| Literature DB >> 26543665 |
P A Nimal Punyasiri1, Brasathe Jeganathan2, Jeevan Dananjaya Kottawa-Arachchi3, Mahasen A B Ranatunga3, I Sarath B Abeysinghe3, M T Kumudini Gunasekare4, B M Rathnayake Bandara5.
Abstract
Chemical analysis of the Sri Lankan tea (Camellia sinensis, L.) germplasm would immensely contribute to the success of the tea breeding programme. However, the polyphenols, particularly catechins (flavan-3-ols), are readily prone to oxidation in the conventional method of sample preparation. Therefore, optimization of the present sample preparation methodology for the profiling of metabolites is much important. Two sample preparation methodologies were compared, fresh leaves (as in the conventional procedures) and freeze-dried leaves (a new procedure), for quantification of major metabolites by employing two cultivars, one is known to be high quality black tea and the other low quality black tea. The amounts of major metabolites such as catechins, caffeine, gallic acid, and theobromine, recorded in the new sampling procedure via freeze-dried leaves, were significantly higher than those recorded in the conventional sample preparation procedure. Additionally new method required less amount of leaf sample for analysis of major metabolites and facilitates storage of samples until analysis. The freeze-dried method would be useful for high throughput analysis of large number of samples in shorter period without chemical deterioration starting from the point of harvest until usage. Hence, this method is more suitable for metabolite profiling of tea as well as other phenol rich plants.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26543665 PMCID: PMC4620427 DOI: 10.1155/2015/964341
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anal Methods Chem ISSN: 2090-8873 Impact factor: 2.193
Figure 1Steps of conventional and new sample preparation procedure for metabolite analysis of tea.
Comparison of dry matter % and the sample required for analysis of cultivars DT1 and TRI2025.
| Cultivars | Sample | Dry matter (%) | Sample required for analysis (g) |
|---|---|---|---|
| DT1 | Fresh | 20.38 | 5.00 |
| Freeze-dried | 91.18 | 0.20 | |
|
| |||
| TRI2025 | Fresh | 21.41 | 5.00 |
| Freeze-dried | 93.49 | 0.20 | |
Figure 2HPLC chromatogram of representative tea accession quantified using ISO: 14502-2 method.
Metabolite composition of tea flush of cultivars DT1 and TRI 2025 determined using two methods of sampling with fresh tea flush (conventional procedure) and freeze-dried tea flush (new procedure).
| Metabolites | DT1 (mg g−1) | TRI 2025 (mg g−1) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh | Freeze-dried |
| LSD | CV | Fresh | Freeze-dried |
| LSD | CV | |
| TPP†† | 266.49 ± 2.79 | 282.27 ± 3.77 |
| 3.56 | 1.21 | 266.33 ± 2.72 | 278.07 ± 3.54 |
| 3.39 | 1.16 |
| EC† | 15.88 ± 0.29 | 19.27 ± 0.27 |
| 0.48 | 1.59 | 6.27 ± 0.54 | 7.47 ± 0.41 |
| 0.82 | 6.9 |
| ECg† | 37.65 ± 1.22 | 41.43 ± 0.53 |
| 1.63 | 2.38 | 25.30 ± 1.45 | 30.71 ± 0.49 |
| 1.87 | 3.86 |
| EGC† | 33.99 ± 0.91 | 42.21 ± 0.56 |
| 1.31 | 1.99 | 17.54 ± 1.06 | 20.01 ± 0.92 |
| 1.72 | 5.28 |
| EGCg† | 84.00 ± 5.15 | 93.61 ± 1.14 |
| 6.45 | 4.20 | 104.17 ± 3.22 | 128.95 ± 2.33 |
| 4.87 | 2.41 |
| Caffeine† | 35.31 ± 1.36 | 38.67 ± 0.33 |
| 1.71 | 2.67 | 34.52 ± 0.13 | 41.71 ± 0.59 |
| 0.74 | 1.12 |
| Theobromine† | 2.17 ± 0.15 | 2.25 ± 0.02 | NS | 0.18 | 4.90 | 4.62 ± 0.32 | 5.89 ± 0.17 |
| 0.45 | 4.91 |
| Gallic acid† | 0.29 ± 0.01 | 0.55 ± 0.03 |
| 0.03 | 4.26 | 0.31 ± 0.01 | 0.83 ± 0.01 |
| 0.02 | 1.59 |
Means ± SD (n = 8), P: probability, significant at 5% level of probability, significant at 1% level of probability, NS: not significantly different, CV: coefficient of variance, LSD: Least Significant Difference, ††determined by ISO-14052-1 Spectrophotometric method, †determined by ISO-14052-2 HPLC method, and TPP: total polyphenols.