2.1. Total Phenol, Total Tannin and Total Anthocyanin Analysis of Grape Pomace Seed and Skin Extracts
Seeds of Grenache (1st location), Syrah and Carignan [GRE1, SYR1 and CAR] and skins from Grenache (2nd location), Syrah (two different locations), Carignan, Mourvèdre and Alicante [GRE2, SYR1, SYR2, CAR, MOU and ALI] were extracted using water and 70% hydro-alcoholic solution, thus giving two types of samples: aqueous samples (EAQ) and 70% hydro-alcoholic samples (EA70). Aqueous and 70% hydro-alcoholic extracts were characterized for their overall composition by total phenol content, total tannin and total anthocyanin analysis via Folin-Ciocalteu assay, acidic hydrolysis and SO
2 bleaching procedure. Results are presented in
Table 1 for seed extracts and
Table 2 concerning skin extracts.
Table 1.
Total phenol contents, total tannins, total anthocyanins and flavan-3-ol monomers, dimers and trimer characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace seed extracts.
Table 1.
Total phenol contents, total tannins, total anthocyanins and flavan-3-ol monomers, dimers and trimer characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace seed extracts.
| Seeds-EAQ | Seeds-EA70 |
---|
GRE1 a | SYR1 a | CAR a | GRE1 a | SYR1 a | CAR a |
---|
Total composition: | |
TPC | 128.22 ± 0.37a | 215.93 ± 1.17c | 186.08 ± 0.28b | 195.66 ± 1.06a | 207.38 ± 2.15b | 215.84 ± 1.47b |
Total tannins | 157.02 ± 0.56a | 266.87 ± 2.62b | 264.61 ± 2.39b | 302.86 ± 4.85a | 455.42 ± 1.84b | 423.11 ± 15.13b |
Total anthocyanins | 3.98 ± 0.16a | 10.55 ± 0.56b | 11.35 ± 0.51b | 12.17 ± 0.51a | 38.67 ± 4.34b | 57.34 ± 1.86b |
Proanthocyanidins composition: | |
---|
C | 2.07 ± 0.09a | 5.12 ± 0.04b | 2.27 ± 0.00a | 3.60 ± 0.02a | 8.60 ± 0.00c | 5.28 ± 0.03b |
EC | 0.98 ± 0.04a | 3.76 ± 0.03b | 0.94 ± 0.00a | 1.46 ± 0.00a | 5.24 ± 0.00c | 2.02 ± 0.06b |
Σ Monomers | 3.04 ± 0.09a | 8.88 ± 0.00b | 3.21 ± 0.00a | 5.07 ± 0.01a | 13.84 ± 0.00c | 7.29 ± 0.02b |
B1 | 1.01 ± 0.08a | 2.94 ± 0.01b | 0.87 ± 0.01a | 1.68 ± 0.01a | 3.53 ± 0.01c | 3.06 ± 0.00b |
B2 | 0.70 ± 0.01a | 2.23 ± 0.02b | 0.68 ± 0.00a | 0.84 ± 0.00a | 2.16 ± 0.02c | 1.29 ± 0.00b |
B3 | 0.28 ± 0.02a | 0.86 ± 0.00b | 0.25 ± 0.00a | 0.45 ± 0.02a | 0.87 ± 0.02c | 0.58 ± 0.01b |
B4 | 0.51 ± 0.01b | 0.85 ± 0.04c | 0.11 ± 0.00a | Nd | 0.53 ± 0.01 | Nd |
Σ Dimers | 2.50 ± 0.05b | 6.870 ± 0.03c | 1.90 ± 0.01a | 2.97 ± 0.00a | 7.10 ± 0.03c | 4.92 ± 0.01b |
C1 | 0.48 ± 0.01a | 2.00 ± 0.06b | 0.53± 0.01a | 0.54 ± 0.00a | 1.25 ± 0.03c | 0.83 ± 0.01b |
Table 2.
Total phenol contents, total tannins, total anthocyanins and flavan-3-ol monomers, dimers and trimer characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace skin extracts.
Table 2.
Total phenol contents, total tannins, total anthocyanins and flavan-3-ol monomers, dimers and trimer characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace skin extracts.
