Bazı Elma ve Armut Çeşitlerinde Fitokimyasal Özelliklerin Belirlenmesi

Abstract

Bu çalışma bazı elma ve armut çeşitlerini fitokimyasal olarak karakterize etmek amacıyla 2017 ve 2018 yıllarında yürütülmüştür. Araştırma sonucunda, türlere ait çeşitlerin ortalama değerleri incelendiğinde, titre edilebilir asit (TEA), Vitamin C, toplam fenol ve antioksidan aktivite (AOA) özelliklerinin elma türünde, suda çözünebilir kuru madde (SÇKM) ve pH değerlerinin ise armut türünde daha yüksek olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Elmalarda; TEA, Vitamin C, toplam fenol, AOA, SÇKM ve pH değerlerinin sırası ile %1.35 - % 0.34, 5.63 – 2.41 mg/100 mL, 494.8 – 158.68 mg/L, %78.23 – %55.94, %12.93 – %10.65, 3.73 – 3.00 aralıklarında olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Armutta ise bu değerler; %0.5 – 0.13, 5.77 – 1.52 mg/100 mL, 334.76 – 103.49 mg/L, %78.43 – %11.93, %15.78 – %11.78, 4.87 – 3.47 sınırları içerisinde değişiklik göstermiştir. Her iki türde asitliğin artmasına paralel olarak, toplam fenol miktarı, Vitamin C ve antioksidan aktivitenin arttığı tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca yapılan korelasyon analizleri sonucunda, toplam fenol ve Vitamin C miktarında meydana gelen artışın antioksidan aktiviteyi arttırdığı bulunmuştur. ‘Jersey Mac’ incelenen özellikler bakımından diğer elma çeşitlerinden çok daha üstün bulunurken genel olarak erkenci çeşitlerin fitokimyasal olarak daha iyi özellikler barındığı sonucu ortaya çıkmıştır. Armut çeşitleri arasında ise ‘Limon’, ‘Santa Maria’, ‘Conference’ ve ‘Moonglow’ çeşitleri ön plana çıkmıştır. Çalışmadan elde edilen verilerin, hem tüketici tercihlerini hem de ıslah programlarında ebeveyn seçimini yönlendirebileceği düşünülmektedir.

Keywords

• Vitamin C,Toplam fenol,Korelasyon,Pyrus communis,Malus x domestica Bork

Determination of Phytochemical Characteristics of Some Apple and Pear Cultivars

Abstract

This study was carried out in 2017 and 2018 with the aim of characterize some apple and pear varieties in terms of phytochemical  characteristics. As a result of the study, when the average values of cultivars belong to species were examined, it was found that the properties of titreable acidity (TA), Vitamin C, total phenol and antioxidant activity (AOA) were higher in apple, while soluble solid content (SSC) and pH values were higher in pear. In apples, TA, Vitamin C, total phenol, AOA, SSC and pH values were determined in the range of %1.35 - % 0.34, 5.63 – 2.41 mg/100 mL, 494.8 – 158.68 mg/L, %78.23 – %55.94, %12.93 – %10.65, 3.73 – 3.00 respectively. In pears, these values varied between %0.5 – 0.13, 5.77 – 1.52 mg/100 mL, 334.76 – 103.49 mg/L, %78.43 – %11.93, %15.78 – %11.78, 4.87 – 3.47. It was detected that, total phenolic content, vitamin C and antioxidant activity was increased corresponding to increasing of the acidity in both species. In addition, as a consequence of the corelation analysis, antioxidant acitivity increased by rising of total phenolics and vitamin C content. It was found that ‘Jersey Mac’ was superior than the other apple cultivars in terms of investigated features, and early harvested cultivars had better phytochemical features, generally. ‘Limon’, ‘Santa Maria’, ‘Conference’ and ‘Moonglow’ cultivars were came into prominence among pear varieties. It was thought that, the data obtained from the study can lead the selection of parents in breeding programes and consumer preferences.

