| Literature DB >> 35495905 |
Huajie Wang1,2, Yaya Yu1, Wen Ouyang1,3, Yongwen Jiang1, Jinjin Wang1, Jinjie Hua1, Haibo Yuan1.
Abstract
Round green tea (RGT) is widely distributed and presents a high yield in China. The quality of RGT can be determined by its aroma; however, the transformation and formation of volatile metabolites during RGT processing remain unclear. In this study, 173 volatile compounds (nine categories) were identified totally from RGT via gas chromatography-mass spectrometry with infrared-assisted headspace-solid phase microextraction. These substances exhibited different changing trends during various procedures, with the most intense transformation occurring during fixation, followed by pan-frying and second drying; moreover, 51 substances were screened, mainly containing fatty acid-derived volatiles (i.e., (E)-2-hexen-1-ol, Hexanal, pentanal, hexanal) and glycoside-derived volatiles (i.e., linalool, geraniol, benzyl alcohol, benzaldehyde), and their evolution during processing was clarified. Furthermore, the effect of the second-drying temperature on volatile compound metabolism was clarified, and 90°C was the best temperature for RGT aroma. This research lays a foundation for in-depth quality control and the aroma formation mechanism of RGT.Entities:
Keywords: fatty acid-derived volatiles; glycoside-derived volatiles; nontargeted metabolomic analysis; round green tea; second-drying temperature; volatile metabolites
Year: 2022 PMID: 35495905 PMCID: PMC9047777 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.877132
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
Figure 1Flow chart of round green tea processing.
Figure 2(A) Principal Component Analysis (PCA) score scatter plot composed of all volatile compounds in the round green tea process. (B) The dynamic metabolic trajectory plot of volatile compounds, drawn by scatting of the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) scores t[1] vs. t[2]. (C) Variation trend chart of different types of volatile compounds content in different processes of round green tea. (D) Variation of the proportion of different types of volatile compounds in different process of round green tea.
Figure 3(A) Loading diagram of Partial Least Squares Discrimination Analysis (PLS-DA) model. (B) Heat map of 51 difference volatile compounds.
Figure 4Evolution of compounds from different sources: (A) Fatty derived volatiles, (B) Glycoside-derived volatiles, (C) Amino acid-derived volatiles, and (D) Carotenoid-derived volatiles.
Figure 5(A) Histogram of different types of volatile compounds of round green tea by different second-drying temperature. (B) Partial Least Squares Discrimination Analysis (PLS-DA) score. (C) Loading diagram for volatile compounds of round green tea by different second-drying temperature. (D) Heat map of 117 difference volatile compounds. Different letters indicate the significance of the difference of the same type substance at different temperatures through LSD test (p < 0.05).
Aroma characteristics and OAV values of 21 different volatile compounds (OAV > 1) in different second-drying temperature samples.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1-Hexanol | 0.7 | Green, cut grass | 10.14 ± 1.89a | 2.37 ± 0.259b | 4.13 ± 0.40b |
| 2-Heptanone | 1 | pieplant, musty | 2.15 ± 0.61a | 0.00 ± 0.00c | 1.34 ± 0.15b |
| (E)-4-Heptenal | 0.02 | Green | 67.08 ± 15.33a | 0.00 ± 0.00c | 28.55 ± 2.95b |
| Heptanal | 3 | Heavy, planty green odor | 5.94 ± 1.25a | 3.98 ± 0.62b | 0.71 ± 0.05c |
| Benzaldehyde | 3 | almond-like smell | 2.27 ± 0.29a | 1.04 ± 0.09b | 1.24 ± 0.03b |
| Octanal | 0.7 | Green, fatty, citruse | 5.88 ± 1.49a | 3.96 ± 0.54b | 0.00 ± 0.00c |
| 1-Octanol | 0.022 | Green, citrus, fatty, coconut-like | 533.65 ± 89.58a | 450.99 ± 37.79b | 0.00 ± 0.00c |
| Nonanal | 1 | candle-like, sweet orange-like, fatty and floral | 29.97 ± 4.34a | 29.62 ± 1.38a | 0.00 ± 0.00b |
| Decanal | 0.1 | Aldehyde-like, candle-like, fatty and citrus-like aroma | 18.96 ± 2.78b | 27.89 ± 2.26a | 16.44 ± 0.34b |
| 1-Decanol | 0.023 | Orange, floral | 25.13 ± 7.39a | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.00 ± 0.00b |
| Nerolidol 2 | 0.25 | Floral, green, citrus, woody, waxy | 11.08 ± 0.74a | 6.98 ± 0.67b | 0.00 ± 0.00c |
| tau-Cadinol | 0.44 | Tar, camphor, and greasy | 5.42 ± 0.56a | 5.49 ± 0.44a | 0.00 ± 0.00b |
| Naphthalene | 0.44 | Pungent, dry, tarry odor | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 4.57 ± 0.09a | 0.00 ± 0.00b |
| 2,6,10,10-tetramethyl-1-Oxaspiro [4.5] dec-6-ene | 0.2 | Fruity, woody, slightly camphor-like | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 6.25 ± 0.11a | 0.00 ± 0.00b |
| 3,7-dimethyl-1,5,7-Octatrien-3-ol | 110 | Moldy | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.63 ± 0.03a |
| 2,5-dimethyl-Pyrazine | 1,750 | Roasted | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.001 ± 0.00a |
| ethyl-Pyrazine | 4,000 | Nutty coffee, cocoa-like | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.00 ± 0.00a |
| 5-methyl-2-Furancarboxaldehyde | 500 | Caramel, bready, coffee-like | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.01 ± 0.00a |
| 2-ethyl-6-methyl-Pyrazine | 40 | Roasted | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.11 ± 0.00a |
| 3-ethyl-2,5-dimethyl-Pyrazine | 8.6 | Roasted potato, cocoa-like, nutty | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.00 ± 0.00b | 0.41 ± 0.01a |
| trans-beta-Ionone | 0.007 | Violet-like, floral, and raspberry-like | 9,676.94 | 9,260.63 | 10,176.88 |
Different letters (a, b, c) represent the significance of the difference between the same substance at different second drying temperatures through LSD test (p < 0.05).
OTs: Odor thresholds in water. The values were calculated according to reported references.
(.
.