Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Selection of elderberry (Sambucus nigra L.) genotypes best suited for the preparation of juice

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
European Food Research and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Experiments with elderberry genotypes, ripening stage and pectinolysis were carried out in order to investigate the possibility to improve different quality characteristics of elderberry juice. Raw juice was processed using either an optimised method with respect to enzyme concentration and treatment time or produced directly without any enzymatic treatment. Neochlorogenic acid, chlorogenic acid, cyanidin-3-sambubioside-5-glucoside, cyanidin-3,5-diglucoside, cyanidin-3-sambubioside, cyanidin-3-glucoside, quercetin-3-rutinoside (rutin) and quercetin-3-glucoside (isoquercitrin) were identified in the raw juice by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) and quantified by high-performance liquid chromatography-diode array detection (HPLC-DAD). The content of phenolic acids and flavonoids in elderberries were shown to be affected by berry development stage at harvest (ripening stage). Furthermore, a considerable variation in juice yield and physicochemical properties such as turbidity, soluble solids, titratable acidity, and content of phenolic acids and flavonoids was found between juices processed from elderberries by pectinolysis of different elderberry genotypes. Pectinolysis appeared not to have any major effect on juice yield and the content of phenolic acids and flavonoids in the juice compared to non-enzymatic processed juice. Factor analysis revealed correlations among quality characteristics such as soluble solids, titratable acidity, turbidity, and content of phenolic acids and flavonoids and it is shown that these correlations may be useful for the selection of elderberry genotypes best suited for the preparation of juice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kaack K (1997) Fruit Var J 51:28–31

    Google Scholar 

  2. Schumacher F (1983) Schweiz Z Obst Weinbau 119:551–560

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jensen K, Christensen LP, Hansen M, Jørgensen U, Kaack K (2001) J Sci Food Agric 81:237–244

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Siebert KJ, Carrasco A, Lynn PY (1996) J Agric Food Chem 44:1997–2005

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Beveridge T (1997) Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 37:75–91

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Meyer AS, Köser C, Adler-Nissen J (2001) J Agric Food Chem 49:3644–3650

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kunsch U, Temperli A (1978) Qual Plant Plant Foods Hum Nutr 28:233–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Frankel EN, Kanner J, German JB, Parks E, Kinsella JE (1993) Lancet 341:454–457

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hollman PCH, Hertog MGL, Katan MB (1996) Food Chem 57:43–46

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Heinonen IM, Meyer AS, Frankel EN (1998) J Agric Food Chem 46:4107–4112

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Olthof MR, Hollman PCH, Katan MB (2001) J Nutr 131:66–71

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Netzel M, Strass G, Herbst M, Dietrich H, Bitsch R, Bitsch I, Frank T (2005) Food Res Int 38:905–910

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Murkovic M, Abuja PM, Bergmann AR, Zirngast A, Adam U, Winklhofer-Roob BM, Toplak H (2004) Eur J Clin Nutr 58:244–249

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Middleton E, Kandaswami C (1992) Biochem Pharmacol 43:1167–1179

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Barak V, Halperin T, Kalickman I (2001) Eur Cytokine Network 12:290–296

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Barak V, Birkenfeld S, Halperin T, Kalickman I (2002) Isr Med Assoc J 4:919–922

    Google Scholar 

  17. Zakay-Rones Z, Thom E, Wollan T, Wadstein J (2004) J Int Med Res 32:132–140

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Hernández NE, Tereschuk ML, Abdala LR (2000) J Ethnopharmacol 73:317–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Liu W, Wu CF, Yu QH, Guo YY (1991) Fitoterapia 62:83–85

    Google Scholar 

  20. Moon YJ, Wang X, Morris ME (2006) Toxicol In Vitro 20:187–210

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Valko M, Rhodes CJ, Moncol J, Izakovic M, Mazur M (2006) Chem Biol Interact 160:1–40

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhao C, Giusti MM, Malik M, Moyer MP, Magnuson BA (2004) J Agric Food Chem 52: 6122–6128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Porpaczy A, Laszlo M (1984) Acta Alim 13:109–115

