Subscriber access provided by NEW YORK UNIV
Letter
Ethanol in olive fruit. Changes during ripeness Gabriel Beltran, Mohamed Aymen Bejaoui, Antonio Jimenez, and Araceli Sánchez-Ortiz J. Agric. Food Chem., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.5b01453 • Publication Date (Web): 22 May 2015 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on May 26, 2015
Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.
Page 1 of 17
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
‘Ethanol in olive fruit. Changes during ripeness’ Gabriel Beltrán*, Mohamed A. Bejaoui, Antonio Jimenez, Araceli Sanchez-Ortiz
IFAPA Center Venta del Llano, Junta de Andalucia. P.O. Box 50, 23620 Mengibar, Jaén. Spain
* Corresponding author: Dr. Gabriel Beltrán Tel: +34 671532213; Fax: +34 953 366 380; Email:
[email protected] ACS Paragon Plus Environment
1
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 2 of 17
1 2
ABSTRACT
3 4
Ethanol is one of the precursors of ethyl esters, the virgin olive oil quality parameter
5
for extra category recently adopted by the European Union and International Olive Oil
6
Council. Although ethyl esters content has great importance for virgin olive oil
7
classification, the origin of ethanol is not clear. A possible source of ethanol may be
8
the own olive fruit while remains on the tree. Variation of fruit ethanol content during
9
ripening was studied for three different olive cultivars: ‘Picual’, ‘Hojiblanca’ and
10
‘Arbequina’. Ethanol was measured in fruit homogenates by HS-SPME-GC-FID. The
11
ethanol content varied between 0.56 and 58 mg/kg. ‘Hojiblanca’ fruits showed the
12
highest ethanol concentration. For all the cultivars, ethanol content of fruit increased
13
during ripening process although a clear cultivar dependent effect was observed since
14
‘Hojiblanca’ fruits showed the most important raise. Therefore, results indicated that
15
ethanol can be accumulated during fruit maturation on the olive tree.
16 17
Keywords: Olea europaea L .; olive fruit; ethanol; ripening; cultivar
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
2
Page 3 of 17
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
33
INTRODUCTION
34 35
Olive (Olea europaea L.) growing has great importance in the Mediterranean basin
36
since is the base of two important food industries: Table olives and virgin olive oil
37
production. Even although it has great importance information about the raw material
38
characteristics is scarce, mainly in olives for oil mill use.
39 40
In this way, ethanol in olive fruit is a metabolite that has achieved great importance for
41
the last two years since is one of the precursors of ethyl esters. Ethyl esters is a virgin
42
olive oil quality parameter adopted recently by both European Commission and
43
International Olive Oil Council1, 2 to discriminate ‘extra virgin olive oil ‘ from healthy
44
and high quality olive fruits. In fact, for oil classification into ‘extra virgin’ category
45
ethyl esters content must be lower than 40 mg/kg. This limit will be reduced in
46
sequence for the next crop years: 35 mg/kg in 2014/15 and finally, 30 mg/kg for the
47
crop year 2015/16.
48 49
Although a close relationship between virgin olive oil quality and ethyl esters was
50
described,3-5 their biosynthesis and the source of ethanol as ethyl ester precursor are
51
not clear and have to be analysed.
52 53
Conte et al.6 proposed that ethanol can be solely produced by fermentation during
54
virgin olive oil extraction and storage process. However a possible source of ethanol
55
may be the synthesis in the own olive fruit. The production of ethanol in olives may be
56
originated on the tree, during fruit collection, transport and/or in the postharvest
57
treatments until processing. However to our best of knowledge there are no data for
58
ethanol content in olive fruit and its possible biosynthesis from the olive tree to the oil
59
mill.
