We tested the susceptibility of 102 proanthocyanidin (PA)-rich plant extracts to oxidation under alkaline conditions and the possibility to produce chemically modified PAs via oxidation. Both the nonoxidized and the oxidized extracts were analyzed using group-specific ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography-diode array detection-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-DAD-MS/MS) methods capable of detecting procyanidin (PC) and prodelphinidin (PD) moieties along the two-dimensional (2D) chromatographic fingerprints of plant PAs. The results indicated different reactivities for PCs and PDs. When detected by UHPLC-DAD only, most of the PC-rich samples exhibited only a subtle change in their PA content, but the UHPLC-MS/MS quantitation showed that the decrease in the PC content varied by 0-100%. The main reaction route was concluded to be intramolecular. The PD-rich and galloylated PAs showed a different pattern with high reductions in the original PA content by both ultraviolet (UV) and MS/MS quantitation, accompanied by the shifted retention times of the chromatographic PA humps. In these samples, both intra- and intermolecular reactions were indicated.
We tested the susceptibility of 102 proanthocyanidin (PA)-rich plant extracts to oxidation under alkaline conditions and the possibility to produce chemically modified PAs via oxidation. Both the nonoxidized and the oxidized extracts were analyzed using group-specific ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography-diode array detection-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-DAD-MS/MS) methods capable of detecting procyanidin (PC) and prodelphinidin (PD) moieties along the two-dimensional (2D) chromatographic fingerprints of plant PAs. The results indicated different reactivities for PCs and PDs. When detected by UHPLC-DAD only, most of the PC-rich samples exhibited only a subtle change in their PA content, but the UHPLC-MS/MS quantitation showed that the decrease in the PC content varied by 0-100%. The main reaction route was concluded to be intramolecular. The PD-rich and galloylated PAs showed a different pattern with high reductions in the original PA content by both ultraviolet (UV) and MS/MS quantitation, accompanied by the shifted retention times of the chromatographic PA humps. In these samples, both intra- and intermolecular reactions were indicated.
Proanthocyanidins (PAs, syn. Condensed tannins) are oligomers and polymers
consisting of flavan-3-ol (Figure ) units and are
found almost in all plant families, both in woody and nonwoody plants.[1−3] The most common PAs are procyanidins (PCs) consisting of catechin and/or
epicatechin units, as well as prodelphinidins (PDs) consisting of gallocatechin and/or
epigallocatechin units. PAs are often mixtures of PCs and PDs, but they can also contain
rare monomers such as the propelargonidins that share afzelechin/epiafzelechin
subunits.[4] The subunits can be linked via C4 → C8 bonds or C4
→ C6 bonds (B-type PAs) or additionally via C2 → O → C7 or C2 →
O → C5 bonds (A-type PAs), thus increasing the potential number of oligomers and
polymers easily to several hundreds and even thousands.[2,4,5] The possible galloylation of
the subunits increases this complexity even further.[4]
Figure 1
Dimeric PA, prodelphinidin B3, consisting of the gallocatechin extension unit and the
catechin terminal unit.
Dimeric PA, prodelphinidin B3, consisting of the gallocatechin extension unit and the
catechin terminal unit.Currently, the estimated annual worldwide production of PAs is several 100
kilotons.[6−8] From this, majority is
extracted from a few resources only (barks and/or woods of wattle, mimosa, quebracho, oak,
chestnut, mangrove, sumach, myrabolans, tara, and several species of pines and firs), mainly
for the demands of leather tanning industry, wine industry, animal nutrition, and for some
other industrial uses such as mineral flotation and oil drilling.[8−10] Meanwhile, a substantial part of the residues from the handling and
processing of fruits, vegetables, and forest resources still comprises significant amounts
of the original plant materials and accordingly, natural compounds, such as PAs, can be
found in many of these leftovers.[11−14] In addition to the possible use of these
resources to extract tannins for the abovementioned industrial purposes, with some
additional processing steps, these residues could be transformed from low-value leftovers
into attractive high-value products, for example, as feedstock for the expanding markets in
the sustainable food and feed, cosmetic, and pharmaceutical industries.One possibility to increase the value of plant PAs is to modify the intact PAs via
oxidation, thereby producing new types of molecules with modified, hopefully enhanced
bioactivities. Our preliminary studies have indicated that for some PA sources, oxidation
increases the protein precipitation capacities (Engström et al. unpublished). The
oxidation reactions of flavan-3-ols and dimeric PAs are well known, and diverse oxidation
products have been characterized and their mechanisms of formation
proposed.[15−21]
However, although the oxidation reactions of oligomeric and polymeric PAs play an important
role in, for example, wood adhesive[13,22−25] and beverage
industries,[13,26−28] little is
known about these reactions and the resulting structural changes. This is mostly due to the
challenges in the analysis of the structurally diverse PAs in general, which becomes even
more complex after oxidation. Thus far, most detailed studies concerning PA oxidation have
utilized chemical depolymerization[29,30] and/or focused on the characterization of oxidation
markers[20,26,31,32] The results have indicated two main reaction
routes, intramolecular and intermolecular oxidation reactions; the main reaction route
depends on the PA characteristics and their concentration in the sample
oxidized.[17,26,27,29,33] These pioneering studies
have focused on specific PA sources, such as applePAs or the PAs involved in
wine-making.[20,26,27,33] However, the identification of the
reactivity of different types of PA sources, their possible reaction pathways, and the
resulting structural changes due to oxidation is needed to establish solid knowledge to
support the exploitation of various PA residues for possible applications.In the present study, we tested the effects of nonspecific alkaline oxidation mimicking the
often-used alkaline extraction process for bark waste[23,34−37] on 102
PA-containing plant extracts. Both the original and oxidized extracts were analyzed using
the Engström method.[38−40] The method produces
two-dimensional (2D) chromatographic PA fingerprints and provides both qualitative and
quantitative information on the PA content, the PD/PC share and the mean degree of
polymerization (mDP) of the samples, and how these are distributed along the chromatographic
hump typically produced by large PA oligomers and polymers. To our knowledge, this is the
first study to explore the oxidative modifications of the many PA sources with varying PA
compositions. In this initial screening step, we aimed at gaining a better understanding on
what types of PAs can tolerate these quite harsh conditions and, on the other hand, what new
types of PAs could be produced by this process and how these are related to the original PA
compositions of the plant samples.