Keywords

• Correlation,Malus x domestica Borkh.,Pyrus communis,Vitamin C

References

1. Acero, N., Gradillas, A., Beltran, M., Garcia, A. Ve Mingarro, D.M. 2019. Comparison of Phenolic Compounds Profile and Antioxidant Properties of Different Sweet Cherry (Prunus avium L.) Varieties. Food chemistry, 2019, 279: 260-271.
2. Bai, X., Zhang, H. ve Ren, S. 2013. Antioxidant Activity and HPLC Analysis of Polyphenol‐Enriched Extracts from Industrial Apple Pomace. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2013, 93(10): 2502-2506.
3. Cevallos-Casals, B.A., Byrne, D., Okie, W.R. ve Cisneros-Zevallos, L. 2006. Selecting New Peach and Plum Genotypes Rich in Phenolic Compounds and Enhanced Functional Properties. Food chemistry, 2006, 96(2): 273-280.
4. Chang, Y.L., Lin, J.T., Lin, H.L., Liao, P.L., Wu, P.J. ve Yang, D.J. 2019. Phenolic Compositions and Antioxidant Properties of Leaves of Eight Persimmon Varieties Harvested in Different Periods. Food Chemistry, 2019, 289: 74-83.
5. Dai, J. ve Mumper, R.J. 2010. Plant Phenolics: Extraction, Analysis and Their Antioxidant and Anticancer Properties. Molecules, 2010, 15(10): 7313-7352.
6. Delaire, M., Fatoumata, S., Mehinagic, E., Guillermin, P., Patron, C., Le Meurlay, D., ... ve Symoneaux, R. 2015. Effect of Apple Growth Pattern on Fruit Textural Quality at Harvest and After Cold Storage in cv.‘Braeburn’. Scientia Horticulturae, 2015, 194: 134-137.
7. Demir, G. ve Aktaş, N. 2018. A Research on Functional Food Knowledge, Preference and Consumption of University Students. Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Fonksiyonel Besin Bilgi, Tercih ve Tüketimleri Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Journal of Human Sciences, 2018, 15(4): 2387-2397.
8. Dong, X., Hu, Y., Li, Y. ve Zhou, Z. 2019. The Maturity Degree, Phenolic Compounds and Antioxidant Activity of Eureka Lemon [Citrus limon (L.) Burm. f.]: A Negative Correlation Between Total Phenolic Content, Antioxidant Capacity and Soluble Solid Content. Scientia Horticulturae, 2019, 243: 281-289.