| Skins-EAQ |
---|
GRE2 a | SYR1 a | SYR2 a | CAR a | MOU a | ALI a |
---|
TPC | 109.72 ± 0.19c | 146.50 ± 1.19e | 71.88 ± 0.08a | 120.83 ± 1.12d | 102.27 ± 0.38b | 196.71 ± 0.37f |
Total tannins | 112.28 ± 2.67b | 156.63 ± 2.63c | 86.36 ± 1.86a | 161.61 ± 1.32c | 104.79 ± 2.00b | 221.4 ± 3.47d |
Total anthocyanins | 8.70 ± 0.01c | 16.01 ± 0.01d | 1.76 ± 0.01a | 14.62 ± 0.75d | 5.65 ± 0.01b | 21.40 ± 0.20e |
Proanthocyanidins composition: | |
C | 0.764 ± 0.003a | 1.415 ± 0.012c | 0.523 ± 0.057a | 1.013 ± 0.003b | 0.656 ± 0.011a | 2.027 ± 0.127d |
EC | 0.285 ± 0.001a | 1.043 ± 0.012b | 0.370 ± 0.032a | 0.352 ± 0.008a | 0.377 ± 0.001a | 1.368 ± 0.088c |
Σ Monomers | 1.050 ± 0.002ab | 2.460 ± 0.020c | 0.890 ± 0.060a | 1.360 ± 0.010b | 1.030 ± 0.010ab | 3.400 ± 0.1500d |
B1 | 0.621 ± 0.002ab | 0.918 ± 0.008b | 0.368 ± 0.003a | 0.736 ± 0.007b | 0.618 ± 0.002ab | 0.908 ± 0.172b |
B2 | 0.410 ± 0.002a | 0.660 ± 0.006bc | 0.363 ± 0.038a | 0.433 ± 0.009a | 0.568 ± 0.004b | 0.771 ± 0.048c |
B3 | 0.278 ± 0.003a | 0.387 ± 0.007a | 0.175 ± 0.006a | 0.277 ± 0.010a | 0.288 ± 0.007a | 0.345 ± 0.115a |
B4 | Nd | Nd | Nd | Nd | Nd | 0.317 ± 0.091 |
Σ Dimers | 1.310 ± 0.002ab | 1.960 ± 0.004bc | 0.910 ± 0.030a | 1.450 ± 0.020ab | 1.470 ± 0.010ab | 2.340 ± 0.300c |
C1 | 0.469 ± 0.000ab | 0.817 ± 0.012b | 0.344 ± 0.082a | 0.537 ± 0.002ab | 0.547 ± 0.125ab | 0.665 ± 0.146ab |
| Skins-EA70 |
GRE2 a | SYR1 a | SYR2 a | CAR a | MOU a | ALI a |
TPC | 195.15 ± 0.28c | 224.92 ± 0.18f | 173.58 ± 0.08a | 203.47 ± 0.83d | 219.88 ± 0.18e | 188.94 ± 0.69b |
Total tannins | 256.07 ± 3.65a | 312.46 ± 10.77bc | 250.17 ± 7.07a | 345.34 ± 4.18c | 268.6 ± 11.68ab | 232.65 ± 3.14a |
Total anthocyanins | 53.66 ± 0.83a | 86.68 ± 1.71b | 45.38 ± 0.20a | 88.44 ± 0.59b | 46.64 ± 0.39a | 54.41 ± 2.66a |
Proanthocyanidins composition: | |
C | 1.420 ± 0.005a | 2.287 ± 0.100b | 2.094 ± 0.045b | 1.440 ± 0.002a | 1.522 ± 0.021a | 5.084 ± 0.026c |
EC | 0.441 ± 0.003a | 1.363 ± 0.008b | 1.101 ± 0.195b | 0.443 ± 0.003a | 0.658 ± 0.001a | 2.626 ± 0.005c |
Σ Monomers | 1.860 ± 0.001a | 3.650 ± 0.080c | 3.190 ± 0.110b | 1.880 ± 0.003a | 2.180 ± 0.020a | 7.710 ± 0.020d |
B1 | 0.915 ± 0.006a | 1.266 ± 0.009b | 1.190 ± 0.164ab | 1.140 ± 0.013ab | 1.150 ± 0.011ab | 2.589 ± 0.004c |
B2 | 0.396 ± 0.021a | 0.635 ± 0.008c | 0.602 ± 0.008bc | 0.388 ± 0.021a | 0.566 ± 0.001b | 1.284 ± 0.001d |
B3 | 0.297 ± 0.001b | 0.292 ± 0.003b | 0.360 ± 0.001c | 0.265 ± 0.003a | 0.305 ± 0.002b | 0.603 ± 0.011d |
B4 | Nd | Nd | Nd | Nd | Nd | 0.350 ± 0.000 |
Σ Dimers | 1.610 ± 0.010a | 2.190 ± 0.003c | 2.150 ± 0.110c | 1.790 ± 0.030ab | 2.020 ± 0.010bc | 4.830 ± 0.010d |
C1 | 0.336 ± 0.002a | 0.435 ± 0.001ab | 0.662 ± 0.133b | 0.307 ± 0.002a | 0.371 ± 0.004a | 0.629 ± 0.003b |
Overall, the results showed that the use of a 70% hydro-alcoholic solution allowed a better extraction of phenolic compounds whether in seeds or in skins. Among the seed extracts, seeds from SYR1 and CAR were particularly rich in polyphenols, tannins and anthocyanins in EAQ and EA70 extracts (
Table 1). SYR 1 (EA70) contained a higher tannins concentration, up to 455.42 mg/g DW, while CAR (EA70) has a higher quantity in total anthocyanins (57.34 mg/g DW). In both extracts, phenolic contents in GRE1 were low in comparison with other varieties. Our results are in accordance with several studies which have reported a lower amount of total phenol and anthocyanin contents in products derived from Grenache variety compared to other varieties such as Syrah, Mourvèdre and Carignan [
24,
25]. Indeed, Grenache cultivar is known to be used for rosé or fortified wines production and it is typically blended with other varieties. Moreover Grenache is also known to have thin skin with high ripeness level and high susceptibility to oxidation [
26].
For both type of seed extracts, SYR1 was the richest, whether in monomers (8.88 mg/g DW in EAQ and 13.84 mg/g DW in EA70), in dimers (6.87 mg/g DW in EAQ and 7.10 mg/g DW in EA70) and trimer C
1 (2.00 mg/g DW in EAQ and 1.25 mg/g DW in EA70) as opposed to GRE1 (
Table 1). The latter had already appeared to contain low amount of polyphenols in previous total analysis. However, despite this low content, GRE1 still possessed an exploitable potential, especially when extracted with 70% hydro-alcoholic solution.