From the preliminary screening of 300 plant samples, we found 102 samples to contain PC-
and PD-rich oligomers and polymers, resulting in a distinctive chromatographic hump at 280
nm and variable quantitative characteristics (PA content, PC/PD ratio, mDP). At this
stage, the relevance of the plant species to agricultural usage or human consumption was
not considered, but the focus was on the variability of quantitative measures. These 102
samples were taken forward to the oxidation tests at high pH. Based on the visual
observations of the ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography–diode array
detection (UHPLC–DAD) chromatograms and the integration of the total
chromatographic peak areas at 280 nm before and after oxidation (Figure S1, Supporting Information), we divided the 102 plant samples into
four different categories (Table ). These
categories were as follows: (A) nonmodified PAs without a clear loss (< 20%) of PA
concentration; (B) nonmodified PAs with a clear loss (≥ 20%) of PA concentration;
(C) modified PAs without a clear loss (< 20%) of PA concentration; and(D) modified PAs
with a clear loss (≥ 20%) of PA concentration. Herein, the word
“nonmodified” is used for samples where no shift in the retention time
window of the PA hump was observed. Examples of the PA chromatograms from each category
are presented in Figure . In category A samples,
as in Phoenix loureiroi leaflets (Figure A), the PA humps of the control and the oxidized samples were very
similar, both peak area wise and retention time wise. This indicated very little or no
changes in the PA structures and concentrations. A majority, 40 studied samples, belonged
to this category. Twenty of the studied samples, such as Coffea arabica
leaves (Figure B), belonged to category B. In
these samples, the peak area of the PA hump significantly decreased because of the
oxidation but did not change retention time wise. On the other hand, in categories C and
D, with 13 and 30 samples in each, respectively, the chromatographic PA humps moved to
later retention times. The difference between the two categories was that in the category
C samples, as in Newtonia buchananii leaflets (Figure
C), the peak area of the PA hump was the same (<20%
decrease) before and after oxidation, but in the category D samples, as in Aeonium
arboreum flowers (Figure D), the PA
hump areas significantly decreased (≥20%). These findings indicated high reactivity
and major structural changes, such as further polymerization reactions and other
rearrangements, in the PAs. Regarding the decrease in the PA hump area in B and D
categories, no precipitation was observed during the oxidation, and thus, the decrease in
the ultraviolet (UV) peak areas was mainly caused by the structural modifications
affecting the ability of the PAs to absorb light at 280 nm. Altogether, these
modifications agreed with the previous studies showing changes in the chromatographic
profiles of PAs during oxidation.[19,36,41] To better understand how the
reactivity/stability of the studied samples under alkaline conditions was reflected in the
original PA compositions and concentrations, we analyzed both the nonoxidized and the
oxidized samples by ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography triple-quadrupole mass
spectrometry (UHPLC–QqQ–MS/MS).
Table 1
Plant Species and Plant Parts Studied, their UV Categories, and Quantitative and
Qualitative Measures before and after Oxidation
no.
plant family and species
plant parts
UV category
aPA content (mg/g)
PD %
mDP
GPAs
Adoxaceae
1
Viburnum tinus
leaves
A
25 → 2
1 → 0
3 → 3
Apocynaceae
2
Mandevilla splendens
leaves
A
28 → 26
0 → 1
10 → 11
Araceae
3
Aglaonema commutatum var.maculatum
leaves
A
19 → 10
0 → 0
4 → 3
4
Aglaonema crispum
leaves
B
13 → 1
0 → 0
4 → 2
5
Aglaonema treubii
leaves
B
4 → 0
0 → ND
3 → ND
Araucariaceae
6
Araucaria bidwillii
leaves
D
4 → 0
67 → ND
23 → ND
7
Wollemia nobilis
needles
A
19 → 12
1 → 0
9 → 9
Asphodelaceae
8
Dianella ensifolia
leaves
D
4 → 0
50 → ND
12 → ND
9
Dianella intermedia
leaves
C
7 → 1
50 → 0
10 → 5
Balsaminaceae
10
Impatiens repens
flowers
D
15 → 5
59 → 27
12 → 8
Begoniaceae
11
Begonia bowerae ’Nigra’
leaves
A
15 → 9
1 → 0
3 → 3
Casuarinaceae
12
Allocasuarina campestris
needles
B
9 → 1
46 → 0
6 → 1
Cephalotaxaceae
13
Cephalotaxus harringtonia subsp. drupacea
leaflets
A
55 → 22
8 → 8
3 → 3
Combretaceae
14
Callisia gentlei var. elegans
leaves
C
20 → 1
92 → 65
10 → 8
15
Combretum bracteosum
leaves
B
11 → 1
0 → 0
4 → 3
16
Combretum indicum
leaves
B
4 → 1
0 → 0
3 → 4
Crassulaceae
17
Aeonium arboreum
flowers
D
16 → 0
93 → ND
17 → ND
x
18
Crassula ovata
leaves
D
6 → 0
89 → ND
37 → ND
x
19
Echeveria harmsii
leaves
D
21 → 0
87 → ND
21 → ND
x
20
Kalanchoë manginii
flowers
D
29 → 1
87 → 0
17 → 3
x
21
Pachyphytum hookeri
leaves
D
36 → 0
89 → ND
25 → ND
x
22
Sedum rubrotinctum
leaves
D
14 → 0
92 → ND
25 → ND
x
23
Villadia batesii
pieces
D
26 → 0
87 → ND
24 → ND
x
Cupressaceae
24
Cunninghamia lanceolata
leaves
A
51 → 34
1 → 1
4 → 4
25
Cupressus bakeri
branches
C
29 → 5
45 → 2
8 → 3
26
Sequoia sempervirens
branches
D
25 → 1
82 → 0
11 → 2
27
Tetraclinis articulata
pieces
D
14 → 4
46 → 8
7 → 3
Cyperaceae
28
Cyperus owanii
leaflets
A
19 → 9
6 → 0
6 → 6
29
Cyperus owanii
flowers
A
28 → 16
0 → 1
6 → 6
Davalliaceae
30
Davallia pyxidata
leaflets
C
19 → 3
12 → 0
7 → 10
Dicksoniaceae
31
Dicksonia squarrosa
leaflets
A
20 → 8
2 → 2
3 → 2
Dryopteridaceae
32
Cyrtomium falcatum
leaflets
D
15 → 1
72 → 16
9 → 10
33
Polystichum proliferum
leaves
A
44 → 25
1 → 2
13 → 13
Ebenaceae
34
Diospyros mespiliformis
leaves
D
14 → 3
61 → 13
8 → 3
x
Ericaceae
35
Rhododendron hemitrichotum
leaves
A
63 → 25
3 → 7
3 → 4
36
Rhododendron hemitrichotum
flowers
A
24 → 9
1 → 2
7 → 6
Euphorbiaceae
37
Euphorbia characias
leaves
B
7 → 1
3 → 0
7 → 4
38
Euphorbia characias
flowers
B
10 → 2
2 → 0
5 → 2
Fabaceae
39
Acacia karroo
leaves
D
35 → 0
96 → ND
10 → ND
x
40
Acacia melanoxylon
leaflets
C
47 → 8
56 → 4
8 → 4
x
41
Acacia victoriae
leaflets
D
23 → 3
91 → 66
12 → 6
x
42
Bauhinia variegata
leaves
A
11 → 4
5 → 0
5 → 6
43
Calliandra haematocephala
leaflets
D
24 → 4
83 → 72
9 → 6
x
44
Ceratonia siliqua
leaves
D
9 → 1
80 → 49
10 → 3
x
45
Mimosa polycarpa
leaflets
D
12 → 1
45 → 0
7 → 4
x
46
Newtonia buchananii
leaflets
C
68 → 1
88 → 0
4 → 2
x
Fagaceae
47
Quercus ilex
leaves
C
45 → 8
24 → 4
4 → 3
Geraniaceae
48
Pelargonium odoratissimum
leaves
B
19 → 0
86 → ND
10 → ND
Lauraceae
49
Apollonias barbujana
leaves
A
30 → 20
0 → 1
3 → 3
50
Laurus nobilis
leaves
A
12 → 6
0 → 0
2 → 2
Malvaceae
51
Heritiera solomonensis
leaves
A
76 → 50
0 → 1
7 → 7
52
Pavonia cauliflora
flowers
A
25 → 12
1 → 1
6 → 6
Marcgraviaceae
53
Marcgravia umbellata
leaves
A
29 → 13
0 → 2
3 → 3
Melastomataceae
54
Medinilla magnifica
leaves
D
5 → 0
71 → ND
9 → ND
Moraceae
55
Artocarpus sp.