9. Drogoudi, P.D. ve Pantelidis, G. 2011. Effects of Position on Canopy and Harvest Time on Fruit Physico-Chemical And Antioxidant Properties in Different Apple Cultivars. Scientia Horticulturae, 2011, 129(4): 752-760.
10. Ekici, İ. ve Yıldırım, A.N. 2017. Asya Armut (Pyrus pyrifolia) Çeşitlerinin Uşak Koşullarında Morfolojik, Fenolojik, Pomolojik ve Bazı Biyokimyasal Özelliklerinin Belirlenmesi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2017, 21(1): 118-124.
11. Erdem, H. ve Öztürk, B. 2012. Yapraktan Uygulanan Çinko’nun BA-29 Anacı Üzerine Aşılı Armut Çeşitlerinin Verimi, Mineral Element İçeriği ve Biyokimyasal Özellikleri Üzerine Etkisi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 2012, 7(1): 93-106.
12. FAO, 2017, Food and Agricultural Organization, Erişim tarihi 01.05.2019
13. Galvis Sanchez, A.C., Gil‐Izquierdo, A. ve Gil, M.I. 2003. Comparative STudy of Six Pear Cultivars in terms of Their Phenolic and Vitamin C Contents and Antioxidant Capacity. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2003, 83(10): 995-1003.
14. Giampieri, F., Forbes-Hernveez, T.Y., Gasparrini, M., Alvarez-Suarez, J.M., Afrin, S., Bompadre, S., ... ve Battino, M. 2015. Strawberry as a Health Promoter: An Evidence Based Review. Food & Function, 2015, 6(5): 1386-1398.
15. Gundogdu, M., Canan, I. ve Okatan, V. 2018. Bioactive Contents and Some Horticultural Characteristics of Local Apple Genotypes from Turkey. JAPS: Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences, 2018, 28(3): 865-874.
16. Gündüz, K. ve Özbay, H. 2018. The Effects of Genotype and Altitude of The Growing Location on Physical, Chemical, and Phytochemical Properties of Strawberry. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 2018, 42(3): 145-153.
17. Günen, Y., Misirli, A. ve Gulcan, R. 2005. Leaf Phenolic Content of Pear Cultivars Resistant or Susceptible to Fire Blight. Scientia horticulturae, 2005, 105(2): 213-221.He, J., Yin, T., Chen, Y., Cai, L., Tai, Z., Li, Z., ... ve Ding, Z. 2015. Phenolic Compounds and Antioxidant Activities of Edible Flowers of Pyrus pashia. Journal of Functional Foods, 2015, 17: 371-379.
18. Karşı, T. ve Aslantaş, R. 2016. Erzurum’da Yetiştirilen Bazı Elma (Malus communis L.) Çeşitlerinin Fenolojik, Pomolojik ve Kimyasal Özelliklerinin Belirlenmesi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 2016, 47(1): 11-21.
19. Koley, T.K., Kaur, C., Nagal, S., Walia, S. ve Jaggi, S. 2016. Antioxidant Activity and Phenolic Content in Genotypes of Indian jujube (Zizyphus mauritiana Lamk.). Arabian Journal of Chemistry, 2012, 9: S1044-S1052.
20. Li, H., Tsao, R. ve Deng, Z. 2012. Factors Affecting the Antioxidant Potential and Health Benefits of Plant Foods. Canadian journal of plant science, 2012, 92(6): 1101-1111.
21. Li, X., Wang, T., Zhou, B., Gao, W., Cao, J. ve Huang, L. 2014. Chemical Composition and Antioxidant and Anti-İnflammatory Potential of Peels and Flesh from 10 Different Pear Varieties (Pyrus spp.). Food chemistry, 2014, 152: 531-538.
22. Mertoğlu, K. ve Evrenosoğlu, Y. 2017. Ateş Yanıklığı (Erwinia amylovora) Hastalığına Dayanıklılık Islahında, Hastalığa Karşı Testlenmiş F1 Melez Armut Popülasyonunun Fenolojik ve Meyve Özellikleri. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 2017, 14 (3): 104-115.
23. Nielsen, R.W. 2016. Growth of The World Population in The Past 12,000 Years and Its Link to theI. Journal of Economics Bibliography, 2016, 3(1): 1-12.
24. Okatan, V., Bulduk, I., Sekara, A., Colak, A. M., Kaki, B. ve Gundogdu, M. 2018. Bioactive Components and Market Quality of Apple (Malus X Domestıca Borkh.) Fruits Could be Effectively Controlled by Trees Pretreatment with Boric Acid, Melatonin and Gibberellic Acid. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 2018, 27(10): 6933-6944.
25. Oszmianski, J., Lachowicz, S., Glawdel, E., Cebulak, T. ve Ochmian, I. (2018). Determination of phytochemical composition and antioxidant capacity of 22 old apple cultivars grown in Polve. European Food Research and Technology, 244(4), 647-662.
26. Özdemir, Y., Akcay, M. E., Ercisli, S., Ozkan, M., & Ozyurt, U. 2016. Physical, Chemical, Sensorial and Bioactive Characteristics of Local and Standard Pear Cultivars in Turkey. Acta Sci. Pol. Hortorum Cultus, 2016, 15(3): 127-139.
27. Palmieri, L., Masuero, D., Martinatti, P., Baratto, G., Martens, S. ve Vrhovsek, U. 2017. Genotype‐nyttyyby‐Environment Effect on Bioactive Compounds in Strawberry (Fragaria x ananassa Duch.), Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2017, 97(12): 4180-4189.
