| Literature DB >> 31991890 |
Jose-Antonio López-Pastor1, Ascensión Martínez-Sánchez2,3, Juan Aznar-Poveda1, Antonio-Javier García-Sánchez1, Joan García-Haro1, Encarnación Aguayo2,3.
Abstract
Ascorbic Acid (AA) is a natural and powerful water-soluble antioxidant associated with long-lasting food products. As time passes, the AA content in products sharply decreases, and they become increasingly degraded. There are several techniques to precisely quantify AA concentrations. However, most of them employ costly laboratory instruments, such as High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) or complex electrochemical methods, which make unfeasible recurrent AA measurements along the entire supply chain. To address this issue, we contribute with an in-field and real-time voltammetric method, carried out with a low-cost, easy-to-use, and portable device. An unmodified Screen-Printed Electrode (SPE) is used together with the device to achieve short reading times. Our method has been extensively tested in two multifruit juices using three different SPEs. Calibration curves and Limit of Detection were derived for each SPE. Furthermore, periodic experiments were conducted to study the shelf life of juices under consideration. During the analysis, a set of assays for each SPE were implemented to determine the remaining AA amount per juice and compare it with that obtained using HPLC under the same conditions. Results revealed that our cost-effective device is fully comparable to the HPLC equipment, as long as the juice does not include certain interferents; a scenario also contemplated in this article.Entities:
Keywords: ascorbic acid; electrochemical sensing; multifruit juices; oxidation potential; portable low-cost potentiostat; unmodified screen-printed electrodes (SPE)
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31991890 PMCID: PMC7038320 DOI: 10.3390/s20030676
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1General overview of the device, and screen capture of the graphical user interface, including the plotting area of the cyclic voltammetry and the reading of ascorbic acid (AA) grams per 100 mL as a result of the analysis.
Figure 2Calibration results with five concentrations in triplicate employing linear regression in a range from 0.05 to 1 mM for (i) the original standard solution of AA in H2SO4 0.5 M and (ii) the solution adjusted to pH 3.5, for each screen-printed electrode (SPE): (a) DRP-110, (b) DRP-550, and (c) DRP-110CNT.
Figure 3Cyclic voltammetry response of (a) DRP-110 sensor, (b) DRP-550 and (c) DRP-110CNT for two different AA concentrations (0.5 mM and 1 mM).
Figure 4Comparison of the AA concentration achieved for each type of SPE using the proposed device and the HPLC equipment for the multifruit juices under study: orange, I (a and c); and red, II (b and d), for standard solutions at different pH. The x-axis represents the days of the analysis whereas the y-axis denotes the AA concentration.
Figure 5Linear correlation between the HPLC method and DRP-110 (a and d), DRP-550 (b and e), and DRP-110CNT (c and f) for juice I (up) and for juice II (down), for both standard solutions. The x-axis represents the AA concentration measured for each kind of SPE whereas the y-axis indicates the measurement employing the HPLC method.
Pearson Coefficient (r) and Root-mean-square deviation metric (RMSE) of the determination for each sensor with respect to the HPLC method employing both standard references.
| Multifruit juice I | Multifruit juice II | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| H2SO4 0.5 M | H2SO4 0.5 M |
| H2SO4 0.5 M | H2SO4 0.5 M | ||||
|
| Pearson Coeff. ( | RMSE | Pearson Coeff. ( | RMSE |
| Pearson Coeff. ( | RMSE | Pearson Coeff. ( | RMSE |
|
| 0.8806 | 3.5790 | 0.8806 | 2.3323 |
| 0.6826 | 6.2140 | 0.6826 | 6.506 |
|
| 0.9801 | 1.6442 | 0.9801 | 2.0016 |
| 0.8457 | 5.8858 | 0.8457 | 4.2524 |
|
| 0.9216 | 3.4315 | 0.9216 | 2.2786 |
| −0.0431 | 5.0622 | −0.0431 | 5.8018 |
AA interference study: quantity, oxidation peak, and total interference estimation (TIE) of each individual component of multifruit juices I and II.
| Portion | Orange juice | Grape juice | Mango nectar | Carrot juice | Apple juice | Pomeg-ranate juice (II) | Guavas juice | Blueberries juice (II) | Root-beet juice (II) | Black-berries juice (II) | Max | Oxidation Peak (V) | TIE (µA) | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 9.17 | 14.2 | 12.45 | 3.91 | 10.97 | 1.61 | 13 | 7.92 | 6.64 | 7.7 | 14.2 | * | * | Glucose, fructose, and linked flavonoids tested in lab. Additionally, see [ |
|
| 6 | 11 | 17 | 24 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 8 | 17 | 14 | 24 | * | * | [ |
|
| 10 | 10 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 14 | * | * | [ |
|
| 188 | 104 | 24 | 292 | 80 | 214 | 0 | 75 | 219 | 135 | 292 | * | * | [ |
|
| 30 | 25 | 15.2 | 8.5 | 30.4 | 0.1 | 24 | 4.2 | 3.8 | 11.3 | 30.4 | +0.4 | - | [ |
|
| 0 | 0.017 | 0.003 | 0.092 | 0 | 0.015 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.012 | 0.092 | +0.6 | 0.31 | [ |
|
| 0.028 | 0.015 | 0.003 | 0.055 | 0 | 0.05 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.018 | 0.055 | * | * | [ |
|
| 0.05 | 0.036 | 0.015 | 0.217 | 0 | 0.04 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.021 | 0.217 | * | * | [ |
|
| 0 | 0 | 35 | 956 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 956 | * | * | [ |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0.21 | 1.16 | 0 | 0.38 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.9 | 1.16 | * | * | [ |
|
| 0 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 15.5 | 0 | 10.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15.2 | 15.5 | * | * | [ |
|
| 0 | 5 | 402 | 9303 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 74 | 9303 | * | * | [ |
|
| 0 | 57 | 0 | 333 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 68 | 333 | * | * | [ |
1 Magnesium concentration is higher in multifruit juice I due to its artificial enrichment. 2 Vitamin C (AA) concentration is higher in multifruit juice II due to its artificial addition. * Oxidation peak too far from that of AA, negligible interference.
Figure 6Study of discrimination of the anthocyanins extracted from the multifruit juice II.