Detection and determination of furfural in crude palm oil.

In the palm oil mill, fresh fruit bunch (FFB) undergoes various thermal and mechanical treatments to produce the crude palm oil (CPO). FFB consists of many fruits attached to the spikelets that are spirally arranged on the main bunch stalk. Each fruit is made up of a nut enveloped by the fleshy mesocarp, which is reinforced by strands of fibers running from the base towards the fruit tip. A ripe fruit mesocarp contains oil-rich cellulosic cells. These cells are bound together by hemicellulose. Whilst cellulose is very stable, the hemicellulose is easily hydrolyzed. This hydrolysis occurs during sterilization of the FFB when it is exposed to temperatures of 140-145°C and pressure of 40-45 pound per square inch (psi) or 275.8-310.3 kPa for 1-1½ hours. This condition aims at and ensures the detachment of fruits from the bunch. The in-depth chemical changes that occur in the FFB during sterilization are not fully understood and continuously being investigated. Xyloses form one of the products of hydrolysis, and furfural is another product that results from the dehydration of pentose formed also upon the hydrolysis of hemicellulose. Presence of furfural was tested in six extracted samples, namely CPO, mill-pressed crude, condensate oil, sludge oil, sterilized FFB oil and unsterilized FFB oil, using aniline acetate colorimetric method, thin-layer chromatography (TLC) and UV-visible spectrophotometry. The color formation was compared to that of standard furfural. Furfural was detected in CPO, crude, condensate oil, sludge oil and sterilized FFB oil, while it was undetected in the unsterilized FFB. The amount of furfural was quantified in CPO, condensate oil and sludge oil using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field