| Literature DB >> 31067628 |
Ermes Lo Piccolo1, Ambra Viviani2, Lucia Guidi3,4, Damiano Remorini5,6, Rossano Massai7,8, Rodolfo Bernardi9,10, Marco Landi11.
Abstract
Ancient apple cultivars usually have higher nutraceutical value than commercial ones, but in most cases their variability in pomological traits does not allow us to discriminate among them. Fruit of two Tuscany ancient apple cultivars, 'Casciana' and 'Rotella', picked from eight different orchards (four for each cultivar) were analyzed for their pomological traits, organoleptic qualities, polyphenolic profile and antiradical activity. The effectiveness of a polyphenol-based cluster analysis was compared to molecular markers (internal transcribed spacers, ITS1 and ITS2) to unequivocally discern the two apples. 'Casciana' and 'Rotella' fruit had a higher nutraceutical value than some commercial cultivars, in terms of phenolic abundance, profile and total antiradical activity. Although pedo-climatic conditions of different orchards influenced the phenolic profile of both apples, the polyphenolic discriminant analysis clearly separated the two cultivars, principally due to higher amounts of procyanidin B2, procyanidin B3 and p-coumaroylquinic acid in 'Casciana' than in 'Rotella' fruit. These three polyphenols can be used proficiently as biochemical markers for distinguishing the two apples when pomological traits cannot. Conversely, ITS1 and ITS2 polymorphism did not allow us to distinguish 'Casciana' from 'Rotella' fruit. Overall, the use of polyphenolic fingerprint might represent a valid tool to ensure the traceability of products with a high economic value.Entities:
Keywords: ancient cultivars; antiradical activity; apple; cluster analysis; molecular marker; organoleptic quality; pomology
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31067628 PMCID: PMC6539648 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24091758
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Apple fruits: from ‘Rotella’ (A) and ‘Casciana’ (B).
Pomological and organoleptic characteristics of fruit of ‘Casciana’ and ‘Rotella’ apple cultivars. The first letter of the code of each sample is indicative of the cultivar, namely ‘Casciana’ (C) or ‘Rotella’ (R). Each value is the mean of eight (for weight and width) or three (for SSC and TA) replicates ± standard deviation. For each parameter, means flanked by the same letter are not significantly different after a one-way ANOVA test with accession as source of variability following an LSD test (P = 0.05).
| Parameter | Apple Code | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RKI | RBE | RFM | RFR | CMA | CBR | CGR | CPE | |
| Weight | 132.81 ± 15.79 a | 46.00 ± 3.42 f | 110.64 ± 6.54 c | 124.43 ± 6.04 b | 69.05 ± 10.58 e | 94.73 ± 5.16 d | 69.33 ± 5.24 e | 89.36 ± 5.26 d |
| Width min | 70.02 ± 3.48 a | 47.48 ± 3.14 d | 66.07 ± 2.14 ab | 66.67 ± 2.10 ab | 53.80 ± 2.47 c | 60.86 ± 2.95 b | 57.66 ± 3.16 bc | 60.01 ± 4.12 b |
| Width max | 74.93 ± 5.11 a | 55.08 ± 3.33 c | 71.26 ± 8.50 a | 71.11 ± 3.31 a | 57.50 ± 1.34 c | 64.46 ± 2.85 b | 55.31 ± 2.29 c | 68.22 ± 2.82 ab |
| SSC | 15.60 ± 0.68 | 17.20 ± 1.40 | 15.40 ± 0.58 | 17.70 ± 0.98 | 16.80 ± 1.56 | 16.60 ± 1.10 | 14.80 ± 0.67 | 17.70 ± 1.90 |
| Titratable acidity | 4.28 ± 0.27 c | 2.71 ± 0.32 d | 3.83 ±0.82 c | 4.50 ± 0.23 c | 6.86 ± 0.29 a | 5.79 ± 0.59 b | 3.85 ± 0.39 c | 3.92 ± 0.39 c |
Polyphenols profile (μg g−1 FW) of fruit of ‘Casciana’ and ‘Rotella’ apple cultivars. The first letter of the code of each sample is indicative of the cultivar, namely ’Casciana‘ (C) or ’Rotella‘ (R). Each value is the mean of three replicates ± standard deviation. For each phenol, means flanked by the same letter are not significantly different after a one-way ANOVA test with cultivars as source of variability following an LSD test (P = 0.05).