Concerning skins, results for EAQ extracts revealed that ALI contained the highest phenolic contents for the three tests combined (TPC: 196.71 mg GAE/g DW, total tannins: 221.40 mg/g DW and total anthocyanins: 21.40 mg/g DW) while in EA70, SYR1 skins were predominantly high in phenolic contents (total phenol contents: 224.92 mg GAE /g DW, total tannins: 312.46 mg/g DW and total anthocyanins: 86.68 mg/g DW) (
Table 2). The poorest extract was SYR2, whether in EAQ or in EA70.
In greater detail, EAQ values ranged from 0.89 mg/g DW to 3.4 mg/g DW for the sum of monomers, from 0.91 mg/g DW to 2.34 mg/g DW for the sum of dimers and values from 1.88 mg/g DW to 7.71 mg/g DW and 1.61 mg/g DW to 4.83 mg/g DW were found in EA70 extracts, for the sum of monomers and dimers, respectively. ALI and SYR1 showed a higher content of flavan-3-ol monomers and dimers in both type of extract. Regarding the dimer B
4 which could not be found in grape pomace skins except for those of Alicante varieties, a previous study has already reported this phenomenon in grape skins [
27,
28]. Among EAQ samples, SYR2 skin extracts was evidenced as having fewer amounts than other skin EAQ samples, but in EA70 it was GRE2 and CAR. The difference of polyphenolic content between SYR1 and SYR2 could be explained by the fact that SYR1 and SYR2 were derived from grapes from different parcels. Several studies have demonstrated the importance of climatic and geographical factors and cultural practices [
29,
30]. Moreover, this difference could also be explained by technical processes [
12,
13]. Actually, SYR1 and SYR2 grapes were used to make different wines and as a result the vinification process employed differed. For instance, in the case of SYR1, fermentation lasted 19 days whereas it lasted 22 day for SYR2.
As it was already observed in seed extracts, EA70 were characterized by higher total phenol contents, total tannins and total anthocyanins. This result illustrated a better extraction by 70% alcoholic solution. Fournand
et al. [
31] reported that tannin extraction efficiency in a hydroalcoholic solution similar to wine was lower than 38%. Indeed only a small amount of tannins are released during fermentation and this resulted in a fermented pomace with high tannin contents and increased tannin extractibility. Ethanol can facilitate tissue dissolution and thus, liberate a greater amount of polyphenols. Actually, between EAQ and EA70, total polyphenols and total tannins rate were 1.5- to 2.5- and 1- to 3-fold respectively, higher in EA70. Furthermore, beside the solvent effect, previous studies by Vergara-Salinas
et al. [
32] have shown that fermented pomace could also facilitate the extraction of tannins compared to unfermented ones.
2.2. Anthocyanin Analysis of Grape Pomace Seed and Skin Extracts by HPLC-UV-MSn
In total, 18 anthocyanins were detected by HPLC-PDA-MS. Compounds were identified on the basis of their absorbance spectra, the retention times of commercially available standards, elution order,
m/z of the positively charged molecular ion ([M]
+) and on the MS
2 fragmentation, according to previous reports.
Table 3 and
Table 4 summarize the anthocyanin contents of grape pomace seed and skin extracts in which total anthocyanins represents the sum of individual anthocyanins.
Inall studied varieties, the main compounds consisted of 3-O-monoglucosides ([M−162]+) of delphinidin (m/z 303), cyanidin (m/z 287), petunidin (m/z 317), peonidin (m/z 301) and malvidin (m/z 331) which accounted for 63% in EAQ, 64% in EA70 to 72% in EAQ, 70% in EA70 of the total anthocyanins content in seed and skin pomace extracts, respectively.
Table 3.
Anthocyanin characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace seed extracts.
Table 3.
Anthocyanin characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace seed extracts.
| Seeds-EAQ | Seeds-EA70 |
---|
GRE1 a | SYR1 a | CAR a | GRE1 a | SYR1 a | CAR a |
---|
Dp-3-O-Glc | 0.03 ± 0.00a | 0.08 ± 0.00b | 0.40 ± 0.00c | 0.19 ± 0.00a | 0.31 ± 0.00b | 3.11 ± 0.02c |
Cy-3-O-Glc | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.05 ± 0.00b | 0.09 ± 0.00b | 0.05 ± 0.00a | 0.23 ± 0.00c |
