Subscriber access provided by University of Otago Library
Article
Fluorescent Pteridine Derivatives as New Markers for the Characterization of Monofloral Genuine New Zealand Manuka (Leptospermum scoparium) Honey Nicole Beitlich, Tilo Lübken, Martin Kaiser, Lilit Ispiryan, and Karl Speer J. Agric. Food Chem., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.6b03984 • Publication Date (Web): 03 Nov 2016 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on November 7, 2016
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 22
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
1
Fluorescent Pteridine Derivatives as New Markers for the Characterization of
2
Monofloral Genuine New Zealand Manuka (Leptospermum scoparium) Honey
3
4
Nicole Beitlich,† Tilo Lübken,‡ Martin Kaiser,§ Lilit Ispiryan,† Karl Speer*†
5
6
Food Chemistry Department,† Organic Chemistry Department,‡ and Inorganic
7
Chemistry,§ Technische Universität Dresden, Bergstrasse 66, 01069 Dresden,
8
Germany
9
10 11
* Corresponding author (Tel: +49 351 463 33132; Fax: +49 351 464 33132; Email:
[email protected])
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 2 of 22
2
12
ABSTRACT
13
New Zealand manuka honey is well-known for its unique antibacterial activity. Due to
14
its high price and limited availability, this honey is often subject to honey fraud. Two
15
pteridine derivatives, 3,6,7-trimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione and 6,7-dimethyl-
16
2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione, have now been identified in New Zealand manuka honey.
17
Their structures were elucidated by LC-QTOF-HRMS, NMR, and single-crystal X-ray
18
diffraction after isolation via semi-preparative HPLC. Their marker potential for
19
authentic manuka honey was proved as both substances were neither detectable in
20
the pollen-identical kanuka honey nor in the nine other kinds of monofloral New
21
Zealand honey analyzed (clover, forest, kamahi, pohutukawa, rata, rewarewa, tawari,
22
thyme, and vipers bugloss). The fluorescence property of the pteridine derivatives
23
can be used as an easy and fast TLC screening method for the authentication of
24
genuine manuka honey. 6,7-dimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione has been described
25
for the first time.
26
KEYWORDS: genuine manuka honey, Leptospermum scoparium, single-crystal X-
27
ray
diffraction,
NMR,
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
marker,
FLD
Page 3 of 22
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
3
28
INTRODUCTION
29
New Zealand manuka (Leptospermum scoparium J.R. Forst. & G. Forst) honey has
30
become more and more important for its medicinal application in treating wounds,
31
even more so than for its nutritional value.1 Its antibacterial activity is derived from the
32
low pH value, high sugar concentration, individual proteins as well as peptides, and
33
secondary plant metabolites.2 For the latter, especially methylglyoxal, a strong
34
cytotoxic effective compound, which hitherto had been found in high amounts only in
35
manuka honey, is of particular importance.3-7 In contrast, hydrogen peroxide, another
36
antibacterially effective compound responsible for great success in regard to wound
37
healing, e.g. cornflower honey, is present in manuka honey only in traces.8,9
38
Due to its special value, manuka honey is often adulterated. Even though only 1,700
39
tons of manuka honey are actually produced in New Zealand each year, the so-
40
called manuka honey sold worldwide is estimated at 10,000 tons. Therefore, the
41
UMFHA (Official Unique Manuka Factor Honey Association)10 and the New Zealand
42
Government11 require clear and robust chemical and physical methods for defining
43
genuine manuka honey.