28. Pham, T., Lecomte, S., Efstathiou, T., Ferriere, F. ve Pakdel, F. 2019. An Update on the Effects of Glyceollins on Human Health: Possible Anticancer Effects and Underlying Mechanisms. Nutrients, 2019, 11(1): 79.
29. Polat, M. ve Bağbozan, R. 2014. Eğirdir (Isparta) Ekolojisinde Yetiştirilen Erkenci Yerli Armut (Pyrus communis L.) Tiplerinin Bazı Meyve Özelliklerinin Belirlenmesi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2014, 21(1): 9-12.
30. Polat, M., Okatan, V., Güçlü, S.F. ve Çolak, A.M. 2018. Determination of Some Chemical Characteristics and Total Antioxidant Capacity in Apple Varieties Grown in Posof/Ardahan Region. International Journal of Agriculture, Environment and Food Sciences, 2018, 2(4): 131-134.
31. Ramirez-Ambrosi, M., Lopez-Marquez, D.M., Abad-García, B., Dapena, E., Berrueta, L.A., ve Gallo, B. 2015. Comparative Study of Phenolic Profile of Fruit and Juice Samples of A Progeny of ‘Meana’בFlorina’ from An Asturian Cider Apple Breeding Program. European Food Research and Technology, 2015, 241(6): 769-784.
32. Sahoo, T., Verma, M.K., Singh, S.K., Thakre, M., Sharma, R.R. ve Jaiswal, S. 2017. Heterosis and Heterobeltiosis for Morpho-Physical, Phenolics, Flavonoids and Antioxidants in Grape (Vitis vinifera) Hybrids. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 87(6): 759-764.
33. Salta, J., Martins, A., Santos, R.G., Neng, N.R., Nogueira, J.M., Justino, J. ve Rauter, A.P. 2010. Phenolic Composition and Antioxidant Activity of Rocha Pear and Other Pear Cultivars–A Comparative Study. Journal of Functional Foods, 2010, 2(2): 153-157.
34. Schempp, H., Christof, S., Mayr, U. ve Treutter, D. 2016. Phenolic Compounds in Juices of Apple Cultivars and Their Relation to Antioxidant Activity. Journal of Applied Botany and Food Quality, 2016, 89: 11-20.
35. Selcuk, N ve Erkan, M. 2016. Impact of Passive Modified Atmosphere Packaging on Physicochemical Properties, Bioactive Compounds, and Quality Attributes of Sweet Pomegranates, Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 2016, 40(4): 475-488.
36. Sklodowska, M., Mikicinski, A., Wielanek, M., Kuzniak, E. ve Sobiczewski, P. 2018. Phenolic Profiles in Apple Leaves and The Efficacy of Selected Phenols Against Fire Blight (Erwinia amylovora). European Journal of Plant Pathology, 2018, 151: 213-228.
37. Spinola, V., Mendes, B., Camara, J.S. ve Castilho, P.C. 2013. Effect of Time and Temperature on Vitamin C Stability in Horticultural Extracts. UHPLC-PDA vs Iodometric Titration as Analytical Methods. LWT-Food Science ve Technology, 2013, 50(2): 489-495.
38. Şenyurt, M., Kalkışım, Ö. ve Karadeniz, T. 2015. Gümüşhane Yöresinde Yetiştirilen Bazı Standart ve Mahalli Elma (Malus communis L.) Çeşitlerinin Pomolojik Özellikleri. Akademik Ziraat Dergisi, 2015, 4(2): 59-64.
39. Tang, Y. ve Tsao, R. 2017. Phytochemicals in Quinoa and Amaranth Grains and Their Antioxidant, Anti‐İnflammatory, and Potential Health Beneficial Effects: A Review. Molecular Nutrition & Food Research, 61(7): 1600767.
40. Tekintaş, F.E., Kankaya, A., Ertan, E. ve Seferoğlu, H.G. 2006. M9 Anacı Üzerine Aşılı Bazı Elma Çeşitlerinin Aydın İli Koşullarındaki Performanslarının Belirlenmesi. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 2006, 3(2): 27-30.
41. Tiwari, U. ve Cummins, E. 2013. Factors İnfluencing Levels of Phytochemicals in Selected Fruit and Vegetables During Pre-and Post-Harvest Food Processing Operations. Food Research International, 2013, 50(2), 497-506.
42. Vieira, F.G.K., Borges, G.D.S.C., Copetti, C., Amboni, R.D.D.M.C., Denardi, F. ve Fett, R. 2009. Physico-Chemical and Antioxidant Properties of Six Apple Cultivars (Malus domestica Borkh) Grown in Southern Brazil. Scientia Horticulturae, 2009, 122(3): 421-425.
43. Wang, X., Li, C., Liang, D., Zou, Y., Li, P. ve Ma, F. 2015. Phenolic Compounds and Antioxidant Activity in Red-Fleshed Apples. Journal of functional foods, 2015, 18: 1086-1094.
44. Yazici, K. ve Şahin, A. 2016. Characterization of Pomegranate (Punica granatum L.) Hybrids and Their Potential Use in Further Breeding. Turkish Journal of Agriculture ve Forestry, 2016, 40(6): 813-824.
45. Zar, JH. 2013. Biostatistical Analysis: Pearson New International Edition. Pearson Higher Ed.
46. Zhang, L., Xu, Q., You, Y., Chen, W., Xiao, Z., Li, P. ve Ma, F. 2018. Characterization of Quercetin and Its Glycoside Derivatives in Malus germplasm. Horticulture, Environment, and Biotechnology, 2018, 59(6): 909-917.