Pt-3-O-Glc | 0.05 ± 0.00a | 0.14 ± 0.00b | 0.43 ± 0.00c | 0.33 ± 0.01a | 0.58 ± 0.02b | 3.18 ± 0.01c |
Pn-3-O-Glc | 0.11 ± 0.00a | 0.12 ± 0.00b | 0.15 ± 0.01c | 0.56 ± 0.03a | 0.47 ± 0.02a | 1.11 ± 0.00b |
Mv-3-O-Glc | 0.39 ± 0.00a | 0.93 ± 0.00b | 1.48 ± 0.02c | 2.36 ± 0.12a | 3.57 ± 0.08b | 10.52 ± 0.11c |
Mv-3-O-Glc-acetaldehyde (vitisin B) | Nd | 0.02 ± 0.00b | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.05 ± 0.00c | 0.03 ± 0.00b |
Dp-3-O-(6"-O-acetyl)-Glc | Nd | 0.02 ± 0.00 | Nd | Nd | 0.09 ± 0.00b | 0.06 ± 0.00a |
Dimer Mv-Cat | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.03 ± 0.00b | Nd | 0.04 ± 0.00a | 0.05 ± 0.00b | 0.06 ± 0.00c |
Mv-3-O-glc-pyruvate (vitisin A) | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.04 ± 0.00b | 0.04 ± 0.00b | 0.12 ± 0.00b | 0.07 ± 0.00a | 0.14 ± 0.00c |
Dimer Mv-Cat | 0.002 ± 0.00a | 0.07 ± 0.00c | 0.05 ± 0.00b | Nd | 0.13 ± 0.00a | 0.17 ± 0.00b |
Dimer Mv-Cat | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.03 ± 0.00c | 0.02 ± 0.00b | 0.10 ± 0.00a | 0.13 ± 0.00b | 0.16 ± 0.00c |
Pn-3-O-(6"-O-acetyl)-Glc | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.07 ± 0.00b | Nd | 0.07 ± 0.00a | 0.32 ± 0.01c | 0.12 ± 0.00b |
Mv-3-O-(6"-O-acetyl)-Glc | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.32 ± 0.00c | 0.09 ± 0.00b | 0.06 ± 0.00a | 0.9 ± 0.03c | 0.31 ± 0.00b |
Dp-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-Glc | 0.005 ± 0.00a | 0.06 ± 0.00b | 0.10 ± 0.00c | 0.05 ± 0.00a | 0.18 ± 0.00b | 0.58 ± 0.01c |
Mv-3-O-(6"-O-caffeoyl)-Glc | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.04 ± 0.00c | 0.02 ± 0.00b | 0.08 ± 0.00a | 0.11 ± 0.00b | 0.33 ± 0.00c |
Cy-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-Glc | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.02 ± 0.00b | 0.02 ± 0.00b | 0.07 ± 0.00a | 0.07 ± 0.00a | 0.11 ± 0.00b |
Pt-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-Glc | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.11 ± 0.00b | 0.11 ± 0.00b | 0.08 ± 0.00a | 0.35 ± 0.01b | 0.66 ± 0.00c |
Mv-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-Glc | 0.06 ± 0.00a | 1.14 ± 0.01c | 0.65 ± 0.00b | 0.80 ± 0.00a | 2.85 ± 0.00b | 4.51 ± 0.04c |
Total anthocyanins Glc | 0.60 ± 0.00a | 1.30 ± 0.00b | 2.52 ± 0.03c | 3.53 ± 0.16a | 4.99 ± 0.12b | 18.15 ± 0.09c |
Total anthocyanins acetylated | 0.03 ± 0.00a | 0.41 ± 0.00c | 0.09 ± 0.00b | 0.13 ± 0.00a | 1.30 ± 0.02c | 0.49 ± 0.00b |
Total anthocyanins coumaroylated | 0.08 ± 0.00a | 1.32 ± 0.01c | 0.88 ± 0.00b | 1.00 ± 0.00a | 3.44 ± 0.01b | 5.86 ± 0.02c |
Total anthocyanins | 0.76 ± 0.00a | 3.26 ± 0.01b | 3.63 ± 0.03c | 5.00 ± 0.17a | 10.28 ± 0.14b | 25.38 ± 0.11c |
Table 4.
Anthocyanin characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace skin extracts.
Table 4.
Anthocyanin characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace skin extracts.
| Skins-EAQ |
---|
GRE2 a | SYR1 a | SYR2 a | CAR a | MOU a | ALI a |
---|
Dp-3-O-glc | 0.24 ± 0.01d | 0.15 ± 0.00b | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.53 ± 0.00f | 0.20 ± 0.00c | 0.31 ± 0.00e |
Cy-3-O-glc | 0.09 ± 0.00d | 0.01 ± 0.00a | Nd | 0.05 ± 0.00b | 0.07 ± 0.00c | 0.11 ± 0.00e |
Pt-3-O-glc | 0.33 ± 0.01c | 0.25 ± 0.01b | 0.03 ± 0.00a | 0.54 ± 0.00e | 0.30 ± 0.00c | 0.47 ± 0.02d |
Pn-3-O-glc | 0.35 ± 0.01c | 0.2 ± 0.01b | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.19 ± 0.00b | 0.22 ± 0.00b | 1.49 ± 0.03d |
Mv-3-O-glc | 1.78 ± 0.05d | 1.54 ± 0.05c | 0.11 ± 0.00a | 1.74 ± 0.02d | 1.01 ± 0.01b | 3.14 ± 0.03e |
Mv-3-O-glc-acetaldehyde (vitisin B) | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.02 ± 0.00b | Nd | 0.02 ± 0.00b | 0.01 ± 0.00a | Nd |
Dp-3-O-(6"-O-acetyl) glc | Nd | 0.05 ± 0.00b | Nd | 0.02 ± 0.00a | Nd | Nd |
Dimer Mv-Cat | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.03 ± 0.00b | Nd | Nd | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.03 ± 0.00b |
Mv-3-O-glc-pyruvate (vitisin A) | 0.05 ± 0.00c | 0.04 ± 0.00bc | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.04 ± 0.00b | 0.06 ± 0.00d | 0.10 ± 0.00e |
Dimer Mv-Cat | Nd | 0.08 ± 0.00c | Nd | 0.05 ± 0.00b | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.05 ± 0.00b |
