 713 | 677, 533, 451, 337 | Unknown | P |
| 29 | 28.4 | 270, 335 | 723 | 677, 533, 451, 337 | Unknown | P, J |
| 30 | 28.7 | 272, 330 | 857 | 501, 337 | Unknown | P |
| 31 | 29.1 | 269, 346 | 503 | 371, 341, 299 | 4′- Methoxyluteolin-8- | P, J |
Fruit part: P: peel, J: pulp and juice. * Identified by spiking experiments with a standard compound.
Figure 6Structures, fragmentation, full ESI-MS and MS-MS spectra of peaks 3, 5 and 8.
Figure 7Structures, fragmentation, full ESI-MS and MS-MS spectra of peaks 18, 20, and 13.