44
Pollen analysis, the most common method for honey differentiation, is not suitable for
45
manuka honey authentication as the simultaneously flowering kanuka bush in New
46
Zealand produces pollen indistinguishable from manuka.12 Other analytical
47
parameters for honey authentication such as sensory properties (color, aroma, smell,
48
and viscosity) and physico-chemical characteristics (electrical conductivity, sugar
49
composition) have proved to be unpromising as well.13 This also applies to the
50
analysis of methylglyoxal and its precursor dihydroxyacetone which is tentatively
51
unique to manuka honey and not naturally present in kanuka honey. Both substances
52
are commercially available so that upgrading the scarcely antibacterially active ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 4 of 22
4
53
kanuka honey by adding methylglyoxal or dihydroxyacetone is easily feasible as has
54
been reported recently.14
55
During the last decade, secondary plant metabolites seemed to be most helpful for
56
manuka honey authentication. Next to volatile compounds, non-volatile compounds
57
such as phenolic acids, norisoprenoids, and flavonoids are analyzed by means of
58
HPLC/UHPLC-PDA-MS/MS.15-21 By comparing the PDA-profiles of manuka honeys
59
with various other New Zealand monofloral honeys, in particular kanuka honey,
60
distinguishing peaks can be selected as markers. A marker is defined as a unique
61
compound for a monofloral honey or as a compound present in significantly higher
62
amounts. The markers for manuka honey are leptosperin (former: leptosin), 1, acetyl-
63
2-hydroxy-4-(2-methoxyphenyl)-4-oxobutanoate,
64
methoxyphenyl)-penta-1,4-dione, 3, whereas 4-methoxyphenyllactic acid, 4 and
65
lumichrome, 5, are kanuka markers (Figure 1).15,16,18,20
66
Recently, two additional peaks with marker potential could be detected in the PDA-
67
profiles of manuka honey by our working group (Figure 1).22 During our studies for
68
their elucidation a new marker compound for manuka honey named lepteridine was
69
proposed, which turned out to be one of these two peaks.17 Therefore, the aim of this
70
study concentrated on the identification of the still unknown compound in addition to
71
the recently reported, using semi-preparative HPLC for separation and concentration
72
for the subsequent elucidation by NMR and single-crystal X-ray diffraction.
73
Subsequently, the marker potential of the isolated substances needs to be tested.
74
The more marker compounds exist for a certain kind of honey, the more difficult it
75
becomes to adulterate the honey.
76
MATERIALS AND METHODS
2,
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
and
3-hydroxy-1-(2-
Page 5 of 22
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
5
77
Honey Samples. 64 genuine monofloral manuka honeys and 18 genuine monofloral
78
kanuka (Kunzea ericoides) honeys harvested in regions with monocultures were
79
analyzed by UHPLC-PDA-MS/MS. Other relevant New Zealand monofloral honeys,
80
nine in total, were considered in the study: 18 clover (Trifolium species), 7 forest, 10
81
kamahi (Weimannia racemosa), 7 pohutukawa (Metrosideros excelsa), 6 rata
82
(Metrosideros umbellata), 13 rewarewa (Knightia excelsa), 6 tawari (Ixerba
83
brexioides), 15 thyme (Thymus vulgaris), and 5 vipers bugloss (Echium vulgare). All
84
the samples were provided by the UMFHA and were stored in darkness at 8 °C until
85
analyzed.
86
Chemicals. Methanol (HPLC grade; LC-MS grade) and acetonitrile (HPLC grade)
87
were acquired from Fisher Scientific (Schwerte, Germany). A daidzein standard was
88
purchased from Alfa Aesar (Karlsruhe, Germany). 4-methoxy-13C,d3-benzoic-2,3,5,6-
89
d4 acid as internal standard, acetic acid, 100% glacial, as well as chlorogenic acid
90
were supplied by Sigma-Aldrich (Steinheim, Germany). Sodium chloride, sodium
91
sulfate, acetonitrile (HPLC grade), and methanol (HPLC grade) were purchased from
92
VWR International (Darmstadt, Germany). Ethyl acetate and caffeine were from
93
Sigma Aldrich (Steinheim, Germany). 6,7-dimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione was
94
acquired from AKos (Steinen, Germany). Deuterated solvents dimethyl sulfoxide-d6
95
(99.8%) and methanol-d4 (99.8%) were purchased from Deutero GmbH (Kastellaun,
96
Germany). All the chemicals were of analytical grade. Bi-distilled water was
97
generated by a Bi-Distillation Apparatus Bi 18E (QSC GmbH, Maintal, Germany).
98
SPE-UHPLC-PDA-MS/MS
99
metabolites was performed as reported by Oelschlaegel et al.8 Peak data for
100
statistical analysis were secured by using internal standards. The statistical
Analysis.
The
analysis
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
of
the
secondary
plant
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 6 of 22
6
101
interpretation of the analytical results was expressed as boxplots and significance
102
tests (Kruskal-Wallis, P < 0.01) with SPSS 22.0 (IBM, Ehningen, Germany).