Dimer Mv-Cat | 0.01 ± 0.00bc | 0.03 ± 0.00d | 0.01 ± 0.00c | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.01 ± 0.00ab | 0.03 ± 0.00d |
Pn-3-O-(6"-O-acetyl)-glc | 0.02 ± 0.00c | 0.10 ± 0.00e | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.02 ± 0.00b | 0.01 ± 0.00ab | 0.09 ± 0.00d |
Mv-3-O-(6"-O-acetyl)-glc | Nd | 0.52 ± 0.00e | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.07 ± 0.00c | 0.04 ± 0.00b | 0.19 ± 0.00d |
Dp-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-glc | Nd | 0.09 ± 0.00c | Nd | 0.13 ± 0.00d | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.06 ± 0.00b |
Mv-3-O-(6"-O-caffeoyl)-glc | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.05 ± 0.00c | Nd | 0.03 ± 0.00b | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.05 ± 0.00c |
Cy-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-glc | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.02 ± 0.00b | Nd | 0.03 ± 0.00c | 0.03 ± 0.00d | 0.03 ± 0.00c |
Pt-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-glc | 0.04 ± 0.00b | 0.16 ± 0.00e | Nd | 0.12 ± 0.00d | 0.03 ± 0.00a | 0.07 ± 0.00c |
Mv-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-glc | 0.22 ± 0.00c | 1.59 ± 0.00f | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.68 ± 0.01d | 0.15 ± 0.00b | 1.11 ± 0.01e |
Total anthocyanins glc | 2.8 ± 0.07d | 2.15 ± 0.06c | 0.17 ± 0.00a | 3.05 ± 0.02e | 1.8 ± 0.01b | 5.52 ± 0.08f |
Total anthocyanins acetylated | 0.02 ± 0.00a | 0.67 ± 0.00e | 0.03 ± 0.00a | 0.11 ± 0.00c | 0.05 ± 0.00b | 0.27 ± 0.00d |
Total anthocyanins coumaroylated | 0.27 ± 0.00c | 1.86 ± 0.00f | 0.01 ± 0.00a | 0.96 ± 0.01d | 0.24 ± 0.00b | 1.27 ± 0.01e |
Total anthocyanins | 3.19 ± 0.08c | 4.92 ± 0.06e | 0.24 ± 0.00a | 4.25 ± 0.03d | 2.2 ± 0.01b | 7.32 ± 0.08f |
| Skins-EA70 |
GRE2 a | SYR1 a | SYR2 a | CAR a | MOU a | ALI a |
Dp-3-O-glc | 1.43 ± 0.00b | 0.78 ± 0.00a | 0.97 ± 0.00a | 5.35 ± 0.21d | 2.35 ± 0.00c | 1.06 ± 0.01a |
Cy-3-O-glc | 0.34 ± 0.02d | 0.05 ± 0.00a | 0.12 ± 0.00b | 0.39 ± 0.01e | 0.52 ± 0.00f | 0.24 ± 0.00c |
Pt-3-O-glc | 2.05 ± 0.08b | 1.29 ± 0.00a | 1.53 ± 0.00a | 5.04 ± 0.21d | 3.38 ± 0.02c | 1.65 ± 0.03a |
Pn-3-O-glc | 1.91 ± 0.02c | 0.87 ± 0.01a | 0.94 ± 0.02a | 1.71 ± 0.03b | 2.00 ± 0.01d | 5.32 ± 0.01e |
Mv-3-O-glc | 10.96 ± 0.22c | 7.59 ± 0.04b | 6.76 ± 0.09a | 14.82 ± 0.42d | 10.55 ± 0.03c | 11.18 ± 0.05c |
Mv-3-O-glc-acetaldehyde (vitisin B) | 0.03 ± 0.00b | 0.06 ± 0.00e | 0.07 ± 0.00f | 0.05 ± 0.00d | 0.04 ± 0.00c | 0.03 ± 0.00a |
Dp-3-O-(6"-O-acetyl) glc | 0.04 ± 0.00a | 0.16 ± 0.00e | 0.13 ± 0.00d | 0.09 ± 0.00c | 0.05 ± 0.00ab | 0.05 ± 0.00b |
Dimer Mv-Cat | 0.05 ± 0.00a | 0.07 ± 0.00c | 0.11 ± 0.00e | Nd | 0.10 ± 0.00d | 0.06 ± 0.00b |
Mv-3-O-glc-pyruvate (vitisin A) | 0.22 ± 0.01c | 0.17 ± 0.01a | 0.39 ± 0.00e | 0.18 ± 0.01a | 0.32 ± 0.00d | 0.20 ± 0.00b |
Dimer Mv-Cat | 0.12 ± 0.00b | 0.27 ± 0.01e | 0.21 ± 0.00d | 0.16 ± 0.00c | 0.07 ± 0.00a | 0.14 ± 0.00b |
Dimer Mv-Cat | 0.10 ± 0.00b | 0.11 ± 0.00c | 0.21 ± 0.01d | 0.10 ± 0.00b | 0.08 ± 0.00a | 0.23 ± 0.00e |
Pn-3-O-(6"-O-acetyl)-glc | 0.17 ± 0.00a | 0.52 ± 0.01c | 0.39 ± 0.01bc | 0.10 ± 0.00a | 0.19 ± 0.00ab | 0.52 ± 0.14c |
Mv-3-O-(6"-O-acetyl)-glc | 0.46 ± 0.01a | 2.11 ± 0.05d | 1.06 ± 0.00c | 0.41 ± 0.02a | 0.39 ± 0.00a | 0.61 ± 0.00b |
Dp-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-glc | 0.25 ± 0.01b | 0.12 ± 0.00a | 0.35 ± 0.01e | 0.75 ± 0.00f | 0.30 ± 0.00d | 0.27 ± 0.00c |
Mv-3-O-(6"-O-caffeoyl)-glc | 0.34 ± 0.01d | 0.15 ± 0.00a | 0.56 ± 0.00e | 0.24 ± 0.00b | 0.32 ± 0.00c | 0.25 ± 0.00b |
Cy-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-glc | 0.13 ± 0.00b | 0.05 ± 0.00a | 0.17 ± 0.01d | 0.13 ± 0.00b | 0.52 ± 0.00e | 0.14 ± 0.00c |
Pt-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-glc | 0.36 ± 0.00b | 0.20 ± 0.00a | 0.51 ± 0.01c | 0.82 ± 0.01f | 0.65 ± 0.00e | 0.55 ± 0.00d |
Mv-3-O-(6"-O-coumaroyl)-glc | 3.09 ± 0.02b | 1.53 ± 0.00a | 4.12 ± 0.00e | 3.80 ± 0.03d | 3.24 ± 0.00c | 6.25 ± 0.04f |
Total anthocyanins glc | 16.68 ± 0.34b | 10.59 ± 0.05a | 10.33 ± 0.10a | 27.3 ± 0.88d | 18.79 ± 0.02c | 19.45 ± 0.08c |
Total anthocyanins acetylated | 0.67 ± 0.01a | 2.79 ± 0.04d | 1.59 ± 0.01c | 0.60 ± 0.02a | 0.62 ± 0.00a | 1.18 ± 0.14b |
Total anthocyanins coumaroylated | 3.82 ± 0.01b | 1.89 ± 0.00a | 5.14 ± 0.01d | 5.494 ± 0.04e | 4.71 ± 0.00c | 7.21 ± 0.04f |
Total anthocyanins | 22.03 ± 0.35c | 16.10 ± 0.10a | 18.60 ± 0.11b | 34.11 ± 0.95f | 25.06 ± 0.01d | 28.74 ± 0.01e |
Other compounds were largely represented by 3
-O-(6"
-O-coumaroyl) glucoside anthocyanins ([M−308]
+) followed by the 3
-O-(6"
-O-acetyl) glucoside one ([M−204]
+) (
Table 3 and
Table 4). These results are in agreement with previously reported data which illustrated the predominantly monoglucoside character of
V. vinifera species [
33,
34,
35]. Besides, malvidin-3
-O-glucoside and its derivatives,
p-coumaroyl derivatives, petunidin-3
-O-glucoside and peonidin-3
-O-glucoside were the major compounds. Malvidin-3
-O-glucoside alone accounted for 30% in seeds to 40% in skins, whereas the minor compound cyanidin-3
-O-glucoside represented no more than 2% of the total anthocyanins.
In seed pomace extracts, an appreciable amount of anthocyanins still remained. This is due, in the first instance, to the contact between seeds and skins throughout the winemaking process, in particular during the pressing and maceration. Moreover, despite the separation of skins from seeds, the operation was not complete and some skins residues remained.
In the aqueous extracts, total anthocyanin contents ranged from 0.76 ± 0.001 mg/g DW to 3.63 ± 0.03 mg/g DW in GRE1 and CAR, respectively. CAR samples possessed the highest level of 3
-O-glucoside anthocyanins (2.52 ± 0.03 mg/g DW) while SYR1 contained more acetylated and coumaroylated anthocyanins (0.41 ± 0.001 mg/g DW and 1.32 ± 0.01 mg/g DW respectively). Extracts of these two varieties contained four times more anthocyanins than Grenache, which was composed of only 0.76 ± 0.001 mg/g DW of total anthocyanins (
Table 3).
Regarding the 70% hydro-alcoholic extract, overall, the level of anthocyanins was higher: 6.6-, 3.2- and 7-fold more anthocyanins were extracted from GRE1, SYR1 and CAR, respectively, than with the aqueous extraction method. Total anthocyanin levels ranged from 5.00 ± 0.17 mg/g DW in GRE1 to 25.38 ± 0.11 mg/g DW in CAR, which also possessed the highest levels of 3
-O-glucosides and 3
-O-(6"
-O-coumaroyl) glucoside anthocyanins (18.15 ± 0.09 mg/g DW and 5.86 ± 0.02 mg/g DW respectively). Besides, an important amount of 3
-O-(6"
-O-acetyl) glucoside (1.3 ± 0.02 mg/g DW) was founded in SYR1 grape pomace seeds. Among the three studied varieties, the CAR variety proved to be a promising source of anthocyanins, especially in the EA70 extract compared to EAQ and the two other varieties. Data concerning Grenache are in good agreement with those obtained in total analysis (
Table 1) and other comparative studies [
24,
25].
As expected, anthocyanin levels in skin pomace extracts were higher than those in seeds and the predominant compound was malvidin-3
-O-glucoside, followed by petudinin-3
-O-glucoside and peonidin-3
-O-glucoside (
Table 4). Previous studies showed that anthocyanins are extracted mainly in the aqueous phase during maceration prior to fermentation and at the beginning of alcoholic fermentation. Even though up to 77% of anthocyanins could be released in this process [
31], a surprisingly large amount of anthocyanins still remained in grape pomace skins after the vinification process.
In aqueous extracts, the total anthocyanins value ranged from 0.24 ± 0.001 mg/g DW in SYR2 to 7.32 ± 0.08 mg/g DW in ALI. SYR1 possessed appreciable levels especially 3
-O-(6"
-O-acetyl) glucoside and 3
-O-(6"
-O-coumaroyl) glucoside anthocyanins. Concerning the 70% hydro-alcoholic extracts, levels ranged from 16.1 ± 0.1 mg/g DW in SYR1 to 34.11 ± 0.95 mg/g DW in CAR. Moreover, CAR, ALI and MOU were the varieties which possessed the highest amounts of anthocyanin 3
-O-glucosides. Regarding the 3
-O-(6"
-O-acetyl) glucoside anthocyanins, the two Syrah (SYR1 and SYR2) retained the highest amounts reaching 2.79 ± 0.04 mg/g DW and 1.59 ± 0.01 mg/g DW, respectively. The 3
-O-(6"
-O-coumaroyl) glucoside anthocyanins were predominant in ALI, CAR and SYR2 (
Table 4).