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kaack K (1989) Tidsskr Planteavl 93:59–65

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kaack K (1990) Tidsskr Planteavl 94:127–129

    Google Scholar 

  26. Moehler M (2002) Kleinbrennerei 54:4–8

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kaack K, Christensen LP, Hughes M, Eder R (2005) Eur Food Res Technol 221:244–254

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Kaack K, Austed T (1998) Plant Foods Hum Nutr 52:187–198

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Landbo AK, Kaack, K, Meyer AS (2007) Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 8:135–142

    Google Scholar 

  30. Überla K (1971) Faktorenanalyse. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sharma S (1996) Applied multivariate techniques. Wiley, New York, pp 99–143

    Google Scholar 

  32. Weiss J, Saemann H (1980) Flüssiges Obst 47:346–350

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Dürr P, Schobinger U, Waldvogel R (1982) Alimenta 21:67–69

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kaack K (1988) Tidsskr Planteavl 92:79–82

    Google Scholar 

  35. Weissböck G, Wurm L, Vogl K (1998) Mitteilungen Klosterneuburg 48:179–186

    Google Scholar 

  36. Groven I (1968) DIAS Bull 844:1–4

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hong V, Wrolstad RE (1990) J Agric Food Chem 38:698–708

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Inami O, Tamura I, Kikuzaki H, Nakatani N (1996) J Agric Food Chem 44:3090–3096

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Chandra A, Rana J, Li Y (2001) J Agric Food Chem 49:3515–3521

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Dietrich H, Rechner A, Patz CD (2003) Flüssiges Obst 70:714–721

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Bermudez-Soto MJ, Tomas-Barberán FA (2004) Eur Food Res Technol 219:133–141

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Brønnum-Hansen K, Hansen SH (1983) J Chrom 262:385–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kaack K (1990) Tidsskr Planteavl 94:423–429

    Google Scholar 

  44. Brønnum-Hansen K, Flink JM (1986) J Food Technol 21:605–614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Awad MA, de Jager A, van der Plas LHW, van der Krol AR (2001) Sci Hortic 90:69–83

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Serrano M, Guillén F, Martinez-Romero D, Castillo S, Valero D (2005) J Agric Food Chem 53:2741–2745

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Herrman K (1976) J Food Technol 11:433–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Dietrich H, Dieter C (2003) Flüssiges Obst 12:714–721

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kaack K (1989) Tidsskr Planteavl 93:365–368

    Google Scholar 

  50. Czyzowska A, Pogorzelski E (2004) Eur Food Res Technol 218:355–359

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Drdak M, Dandar A, Kukuckova B (1985) Industrielle Obst Gemüseverwertung 70:355–358

    Google Scholar 

  52. Duhard V, Garnier JC, Megard D (1997) Agro Food Ind Hi Tech 8:28–34

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Groven I, Kaack K (1977) DIAS Bull 1316:1–3

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Mr. Kim G. Vitten for excellent technical assistance and the industrial companies Bottle Green Drinks Company, Thorncroft Vineyard Ltd, Steirische Beerenobst-genossenschaft, Beerenfrost Kuelhaus GmbH, Fyns Bærdyrkerforening, Rynkeby Foods, and Dansk Erhvervsfrugtavl for their financial and technical support. We also thank EU for financial support (project no. FAIR CT98 9653, Elderopt).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Food Science, Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Research Centre Aarslev, Kirstinebjergvej 10, 5792, Aarslev, Denmark

    Karl Kaack, Xavier C. Fretté & Lars P. Christensen

  2. Bioprocess Engineering, Department of Chemical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Building 229, 2800, Lyngby, Denmark

    Anne-Katrine Landbo & Anne S. Meyer

Authors
  1. Karl Kaack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xavier C. Fretté
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lars P. Christensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anne-Katrine Landbo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anne S. Meyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lars P. Christensen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kaack, K., Fretté, X.C., Christensen, L.P. et al. Selection of elderberry (Sambucus nigra L.) genotypes best suited for the preparation of juice. Eur Food Res Technol 226, 843–855 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-007-0605-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-007-0605-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation