Comparative Analysis of Betalain Content in Stenocereus Stellatus Fruits and Other Cactus Fruits Using Principal Component Analysis

Figures & data

FIGURE 1 (a) The S. stellatus cactus and its fruits: white (b), yellow (c), purple (d), and (e) red pitayas.

TABLE 1 Proximate analysis, physicochemical characteristics, and color properties of white, yellow, purple, and red types of S. stellatus fruits in Mexico

Variable	SSWM	SSYM	SSPM	SSRM
Proximate analysis (FW)
Moisture (%)	86.58 ± 0.02^AB	85.39 ± 0.12^C	86.65 ± 0.13^A	86.43 ± 0.07^B
Carbohydrates (%)	9.82 ± 0.00^B	10.85 ± 0.00^A	9.65 ± 0.02^C	9.82 ± 0.00^B
Reducing Sugars (%)	6.46 ± 0.09^A	4.81 ± 0.15^C	5.31 ± 0.18^B	4.33 ± 0.27^D
Protein (%)	1.08 ± 0.02^B	1.23 ± 0.14^A	1.30 ± 0.02^A	1.29 ± 0.06^A
Lipids (%)	0.47 ± 0.03^A	0.49 ± 0.06^A	0.47 ± 0.08^A	0.39 ± 0.04^A
Crude fiber (%)	1.63 ± 0.00^A	1.58 ± 0.06^A	1.39 ± 0.00^B	1.58 ± 0.00^A
Ash (%)	0.48 ± 0.01^D	0.58 ± 0.01^A	0.55 ± 0.00^B	0.53 ± 0.01^C
Physicochemical analysis
Soluble solids (°Brix)	9.73 ± 0.30^A	9.53 ± 0.50^A	9.60 ± 0.20^A	9.67 ± 0.11^A
Titratable acidity (% malic acid)	0.81 ± 0.06^A	0.57 ± 0.15^B	0.50 ± 0.09^B	0.48 ± 0.05^B
pH	3.37 ± 0.01^D	3.59 ± 0.02^B	3.64 ± 0.01^A	3.48 ± 0.02^C
Color measurements
Lightness (L*)	67.3 ± 0.9^A	26.8 ± 1.0^B	13.9 ± 1.9^C	12.6 ± 0.6^C
a*	2.2 ± 0.1^D	33.9 ± 1.1^A	29.9 ± 2.5^B	24.4 ± 2.2^C
b*	22.0 ± 0.7^B	33.3 ± 3.1^A	–1.5 ± 0.4^D	8.7 ± 1.5^C
Hue angle (Hº)	84.3 ± 0.2^A	44.4 ± 1.9^B	2.9 ± 1.1^C	19.4 ± 1.6^D
Chroma (C*)	22.1 ± 0.7^C	47.5 ± 2.9^A	30.0 ± 2.4^B	25.9 ± 2.6^BC

The data are presented as a mean of 3 measurements ± SD (p < 0.05);

Different superscript letters indicate significant differences among fruit types;

White (SSWM), yellow (SSYM), purple (SSPM), and red type (SSRM). SS: S. stellatus; W: white; Y: yellow; P: purple; R: red; M: Mexico; FW: fresh weight.

TABLE 2 Total phenolic content (TPC), antioxidant capacity (AC), pigments, and ascorbic-acid (AA) content of Stenocereus stellatus fruits with white (SSWM), yellow (SSYM), purple (SSPM), and red pulp (SSRM)

Variable	SSWM	SSYM	SSPM	SSRM
TPC, AC, Pigments and AA (DW)
Total Phenols (mg GAE g^–^1)	4.47 ± 0.96^A	3.72 ± 0.89^A	4.48 ± 0.59^A	5.79 ± 0.87^A
ABTS assay (µmol TE g^–^1)	128.69 ± 11.94^A	85.39 ± 3.29^B	57.20 ± 3.79^C	109.67 ± 15.00^AB
Bc (µg betanin g^–^1)	nd	135.2 ± 3.5^C	538.3 ± 26.7^B	1457.2 ± 55.2^A
Bx (µg indicaxanthin g^–^1)	nd	928.7 ± 11.9^B	277.8 ± 18.8^C	1511.3 ± 62.2^A
TB ^a (Bc + Bx; µg g^–^1)	nd	1063.6 ± 8.4^B	856.1 ± 64.2^C	2968.6 ± 117.4^A
Ascorbic acid (mg AA g^–^1)	4.11 ± 0.17^A	3.05 ± 0.26^B	3.12 ± 0.27^B	2.61 ± 0.07^B

The data are means of three measurements ± SD (p < 0.05);

^aWater was used as extraction and reference solvent. Different letters represent significant differences among fruit types;

SS: S. stellatus; W: white; Y: yellow; P: purple; R: red; M: Mexico; nd: not detected; DW: dry weight.