60 61
Ethanol in fruits is formed by the enzyme alcohol deshydrogenase (ADH) (EC 1.1.1.1),
62
being described for oranges and pears an increase of ethanol production during
63
maturation.7,8 Considering the fruits as source of ethanol, has been described as during
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
3
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 4 of 17
64
ripening on the tree are activated reactions to produce aroma and other components
65
requiring the synthesis of anaerobic metabolites, among them ethanol.9
66 67
Furthermore, ethanol is accumulated in different fruits that remain for long periods on
68
the tree as oranges and grapefruits. In these cases the concentration of ethanol
69
showed a fast increase during their permanence on the tree.10 Litchi fruits increased
70
the ethanol production during maturation on tree.11 Peaches and nectarines showed
71
increases in aroma volatiles and ethanol during maturation.12
72 73
Ethanol can be accumulated in over-ripe and senescent fruits than remain on the tree
74
for a long period. In apple cultivars although small amount of ethanol can be detected,
75
it can be synthetized at higher concentrations in over-ripe and senescent fruits.13
76 77
Olive is a non-climateric fruit that usually remains for long periods on the tree until
78
harvesting. This period can oscillate between 5 and 9 months, depending of olive
79
cultivar, including fruit development, ripening, and overmaturation. The mean ripening
80
period described for World Olive Germoplasm Bank cultivars varied between 53 and
81
69 days for the earliest and latest olive cultivars, respectively.14 However, a
82
considerable part of the olive production can remain on the tree until overmaturation
83
(2-3 months) because of adverse climatic conditions during harvesting period or high
84
crops. Thus is of great importance determining how ethanol content varies in fruit
85
during ripening process in order to evaluate if ethanol is synthetized on the tree and
86
then, harvesting date may have effect in the levels of ethanol in fruit, olive paste and
87
finally in the virgin olive oil ethanol and ethyl esters content.
88 89
The objective of this work was to study the ethanol content in olive fruit and its
90
variation during ripeness. To achieve this aim three olive cultivars were selected by
91
their importance in the world olive oil production: ‘Picual’, ‘Hojiblanca’ and
92
‘Arbequina’ and acetaldehyde content, as ethanol precursor, was analysed too.
93 94 95
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
4
Page 5 of 17
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
96
MATERIALS AND METHODS
97
Plant Material. The study was carried out for the crop year 2012/13. Olive trees of
98
three olive cultivars: ‘Picual’, ‘Hojiblanca’ and ‘Arbequina’ were selected by their crop
99
load homogeneity (3-4). Two trees were selected for each cultivar. The twenty-five-
100
year-old trees were grown in the Wold Olive Germplasm Collection of IFAPA Center
101
Venta del Llano in Mengibar, Jaen. The trees were spaced 7*7 m and grown under
102
irrigation and traditional techniques.
103 104
Olive samples (2 kg) were collected from each tree and cultivar at three harvesting
105
dates for ‘Picual’, ‘Hojiblanca’ and ‘Arbequina’. In addition for ‘Arbequina’ more
106
harvesting dates were included because of the stepped maturation of its fruits. Fruit
107
ripening index was measured according to the method the method proposed by the
108
Estacion de Olivicultura y Elaiotecnia.15 The fruit sampling dates and ripening index are
109
shown in Table 1. After harvesting, the fruits were washed using milliQ water, dried
110
with filter paper and processed immediately (15 min) in order to avoid any alteration .
111 112
Fruit homogenates. To measure the ethanol content a fruit homogenate approach was
113
followed.16 For this purpose, 4 g of olive fruit mesocarp, from at least 20 olive fruits,
114
were homogenized with 8 mL of distilled water by means of a homogenizer Ultra-
115
Turrax T-25 at the highest speed (24 000 rpm) for 2 min. After an equilibrium period
116
of 5 min at 25 °C, homogenate aliquots of 2 mL were taken into 10 mL vials containing
117
2 mL of a saturated CaCl2 solution to deactivate the enzyme systems, which were
118
sealed and stored at −18 °C unKl analysis. Two homogenates were prepared in
119
duplicate for each olive sample.
120 121
Analysis of ethanol and acetaldehyde. Solid-phase microextraction (SPME) followed by
122
GC-FID were used to analyze the ethanol and acetaldehyde in the samples studied
123
according to the method described by Sanchez–Ortiz et al.16 Briefly, homogenate
124
samples were conditioned to room temperature and then placed in a 10 mL vial fitted
125
with a silicone septum heater at 40 °C. After 10 min of equilibrium time, ethanol from
126
headspace was adsorbed by exposing the solid-phase microextraction (SPME) fiber
127
DVB/Carboxen/PDMS 50/30 μm 1 cm (Supelco Co., Bellefonte, PA) for 50 min at 40 °C
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
5
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 6 of 17
128
in the headspace of the sample, and then retracted into the needle and immediately
129
transferred and desorbed for 5 min into the injection port of a gas chromatograph
130
equipped with an FID.
131 132
Ethanol and acetaldehyde were analysed using a Varian CP 3800 GC equipped with a
133
Supelcowax 10 capillary column (30 m x 0.25 mm, 0,25 μm, Sigma-Aldrich Co. LLC).
