Phenolic Composition and Antioxidant Capacity of Newly Developed Strawberry Lines from British Columbia and Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The total phenolic composition (TPC) and the total antioxidant capacity (TAC) of eleven strawberry genotypes selected from the AAFC breeding program (BC2-72-17, BC2-90-43, BC96-33-4 and BC98-49-34 from British Columbia; and APF937-1, APF939-71, LL981-24, LL9819-14, LL982-14, LL0220-10 and SJ9332-7 from Quebec) were evaluated using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and ferric reducing/antioxidant power (FRAP) assays. TPC and TAC values of these genotypes were compared to those of four commercially grown cultivars (‘Chambly,’ ‘Kent,’ ‘Veestar’ and ‘Yamaska’) and the effects on fruit quality and shelf life were studied. Several groups of phenolic compounds, including anthocyanins, flavonols, hydroxycinnamic, ellagic and benzoic acids, were identified and quantified by HPLC. Significant variation of TPC was observed between genotypes, and anthocyanins were found to be the predominant phenolic group, contributing to 79.2% of the TPC. A significant correlation (r = 0.96) was observed between TPC and anthocyanin content. BC2-72-17 had the highest anthocyanin content and differed significantly from the other genotypes. Although the highest TPC (2123.8 μg g−1) was found in BC2-72-17, this genotype did not have the highest antioxidant capacity. The highest TAC (2259.0 μg g−1) was found in BC2-90-43, indicating that other phenolics may have made a greater contribution than anthocyanins to the high TAC. At room temperature, LL0220-10, SJ9332-7 and ‘Yamaska’ had a three-day shelf life, while it was only two days for all other genotypes. There was a negative correlation between shelf life and ellagic acids, flavonol and anthocyanin levels but this relationship was not significant (p > 0.0.). The fruit soluble solids content (SSC) and titratable acidity (TA) varied between genotypes. ‘Veestar’ and LL981-24 had the highest SSC (7.5). These results point to the importance of identifying genotypes with high phenolic monomer activities in screening for lines with high TAC, to ensure their use in breeding programs aimed at improving the nutritional value of strawberry.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".