TABLE 3 Pigments, total phenolic compounds (TPC), and antioxidant capacity (AC) of cactus fruits from different countries

ID	Fruit	Bc DW (µg betanin g^–^1)	Bx DW (µg indicaxanthin g^–^1)	TB DW (Bc + Bx; µg g^–^1)	TPC DW (mg GAE g^–^1)	ABTS DW (µmol TE g^–^1)	References
Mexico							This work
1	SSYM	135.2 ± 3.5	928.7 ± 11.9	1063.6 ± 8.4^a	3.7 ± 0.9	85.4 ± 3.2
2	SSPM	538.3 ± 26.7	277.8 ± 18.8	856.1 ± 64.2^a	4.5 ± 0.6	57.2 ± 3.7
3	SSRM	1457.2 ± 55.2	1511.3 ± 62.2	2968.6 ± 117.4^a	5.8 ± 0.9	109.7 ± 15.0
4	SPYM	377.8 ± 2.2	3195.5 ± 18.6	3573.4 ± 68.7^a	9.4 ± 0.2	74.1 ± 0.5
5	SPRM	3448.9 ± 33.8	4646.1 ± 76.5	8095.0 ± 17.0^a	9.1 ± 0.2	117.9 ± 5.9
6	SGOM	376.0 ± 75.4	1773.7 ± 301.8	2149.7 ± 377.2	0.5 ± 0.0	nr	[15]
7	SGRM	1996.0 ± 14.3	1476.1 ± 182.1	3473.0 ± 209.8	1.6 ± 0.1	nr
8	SPYM	470.0 ± 222.0	2670.0 ± 270.0	3140.0 ± 492.0	1.2 ± 0.2	735.4 ± 111.6	[4]
9	SPRM	2860.0 ± 380.0	3210.0 ± 560.0	6070.0 ± 940.0	1.6 ± 0.2	1090.6 ± 152.8
10	ORRM	5290.0 ± 350.0	2860.0 ± 240.0	8150.0 ± 590.0	nr	nr	[24]
11	ORRM	2060.0 ± 60.0	990.0 ± 30.0	3050.0 ± 90.0	nr	nr
12	OTRM	2040.0 ± 200.0	1040.0 ± 90.0	3080.0 ± 290.0	nr	nr
13	OFRM	710.0 ± 40.0	440.0 ± 30.0	1150.0 ± 70.0	nr	nr
14	OFPM	390.0 ± 30.0	140.0 ± 10.0	530.0 ± 40.0	nr	nr
15	OFRM	270.0 ± 10.0	230.0 ± 20.0	500.0 ± 30.0	nr	nr
16	OMOM	65.0 ± 10.0	160.0 ± 20.0	225.0 ± 30.0	nr	nr
17	OFYM	72.0 ± 1.0	140.0 ± 20.0	212.0 ± 21.0	nr	nr
18	OFYM	71.0 ± 1.0	410.0 ± 20.0	481.0 ± 21.0	nr	nr
19	OAWM	50.0 ± 20.0	120.0 ± 10.0	170.0 ± 30.0	nr	nr
Spain							[35]
20^b,d	OFRS	978.7 ± 51.5	1635.5 ± 122.3	2614.3 ± 174.0	14.1 ± 0.2	43.1 ± 4.7
21^b,d	OSRS	5157.7 ± 360.6	nr	5157.7 ± 360.6	13.2 ± 0.3	38.5 ± 1.5
22^b,d	OURS	1584.0 ± 135.2	1146.2 ± 58.0	2730.2 ± 193.2	10.6 ± 0.2	10.2 ± 2.6
Argentina							[36]
23^b	OMYA	70.8 ± 5.8	103.0 ± 6.4	173.7 ± 12.2	3.5 ± 0.6	nr
24^b	OMOA	115.9 ± 6.4	341.3 ± 26.0	457.2 ± 32.0	6.4 ± 0.6	nr
25^b	OPPA	2073.4 ± 115.6	965.9 ± 90.2	3039.3 ± 203.0	7.7 ± 0.4	nr
26^b	OPIA	373.5 ± 19.3	302.6 ± 19.3	676.1 ± 38.6	5.1 ± 0.6	nr
27^b	OFPA	2215.1 ± 90.2	901.5 ± 77.3	3116.5 ± 167.4	7.1 ± 0.6	nr
28^b	OFPA	1802.1 ± 77.3	759.8 ± 64.4	2562.8 ± 141.7	5.8 ± 0.6	nr
29^b	OFGA	5.1 ± 0.6	19.1 ± 1.9	25.1 ± 2.6	3.9 ± 0.6	nr
United States							[37]
30^b	OF GU	0.4 ± 0.0	1.7 ± 0.1	2.2 ± 0.1	1.0 ± 0.1	14.4 ± 0.6
31^b	OF OU	31.9 ± 0.2	368.5 ± 1.8	400.3 ± 2.0	1.2 ± 0.1	14.9 ± 0.2
32^b	OF RU	540.9 ± 2.0	306.0 ± 0.9	846.9 ± 2.8	1.5 ± 0.1	16.7 ± 2.1
33^b	OF PU	2026.6 ± 4.9	920.4 ± 2.0	2946.1 ± 6.9	3.1 ± 0.2	23.4 ± 1.7
Taiwan							[38]
34^c	HP RT	1101.9 ± 219.8	nr	1101.9 ± 219.8	4.2 ± 0.0	nr
Belgium							[6]
35^c	HP RB	1651.3 ± 17.0	nr	1651.34 ± 17.0	1.6 ± 0.0	nr