leaves
A
15 → 3
0 → 0
2 → 4
Myrtaceae
56
Acca sellowiana
leaves
B
18 → 4
9 → 0
4 → 2
57
Callistemon citrinus
leaves
B
6 → 0
3 → ND
2 → ND
58
Melaleuca squarrosa
leaves
B
8 → 3
32 → 0
6 → 2
59
Myrtus communis
leaves
B
4 → 0
70 → ND
6 → ND
60
Psidium cattleianum
leaves
B
17 → 2
27 → 0
4 → 2
61
Psidium cattleianum
leaflets
A
33 → 20
17 → 6
5 → 4
Nepenthaceae
62
Nepenthes maxima
leaves
C
22 → 6
2 → 5
4 → 3
x
63
Nepenthes maxima
pitcher
C
32 → 5
2 → 6
4 → 3
x
Oxalidaceae
64
Biophytum sensitivum
leaves
B
45 → 23
0 → 1
7 → 6
Phyllanthaceae
65
Phyllanthus juglandifolius/grandifolius
leaves
C
25 → 3
82 → 21
4 → 2
Podocarpaceae
66
Podocarpus macrophyllus
leaves
C
27 → 2
73 → 0
6 → 2
Polygonaceae
67
Coccoloba uvifera
leaves
D
24 → 9
14 → 3
6 → 4
x
68
Microgramma mauritiana
leaflets
A
35 → 6
1 → 4
10 → 10
69
Microgramma vacciniifolia
leaves
B
11 → 2
0 → 0
4 → 3
70
Ruprechtia salicifolia
leaves
D
24 → 4
3 → 5
7 → 4
x
Portulacaceae
71
Portulaca alata
leaves
A
10 → 9
1 → 0
12 → 14
Primulaceae
72
Aegiceras corniculatum
leaves
D
9 → 2
88 → 88
8 → 3
x
73
Ardisia crenata
leaves
D
13 → 0
82 → ND
12 → ND
x
74
Cyclamen africanum
leaves
C
10 → 3
6 → 0
8 → 7
Pteridaceae
75
Pellaea ovata
pieces
D
47 → 2
85 → 6
9 → 8
76
Pellaea ovata
leaflets
D
31 → 1
77 → 0
7 → 5
Rhizophoraceae
77
Rhizophora mangle
leaves
A
35 → 9
4 → 3
6 → 6
Rosaceae
78
Eriobotrya japonica
leaves
A
15 → 6
0 → 0
5 → 5
79
Osteomeles schwerinae
leaves
A
37 → 17
1 → 1
8 → 8
80
Osteomeles schweriniae
flowers
A
7 → 7
0 → 0
9 → 9
81
Rhaphiolepis indica var. umbellata
leaves
A
47 → 15
1 → 2
5 → 5
Rubiaceae
82
Coffea arabica
leaves
B
43 → 8
0 → 1
10 → 9
83
Hoffmannia refulgens
leaves
A
41 → 15
0 → 1
5 → 5
84
Ixora coccinea
leaves
A
31 → 19
1 → 1
6 → 5
85
Ixora coccinea
flowers
B
16 → 10
0 → 0
7 → 6
Sapindaceae
86
Dimocarpus longan
leaves
A
28 → 12
0 → 1
3 → 3
87
Nephelium connatum
leaves
C
30 → 9
93 → 86
8 → 7
Sapotaceae
88
Sideroxylon inerme
leaves
D
37 → 0
96 → ND
8 → ND
x
Sarraceniaceae
89
Sarracenia purpurea
leaves
A
29 → 18
3 → 2
8 → 7
Strelitziaceae
90
Strelitzia reginae
leaves
A
9 → 6
0 → 0
5 → 5
91
Strelitzia reginae
flowers
A
11 → 7
1 → 0
8 → 8
Tectariaceae
92
Tectaria macrodonta
leaflets
B
9 → 4
0 → 0
5 → 4
Theaceae
93
Camellia japonica
leaves
A
15 → 2
1 → 0
2 → 3
94
Camellia japonica
petals
A
18 → 10
1 → 2
3 → 3
Vitaceae
95
Cissus javana
leaves
D
22 → 2
80 → 60
17 → 10
x
96
Leea guineense
leaves
D
32 → 11
45 → 12
9 → 5
x
97
Rhoicissus sp.
leaves
D
9 → 0
71 → ND
10 → ND
x
Zamiaceae
98
Encephalartos ferox
leaflets
B
21 → 13
0 → 0
9 → 9
99
Macrozamia communis
leaflets
A
41 → 30
1 → 1
9 → 9
100
Zamia furfuracea
leaves
A
15 → 3
0 → 0
4 → 4
Zingiberaceae
101
Alpinia purpurata
leaves
A
34 → 17
0 → 1
7 → 7
102
Elettaria cardamomun
leaflets
A
21 → 8
0 → 2
5 → 5
PA = proanthocyanidin, PD = prodelphinidin, mDP = mean degree of polymerization,
GPAs = galloylated PAs, ND = not detected. The quantitative measures are expressed
as before oxidation → after oxidation. Based on the changes in
UHPLC–DAD profiles, the UV categories were as follows: A = nonmodified PAs
without a loss in the PA hump area; B = nonmodified PAs with a loss in the PA hump
area; C = modified PAs without a loss in the PA hump area; and D = modified PAs with
a loss in the PA hump area.
Figure 2
Examples of the UHPLC–DAD profiles (λ = 280 nm) before and after the
oxidation of PA containing plant samples from the four categories: (A) nonmodified PAs
without a clear loss of PA concentration in the Heritiera
solomonensis leaves (51), (B) nonmodified PAs with a clear loss of PA
concentration in Coffea arabica leaves (82), (C) modified PAs without
a clear loss of PA concentration in the Newtonia buchananii leaflets
(46), and(D) modified PAs with a clear loss of PA concentration in Aeonium
arboreum flowers (17). The upper panels show the nonoxidized samples, and
the lower panels show the oxidized samples. Sample numbers refer to Table .