Considering the difference between the two extraction methods, the extraction yield was superior in 70% hydro-alcoholic extracts with the amounts, depending on the variety, varying from 3- to 77-fold higher. Surprisingly, in SYR2, 77 times more total anthocyanins were extracted. The level of 3
-O-(6"
-O-acetyl) glucoside and 3
-O-(6"
-O-coumaroyl) glucoside anthocyanins reached up to 1.59 ± 0.01 mg/g DW and 5.14 ± 0.01 mg/g DW, respectively. However, the two different methods of extraction did not strictly increase or decrease the ratio of 3
-O-glucoside, 3
-O-(6"
-O-acetyl) glucoside and 3
-O-(6"
-O-coumaroyl) glucoside in grape skin and seed pomace extracts (
Table 3 and
Table 4). In some varieties, using 70% hydro-alcoholic extraction increased the relative amount of 3
-O-(6"
-O-coumaroyl) glucoside obtained, but in other instances, it decreased the ratio. For instance, GRE1 skin pomace extract comprised 9% coumaroylated anthocyanins in EAQ which increased to 17% when using 70% alcohol whereas in SYR1, 38% were extracted in EAQ and the ratio decreased to 12% in EA70. Overall, the data showed that the two different extraction methods did not substantially affect the ratio of 3
-O-glucoside, 3
-O-(6"
-O-acetyl) glucoside and 3
-O-(6"
-O-coumaroyl) glucoside anthocyanins. Actually, this could be due to the structural differences between these compounds and their association with other constituents such as the adsorption on solids (yeast, pomace) or even the modifications in their structure (formation of tannin-anthocyanin complexes) [
36]. Extraction with 70% of ethanol has nevertheless been shown to improve the recovery of anthocyanins from grape by-products. This result was in accordance with several works confirming that anthocyanin yields could be improved by using high ethanol concentration solvents. Cacae
et al. [
37] reported that extraction of anthocyanins from black currants using aqueous ethanol increased with ethanol concentration up to 60%. Another study by Lapornik
et al. [
38] showed that grape marc extracted with ethanol 70% had higher absolute values of anthocyanins than those extracted with water. Moreover, the anthocyanin extraction yield could also be enhanced by improving the extraction method as already shown by Howard
et al. [
39]. The authors studied anthocyanin contents in strawberry puree and demonstrated that strict oxygen exclusion during processing (
i.e., under carbon dioxide or nitrogen) could prevent oxidative reactions.
Among the studied varieties, CAR and ALI were shown to be a rich source of anthocyanins, especially with the 70% hydro-alcoholic extract. The SYR2 also contained substantial amounts of acetylated and coumaroylated anthocyanins in EA70.
2.3. Antioxidant Activities Evaluation of Grape Pomace Seed and Skin Extracts
The antioxidant potential was determined in order to select the most active grape pomace seeds and skins among the studied varieties. The assessment of antioxidant capacity has been the subject of extensive studies and arguments over the past decade. The choice of assay method is often based on speed, simplicity, ease of use and instrumentation availability. Generally, antioxidant measurements can be related either to the capacity of extracts to directly transfer hydrogen to a radical (DPPH or ABTS), to donate electrons (FRAP) or to act as competitors for peroxy radicals (ORAC test) [
40]. Thus, the antioxidant capacity of each extract cannot be determined by a single method. More than one type of measurement needs to be performed to take into account the various mode of action of antioxidants [
41,
42]. In that context, in this work the free radical scavenging potential was evaluated by three spectrophotometric tests: the FRAP, ABTS
•+ and DPPH and a spectrofluorimetric test, the ORAC test.
Concerning seed extracts, the four antioxidant analytical techniques gave the same classification both for EAQ and EA70. The highest antioxidant activities were found in SYR1 for both types of extracts. Results were correlated with previous analysis which evidenced SYR1 as having a substantial amount of flavan-3-ols, procyanidins and anthocyanins. GRE1 extract presented a low antioxidant activity as a consequence of its low phenolic contents (ORAC: 1466.4 µM TE/g DW; FRAP: 0.63 mM Fe
2+/g DW, ABTS: 1203.2 µM TE/g DW and DPPH: 410.8 TE/g DW in EAQ and ORAC: 1926.7 µM TE/g DW; FRAP: 1.28 mM Fe
2+/g DW, ABTS: 2813.1 µM TE/g DW and DPPH: 1277.6 TE/g DW in EA70). Antioxidant activities of EAQ and EA70 grape pomace seed extracts were showed in
Table 5.
Table 5.
Antioxidant activity characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace seed extracts.
Table 5.