103
Liquid Extraction and semi-preparative HPLC for the Fractionation of Unknown
104
Compounds. 30 g honey were dissolved in an aqueous sodium chloride solution
105
(2%, m/v) and then extracted twice with 60 mL ethyl acetate. The combined organic
106
extracts were carefully evaporated to dryness in nitrogen flow, and the residue was
107
dissolved in 5 mL methanol/water (1:1, v/v). A Elite LaChrom semi-preparative HPLC
108
system (VWR, Darmstadt, Germany) was combined with a fraction collector.8 In sum,
109
more than 2 kg of manuka honey were liquid-liquid extracted.23 The concentrated
110
extract was chromatographed employing a 250 mm x 10 mm i. d., 10 µm, Nucleodur
111
C18 Pyramid column (Macherey&Nagel, Düren, Germany;). Due to co-eluting
112
substances a second separation step using a 250 mm x 10 mm i. d., 10 µm, Synergi
113
Polar-RP 80 Å column (Phenomenex, Aschaffenburg, Germany) was necessary. The
114
oven temperature was set at 40 °C, and the mobile phase consisted of 0.1% formic
115
acid and methanol with a flow rate of 2.5 mL/min. The collected fractions were
116
evaporated to dryness and analyzed by UHPLC-QTOF-HRMS, single-crystal X-ray
117
diffraction, and, after dissolving, in deuterated solvent by NMR.
118
UHPLC-QTOF-HRMS Analysis. For determining the exact mass, the isolated
119
compounds were analyzed by a 1290 Infinity UHPLC system coupled with a 6540
120
QTOF (Agilent, Waldbronn, Germany). The same UHPLC parameters, as described
121
in the SPE-UHPLC-PDA-MS/MS section, were used. Mass spectrometric data were
122
acquired ranging from m/z 40 – 1000 in the positive mode with an acquisition rate of
123
6 spectra/s. The following source parameters were set: drying gas temperature, 200
124
°C; drying gas flow rate, 8 L/min ; nebulizer pressure, 35 psi; sheath gas
125
temperature, 350 °C, sheath gas flow, 11 L/min; capillary voltage, 4000 V; and nozzle
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 7 of 22
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
7
126
voltage 300 V. Unknown 1: m/z 207.0868 [M+H]+ (calculated for C9H11N4O2, m/z
127
207.0882, error 0.0014 Da); Unknown 2: m/z 193.0721 [M+H]+ (calculated for
128
C8H9N4O2, m/z 193.0725, error 0.0004 Da).
129
NMR Analysis. The one-dimensional 1H (600 MHz),
130
MHz) NMR spectra of the unknown compounds were acquired on an Avance AV-III
131
600 spectrometer (Bruker Bio Spin GmbH, Rheinstetten, Germany) using
132
tetramethylsilane (TMS) as internal standard. Chemical shifts were given on a δ
133
(ppm) scale relative to TMS (1H,
134
NMR spectra included HSQC, HMBC, and NOESY. Unknown 1: 1H NMR (600 MHz,
135
DMSO-d6): δ 2.654 (3H, s, C(10)H3), 2.670 (3H, s, C(11)H3), 3.466 (3H, s, C(9)H3).
136
13
137
147.2 (C-8a), 150.7 (C-6), 152.0 (C-4), 160.8 (C-7), 163.2 (C-2).
138
MHz, DMSO-d6): 57.9 (N-5), 85.7 (N-8); Unknown 2: 1H NMR (600 MHz, DMSO-d6):
139
2.485 (3H, s, C(9)H3), 2.506 (3H, s, C(9)H3).
140
(C-9), 22.3 (C-10), 123.9 (C-4a), 147.3 (C-6), 148.6 (C-2), 150.8 (C-8a), 157.6 (C-7),
141
161.5 (C-4).
142
Single-crystal X-Ray Diffraction. The unknown compound 1 was crystallized from
143
methanol (mp = 256 - 257 °C), and an appropriate well-shaped single crystal
144
fragment was selected for the experiment. The crystal was glued to a glass fiber.