Examples of the UHPLC–DAD profiles (λ = 280 nm) before and after the
oxidation of PA containing plant samples from the four categories: (A) nonmodified PAs
without a clear loss of PA concentration in the Heritiera
solomonensis leaves (51), (B) nonmodified PAs with a clear loss of PA
concentration in Coffea arabica leaves (82), (C) modified PAs without
a clear loss of PA concentration in the Newtonia buchananii leaflets
(46), and(D) modified PAs with a clear loss of PA concentration in Aeonium
arboreum flowers (17). The upper panels show the nonoxidized samples, and
the lower panels show the oxidized samples. Sample numbers refer to Table .PA = proanthocyanidin, PD = prodelphinidin, mDP = mean degree of polymerization,
GPAs = galloylated PAs, ND = not detected. The quantitative measures are expressed
as before oxidation → after oxidation. Based on the changes in
UHPLC–DAD profiles, the UV categories were as follows: A = nonmodified PAs
without a loss in the PA hump area; B = nonmodified PAs with a loss in the PA hump
area; C = modified PAs without a loss in the PA hump area; and D = modified PAs with
a loss in the PA hump area.
Oxidation-Driven Changes across the Four Categories
To reveal possible qualitative and quantitative changes in the PA composition caused by
oxidation, the samples were analyzed with the Engström method[38−40] that allowed the quantitation of the PA content, the PC/PD ratio, and
the mDP before and after oxidation (Table ). In
addition, the Engström method revealed a qualitative confirmation of whether the
samples contained galloylated PAs or not (Table ). First, when comparing the results from the UHPLC–DAD chromatograms and
the quantitative MS/MS data for all the 102 samples, it was seen that due to oxidation,
the PA content of all the samples but three decreased more than 25%, while the changes in
the UV peak areas were versatile, and the correlation between the two measures was small
(R2 = 0.29). Thus, in contrast to the UHPLC–DAD chromatograms, the
MS/MS results indicated reactivity under alkaline conditions for most of the studied
samples. Otherwise, comparisons between the different measures (UV peak area, PA content,
PD% and mDP) showed strong positive correlations between the UV peak area before and after
oxidation (R2 = 0.61), medium positive correlations between the original PD%
and the percentage decrease in the PA content (R2 = 0.43), the original PA
content and the PA content after oxidation (R2 = 0.42), and the original PD%
and the original mDP (R2 = 0.35). Small positive correlations were obtained
between the original PD% and percentage decrease in the UV peak area (R2 =
0.21) and between the original mDP and the percentage decrease in the UV peak area
(R2 = 0.17). No significant correlations were seen between the original mDP
and the original PA content, the original mDP and the percentage decrease in the PA
content, the original PA content and the percentage decrease in the PA content, and the
original PA content and the percentage decrease in the UV peak area (R2 <
0.1 for all comparisons). The correlation plots are presented in Figure S2 in the Supporting Information.As suggested before,[36,42] to some extent, these quantitative findings and correlations indicated
higher reactivity for PD-rich than PC-rich PAs under alkaline conditions. The strong and
medium positive correlations between the UV peak areas before and after oxidation and the
PA contents by MS/MS before and after oxidation, respectively, suggested that the
oxidation reaction was rather controlled in many of the samples. In addition, lower
average decrease in the UV peak areas vs quantitative MS/MS levels and higher correlation
between the UV peak areas before and after oxidation vs the PA content by MS/MS before and
after oxidation were observed. The MS/MS method utilized in the work, that is, the
Engström method, is based on the fragmentation of PC and PD units from the PA
structures via quinone methide fragmentation.[38,40] Thus, the results indicated that the structural changes
caused by the oxidative reactions were such that the UV absorbance of the PAs was less and
more homogenously affected than the quinone methide fragmentation of the PC and PD units
from the oxidized PA structures in MS/MS. To further understand the
reactivities/stabilities of the studied samples and the differences between the different
categories, next, the results were compared between the categories and within each
category.
Oxidation-Driven Changes in Category A Samples
In general, the average decrease in the quantitative MS/MS levels because of oxidation
increased from category A to category D (A: -50%, B: -78%, C: −84%, and D:
−91%) and so did the average PD percentage before oxidation (A: 2%, B: 15%, C: 48%,
and D: 72%) and mDP before oxidation (A: 6, B: 6, C: 7, and D: 12). The most obvious
finding was that all the samples in category A were PC-rich, almost PC-pure samples; the
average PD % of the 40 samples being 2%. In addition, in most of the samples in this
category, the mDP was the same before and after oxidation; in a few samples in which mDP
changed, the increase or decrease was maximum two mDP units. The UV peak areas decreased
less than 20% in all the samples in category A (on average 9%), indicating low reactivity
or reactions that did not significantly affect the ability of the PAs to absorb light at
280 nm. In contrast, the decrease in the quantitative MS/MS results varied between 0 and
92% (on average 50%), indicating rather high reactivity and modifications that disabled
the fragmentation of PC and PD units via quinone methide fragmentation in many of the
samples. Accordingly, the correlation between the decrease in the UV peak areas and the
decrease in the quantitative MS/MS levels was small (R2 = 0.15). Because of the
low decrease rates of the PA humps in the UHPLC–DAD chromatograms, the UV peak
areas before and after oxidation correlated well (R2 = 0.98). Interestingly,
there was a strong positive correlation also between the PA content before and after
oxidation (R2 = 0.69), but the percentage decrease did not correlate with the
original PA content (R2 = 0.00). This suggests that oxidation was rather
controlled in a way that the more the PAs were present in the original samples, the more
PAs were detected after oxidation in most of the category A samples. In addition, there
was a small negative correlation (R2 = 0.25) between the original mDP and a
decrease in the quantitative MS/MS results, indicating that high mDP samples had slightly
more unmodified units present in their structures after oxidation than low mDP samples.
All the correlation plots are presented in Figure S3 in the Supporting Information.Figure A–F shows examples of different
types of UHPLC–MS/MS fingerprints before and after oxidation in category A. Some of
the UHPLC–MS/MS fingerprints were almost identical before and after oxidation
(e.g., Figure A,B), and the quantitative
measures were unchanged; in these samples, the possibility of unsuccessful oxidation could
be ruled out by the oxidation profiles of quinic acid derivatives.[37]
This indicated high stability for PCs in these samples under alkaline conditions. However,
such samples were only a few, and in most of the category A samples, the
UHPLC–MS/MS fingerprints were similar, but the intensity dropped or the intensity
dropped and the shape changed, and/or a small shift was seen in the UHPLC–MS/MS
fingerprints (e.g. Figure C,F). Interestingly,
also in these samples, the mDP remained rather unmodified. This could be achieved in two
ways: either the percentage decrease in both the extension and terminal units was the
same, or alternatively, in comparison to the original PAs, both longer and shorter
oligomers and polymers were formed with no percentual decrease in the detected units. To
make a difference between the two possibilities, we compared the multiple reaction
monitoring (MRM) detection of both the extension and terminal units separately. This
confirmed that the percentage decrease in the MRM detection of the extension and terminal
units of category A samples were very similar in most of the samples (R2 =
0.85, Figure S3, Supporting Information). The few outliers with greater percentage
decrease in the extension units were samples in which the mDP decreased by one or two
units (Table ), and the few outliers with
greater decrease in the terminal units were such samples in which the mDP increased by one
or two units (Table ). As the mDP was higher
than two in most of the category A samples, it means that, on average, the extension units
were more probable to react than the terminal units.