134
Operating conditions were as follows: He was the carrier gas; injector and detector at
135
250 °C; and column held for 5 min at 40 °C and then programmed at 4 °C min−1 to 200
136
°C. Compound identification was carried out on an ISQ single quadrupole MS, Thermo
137
Fisher Scientific, Austin, Texas, USA) operating in EI mode (70 eV) under identical
138
conditions for GC-FID, matching against the Wiley/NBS Library, and by GC retention
139
time against standard. Quantification was performed using individual calibration
140
curves in the matrix (olive mesocarp homogenate). Results were expressed as mg per
141
kilogram of fruit.
142 143
Data analysis. Data for harvesting dates were shown as mean value and standard
144
deviation whereas for cultivar content was expressed as mean value and standard
145
error. ANOVA analysis was performed to establish the effect of cultivar and ripening
146
stage considering the three common harvesting dates for the three olive cultivars.
147
Tukey’s test was applied to establish differences between means p:0.05. Statistical
148
analyses were performed with Statistix 8.0 software.
149 150
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
151
ADH activity catalyses the reversible reduction of aldehydes to alcohols using reduced
152
pyridine nucleotides as cofactors. In previous works ADH activity was measured only in
153
crude extracts prepared from acetone powders of olive mesocarp and seed tissues
154
whereas it was not detected in crude extracts from fresh tissues.16 In order to
155
determine the effect of homogenisation process in ethanol synthesis, a previous
156
experiment was carried out. Fruit frozen tissue was ground in a cold blender
157
containing CaCl2 at 0.33 g.g–1 tissue to inhibit enzyme activities during homogenization
158
comparing with the method used in this work. Both methods showed similar content
159
of ethanol (data not shown).
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
17
6
Page 7 of 17
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
160 161
Ethanol content in fruit varied depending on olive cultivar. For ‘Hojiblanca’ fruits
162
ethanol concentration varied between 6 and 58 mg/kg whereas ‘Picual’ cultivar
163
oscillated from 0.56 to 2.90 mg/kg. ‘Arbequina’ olives showed an ethanol content that
164
ranged between 1.5 and 11.5 mg/kg.
165 166
When ANOVA analysis was performed could be observed as the olive cultivar was the
167
main responsible of the variability for ethanol concentration although the harvesting
168
date showed similar values (Table 2). Among the olive cultivars analysed, ‘Hojiblanca’
169
showed the highest ethanol content in fruit and ‘Picual’ achieved the lowest
170
concentration (Table 3). Significant differences between olive cultivars were obtained
171
(P. 0.05). These differences in ethanol content between cultivars were described for
172
apples and nectarines previously.16 There are not previous works describing
173
differences in olive ethanol content between cultivars. The differences observed in this
174
work may be explained by the ADH content/activity in different olive cultivars as
175
described for ‘Coratina’ and ‘Carolea’ olive cultivars for C6 volatile alcohols.18 In our
176
case, the levels of ethanol in fruits of different cultivars corresponded to similar
177
differences for its precursor the acetaldehyde (data not shown).
178 179
Harvesting date showed a highly significant effect on ethanol content in olive fruits
180
(Table 2). During olive fruit ripening, ethanol concentration increased slightly at the
181
beginning of maturation and then, a fast increase was detected (Figure 1). Although
182
’Arbequina’ has a fruit stepped maturation and was studied for more harvesting dates
183
the behaviour was similar to the other cultivars. In the first raise, ethanol showed an
184
increase comprised between 23% for ‘Picual’ cultivar and 62% for ‘Hojiblanca’. For the
185
last harvesting date the fastest increases were detected; the increases obtained varied
186
around 70% for the three olive cultivars. Between the first sample collection and the
187
final one, ethanol content rose around 80% for ‘Picual’ and ‘Arbequina’ whereas
188
‘Hojiblanca’ fruits achieved an increase of 89%. Therefore, ‘Hojiblanca’ fruits achieved
189
the highest ethanol content during fruit maturation. These differences between
190
cultivars in the biosynthesis of ethanol may be explained by the high significance
191
obtained for the interaction between olive cultivar and harvesting date in the ANOVA
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
7
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 8 of 17
192
(Table 2). Ethanol is formed from acetaldehyde by the enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase
193
(ADH). Salas et al.17 described an increase of ADH activity from 13 weeks after
194
flowering up to 25 weeks after flowering when fruits are still green. After this point
195
ADH activity decreased during the ripening process. Therefore the increase of fruit
196
ethanol content observed for the three cultivars may be not explained by a higher ADH
197
activity since the period analysed corresponded to a reduction of ADH activity.
198 199
Both acetaldehyde and ethanol have been shown to accumulate in various fruit (both
200
climacteric and non-climacteric) that remain on the tree for long periods.9 The increase
201
in anaerobic respiration in over-mature fruit may be explained by a reduction of
202
mithocondrial activity in its tissues. In our case both of them are accumulated in the
203
fruit during maturation although ethanol showed a faster increase giving a reduction
204
of the ratio acetaldehyde/ethanol (Figure 2). This ratio can be used as indicator of fruit
205
anaerobic respiration.