145
Single-crystal X-ray diffraction was measured on a four-circle Kappa APEX II CCD
146
diffractometer (Bruker Karlsruhe, Germany) with a graphite(002)-monochromator,
147
and a CCD-detector at T = 200(2) K. MoKα radiation (λ = 71.073 pm) was used. A
148
multi-scan absorption was applied.24 The structure was solved with direct methods
149
and refined against Fo2.25,26 Further details on the crystal structure investigation can
13
13
C (151 MHz), and
15
N (60.8
C) and MeNO2 (15N), respectively. Two-dimension
C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): 21.4 (C-10), 22.8 (C-11), 28.2 (C-9), 124.0 (C-4a), 15
N NMR (60.8
13
C NMR (151 MHz, DMSO-d6): 21.2
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 8 of 22
8
150
be
obtained
from
the
Cambridge
Crystallographic
151
(http://www.ccdc.cam.ac.uk/) by quoting depository number CSD-1509900.
152
Fluorescence Analysis. Fluorescence properties were checked using a 4500 FL
153
spectrophotometer (Hitachi High-Technologies Europe GmbH, Krefeld, Germany) in
154
the 3-D scan type. The excitation wavelength ranged from λ 220 - 620 nm (sampling
155
interval 10 nm) while the emission wavelength ranged between λ 220 - 620 nm
156
(sampling interval 10 nm). The scan speed was set at 2400 nm/min, the PMT voltage
157
was 700 V, and the response was 0.004 s. Furthermore, the shutter control was on.
158
For instrument control as well as for data acquisition and analysis, FL Solutions
159
software was used.
160
Results and Discussion
161
UHPLC-PDA-MS/MS Analysis.
162
As stated in the introduction, apart from the known markers for manuka, two
163
unknown compounds were discovered in the PDA-profiles (Figure 1, named unknown
164
1, 6, and unknown 2, 7). However, they were not detected in the scarcely
165
antibacterially effective kanuka honey profiles (B), the most prevalent fraudulent
166
substitute for manuka honey (A), or in the other nine monofloral NZ honeys analyzed.
167
Identification of unknown 1 and unknown 2
168
To elucidate the chemical structure of the unknown compounds it was necessary to
169
isolate the substances from the honey matrix, using semi-preparative HPLC. In
170
regard to the smaller peaks, in our case it was necessary to extract more than 2 kg of
171
honey to obtain adequate amounts of the two substances for subsequent UHPLC-
172
MS/MS, NMR, and single-crystal X-ray diffraction measurements.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Data
Centre
(CCDC)
Page 9 of 22
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
9
173
Compound unknown 1
174
Unknown 1 was gained as a silvery-white crystalline compound (about 8 mg) with a
175
UV maximum of 326 nm, an exact molecular weight of 207.0868 Da [M+H]+. The
176
different NMR analyses (1H;
177
1
178
methyl groups: two methyl groups were located at C-6 and C-7 whereas the third
179
methyl group, despite sufficient sample material of high purity, could not be
180
unambiguously assigned to N-1 or N-3 (Figure 1). The crystalline form of unknown 1
181
allowed for the subsequent application of the single-crystal X-ray diffraction. The
182
structural refinement of unknown 1 revealed two crystallographic independent
183
molecules with the same chemical structure in the unit cell (Figure 2). Unknown 1
184
was clearly identified as a pteridine derivative named 3,6,7-trimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-
185
pteridinedione, 6, quite recently reported as lepteridine (Figure 1).17
186
Compound unknown 2
187
Unknown 2 showed a UV spectrum with a maximum at 326 nm, similar to unknown 1.
188
With a molecular weight of 192 Da (a mass difference of 14 Da from unknown 1) and
189
a similar fragmentation pattern as unknown 1, a structural relationship could be
190
assumed. About 2 mg of unknown 2 were isolated as a white powder. The 1H;
191
13
C{1H}; DEPT 135;
1
H/13C-HSQC;
1
H/13C-HMBC;
H/15N-HSQC; 1H/15N-HMBC; NOESY) indicated a pteridinedione structure with three
13
C{1H}; DEPT 135; 1H/13C-HSQC; 1H/13C-HMBC analyses resulted in the following
192
structure: 6,7-dimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione, 7 (Figure 1). Finally, the structure
193
identification could be confirmed with a commercially available standard (AKos,
194
Steinen, Germany). The occurrence of the demethylated lepteridine in honey has
195
thus been described for the first time.