Figure 3
Examples of UHPLC–DAD–MS/MS fingerprints of the studied plant samples
in categories A and B before and after oxidation obtained using the Engström
method. The solid red lines are PC units detected before oxidation, red dashed lines
are PC units detected after oxidation, solid blue lines are PD units detected before
oxidation, and blue dashed lines are PD units detected after oxidation. Shown plant
species are as follows: (A) Mandevilla splendens leaves (2), (B)
Osteomeles schweriniae flowers (80), (C) Pavonia
cauliflora flowers (52), (D) Alpinia purpurata leaves
(101), (E) Polystichum proliferum leaves (33), (F) Camellia
japonica leaves (93), (G) Encephalartos ferox leaflets
(98), (H) Aglaonema crispum leaves (4), (I) Coffea
arabica leaves (82), (J) Acca sellowiana leaves (56), (K)
Psidium cattleianum leaves (60), and(L) Pelargonium
odoratissimum leaves (48). The sample numbers refer to Table .
Examples of UHPLC–DAD–MS/MS fingerprints of the studied plant samples
in categories A and B before and after oxidation obtained using the Engström
method. The solid red lines are PC units detected before oxidation, red dashed lines
are PC units detected after oxidation, solid blue lines are PD units detected before
oxidation, and blue dashed lines are PD units detected after oxidation. Shown plant
species are as follows: (A) Mandevilla splendens leaves (2), (B)
Osteomeles schweriniae flowers (80), (C) Pavonia
cauliflora flowers (52), (D) Alpinia purpurata leaves
(101), (E) Polystichum proliferum leaves (33), (F) Camellia
japonica leaves (93), (G) Encephalartos ferox leaflets
(98), (H) Aglaonema crispum leaves (4), (I) Coffea
arabica leaves (82), (J) Acca sellowiana leaves (56), (K)
Psidium cattleianum leaves (60), and(L) Pelargonium
odoratissimum leaves (48). The sample numbers refer to Table .The Engström method also enabled to compare if there was a difference between the
average reactivity of the small oligomers, medium-size oligomers and polymers, and large
polymers by comparing separately the change in the detection of the small oligomers,
medium-size oligomers and polymers, and large polymers obtained by the three different
cone voltages of the method, 75, 85, and 140 V for the PC units and 55, 80, and 130 V for
the PD units, respectively. In category A, there was a small difference between the
decrease in the detection with the lowest and highest cone voltage; the detection with the
highest cone voltage decreased 4% more on average, while the correlation between the
decrease in the quantitative MS/MS results was strong (R2 = 0.96, Figure S3, Supporting Information). This indicated slightly higher
reactivity for the larger oligomers and polymers than that for the smaller oligomers.
Altogether, in the category A samples, none of the obtained parameters (PA, content, PD
share, and mDP) adequately explained the differences in the reactivities of the studied
samples. However, based on the UV profiles before and after oxidation, the reaction routes
were most likely similar in the category A samples.
Oxidation-Driven Changes in Category B Samples
In category B, all but two of the samples were PC-rich (Table ). The decreases in the UV peak areas were versatile, varying
between 21 and 96% (on average 45%), while the decreases in the PA content by MS/MS varied
between 38 and 100% (on average 78%), and there was a medium positive correlation between
the two measures (R2 = 0.32). The main differences in comparison to the
category A samples were that the UV peak areas decreased more and so did the quantitative
MS/MS results. In addition, the changes in the mDPs were more variable than in category A;
in some samples, the mDP was the same before and after oxidation, while in other samples,
the mDP decreased by one to five mDP units. In one sample, the mDP increased by one unit
because of oxidation. Notably, all the samples with any PDs detected were such that the
mDP decreased by at least two units, and the decrease in the quantitative MS/MS level was
greater than 60%; this indicated a somewhat triggered reactivity for the PD-containing
samples. In the PC-pure samples, the variation in reactivity was higher, and while the
decrease in the UV peak area varied between 22 and 88%, the decrease in the quantitative
MS/MS levels varied between 38 and 92%. The correlation between the PA contents before and
after oxidation was strong (R2 = 0.62) and so was the correlation between the
UV peak areas before and after oxidation (R = 0.67), a few outliers causing most of the
variation. Again, this indicated a somewhat controlled oxidation reaction in most of the
samples. There was a small negative correlation between the original PA content and the
percentage decrease in the PA content (R2 = 0.14). The correlation between the
original mDP and the decrease in the PA content was smaller (R2 = 0.11) than
that in the category A samples. All the correlations presented above are presented in
Figure S4 in the Supporting Information.Examples of the qualitative MRM fingerprints from the category B samples are presented in
Figure G,L. As expected, because of the rather
artificial category threshold value, some fingerprints were both visually and
quantitatively very similar to category A fingerprints (e.g., Figure
G). In other samples, the peak areas of the MRM fingerprints
decreased markedly, but the shapes and the retention time windows were the same (e.g.,
Figure H,I). In samples with PDs present, the
MS/MS levels decreased markedly: no PDs were detected after oxidation, and the shape of
the PC fingerprints changed (e.g., Figure J,K).
The change in the shape was caused by the greater decrease in the parts of the PC
fingerprints where PDs were overlapping before oxidation; this further supported the
higher reactivity of the PD units and also indicated that the PCs were more susceptible to
modifications if PDs were present in the PA structure. In most extreme samples, no PAs
were detected after oxidation (e.g., Figure L).
When comparing the decrease in the extension and terminal units separately, it was noted
that the correlation between them was weaker (R2 = 0.53, Figure S4, Supporting Information) than that in the category A samples,
reflecting larger decreases in the mDPs. Regarding detection with different cone voltages,
detection with a high cone voltage decreased in average 8% more than detection with a low
cone voltage. The correlation between the two measures was smaller than that in category A
but was still strong (R2 = 0.89, Figure S4, Supporting Information). Interestingly, the largest differences
in the decrease in detection with the low and high cone voltages were for the PC units (a
13% average difference) in the PD-containing samples. The difference was smaller for the
PC-pure samples (a 6% average difference) and for the detection of the PD units (a 6%
average difference). Furthermore, in samples where both PC and PD units were detected, the
decrease of the PD units was larger than the decrease of the PC units. Altogether, these
findings further supported the higher oxidative activity PDs but, in addition, indicated
an induced reactivity by the PD units in samples with both PCs and PDs present.
Oxidation-Driven Changes in Category C and D Samples
Based on the UHPLC–DAD chromatograms, categories C and D were very different in
comparison to categories A and B: in categories C and D, the chromatographic PA humps of
the samples eluted later, and the shapes of the humps were modified because of oxidation.