206 207
The increase of ethanol content observed for the three cultivars was similar to those
208
described for both climacteric and non-climateric fruits during the ripening and their
209
permanence on the tree for long periods
210
was not achieved.
10, 19
although in our case over-maturation
211 212
The results confirm that ethanol is produced naturally in the olive fruits whereas
213
remains on the tree since for this work their processing was immediate. Ethanol
214
content in olives had a very important genetic component since significant differences
215
were observed between cultivars. ‘Hojiblanca’ fruits showed the highest ethanol
216
concentration. During fruit ripening ethanol concentration rose, showing a slight
217
increase at the beginning and a fast raise for the last harvesting date. Ethanol
218
production during fruit ripening was affected by the cultivar too. Therefore ethanol
219
was accumulated in the olive fruit during its permanence on tree as a result of
220
anaerobic respiration. Further works should be focused on the formation of ethanol
221
from olive tree to virgin olive oil and how ethyl esters are synthetized.
222 223
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
8
Page 9 of 17
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
224
REFERENCES
225
(1) European Commission. EU 1348/2013 of 16 December 2013 amending Regulation
226
No 2568/91/EEC on the characteristics of olive oil and olive-residue oil and on the
227
relevant methods of analysis. Off. J. Europ. Comm. 2013, L338, 31-67.
228 229
(2) International Olive Oil Council. Trade standard applying to olive oils and olivepomace oils. COI 2013/T15/NC No 3/Rev. 17.
230
(3) Pérez-Camino, M. C.; Cert, A.; Romero-Segura, A.; Cert-Trujillo, R.; Moreda, W. Alkyl
231
esters of fatty acids a useful tool to detect soft deodorized olive oils. J. Agric. Food
232
Chem. 2008, 56, 6740–6744.
233
(4) Biedermann, M.; Bongartz, A.; Mariani, C.; Grob, K. Fatty acid methyl and ethyl
234
esters as well as wax esters for evaluating the quality of olive oils. Eur. Food Res.
235
Technol. 2008, 228, 65-74.
236 237
(5) Mariani, C.; Bellan, G. On the possible increase of the alkyl esters in extra virgin olive oil. Riv. Ital. Sost. Grasse 2011, 88, 3-10.
238
(6) Conte, L.; Mariani, C.; Gallina Toschi, T.; Tagliabue, S. Alkyl esters and related
239
compounds in virgin olive oils: Their evolution over time. Riv. Ital. Sost. Grasse 2014,
240
91, 21-29
241 242 243 244
(7) Bruemmer, J.H.; Roe, B. Pyruvate dehydrogenase activity during ripening of ‘Hamlin’ oranges. Phytochemistry 1985, 24, 2105-2106. (8) Chervin, C.; Truett, J.K. Alcohol deshydrogenase expression and alcohol production during pear ripening. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 1999, 124, 71-75.
245
(9) Pesis, E. The role of the anaerobic metabolites, acetaldehyde and ethanol, in fruit
246
ripening, enhancement of fruit quality and fruit deterioration. Postharvest Biol.
247
Tech. 2005, 37, 1-19.
248 249
(10) Davis, P.I. Relation of ethanol content of citrus fruits to maturity and storage conditions. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 1970, 84, 217-222.
250
(11) Pesis, E.; Dvir, O.; Feygenberg, O.; Ben-Arie, R.; Ackerman, M.; Lichter, A.
251
Production of acetaldehyde and ethanol during maturation and modified
252
atmosphere storage of Litchi fruit. Postharvest Biol. Tech. 2002, 14, 99-106.
253
(12) Lavilla, T., Recasens, I.; Lopez, M.L. Production of volatile aromatic compounds in
254
Big Top nectarines and Royal Glory peaches during maturity. Acta Hortic. 2001, 553,
255
233-234.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
9
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 10 of 17
256
(13) Nichols, W. C.; Patterson, M.E. Ethanol accumulation and poststorage quality of
257
‘Delicious’ apples during short term, low O2, Ca storage. Hortscience 1987,33, 992-
258
994.
259
(14) Barranco, D.; Rallo, L. Epocas de floracion y maduracion. In Variedades de Olivo en
260
España; Rallo, L., Barranco, D., Caballero, J.M., del Rio, C., Martin, A., Trujillo, I.,
261
Eds.; Junta de Andalucia-MAPA-Ediciones MundiPrensa: Madrid, Spain, 2005; pp.
