Mediterranean Wild Pear Fruits as a Neglected but Valuable Source of Phenolic Compounds
-
Published:2024-05-30
Issue:6
Volume:13
Page:72
-
ISSN:2079-9276
-
Container-title:Resources
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Resources
Author:
Molinu Maria Giovanna1, Sanna Federico2ORCID, D’hallewin Guy1ORCID, Re Giovanni Antonio2ORCID, Sulas Leonardo2ORCID, Piluzza Giovanna2ORCID
Affiliation:
1. National Research Council, Institute of Sciences of Food Production, Traversa La Crucca 3, Località Baldinca, 07100 Sassari, Italy 2. National Research Council, Institute for the Animal Production System in Mediterranean Environment, Traversa La Crucca 3, Località Baldinca, 07100 Sassari, Italy
Abstract
The genus Pyrus has a long history in Sardinia (Italy), where two wild pear species (P. spinosa Forssk. and P. pyraster (L.) Burgsd.) and Pyrus communis L. cultivars are extensively distributed. Even if neglected, these taxa represent well-adapted key resources for redesigning sustainable farming systems. This report aims at shedding light on the phenolic fingerprint and antioxidant properties of wild pear fruits and comparing their traits with those of the studied pear cultivar germplasm (PCG). Fruits of wild pear species were collected, and flesh, peel, and core subsamples were analyzed. Moreover, available data from previous research on PCG were analyzed. The contents of total phenolics (TotP), total flavonoids (TotF), and condensed tannins (CT), as well as the antioxidant capacity, were similar in the flesh of the two wild species. However, P. spinosa had significantly higher values of TotP (89 g GAE kg−1 DM) and CT (33 g DE kg−1 DM) in the peel. Eleven individual phenolic compounds were identified and quantified in the fruit flesh, 14 in both peel and core. For both wild species, arbutin and chlorogenic acid were the main phenolic compounds, followed by the quercetin glycosides. Comparing the antioxidant capacity and TotF fruit flesh values of wild pears with those of PCG, the latter resulted up to 15-fold lower. The wild types showed unique metabolite profiles. Results support novel insights on the phytochemicals of wild pear fruits.
Funder
Italian Ministry of Agricultural, Food, and Forestry Policies
Reference44 articles.
1. Simionca Mărcășan, L.I., Pop, R., Somsai, P.A., Olteanu, I., Popa, S., Sestraş, A.F., Militaru, M., Mihai, B., and Sestraş, R.E. (2023). Comparative Evaluation of Pyrus Species to Identify Possible Resources of Interest in Pear Breeding. Agronomy, 13. 2. Li, X., Li, X., Wang, T., and Gao, W. (2016). Nutritional Composition of Fruit Cultivars, Academic Press. 3. Dendroclimatological analysis of wild pear Pyrus pyraster (L.) Burgsd. from Biedrusko Military area (West Poland)—Preliminary study;Cedro;Geochronometria,2016 4. Özderin, S. (2022). Determination of some chemical properties of wild pear (Pyrus spinosa Forsk.). BioResources, 17. 5. Alexandri, S., Tsaktsira, M., Hatzilazarou, S., Kostas, S., Nianiou-Obeidat, I., Economou, A., Scaltsoyiannes, A., and Tsoulpha, P. (2023). Selection for Sustainable Preservation through In Vitro Propagation of Mature Pyrus spinosa Genotypes Rich in Total Phenolics and Antioxidants. Sustainability, 15.
|
|