196
Possible biosynthesis
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 10 of 22
10
197
As the two newly identified compounds were very similar to riboflavin, 8, and its light
198
induced acidic degradation product lumichrome, 5, it may be possible that they are a
199
part of the riboflavin biosynthesis (Figure 3). 6,7-Dimethyl-8-ribityllumazine, 9, has
200
already been described as a direct precursor of riboflavin (Figure 3).27 As shown in
201
Figure 3, the reaction of two molecules of 9 resulted in riboflavin and 5-amino-6-
202
ribitylamino-2,4(1H,3H)-pyrimidinedione,
203
degradation of riboflavin to lumichrome, it can be hypothesized that under the acidic
204
honey condition 6,7-dimethyl-8-ribityllumazine converts to 6,7-dimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-
205
pteridinedione,
206
pteridinedione, 6.
207
Marker potential of the identified pteridines in manuka honey in comparison to
208
other monofloral New Zealand honeys
209
Daniels et al.17 identified 3,6,7-trimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione in manuka honey
210
authenticated
211
dihydroxyacetone, methylglyoxal, and phenolic compounds. These authors also
212
analyzed one or two samples from a number of other monofloral New Zealand
213
honeys. However, no data were presented concerning color, conductivity, and pollen
214
analysis. Thus, the authenticity of these honey samples has not been defined clearly.
215
In our study, in addition to authentic kanuka honeys, nine other monofloral New
216
Zealand honeys (clover, forest, kamahi, pohutukawa, rata, rewarewa, tawari, thyme,
217
and vipers bugloss) with at least five authentic monofloral samples of each were
218
analyzed. As shown in the boxplots and employing the significance test (Kruskal-
219
Wallis, P < 0.01), both substances are not only markers for distinguishing manuka
220
from kanuka honey but, moreover, also for significantly differentiating manuka honey
221
from the nine New Zealand honeys named above (Figure 4). The variability of the
7.
by
A
methylation
floral-source
field
10.
may
site
In
accordance
create
analysis
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
with
the
acidic
3,6,7-trimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-
and
determining
the
Page 11 of 22
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
11
222
pteridine derivatives within the manuka honey was caused by the different
223
geographical origins.
224
Fluorescent properties
225
identification of manuka honey; for example, leptosperin has recently been described
226
as a fluorophore.28 As riboflavin and lumichrome are also well-known for their
227
fluorescence activity, fluorescence was also checked for the pteridine derivatives due
228
to their structural similarity. The excitation wavelength was determined at 329 nm
229
while the corresponding emission wavelength was 470 nm. The blue fluorescence of
230
the newly identified pteridine derivatives was used for a TLC screening, where no
231
other kind of honey tested had a fluorescent spot at the same Rf values as the
232
manuka honey in accordance with the boxplots results (Figure 5). Therefore, TLC is
233
an easy and fast screening method for unknown honey samples or honey samples
234
declared as manuka honey in order to detect genuine manuka honey.
235
For final manuka honey characterization and authentication, our HAHSUS method
236
(Honey Authentication by HS-SPME-GC/MS and UHPLC-PDA-MS/MS combined
237
with Statistics) is still necessary.29 In addition to the determination of the floral origin it
238
is possible to estimate the percentage of manuka honey in manuka-kanuka mixed
239
honeys. With the new fluorescent marker compounds, a valuable contribution for
240
identification and characterization of genuine monofloral manuka honey was
241
achieved.
242
Supporting Information
243
1
244
dimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione, 7; X-ray crystallographic data of 3,6,7-trimethyl-
245
2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione,6; TLC of isolated fractions unknown 1 and unknown 2
H and
13
are becoming
increasingly
important
for the
quick
C NMR spectra of 3,6,7-trimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione, 6, and 6,7-
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 12 of 22
12
246
including manuka honey and 6,7-dimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione standard
247
substance
248
This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org
249
Author Information
250
* Nicole Beitlich Tel: +49 351 463 37868; Fax: +49 351 464 33132; E-
251
mail:
[email protected] 252
Acknowledgement
253
We sincerely thank the Landesuntersuchungsanstalt Sachsen, Dr. Thomas Frenzel
254
(LUA Sachsen, Dresden, Germany), for the QTOF-HRMS measurements.
255
Conflict of interest
256
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 13 of 22
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
13
257
References
258
1. Alvarez-Suarez, J. M.; Giampieri, F., Cordero, M., Gasparrini, M., Forbes-
259
Hernández, T. Y., Mazzoni, L.; Afrin, S.; Beltrán-Ayala, P. B., González-Paramás, A.