262
281-292.
263
(15) Beltran, G.; Uceda, M.; Hermoso, M.; Frias, L. Maduracion. In El cultivo del olivo;
264
Barranco, D., Fernandez-Escobar, R., Rallo, L., Eds.; Junta de Andalucia- Ediciones
265
MundiPrensa, Madrid, Spain, 2004; pp. 158–183.
266
(16) Sanchez-Ortiz, A.; Romero-Segura, C.; Gazda, V.E.; Graham, I.A.; Sanz, C.; Perez,
267
A.G. Factors limiting the synthesis of virgin olive oil volatile esters. J. Agric. Food
268
Chem. 2012, 60, 1300-1307.
269 270
(17) Salas, J.J.; Sanchez, J. Alcohol dehydrogenases from olive (Olea europaea) fruit. Phytochem. 1998, 48, 35-40.
271
(18) Iara, D.L.; Bruno, L.; Macchione, B.; Tagarelli, A.; Sindona, G.; Giannino, D.; Bitonti,
272
M.B.; Chiapetta, A. The aroma biogenesis-related Olea europaea Alcohol
273
Dehydrogenase gene is developmentally regulated in the fruits of two O. europaea
274
L. cultivars. Food Res. Int. 2012, 49, 720-727.
275 276
(19) Zerbini, P.E.; Giudetti, G.; Rizzolo, A.; Grassi, M. Harvest and quality indexes of peach. Inf. Agrar. 2001, 57, 57-60.
277 278
Note
279
This work was supported by the projects FEDER-INIA RTA 2010-00013-C02-01 from
280
Spanish government and FEDER P10-AGR6099 from Junta de Andalucia.
281 282 283 284 285 286 287
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
10
Page 11 of 17
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
288 289
FIGURE CAPTIONS
290
Figure 1. Changes during the ripening process in ethanol concentration of fruits from
291
the olive cultivars: ‘Picual’, Hojiblanca’ and ‘Arbequina’.
292 293 294
Figure 2. Changes during the ripening process in the ratio Acetaldehyde/Ethanol of
295
fruits from the olive cultivars: ‘Picual’, Hojiblanca’ and ‘Arbequina’.
296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
11
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 12 of 17
Table 1. Sampling Dates of Olive Fruits from ‘Picual’, ‘Hojiblanca’ and ‘Arbequina’ Olive Cultivars.
Olive cultivar ‘Picual’ ‘Hojiblanca’ ‘Arbequina’
11 Sept (14 WAF)
0
a
16 Oct (21 WAF) 0 0 0.3
24 Oct (22 WAF)
1.0
a
13 Nov (26 WAF) 1.8 1.5 2.0
a
20 Dec b (30 WAF ) 2.4 2.2 2.4
a
Harvesting dates common for the three olive cultivars b WAF: Weeks after flowering
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
12
Page 13 of 17
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Table 2. Partial Mean Squares from Analysis of Variance for the Effect of Cultivar and Harvesting Date on Fruit Ethanol Content from the Olive Cultivars: ‘Picual’, ‘Hojiblanca’ and ‘Arbequina’.
Source Cultivar Harvesting date(HD) Cultivar*HD Error Total
DFa 2 2 4 9 17
MSb 942.828 938.539 353.892 0.805
SSToc 36.36 36.20 27.30 0.14
P 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
a
Degrees of freedom Mean squares c Partial mean squares for the effect, expressed as percentage, of the total corrected sum of the squares. b
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
13
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 14 of 17
Table 3. Mean Ethanol Content of Olive Fruits from ‘Picual’, ‘Hojiblanca’ and ‘Arbequina’ Olive Cultivars.
Olive cultivar ‘Picual’ ‘Hojiblanca’ ‘Arbequina’ a
Ethanol (mg/kg) 3.4 ± 1.7 ac 26.1 ± 10.2 a 5.7 ± 1.9 b
Different letters indicate significant differences between means for p value of 0.05
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
14
Page 15 of 17
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Figure 1.
60
55
50
Ethanol (mg/kg)
20
15 11-Sept 16-Oct
10
24-Oct 13-Nov 5
20-Dec
0 'Picual'
'Arbequina'
'Hojiblanca'
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
15
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 16 of 17
Figure 2.
Acetaldehyde/Ethanol
1.0 0.8 11-Sept 0.6
16-Oct 24-Oct
0.4
13-Nov 20-Dec
0.2 0.0 'Picual'
'Arbequina'
'Hojiblanca'
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
16
Page 17 of 17
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
For Table of Contents Only
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
17