The magnitude of both the change in the elution time and the change in the shape of the
hump was significant: in some samples, the middle of the hump shifted only with a
retention time of 0.2 min to the right, while in most extreme samples, the middle of the
hump shifted with a retention time of 2.3 min, and part of the hump eluted after the
actual gradient during the column wash. In general, category D contained more samples with
large shifts in retention times than category C; however, this property could not be
linked solely to either category.As noted already between categories A and B, because of the 20% threshold value used,
overlapping was detected in categories C and D regarding the quantitative MS/MS data. All
the samples in categories C and D contained PDs, although the PD share varied in category
C from 2 to 93% (average 48%) and in category D between 3 and 96% (average 72%). In both C
and D categories, the decrease in the quantitative MS/MS levels was high because of
oxidation, on average, 84 and 91%, respectively, and the correlations with the decrease in
the UV peak areas were small (R2 = 0.05 and 0.22, respectively). In addition,
while there was a strong correlation between the PA content before and after oxidation in
categories A and B, in C and D categories, no correlation was observed (R2 =
0.07 and R2 = 0.05, respectively). Together, these findings indicated such
oxidation reactions for categories C and D that most of the oxidation products were no
longer detected with the Engström method.[38] Regarding the
detected UV peak areas at 280 nm before and after oxidation, in category C, the
correlation was naturally strong (R2 = 0.82) as the changes in the peak areas
were subtle. In category D, the correlation was smaller but was still strong
(R2 = 0.64). Thus, in contrast to the MS/MS results, this supported somewhat
controlled oxidation reactions to occur. In most of the samples, the detected mDP
decreased, by two mDP units in category C and by seven mDP units in category D on average,
indicating that many of the structural units participated in the reactions and that the
extension units reacted more than the terminal units. The changes in the detection of the
extension and terminal units separately and/or differences in detection by the low versus
high cone voltage explained the decreases in the mDPs and confirmed the higher reactivity
of the extension units. Also, the observation made with a few samples in category B
containing both the PC and PD units was confirmed; the PD units decreased always more than
the PC units, and when the PD units were in majority, the decrease in the PC units was
higher than that if PCs were in majority. All the correlations discussed above are
presented in Figure S5 in the Supporting Information.Some UHPLC–MS/MS fingerprints from the category C and D samples are presented in
Figure . These show the high decrease of both
PDs and PCs in samples with a high PD share (Figure A,C,F,G,H,K). On the other hand, if the PD and PC shares were close to equal or
PCs were in majority, the PCs decreased less (Figure B,D,E,I,J,L). As can be seen from the UHPLC–MS/MS fingerprints shown in
Figure , the shifts were subtle in many of the
samples and indeed, when plotted against the UV hump before and after oxidation, it was
evident that in most of the samples, the UHPLC–MS/MS fingerprint only overlapped
with the earlier parts of the UV hump after oxidation, indicating that other PA units than
PCs and PDs were present in the oxidized samples. Interestingly, in the same samples, the
intensities of the full-scan total ion chromatograms were low, and similarly to the
UHPLC–MS/MS fingerprints, they only partially overlapped with the earlier parts of
the UV hump, indicating low ionization. We have previously observed the same partial
detection of the UV hump with the UHPLC–MS/MS fingerprint for unoxidized samples
with a high degree of polymerization; when the mDP is high enough, the fragmentation and
ionization of the largest polymers are attenuated, and, in general, this has been linked
with the late retention times (data not shown). Thus, in addition to the structural
changes in the PAs disabling their detection with the MS/MS method, the results indicated
that the size of the PApolymers was increased; therefore, the fragmentation, ionization,
and detection of the oxidized PAs were hampered. Interestingly, the same was not observed
in the category A and B samples; even in samples with 90–100% decrease in the
quantitative MS/MS levels, the total ion chromatograms showed clear signal humps
accordingly to the UV hump. Again, this indicated different reaction routes to be dominant
in categories A and B than in categories C and D.
Figure 4
Some examples of the modified UHPLC–DAD–MS/MS fingerprints of polymeric
PA extracts before and after oxidation and their combined patterns obtained using the
Engström method. The solid red lines are the nonoxidized PC units, the red
dashed lines are the oxidized PC units, the solid blue lines are the nonoxidized
prodelphinidin (PD) units, and the blue dashed lines are the oxidized PD units. Shown
plant species are as follows: (A) Callisia gentlei leaves (14), (B)
Acacia melanoxylon leaflets (40), (C) Newtonia
buchananii leaflets (46), (D) Nepenthes maxima pitcher
(63), (E) Cyclamen africanum leaves (74), (F) Nephelium
connatum leaves (87), (G) Aeonium arboretum flowers (17),
(H) Kalanchoë manginii flowers (20), (I) Tetraclinis
articulate pieces (27), (J) Diospyros mespiliformis leaves
(34), (K) Cissus javana leaves (95), and(L) Leea
guineense leaves (96) . The sample numbers refer to Table
.
Some examples of the modified UHPLC–DAD–MS/MS fingerprints of polymeric
PA extracts before and after oxidation and their combined patterns obtained using the
Engström method. The solid red lines are the nonoxidized PC units, the red
dashed lines are the oxidized PC units, the solid blue lines are the nonoxidized
prodelphinidin (PD) units, and the blue dashed lines are the oxidized PD units. Shown
plant species are as follows: (A) Callisia gentlei leaves (14), (B)
Acacia melanoxylon leaflets (40), (C) Newtonia
buchananii leaflets (46), (D) Nepenthes maxima pitcher
(63), (E) Cyclamen africanum leaves (74), (F) Nephelium
connatum leaves (87), (G) Aeonium arboretum flowers (17),
(H) Kalanchoë manginii flowers (20), (I) Tetraclinis
articulate pieces (27), (J) Diospyros mespiliformis leaves
(34), (K) Cissus javana leaves (95), and(L) Leea
guineense leaves (96) . The sample numbers refer to Table
.
Effect of Galloylation
Based on the detection with the galloyl-specific MS/MS method, among the 102 samples
studied, 25 samples contained galloylated PAs among which 21 were PD-rich and four were
PC-rich. Interestingly, all these samples belonged to categories C and D; four samples
belonged to category C, and 21 samples belonged to category D. Figure
shows the galloyl fingerprints before and after oxidation
for the samples with galloylated PAs. In all the 25 galloylated samples, a general
observation was that the galloyl fingerprint shifted to the right retention time wise, and
the shape of the galloyl fingerprint changed markedly because of oxidation. In samples
where a PA fingerprint was observed after oxidation, the galloyl fingerprint overlapped
with the PA fingerprint and the UV hump. Most interestingly, even if no PAs were detected
by the PC- and PD-specific MS/MS method after oxidation, a clear galloyl hump was detected
with the galloyl-specific MS/MS method, and it had shifted accordingly to the observed UV
hump. Thus, the original galloylated PAs were modified in ways that the galloyl groups
could still be fragmented and detected by MS/MS, although the PC and PD units were not
detected, that is, the quinone methide fragmentation route was disabled because of
structural changes. The high decrease in both the UV peak areas and the MS/MS levels
agreed with previous studies showing higher oxidation rates for galloylated PAs than for
nongalloylated PAs.[43−45] Interestingly, while the
additional galloyl group increases the reactivity, studies with the monomeric PA units
have shown that the principal site of oxidation is not the 3-galloyl group but the
trihydroxyphenyl B-ring.[44] This could explain why, in the present
study, the galloyl fingerprints were detected although oxidized PAs were not detected with
the Engström method.
