TLC determination of flavonoids from different cultivars of Allium cepa and Allium ascalonicum

This study comprises the optimization and validation of a new TLC method for determination of flavonols in the bulbs of seven cultivars of onions and shallots. Separation was performed on RP-18 plates with the solvent mixture tetrahydrofuran/water/formic acid (40+60+6, V/V/V) as a mobile phase. The method was validated for precision, linearity, LOD, LOQ, accuracy and robustness. Chromatographic analysis of the extracts revealed the presence of three main flavonols, quercetin, quercetin-4’-O-glucoside and quercetin-3,4’-O-diglucoside in the majority of analyzed cultivars. The content of flavonols in the analyzed extracts of onion bulbs varied from 123 (‘Exihibition’) to 1079 mg kg–1 fresh mass (fm) (‘Hybing’) in edible parts, and from 1727 (‘Hyline’) to 28949 mg kg–1 fm (‘Red Baron’) in outer scales. The bulbs of two shallot cultivars contained 209 (‘Ambition’) and 523 mg kg–1 fm (‘Matador’) of flavonols in edible parts and 5426 and 8916 mg kg–1 fm in outer scales, respectively

TLC determination of flavonoids from different cultivars of Allium cepa and Allium ascalonicum

This study comprises the optimization and validation of a new TLC method for determination of flavonols in the bulbs of seven cultivars of onions and shallots. Separation was performed on RP-18 plates with the solvent mixture tetrahydrofuran/water/formic acid (40+60+6, V/V/V) as a mobile phase. The method was evaluated for precision, linearity, LOD, LOQ, accuracy and robustness. Chromatographic analysis of the extracts revealed the presence of three main flavonols, quercetin, quercetin-4′-O-glucoside and quercetin-3,4′-O-diglucoside in the majority of analyzed cultivars. The content of flavonols in the analyzed extracts of onion bulbs varied from 123 (‘Exihibition’) to 1079 mg kg-1 fresh mass (fm) (‘Hybing’) in edible parts, and from 1727 (‘Hyline’) to 28949 mg kg-1 fm (‘Red Baron’) in outer scales. The bulbs of two shallot cultivars contained 209 (‘Ambition’) and 523 mg kg-1 fm (‘Matador’) of flavonols in edible parts and 5426 and 8916 mg kg-1 fm in outer scales, respectively

A. The family tree of the affected family shows the pattern of inheritance.

<p>The proband is the black oval on the left side of the figure (II:1), marked with an arrow. Tau haplotypes of sequenced individuals are also noted. “aoo” corresponds to age of onset; “aod” corresponds to age of death; black filling indicates persons possessing the G55R mutation; gray filling corresponds to diagnosed dementia of unknown origin (presumed to be G55R but inadequate medical records exist). Proband's son III:1 (from first marriage) is 36 years old and a carrier of G55R. Proband's second son III:2 (from second marriage) is 31 and also a G55R carrier. The other two sons (III:3 and III:4; from the second marriage) are not G55R carriers and are 29 and 28 years old. <b>B. The tau sequence in the region of the G55R mutation is extremely highly conserved across species lines.</b> The glycine at position 55 is completely conserved in seven species ranging from humans to lizards. Color coding emphasizes conserved nature of acidic (red), basic (blue), hydrophilic/polar (orange), hydrophobic (green) and proline (peach) positions.</p

Schematic map of the six CNS tau isoforms.

<p>Exons 2 (E2), 3 (E3) and 10 (E10) are alternatively spliced to generate all six possible combinations. Arrowheads denote the position of the G55R mutation, present in four of the six isoforms. R1, R2, R3 and R4 denote the four imperfect repeats in the MT binding region.</p

The G55R mutation increases the ability of 4R tau but not 3R tau to nucleate microtubule assembly.

<p>(A) Microtubule assembly in reactions containing a 1∶30 tau:tubulin dimer molar ratio were assayed by light scattering as a function of time. (B) Co-sedimentation assays demonstrate that the G55R mutation does not affect the ability of tau to assemble MT mass at steady-state, nor does it affect the ability of tau to bind to microtubules. Statistical significance was determined by comparing each mutant to its corresponding WT using two-tailed t-tests. Data in both panels represent the mean ± SEM from three independent experiments.</p