| Polyphenols | Apple Code | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RKI | RBE | RFM | RFR | CMA | CBR | CGR | CPE | |
|
| ||||||||
| Q-galactoside | 0.03 ± 0.005 c | 0.07 ± 0.01 b | 0.04 ± 0.005 c | 0.05 ± 0.01 c | 0.05 ± 0.005 c | 0.08 ± 0.004 b | 0.14 ± 0.02 a | 0.04 ± 0.01 c |
| Q-glucoside | 0.17 ± 0.01 b | 0.35 ± 0.08 ab | 0.27 ± 0.04 b | 0.44 ± 0.04 a | 0.29 ± 0.01 b | 0.36 ± 0.15 ab | 0.43 ± 0.07 a | 0.26 ± 0.05 b |
| Q-arabinopyranoside | 0.07 ±0.006 c | 0.14 ± 0.03 b | 0.14 ± 0.02 b | 0.20 ± 0.04 a | 0.11 ± 0.002 bc | 0.12 ± 0.03 bc | 0.19 ± 0.01 ab | 0.14 ± 0.06 b |
| Q-arabinofuranoside | 0.08 ± 0.008 c | 0.35 ± 0.01 a | 0.20 ± 0.02 b | 0.29 ± 0.03 ab | 0.16 ± 0.01 bc | 0.24 ± 0.12 b | 0.31 ± 0.02 ab | 0.17 ± 0.07 b |
| Q-rhamnoside | 0.49 ± 0.054 d | 1.94 ± 0.12 a | 0.87 ± 0.07 c | 1.40 ± 0.35 b | 0.85 ± 0.04 c | 0.88 ± 0.20 c | 1.10 ± 0.18 c | 1.26 ± 0.11 bc |
|
| 0.84 ± 0.06 e | 2.85 ± 0.22 a | 1.52 ± 0.15 cd | 2.38 ± 0.41 b | 1.46 ± 0.05 d | 1.68 ± 0.49 cd | 2.17 ± 0.27 bc | 1.87 ± 0.30 c |
|
| ||||||||
| Catechin | 37.07 ± 2.62 cd | 42.42 ± 0.89 c | 31.92 ± 7.57 d | 61.53 ± 6.93 b | 44.63 ± 2.27 c | 79.36 ± 6.42 a | 55.82 ± 11.06 bc | 46.09 ± 2.43 c |
| Epicatechin | 191.08 ± 39.88 c | 307.65 ± 13.09 b | 272.16 ± 29.17 b | 305.63 ± 10.26 b | 354.08 ± 28.82 ab | 336.45 ± 14.31 ab | 345.65 ± 35.30 ab | 361.40 ± 29.53 a |
| Procyanidin B1 | 5.47 ± 0.40 e | 6.99 ± 0.34 de | 6.01 ± 0.92 e | 9.39 ± 0.95 c | 7.55 ± 0.87 d | 13.11 ± 0.79 a | 10.72 ± 0.96 b | 9.91 ± 0.46 bc |
| Procyanidin B2 | 4.62 ± 0.17 e | 5.97 ± 0.21 d | 5.68 ± 1.12 de | 8.94 ± 0.40 c | 10.51 ± 0.92 b | 10.75 ± 0.64 b | 11.43 ± 1.50 b | 12.52 ± 0.18 a |
| Procyanidin B3 | 43.53 ± 3.53 e | 55.06 ± 2.41 d | 42.35 ± 3.70 e | 78.08 ± 9.45 c | 105.19 ± 6.36 b | 111.87 ± 7.04 b | 112.99 ± 14.93 ab | 123.93 ± 10.51 a |
| Procyanidin B4 | - | 1.03 ± 0.11 b | - | - | 0.72 ± 0.08 c | 1.30 ± 0.37 a | 1.11 ± 0.10 ab | 0.97 ± 0.01 b |
|
| 281.77 ± 35.03 d | 419.12 ± 13.96 b | 358.12 ± 41.02 c | 463.57 ± 9.26 b | 522.68 ± 31.97 a | 552,84 ± 26.42 a | 537.72 ± 60.36 a | 554.82 ± 39.53 a |
|
| ||||||||
| Phlor-xyl-glucose | 29.78 ± 7.35 | 40.34 ± 3.05 | 63.05 ± 26.89 | 46.69 ± 6.86 | 61.50 ± 3.56 | 44.64 ± 4.80 | 52.30 ± 25.58 | 45.59 ± 9.06 |
| Phloridzin | 7.35 ± 2.67 c | 21.35 ± 1.96 a | 15.58 ± 1.42 ab | 15.39 ± 8.11 b | 18.64 ± 4.25 ab | 21.31 ± 4.37 a | 16.17 ± 4.47 ab | 17.49 ± 3.94 ab |
|
| 37.13 ± 8.44 | 61.69 ± 4.98 | 78.63 ± 28.31 | 62.08 ± 14.91 | 80.14 ± 7.81 | 65.95 ± 9.17 | 68.47 ± 28.72 | 63.08 ± 12.67 |
|
| ||||||||
| Chlorogenic acid | 195.97 ± 13.84 d | 403.31 ± 10.80 a | 246.08 ± 20.94 c | 324.66 ± 42.79 b | 309.55 ± 51.13 b | 293.39 ± 12.96 b | 191.61 ± 20.97 d | 166.47 ± 13.33 d |
| Neochlorogenic acid | 7.20 ± 0.56 e | 6.78 ± 0.17 e | 17.96 ± 1.62 d | 19.05 ± 1.49 cd | 26.09 ± 1.21 a | 20.42 ± 0.93 c | 22.27 ± 0.38 b | 25.63 ± 2.77 a |
| Cryptochlorogenic acid | - | - | - | - | 0.71 ± 0.05 a | - | 0.32 ± 0.03 b | 0.34 ± 0.05 b |
| 1.05 ± 0.14 e | 2.00 ± 0.24 c | 2.51 ± 0.44 b | 1.31 ± 0.10 de | 2.23 ± 0.44 bc | 2.58 ± 0.19 b | 3.35 ± 0.23 a | 1.60 ± 0.05 d | |
| 64.96 ± 5.10 e | 27.52 ± 2.12 f | 80.82 ± 8.98 d | 86.21 ± 9.01 d | 154.50 ± 5.51 a | 138.28 ± 11.86 b | 131.00 ± 9.13 b | 118.79 ± 13.18 c | |