Figure 5
UHPLC–MS/MS galloyl fingerprints obtained before (red line) and after (blue
line) oxidation using the Engström method for (A) Acacia
melanoxylon leaflets (40), (B) Newtonia buchananii
leaflets (46), (C) Nepenthes maxima pitcher (63), (D) Aeonium
arboretum flowers (17), (E) Kalanchoë manginii
flowers (20), (F) Diospyros mespiliformis leaves (34), (G)
Cissus javana leaves (95), and (H) Leea guineense
leaves (96). The sample numbers refer to Table .
UHPLC–MS/MS galloyl fingerprints obtained before (red line) and after (blue
line) oxidation using the Engström method for (A) Acacia
melanoxylon leaflets (40), (B) Newtonia buchananii
leaflets (46), (C) Nepenthes maxima pitcher (63), (D) Aeonium
arboretum flowers (17), (E) Kalanchoë manginii
flowers (20), (F) Diospyros mespiliformis leaves (34), (G)
Cissus javana leaves (95), and (H) Leea guineense
leaves (96). The sample numbers refer to Table .
Intra- Versus Intermolecular Reactions
Previous studies have shown that the major oxidation reaction routes of PAs can be
divided into intra- and intermolecular reactions.[17,20,26,27]
The intramolecular reactions include the epimerization of the monomeric units and other
rearrangement reactions within each PA as well as additional links formed between the
units.[17,20,26] Regarding the UHPLC–DAD detection, the epimerization and
formation of A-type linkages would have little effect on the absorbance,[46] but the effect on retention times could be significant, depending on the
different PAs present in the original versus oxidized samples. Studies with monomers and
dimers have indicated large differences in retention times between PA epimers as well as
their monomeric units, for example, epicatechin and its oligomers are more strongly
retained in reverse-phase chromatography than catechin and its oligomers.[46] In addition, PCs with the C4 → C6 linkage as well as doubly linked
A-type PCs elute later than the ones with the C4 → C8 linkage.[46,47]As the Engström method relies on the MS/MS detection of the ions formed via the
quinone methide cleavage in the ion source,[38,40] all modifications that disable this fragmentation route
would concurrently affect their detection. Epimerization would affect little the detection
of the PAs as the detection with the different cone voltages is summarized, and the sum
would remain rather unmodified despite small changes in the detection efficiency of single
PAs. However, other rearrangement reactions and formation of additional links, such as the
formation of A-type PAs from B-type PAs, would alter the detection of the PAs and thus
their quantitation and also the determination of the mDP using the Engström method.
If mostly extension units are affected, the mDP would decrease, and if mostly terminal
units are affected, the mDP would increase. In case the relative decrease of both units
are close to equal, the mDP would remain unchanged.Regarding intermolecular reactions, there are two main possibilities: either the PAs are
linked end-to-end and they maintain a linear structure or they are linked via the middle
extension units whereupon they become branched polymers.[17,20,26,27]
The effect on the detection of the PA units and thus the obtained mDP depends on the
nature of oxidative coupling and if the PA units can still be fragmented and detected from
the resulting oxidation products by the PC- and PD-specific MS/MS method. In case of
linear structures with only C4 → C6 and/or C4 → C8 links formed, the mDP
would increase. However, most likely, other oxidative couplings also occur, for example,
some units get doubly linked with an additional C2 → O → C7 or C2 → O
→ C5 ether bond. These are yet rather simplified scenarios, and it should be noted
that the interflavanyl bonds in PCs and PDs are extremely susceptible to cleavage at pH 10
with the release of the specific unit as an A-ring quinone methide. This may lead to an
extensive scrambling of the interflavanyl bonds as well as releasing a powerful Michael
acceptor capable of freely interacting with nucleophilic carbon and oxygen centers. This
further complicates and multiplies the possible intermolecular reactions. Thus, the
resulting mDP might increase, decrease, or be the same, depending on the original
structures and the overall intermolecular reactions occurring.Naturally, all the abovementioned reactions may occur simultaneously in a reaction
mixture if the reaction conditions are favorable, and indeed, many studies have supported
this.[20,26,27] However, in most of these studies, the reaction times have been rather
long, from days to weeks, enabling the occurrence of multiple reaction routes. In the
present study, oxidation was rapid, and the total incubation time was only 1 h; this is
prone to emphasize the most likely reaction routes and lessen the competition between
intra- and intermolecular reactions.[21,33] Previous studies have reported the formation of A-type
PAs from B-type PAs under alkaline conditions, and interestingly, there is some evidence
that this reaction route would be favored by PC-rich PAs, especially in dilute
solutions.[21,30,33] The unchanged UV chromatogram profiles, stable mDPs, and
rather controlled oxidation reactions suggested that, on average, the favored reaction
route in categories A and B would be intramolecular.By combining data from the UHPLC–DAD chromatograms, the UHPLC–MS/MS
chromatograms, the total ion chromatograms, and mass spectra, we were able to tentatively
detect and identify some new peaks in the early part of the chromatographic PA humps of
some of the category A and B samples. Although the intensities of individual peaks and
corresponding ions were low, the most often appearing oxidation product could be
identified as m/z 575 with fragments m/z 449 and
m/z 423, as previously identified for the A-type PC
dimer.[32,48] In
addition, the concurrent decrease of some peaks and increase of peaks with the same
m/z value and identical UV spectrum indicated epimerization reactions
to occur (data not shown). These further pointed toward the reaction route via
intramolecular oxidation. However, as QqQ is an integer resolution mass spectrometer,
these findings must be considered with caution and will be confirmed in future study,
focusing on the identification of the nonoxidized and oxidized PAs and their possible
reaction routes using a high-resolution mass spectrometer. Furthermore, as complex as the
mass spectra of the PA hump area, the formation of new polymers via intermolecular
reactions cannot be completely ruled out, but if these reactions occurred, they were
rather subtle.In categories C and D, the main findings were the shift in the retention times of the PA
humps in the UHPLC–DAD chromatograms, high decrease rates in the MS/MS detection of
PAs, and variable changes in the UV peak areas of the detected PA humps. In addition, the
lower ionization efficiency of the oxidation products indicated the formation of numerous
new oligomers and polymers, most likely with higher mDPs than the original PAs. Thus, we
suggest that in C and D categories, both intra- and intermolecular oxidation reactions
occurred with varying proportions, depending on the sample. However, these findings could
not be even tentatively confirmed from the total ion chromatograms because of the low
ionization efficiency and/or the low concentration of individual PAs.
