| Literature DB >> 28946701 |
Siti Nazirah Ismail1, M Maulidiani2, Muhammad Tayyab Akhtar3, Faridah Abas4,5, Intan Safinar Ismail6,7, Alfi Khatib8, Nor Azah Mohamad Ali9, Khozirah Shaari10,11.
Abstract
Gaharu (agarwood, Aquilaria malaccensis Lamk.) is a valuable tropical rainforest product traded internationally for its distinctive fragrance. It is not only popular as incense and in perfumery, but also favored in traditional medicine due to its sedative, carminative, cardioprotective and analgesic effects. The current study addresses the chemical differences and similarities between gaharu samples of different grades, obtained commercially, using ¹H-NMR-based metabolomics. Two classification models: partial least squares-discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) and Random Forests were developed to classify the gaharu samples on the basis of their chemical constituents. The gaharu samples could be reclassified into a 'high grade' group (samples A, B and D), characterized by high contents of kusunol, jinkohol, and 10-epi-γ-eudesmol; an 'intermediate grade' group (samples C, F and G), dominated by fatty acid and vanillic acid; and a 'low grade' group (sample E and H), which had higher contents of aquilarone derivatives and phenylethyl chromones. The results showed that ¹H- NMR-based metabolomics can be a potential method to grade the quality of gaharu samples on the basis of their chemical constituents.Entities:
Keywords: Aquilaria malaccensis; NMR-based metabolomics; PLS-DA; Random Forests classifier; gaharu; quality
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28946701 PMCID: PMC6151416 DOI: 10.3390/molecules22101612
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 11H-NMR spectra of eight groups (A-H) of A. malaccensis gaharu samples of different grades. Metabolites labeled with numbers were tentatively identified. The spectra are arranged according to the selling price of the gaharu samples, from grades A (the most expensive) through B, C, D, E, F, G to H (the cheapest), respectively.
Identified metabolites in the 1H-NMR spectra of (A. malaccensis) gaharu samples.
| Tentative Compound | Chemical Shifts |
|---|---|
| 6-Hydroxy-2-(2-phenylethyl)chromone ( | 8.09 (d, |
| 6-Hydroxy-2-[2-(4-hydroxyphenyl)ethyl]chromone ( | 7.98 (d, |
| Jinkohol ( | 2.01 (dd, |
| usunol ( | 5.32 (ddd, |
| α-Agarofuran ( | 5. 59 (s, H-3); 2.22 (dd, |
| 10-epi-γ-Eudesmol ( | 2.12 (d, |
| Isoeugenol ( | 7.09 (dd, |
| Vanillic acid ( | 3.94 (s, H-8); 6.92 (d, |
| Cinnamic acid ( | 7.60 (dd, |
| 2.29 (s, H-8); 6.82 (m, H-4, H-6); 7.14 (m, H-5); 7.20 (m, H-3) | |
| Xanthosine ( | 7.88 (s, H-7); 5.85 (d, |
| Catechol ( | 6.87 (m, H-4, H-5); 6.94 (m, H-3, H-6) |
| Fatty acid: ( | 1.28 (m) |
| Aquilarone derivatives ( | 4.72 (d, |
Figure 2(a) PLS-DA score plot and (b) Random Forests multidimensional scaling (MDS) plot for A. malaccensis gaharu samples of different grades.
Figure 3Loading plots corresponding to the PLS-DA score plot.
Confusion matrix for Random Forests in the classification of eight groups of A. malaccensis gaharu samples of different grades.
| Random Forests Class | Producer Accuracy | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | Total | Percent Correct | Omission Error (%) | ||
| Reference class | A | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 67 | 33 |
| B | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 50 | 50 | |
| C | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 83 | 17 | |
| D | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 50 | 50 | |
| E | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 100 | 0 | |
| F | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 83 | 17 | |
| G | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 50 | 50 | |
| H | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 100 | 0 | |
| Total | 6 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 48 | |||
| Users accuracy | ||||||||||||
| Percent correct | 67 | 43 | 83 | 50 | 100 | 71 | 75 | 100 | 72.92 | |||
| Commission error (%) | 33 | 57 | 17 | 50 | 0 | 29 | 25 | 0 | ||||
| Agreement | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 6 | 35 | |||
| By chance | 0.75 | 0.88 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.875 | 0.5 | 0.75 | 6.00 | |||
| Kappa | 0.69 | |||||||||||
Figure 4Variable importance (VIP) values for (a) high; (b) intermediate and (c) low grade clusters based on Random Forests.