| Gallic acid | 0.03 ± 0.005 | 0.03 ± 0.01 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Caffeoyl glucoside | 0.10 ± 0.01 c | 0.93 ± 0.10 a | 0.25 ± 0.04 b | 0.16 ± 0.01 c | 0.22 ± 0.05 bc | 0.17 ± 0.01 c | 0.25 ± 0.02 b | 0.20 ± 0.02 bc |
| Protocatechuic acid | 0.04 ± 0.002 d | 0.06 ± 0.01 c | - | 0.06 ± 0.01 c | 0.05 ± 0.005 c | 0.10 ± 0.01 a | 0.08 ± 0.01 b | 0.07 ± 0.01 bc |
| Feruloyl glucose | 8.64 ± 0.90 d | 75.47 ± 6.61 a | 15.56 ± 1.91 c | 10.47 ± 2.18 d | 22.91 ± 3.88 b | 15.60 ± 1.11 c | 23.68 ± 2.46 b | 12.63 ± 0.21 cd |
|
| 277.97 ± 19.55 e | 516.10 ± 6.55 a | 363,18 ± 22.63 cd | 441.92 ± 53.28 b | 516.26 ± 48.26 a | 470.54 ± 3.72 b | 372.56 ± 28.43 c | 325,73 ± 6,64 d |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 2Antiradical activity determined by DPPH assay in the flesh of eight groups belonging to ‘Casciana’ and ‘Rotella’ ancient apple cultivars. Each value is the mean of three replicates ± standard deviation. The first letter of the code of each sample is indicative of the cultivar, namely ’Casciana‘ (C) or ’Rotella‘ (R). Bars with the same letter are not significantly different after a one-way ANOVA test with accession as source of variability following an LSD test (P = 0.05). TE: Trolox equivalent.
Correlation coefficients (r) between selected phenols and total antiradical activity of fruit of ‘Casciana’ and ‘Rotella’ apple accessions. Table only reports the phenols for which a significant correlation was found with the total antiradical activity (*: P < 0.05, **: P < 0.01; ***: P < 0.001).
| Phenol | Correlation |
|---|---|
| Caffeoyl glucoside | 0.61 ** |
| Chlorogenic acid | 0.58 ** |
| Epicatechin | 0.51 * |
| Feruloyl glucose | 0.66 *** |
| Q-arabinofuranoside | 0.68 *** |
| Q-rhamnoside | 0.58 ** |
Figure 3Heatmap visualization of the twenty-two phenolic compounds detected in the flesh of eight groups belonging to ‘Casciana’ and ‘Rotella’ ancient apple cultivars. The first letter of the code of each sample is indicative of the cultivar, namely ’Casciana‘ (C) or ’Rotella‘ (R). The intensity of different colors represents the phenol content (cyan = low content, red = high content). On the top side of the figure the hierarchical cluster is reported according to the phenolic profile of each group, by excluding flavonols.
Figure 4Electrophoresis of PCR colony screening of 10 colonies obtained after cloning the RFM amplified. In the right line the Marker ΦX174 DNA-HaeIII digest (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA).
Figure 5Molecular phylogenetic relationship between sequences of ‘Rotella’ and ‘Casciana’ nuclear ribosomal ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 and other sequences belonging to the genus Malus. The first letter of the code of each sample is indicative of the cultivar, namely ’Casciana’ (C) or ’Rotella’ (R). The taxa highlighted in bold are cultivar of Malus domestica. The evolutionary relationships were estimated by the statistical model Neighbor-Joining and the bootstrap was estimated with 1000 replications with the MEGA7 program. The sequence of Platanus acerifolia was used as outgroup. Asterisks represent a bootstrap of more than 70%.