| Literature DB >> 35159533 |
Vincenzo D'Amelia1, Giorgia Sarais2, Giacomo Fais2, Debora Dessì2, Vittoria Giannini3, Raffaele Garramone4, Domenico Carputo4, Sara Melito3.
Abstract
Potato is a staple food crop and an important source of dietary energy. Its tubers contain several essential amino acids, vitamins, minerals and phytochemicals that contribute to the nutritional value of this important product. Recently, scientific interest has focused on purple and red potatoes that, due to the presence of anthocyanins, may be considered as natural powerful functional food. The aim of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of pigmented varieties, the types of anthocyanins accumulated and the level of both beneficial phytochemicals (vitamin C and chlorogenic acids, CGAs) and anti-nutritional compounds (glycoalkaloids) following various cooking methods. The analyses described the presence of a mix of several acylated anthocyanins in pigmented tubers along with high level of CGA. The amount of antioxidants was differently affected by heat treatments according to the type of molecule and the cooking methods used. In some cases, the beneficial compounds were made more available by heat treatments for the analytical detection as compared to raw materials. Data reported here describe both the agronomic properties of these pigmented varieties and the effects of food processing methods on bioactive molecules contained in this natural functional food. They may provide useful information for breeders aiming to develop new varieties that could include desirable agronomical and industrial processing traits.Entities:
Keywords: agronomic performance; antioxidants; beneficial phytochemicals; cooking methods; glycoalkaloids; potato
Year: 2022 PMID: 35159533 PMCID: PMC8834363 DOI: 10.3390/foods11030384
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Results for the evaluation of different potato varieties.
| Variety | TY | TSG | CC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Musica | 0.59 ± 0.13 a | 1.069 ± 0 | 4.00 ± 0.58 b |
| Magenta Love | 0.14 ± 0.08 b | 1.078 ± 0 | 2.00 ± 0 c |
| Scano di Montiferro | 0.20 ± 0.01 b | 1.095 ± 0 | 7.00 ± 0.58 a |
| Violet Queen | 0.21 ± 0.04 b | 1.079 ± 0 | 4.00 ± 0 b |
a–c Means denoted by the same letter did not differ significantly at p ≤ 0.05 according to Tukey’s multiple range test. Tuber yield (TY, kg of tubers per plant), tuber specific gravity (TSG) and chip category color (CC) of all tested genotypes. Chip category color was evaluated at harvest (direct). For each trait, the average value and the standard deviation was reported.
Content of chlorogenic acid and isomers (CGAs) in raw and cooked potatoes expressed as mg kg−1 of DM.
| Variety | Fresh | Fresh | Boiled | Microwaved | Baked | Fried |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Musica | 81.1 ± 4.3 (a) | 83.5 ± 12.2 (a) | 15.2 ± 1.9 (a) | 595.7 ± 16.4 (a) | 121.7 ± 18.9 (a) | 226.3 ± 21.2 (a) |
| Magenta Love | 3724.8 ± 152.5 (b) | 2615.6 ± 198.6 (b) | 8074.8 ± 221.5 (b) | 13,530.3 ± 315.6 (b) | 3668.8 ± 88.7 (b) | 2776.1 ± 51.8 (b) |
| Violet Queen | 1966.5 ± 74.1 (c) | 1382.7 ± 101.8 (c) | 4315.5 ± 84.6 (c) | 3748.7 ± 86.9 (c) | 2457.7 ± 95.6 (c) | 1002.3 ± 16.7 (c) |
| Blue star | 387.5 ± 33.6 (d) | 361.4 ± 24.1 (d) | 388.7 ± 21.3 (d) | 3115.7 ± 25.7 (d) | 1175.6 ± 102.3 (d) | 371.0 ± 3.9 (d) |
| Scano di Montiferro | 1685.6 ± 57.9 (c) | 1059.9 ± 31.2 (c) | 2119.8 ± 14.2 (e) | 5785.7 ± 66.4 (e) | 1594.3 ± 109.7 (e) | 865.0 ± 11.2 (c) |
Values are means ± SD (n = 3). Statistical analyses were undertaken by comparing CGA content across varieties. Means denoted by the same letter did not differ significantly at p ≤ 0.05 according to Tukey’s multiple range test.