Conclusions
Altogether, the results in the current study indicated two different main reaction routes
for PAs under alkaline conditions; in most of the PC-rich samples, the main reaction route
was such that the retention time of the detected PA hump by UHPLC–DAD remained
unchanged, and in most of the samples, the decrease in the UV peak area was moderate, while
the decrease in the MS/MS detection varied a lot. On the other hand, most of the PD-rich
samples and the samples with galloylated PAs showed a different reaction route by
UHPLC–DAD as the detected PA hump shifted retention time wise. Also, in these
samples, the decrease in the quantitative MS/MS levels was high, while the decrease in the
UV peak area varied a lot between the samples. Based on the results, we suggest the main
reaction route in the category A and B samples to be intramolecular, while in the C and D
categories, both intra- and intermolecular reactions were present. Unfortunately, the
methods of the present study did not allow to make a difference between different PA epimers
and other isomers, which have been shown to affect PA reactivity as well and could further
explain some of the variations in the reactivities within the A/B and C/D categories in
samples with otherwise similar quantitative parameters. Based on this preliminary screening,
the next obvious step will be to use high-resolution MS to confirm the suggested reaction
routes and findings from the present study. Additionally, as the studied samples expressed
various stabilities, it will be of interest to define whether stability or significant
modifications result in better bioactivities for an increased value of the original
biomaterial.
Materials and Methods
Chemicals and Reagents
Analytical-grade acetone (VWR International S.A.S., France) was used during extraction.
For oxidation, a pH 10 carbonate buffer (50 mM; sodium carbonate/sodium hydrogen
carbonate, J.T. Baker, Deventer, Netherlands) and, for stopping the oxidation, formic acid
(J.T. Baker, Deventer, Netherlands) were used. For the UHPLC analysis, LC–MS-grade
acetonitrile was purchased from VWR International S.A.S. (USA), and LC–MS-grade
formic acid was purchased from Sigma Aldrich (Seelze, Germany). The Milli-Q water used was
purified with the Millipore Synergy UV (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) system.
Plant Samples and Extraction
In total, 300 plant samples were collected from the botanical garden
(60°26′0”N, 22°10′19″E) of the University of Turku,
Finland. All the samples were identified with the herbarium of the botanical garden. After
collection, the plant samples were freeze-dried, ground into fine powder, and stored in a
freezer (−20 °C). For extraction, 20 mg of finely ground dried plant tissue
was mixed with 1.4 mL of acetone/water (80/20, v/v), vortexed, and macerated overnight at
4 °C. The samples were then extracted twice for 3 h with 1400 μL of
acetone–water (7:3, v/v), the extracts were combined and concentrated to remove
acetone, and the aqueous phases were freeze-dried.
Sample Preparation
For the PA screening phase with UHPLC–MS/MS, the freeze-dried extracts were
dissolved in 1 mL of Milli-Q water and vortexed for 15 min. The extracts were filtered
with 0.2 μm polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) filters (VWR International, Radnor, PA,
USA) to remove the lipophilic components. After fivefold dilution with water, the samples
were analyzed by the UHPLC–DAD–QqQ-MS/MS protocol described below. For the
aerial oxidation of the PA-containing extracts, 20 μL of each extract was oxidized
with 180 μL of pH 10 buffer for 1 h at room temperature. Oxidation was stopped by
adding 100 μL of 0.6% aq. HCOOH. The control extracts were prepared by taking 20
μL of each extract and adding 280 μL of the 180/100 (v/v) mixture of the pH 10
buffer and 0.6% aq. HCOOH. After further vortexing for 5 min, 100 μL of each sample
(nonoxidized and oxidized) was inserted into separate UHPLC vials for the
UHPLC–DAD–QqQ-MS/MS analysis.
UHPLC–DAD–QqQ-MS/MS Analysis
The UHPLC–DAD–QqQ-MS/MS analyses were performed with a Xevo TQ QqQ mass
spectrometer (Waters Corp., Milford, MA, USA) coupled with an Aquity UPLC system (Waters
Corp., Milford, MA, USA). The UPLC system consisted of a sample manager, a binary solvent
manager, a column, and a diode array detector. The column used was a Waters Acquity UPLC
BEH Phenyl (1.7 μm, 2.1 × 100 mm Waters Corp. Wexferd, Ireland). Similar
elution protocol, ion source parameters, and detection at UV and MS/MS were utilized, as
reported in Engström et al.[38] The data collection of both UV and
MS occurred continuously from 0 to 7 min. The stabilities of the UHPLC retention times and
the m/z values of the MS detector were monitored with a flavonoid mix
stock solution containing 4 μg mL–1 each of
kaempferol-7-O-glucoside,
kaempferol-7-O-neohesperoside, kaempferol-3-O-glucoside,
quercetin-3-O-galactoside, and quercetin-3-O-glucoside
in acetonitrile/0.1% aqueous formic acid (1:4 v/v). The stability of the MS/MS response
was monitored by injecting 1 μg mL–1 catechin solution (in 1/4
acetonitrile/0.1% formic acid (v/v)) five times before and after every batch of 10
samples. Quantitative results were corrected for possible fluctuations in the
system’s quantitative performance within each analysis set, as well as among
different sets.The detection and quantification of the PC and PD subunits and the mDP were obtained with
the Engström method,[38,40] with the exceptions that the PC and PD subunits were detected using
three different cone voltages, which were 75, 85, and 140 V for the PCs and 55, 80, and
130 V for the PDs. The recorded PC and PD traces were smoothed (window size 30 scans
× 5 smoothing iterations) and integrated with the TargetLynx software (V4.1 SCN876
SCN 917, 2012 Waters Inc.). Quantitative results were obtained from the calibration curves
obtained separately for PC, PD, and mDP. The PC and PD calibration curves were obtained
with two Sephadex LH-20 fractions: the PC standard from Tilia flowers and
the PD standard from Ribes nigrum leaves. The concertation range of the
calibration curves was 1.50–0.1875 mg mL–1 for the PC standard
and 2.00–0.25 mg mL–1 for the PD standard. The mDP calibration
curve (to fine-tune the equation for the calculation of mDP[38]) was
obtained with six Sephadex LH-20 fractions from Vaccinium vitis-idaea
leaves, Calluna vulgaris flowers, and Tilia flowers with
known mDPs. All the calibration curve samples were prepared in 2/8 acetonitrile/0.1%
formic acid (v/v).The PAtannin fingerprints were produced from the MRM raw data by calculating the PA
concentration at each time point with the PC and PD calibration curves, as explained by
Salminen in 2018.[40]
Statistical Analysis
All the coefficients of determination, that is, the R2 values mentioned in the
text, were obtained from simple linear regression models in Microsoft Excel software
(Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus).
Funding
The project was funded by the ModiFeed project (part of Biofuture strategy), Department of
Chemistry, University of Turku, Finland and by the Academy of Finland (grant number
298177 to J.-P.S.).
Authors: Matti Vihakas; Maija Pälijärvi; Maarit Karonen; Heikki Roininen; Juha-Pekka Salminen Journal: Phytochemistry Date: 2014-04-29 Impact factor: 4.072
Authors: Angela M Miranda-Hernández; Diana B Muñiz-Márquez; Jorge E Wong-Paz; Pedro Aguilar-Zárate; Martina de la Rosa-Hernández; Ramón Larios-Cruz; Cristóbal N Aguilar Journal: Food Chem Date: 2019-04-05 Impact factor: 7.514
Authors: Marica T Engström; Maija Pälijärvi; Christos Fryganas; John H Grabber; Irene Mueller-Harvey; Juha-Pekka Salminen Journal: J Agric Food Chem Date: 2014-04-02 Impact factor: 5.279