Antioxidant activity characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace seed extracts.
| Seeds-EAQ | Seeds-EA70 |
---|
GRE1 a | SYR1 a | CAR a | GRE1 a | SYR1 a | CAR a |
---|
ORAC b | 1466.39 ± 29.58a | 2230.69 ± 101.74b | 2058.58 ± 85.11b | 1926.73 ± 108.55a | 2613.98 ± 150.86a | 2332.90 ± 91.94a |
FRAP b | 0.63 ± 0.02a | 1.33 ± 0.08c | 1.06 ± 0.08b | 1.28 ± 0.01a | 1.45 ± 0.16a | 1.20 ± 0.06a |
ABTS b | 1203.20 ± 24.09a | 2432.62 ± 55.95c | 1948.75 ± 61.10b | 2813.15 ± 89.95a | 3601.20 ± 88.59b | 3495.58 ± 66.40b |
DPPH b | 410.79 ± 43.30a | 1037.12 ± 64.04b | 1050.59 ± 30.11b | 1277.59 ± 54.69a | 1685.87 ± 130.65b | 1536.77 ± 38.92b |
In skins, results obtained by the different antioxidant analyses were more disparate, especially in EA70 extracts (
Table 6). In aqueous extracts, the highest antioxidant activity was found in SYR1 and ALI. This observation was observed with every test and correlated well with previous results evidencing these extracts as containing high phenolic content. In EA70, different antioxidant tests did not give the same extract classification. Despite this fact, SYR1 skin extract was classified as being the first or second extract showing the highest antioxidant capacity in the four tests (ORAC: 1912.6 µM TE/g DW; FRAP: 1.52 mM Fe
2+/g DW, ABTS: 2614.5 µM TE/g DW and DPPH: 1391.7 TE/g DW).
Regression analyses (correlation coefficient R
2) were attempted in order to correlate the results obtained with different methods. The best correlations with total phenolic contents were obtained with EAQ extracts both for seed and skin extracts: from R
2 = 0.87 for DPPH to R
2 = 0.99 for FRAP and from R
2 = 0.79 for DPPH to R
2 = 0.97 for ABTS in seed and skin extracts, respectively. Weaker correlations from R
2 = 0.43 for ORAC to R
2 = 0.72 for ABTS in seeds and from R
2 = 0.34 for FRAP to R
2 = 0.63 for ABTS in skins were observed in EA70 extracts. Positive correlations between TPC and antiradical activity using similar tests on grape seed samples and various plant samples have also been observed by other investigators [
43,
44,
45]. Furthermore, this study demonstrated that correlations between grape pomace contents and antioxidant levels were higher with total values than with the specific compound concentrations quantified by HPLC. As noted in a recent publication [
46], our result illustrated that antioxidant activity is more related to the total constituent levels than to the concentration of any individual compound, despite the fact that some compounds may contribute more than the others.
Table 6.
Antioxidant activity characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace skin extracts.
Table 6.
Antioxidant activity characterisation in EAQ and EA70 grape pomace skin extracts.
| Skins-EAQ |
---|
GRE2 a | SYR1 a | SYR2 a | CAR a | MOU a | ALI a |
---|
ORAC b | 1190.70 ± 183.58ab | 1345.94 ± 19.15ab | 1065.98 ± 84.21a | 1077.76 ± 60.16a | 1033.76 ± 77.61a | 1714.62 ± 14.77b |
FRAP b | 0.56 ± 0.01c | 0.88 ± 0.01e | 0.14 ± 0.02a | 0.67 ± 0.02d | 0.32 ± 0.01b | 1.13 ± 0.00f |
ABTS b | 934.12 ± 11.9b | 1427.98 ± 54.80c | 668.30 ± 29.99a | 1048.83 ± 101.57b | 965.59 ± 16.63b | 1760.08 ± 91.03d |
DPPH b | 99.45 ± 10.82a | 690.29 ± 147.01bc | 263.85 ± 71.54ab | 591.01 ± 85.59abc | 279.43 ± 61.65ab | 1057.12 ± 45.22c |
| Skins-EA70 |
GRE2 a | SYR1 a | SYR2 a | CAR a | MOU a | ALI a |
ORAC b | 1828.26 ± 40.37bc | 1912.56 ± 6.09bc | 1701.83 ± 88.34bc | 1238.38 ± 11.09a | 2070.03 ± 60.64c | 1628.45 ± 82.58b |
FRAP b | 1.32 ± 0.03c | 1.52 ± 0.05d | 0.94 ± 0.03a | 1.34 ± 0.03c | 1.03 ± 0.02ab | 1.13 ± 0.01b |
ABTS b | 2612.08 ± 130.93a | 2614.5 ± 10.42a | 2010.64 ± 146.96a | 2555.92 ± 146.04a | 2674.84 ± 187.30a | 1923.37 ± 87.01a |
DPPH b | 876.96 ± 74.32a | 1391.69 ± 37.24bc | 1164.91 ± 55.55ab | 1075.39 ± 46.16ab | 833.28 ± 26.37a | 1749.31 ± 112.65c |
Actually, the antioxidant activities of EAQ and EA70 followed the same trend as the phenol content of the extracts. EA70 extracts exhibited higher potential and proved to be more effective than EAQ extracts. However, due to the great diversity of polyphenols, the structure-activity relationship and bioavailability, the therapeutic efficacy of the antioxidants differs extensively [
41,
42,
47]. Many reports still showed inconsistent and conflicting results using different approaches for the assessment of antioxidant capacity, making difficult the development of a universal method by which antioxidant activity can be measured accurately and quantitatively. Because of bioavailability, metabolism, biotransformation and chemical reactivity,
in vitro capacity cannot be simply extrapolated [
48]. Therefore, in order to evaluate the health effects of these extracts,
in vivo experiments need to be performed and the effects of antioxidant may be evaluated using appropriate biomarkers in biological fluids and tissues. Nevertheless,
in vitro antioxidant activity assays could be used as a pre-selection tool for the choice of grape pomace seed and skin extracts with high potential. These experiments evidenced seeds from Carignan and Syrah (SYR1) and skins from Carignan and Alicante as being the most antioxidant ones.