260
M.; Santos-Buelga, C.; Varela-Lopez, A.; Quiles, J. L.; Battino, M. Activation of
261
AMPK/Nrf2 signalling by Manuka honey protects human dermal fibroblasts against
262
oxidative damage by improving antioxidant response and mitochondrial function
263
promoting wound healing. J. Funct. Foods. 2016, 25, 38-49.
264
2. Molan, P. The antibacterial activity of honey. 1. The nature of the antibacterial
265
activity. Bee World. 1992, 73, 5-28.
266
3. Adams, C.; Boult, N.; Deadmen, B.; Farr, J.; Grainger, M.; Manley-Harris, M.;
267
Snow M. Isolation by HPLC and characterization of the bioactive fraction of New
268
Zealand manuka (Leptospermum scoparium) honey. Carbohydr. Res. 2008, 343,
269
651-659.
270
4. Mavric, E.; Wittmann, S.; Barth, G.; Henle, T. Identification and quantification of
271
methylglyoxal as the dominant antibacterial constituent of manuka (Leptospermum
272
scoparium) honeys from New Zealand. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2008, 52, 483-489.
273
5. Molan, P.; Russel K. Non-peroxide antibacterial activity in some New Zealand
274
honey. J. Apic. Res. 1988 27, 62-67.
275
6. Kwakman, P.; Te Velde, A.; de Boer, L.; Vandenbroucke-Grauls, C.; Zaat, S. Two
276
major medicinal honeys have different mechanisms of bactericidal activity. PloS
277
ONE. 2011, 6, e17709.
278
7. Weston, R. Identification and quantitative levels of antibacterial components of
279
some New Zealand honeys. Food Chem. 2000, 70, 427-435.
280
8. Oelschlaegel, S.; Pieper, L.; Staufenbiel, R.; Gruner, M.; Zeippert,L.; Pieper, B.;
281
Koelling-Speer, I.; Speer, K. Floral markers of cornflower (Centaurea cyanus) honeys
282
and its peroxide antibacterial activity for an alternative treatment of digital dermatitis.
283
J. Agric. Food Chem. 2012, 60, 11811-11820.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 14 of 22
14
284
9. Bogdanov, S. Nature and origin of the antibacterial substances in honey. Food Sci.
285
Technol. 2012, 30, 748-753.
286
10. UMFHA website: http://www.umf.org.nz/ (Accessed: 30 May 2016)
287
11. New Zealand Government, Ministry for Primary Industries. Interim labelling guide
288
for manuka honey. 2014. https://www.mpi.govt.nz/document-vault/4603 (Accessed:
289
30 May 2016)
290
12. New Zealand Government, Ministry for Primary Industries. Options for defining
291
monofloral manuka honey. 2013. https://www.mpi.govt.nz/document-vault/3509
292
(Accessed: 30 May 2016)
293
13. New Zealand Government, Ministry for Primary Industries. Science and
294
characterizing manuka honey. 2014. https://www.mpi.govt.nz/document-vault/4147
295
(Accessed: 29 August 2016)
296
14. New Zealand Government, Ministry for Primary Industries. Evergreen brand
297
manuka honey products. 2016. https://www.mpi.govt.nz/food-safety/food-safety-for-
298
consumers/food-recalls/evergreen-life-limited-manuka-honey-and-honey-products/
299
(Accessed: 30 May 2016)
300
15. Beitlich, N.; Koelling-Speer, I.; Oelschlaegel, S.; Speer, K. Differentiation of
301
manuka honey from kanuka honey and from jelly bush honey using HS-SPME-
302
GC/MS and UHPLC-PDA-MS/MS. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 6435-6444.
303
16. Oelschlaegel, S.; Gruner, M.; Wang, P.-A.; Boettcher, A.; Koelling-Speer, I.;
304
Speer, K. Classification and Characterization of manuka honeys based in phenolic
305
compounds and methylglyoxal. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2012, 60, 7229-7237.
306
17. Daniels, B.; Prijic, G.; Meidinger, S.; Loomes, S.; Stephens, M.; Schlothauer, R.;
307
Furkert, D.; Brimble, M. Isolation, structural elucidation and synthesis of lepteridine
308
from manuka honey. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2016, 64, 5079-5084.
309
18. Kato, Y.; Umeda, N.; Maeda, A.; Matsumozo, D.; Kitamoto, N.; Kikuzaki, H.
310
Identification of a novel glycoside, leptosin, as a chemical marker of manuka honey.
