Effects of genotype, location and baking on the phenolic content and some antioxidant properties of cereal species

Abstract

In order to assess the effect of genotype, location and their interaction on total phenolic content (TPC) of chemical extracts, the whole grains of durum and soft wheat, oat, barley and triticale were evaluated. Data showed differences in phenolic content of chemical extracts among cereal species and the analysis of variance confirmed the key role of location. Besides TPC and trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEAC) values assessed by chemical extraction were compared with those obtained with an in vitro digestive enzymatic extraction. Differences were found between methanolic and enzymatic extracts, and data confirmed that enzymatic technique enhanced extraction of antioxidants but pointed out lesser differences among cereal types. The breads obtained by flours enriched with different levels of bran were also evaluated. Chemical extracts highlighted the increasing levels of antioxidants according to bran enrichments, without pointing out changes caused by baking. The enzymatic extraction instead did not show differences regarding to bran enrichments, but documented a loss in antioxidant properties of breads in respect to corresponding flours. On the other hand the scarce differences between flours and corresponding breads did not allow asserting that baking modified the TPC and TEAC, independently of the extraction methods used. Indeed, during baking process, also the observed phenolic acids profile variations did not vary the antioxidant properties of breads.

Bread formulated with guava powder was enriched in phenolic and aroma compounds, and was highly acceptable by consumers

“…Phenolic contents in CB (6.2 mg/100 g) were similar to those previously reported in breads made with white wheat flour methods (3.4 mg/100 g to 11.1 mg/100 g) (Lu et al 2014;Menga et al 2010). The replacement of wheat flour by GP promoted a dose-dependent increase in phenolics contents guava breads (Table 1).…”

Hulless Barley – A Rediscovered Source for Functional Foods Phytochemical Profile and Soluble Dietary Fibre Content in Naked Barley Varieties and Their Antioxidant Properties

“…Significant differences in the content of anthocyanins and carotenoids, and in reducing power were observed between genotypes, and between the different millstreams of the respective plant material. From the results of this study, and from other studies previously carried out (Siebenhandl et al, 2007;Bokore, 2008;Menga et al, 2010) it can be concluded that on the one hand genetic and environmental factors have a major impact on the phytochemical profile and the antioxidant activity, but on the other hand also postharvest treatments such as fractionation of the raw material can have a major influence. Thus, it is anticipated that the development of barley cultivars for human consumption should focus on breeding for specific end uses (Hang et al, 2007).…”

“…The release of phenolics in the colon may explain the inverse association between whole-grain consumption and incidence of certain chronic diseases (Andreasen et al, 2001;Kern et al, 2003). Moreover, an apparent increase of antioxidant release during enzymatic incubation was found in in vitro studies (Pérez-Jiménez & Saura-Calixto, 2005;Nagah & Seal, 2005;Menga et al, 2010).…”

“…Sharma & Gujral (2010) estimated the phenolic content in barley ranging from 2.14 to 2.36 µg FA g -1 flour and 3.57 -5.02 µg g -1 in bran. Madhujith et al (2006) reported a range of 0.17 to 6.26 mg FA g -1 , depending on genotype and fraction, and Menga et al (2010) found varying levels of TPC and TEAC, when comparing a methanolic extract with an extract after enzymatic digestion.…”

Agronomic Management under Organic Farming May Affect the Bioactive Compounds of Lentil (Lens culinaris L.) and Grass Pea (Lathyrus communis L.)?

“…However for grass pea, the trend was not the same, as grass pea showed significant effects of variety only for TPC and HTC, and significant effects of environment only for TFC and CTC, and for interaction between year × row only for CTC (p < 0.001). No reports are available in the literature related to these findings, although effects of environment on phenolics have been indicated in several studies on cereals, fruit and pulses under conventional farming [40][41][42]. According to the results from the present study, lentils are more receptive than grass pea to environment changes, as shown for all of the modified antioxidant compounds studied here.…”