Figure 1The effects of different cooking methods on total anthocyanin content in purple and red tubers expressed as percentage with respect to fresh non-peeled samples (raw samples).
Total anthocyanin content in raw potatoes expressed as mg kg−1 of DM (mean + SD; n = 3).
| Variety | Raw Non-Peeled | Raw Peeled |
|---|---|---|
| Musica | nd | nd |
| Magenta Love | 471.2 ± 30.1 | 1054.1 ± 1.4 |
| Violet Queen | 1688.3 ± 70.2 | 1311.0 ± 115.7 |
| Blue Star | 131.3 ± 10.7 | 136.7 ± 15.9 |
| Scano di Montiferro | 984.5 ± 37.5 | 1213.0 ± 50.1 |
nd = not detectable.
Single anthocyanin content in raw purple potato tubers. Values are expressed as mg kg−1 of DM (mean + SD; n = 3).
| Variety | Petunidin 3-O rutinoside * | Petunidin | Petunidin | Petunidin | Malvidin | Malvidin | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Violet Queen | Fresh | 19.4 ± 2.0 b | 27.4 ± 1.3 b | 360.9 ± 13.0 b | 17.0 ± 0.8 c | 98.7 ± 3.2 b | 12.8 ± 0.9 b |
| Fresh | 17.6 ± 1.0 b | 60.5 ± 2.9 b | 912.5 ± 33.9 b | 31.7 ± 0.4 c | 177.0 ± 3.8 b | 22.3 ± 1.6 a | |
| Blue Star | Fresh | <0.5 a | 11.3 ± 0.8 a | 24.8 ± 1.3 a | 11.4 ± 0.7 b | 15.5 ± 0.7 a | 11.5 ± 1.0 a |
| Fresh | <0.5 a | 15.4 ± 0.8 a | 32.9 ± 1.8 a | 8.9 ± 0.3 b | 11.5 ± 0.9 a | 8.9 ± 0.6 b | |
| Scano di Montiferro | Fresh | 31.3 ± 1.8 c | 16.2 ± 1.0 a | 13.3 ± 1.0 a | N.D. a | 350.1 ± 15.5 c | 29.5 ± 1.9 c |
| Fresh | 36.7 ± 2.0 c | 21.9 ± 1.1 a | 42.3 ± 1.4 a | N.D. a | 443.1 ± 17.3 c | 34.8 ± 1.9 c |
* Anthocyanins concentrations were expressed as malvidin 3-O-glucoside equivalent; a–c: Means denoted by the same letter did not differ significantly at p ≤ 0.05 according to Tukey’s multiple range test.
Single anthocyanin content in raw red potato tubers. Values are expressed as mg kg−1 of DM (mean + SD; n = 3).
| Variety | Petunidin 3-O-rutinoside-5-glucoside * | Pelargonidin | Pelargonidin | Pelargonidin 3-O-cis-p-coumaroyl-rutinoside-5-O-glucoside * | Pelargonidin 3-O-p-coumaroyl- | Peonidin 3-O-p-coumaroyl- | Pelargonidin | Peonidin | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Magenta Love | Fresh | <0.5 mg/kg | <0.5 | 23.8 ± 1.1 | 26.7 ± 2.4 | 129.1 ± 9.0 | 30.0 ± 2.0 | 25.3 ± 1.0 | 20.6 ± 1.0 |
| Fresh | 54.0 ± 4.1 | 19.4 ± 1.9 | 39.0 ± 2.5 | 82.3 ± 6.5 | 573.6 ± 21.8 | 90.2 ± 6.8 | 42.6 ± 2.9 | 16.2 ± 0.6 |
* Anthocyanins concentrations were expressed as malvidin 3-O-glucoside equivalent.
Figure 2The content of vitamin C (mg kg−1) in raw peeled and non-peeled potato tubers and after different cooking methods (x-axis). Values are means ± SD (n = 3). Means denoted by the same letter, within the same group described on the x axis, did not differ significantly at p ≤ 0.05 according to Tukey’s multiple range test.
Figure 3The content of glycoalkaloids (mg kg−1) in raw peeled and non-peeled potato tubers and after different cooking methods (x-axis). (A) α-chaconine; (B) α-solanine. Values are means ± SD (n = 3). Means denoted by the same letter, within the same group described on the x-axis, did not differ significantly at p ≤ 0.05 according to Tukey’s multiple range test.