311
J. Agric. Food Chem. 2012, 60, 3418-3423.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 15 of 22
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
15
312
19. Revell, L.; Morris, B.; Manley-Harris, M. Analysis of volatile compounds in New
313
Zealand unifloral honeys by SPME-GC-MS and chemometric-based classification of
314
floral source. Food Measure. 2014, 8, 81-91.
315
20. Stephens, J.; Schlothauer, R.; Morris, B.; Yang, D.; Fearnley, L.; Greenwood, D.;
316
Loomes, K. Phenolic compounds and methylglyoxal in some New Zealand manuka
317
and kanuka honeys. Food Chem. 2010, 120, 78-86.
318
21. Yao, L.; Datta, N.; Tomás-Barberán, F.; Ferreres, F.; Martos, I.; Singanusong, R.
319
Flavonoids, phenolic acids and abscisic acid in Australian and New Zealand
320
Leptospermum honeys. Food Chem. 2003, 8, 159-168.
321
22. Weigel, M. Methoden zur Differenzierung neuseeländischer Sortenhonige.
322
Thesis. Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, 2015.
323
23. Trautvetter, S.; Koelling-Speer, I.; Speer, K.. Confirmation of phenolic acids and
324
flavonoids in honeys by UPLC-MS. Apidologie. 2009, 40, 140-150.
325
24. Sheldrik, M. SADABS Area-Detector absorption correction, Version 2014/5,
326
Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA, 2014.
327
25. Sheldrick, M. A short history of SHELX. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. A.: Found
328
Crystallogr. 2008, 64, 112-122.
329
26. Sheldrik, M. SHELX2014, Programs for crystal structure determination, Georg-
330
August-Universität Göttingen, Göttingen (Germany), 2014.
331
27. Ladenstein, R.; Fischer, M.; Bacher, A. The lumazine synthase/riboflavin
332
synthase complex: shapes and functions of a highly variable enzyme system. FEBS
333
J. 2013, 280, 2537-2563.
334
28. Bong, J.; Prijic, G.; Braggins, T. J.; Schlothauer, R. C.; Stephens, J. M.; Loomes,
335
K. M. Leptosperin is a distinct and detectable fluorophore in Leptospermum honeys.
336
Food Chem. 2017, 214, 102-109.
337
29. Beitlich, N.; Speer, K. Abgrenzung des antibakteriell wirksamen Manukahonigs
338
von pollenidentischen Kanukahonig. Dtsch. Lebensm.-Rundsch. 2015, 111, 150-153.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 16 of 22
16
Figure Captions Figure 1. UHPLC-PDA-MS/MS profiles: comparison of monofloral manuka honey (A) and monofloral kanuka honey (B), λ 254 nm (I), λ 326 nm leptosin, 1, acetyl-2hydroxy-4-(2-methoxyphenyl)-4-oxobutanoate,
2,
3-hydroxy-1-(2-methoxyphenyl)-
penta-1,4-dione, 3, 4-methoxyphenyllactic acid, 4, lumichrome, 5, unknown 1, 6, unknown 2, 7, internal standard, IS Figure 2. ORTEP for crystal structure of 3,6,7-trimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione, 6. Figure 3. Possible relationship of the identified compounds 3,6,7-trimethyl2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione, 6, and 6,7-dimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione, 7, in riboflavin, 8, biosynthesis. Lumichrome, 5; 6,7-Dimethyl-8-ribityllumazine, 9; 5-amino6-ribitylamino-2,4(1H,3H)-pyrimidinedione, 10. Figure 4. Boxplots of 3,6,7-trimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione and 6,7-dimethyl2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione in different New Zealand monofloral honeys. Figure 5. TLCs of manuka honey, kanuka honey and other New Zealand honeys taken with TLC Visualizer (WinCATS, λ 366 nm); 3,6,7-trimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)pteridinedione, 6, and 6,7-dimethyl-2,4(1H,3H)-pteridinedione, 7.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 17 of 22
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
17
Figure 1
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 18 of 22
18
Figure 2
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 19 of 22
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
19
Figure 3
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 20 of 22
20
Figure 4
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 21 of 22
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
21
Figure 5
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 22 of 22
22
Table of Contents Graphic
ACS Paragon Plus Environment