The values are mean ± SD;

ID: sample identification;

SS: Stenocereus stellatus; SP: S. pruinosus; SG: S. griseus; OR: Opuntia robusta; OT: O. streptacantha; OF: O. ficus-indica; OM: O. megacantha; OA: O. albicarpa; OS: O. stricta; OU: O. undulata; OP: Opuntia spp.; HP: Hylocereus polyrhizus; W: white; Y: yellow; P: purple; R: red; O: orange; I: pink; G: green; M: Mexico; S: Spain; A: Argentina; U: United States; T: Taiwan; B: Belgium; DW: dry weight; nr: not reported;

^aWater was used as extraction and reference solvent;

^bdata expressed in DW based on water content 84.47%;

^cdata expressed in DW based on water content 89.99%;

^dwhole fruit.

FIGURE 2 Three-dimensional plots of the principal components PC1, PC2, and PC3 for (a) scores of the samples; (b) loadings of the variables. SS: Stenocereus stellatus; W: white; Y: yellow; P: purple; R: red.

TABLE 4 Confidence intervals for the sample grouping by pigment content

Range	Bc (µg betanin g^–^1)	Bx (µg indicaxanthin g^–^1)	TB (Bc + Bx; µg g^–^1)
Low	<693.86	<615.98	<1208.98
Medium	1874.70–2686.00	1727.40–2742.20	2935.30–3288.3
High	5059.60–5388.10	2776.70–4591.10	4488.30–9248.10

FIGURE 3 A 2-dimensional plot of the principal components PC1 and PC2 for scores and loadings of principal component analysis (PCA) regarding pigment content of cactus fruits. Numbers represent the ID of a sample.

Downham, A.; Collins, P. Colouring Our Foods in the Last and Next Millennium. International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2000, 35, 5–22.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

García-Cruz, L.; Salinas-Moreno, Y.; Valle-Guadarrama, S. Betalains, Phenolic Compounds and Antioxidant Activity in Pitaya de Mayo (Stenocereus Griseus H.). Revista Fitotecnia Mexicana 2012, 35(5), 1–5.

 Google Scholar

García-Cruz, L.; Valle-Guadarrama, S.; Salinas-Moreno, Y.; Joaquín-Cruz, E. Physical, Chemical, and Antioxidant Activity Characterization of Pitaya (Stenocereus Pruinosus) Fruits. Plant Foods for Humans Nutrition 2013, 68, 403–410.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Castellanos-Santiago, E.; Yahia, E.M. Identification and Quantification of Betalains from the Fruits of 10 Mexican Prickly Pear Cultivars by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography and Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2008, 56, 5758–5764.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Fernández-López, J.A.; Almela, L.; Obón, J.M.; Castellar, R. Determination of Antioxidant Constituents in Cactus Pear Fruits. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 2010, 65, 253–259.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Coria, C.Y.S.; Ochoa, M.J.; Nazareno, M.A. Health-Promoting Substances and Antioxidant Properties of Opuntia sp. Fruits. Changes in Bioactive-Compound Contents during Ripening Process. Food Chemistry 2011, 126, 514–519.

 Google Scholar

Stintzing, F.C.; Herbach, K.M.; Mobhammer, M.R.; Carle, R.; Yi, W.; Sellappan, S.; Akoh, C.C.; Bunch, R.; Felker, P. Color, Betalain Pattern, and Antioxidant Properties of Cactus Pear (Opuntia spp.) Clones. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2005, 53, 442–451.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wu, L.C.; Hsu, H.W.; Chen, Y.C.; Chiu, C.C.; Lin, Y.I.; Ho, J.A. Antioxidant and Antiproliferative Activities of Red Pitaya. Food Chemistry 2006, 95, 319–327.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Liaotrakoon, W.; De Clercq, N.; Van Hoed, V.; Van de Walle, D.; Lewille, B.; Dewettinck, K. Impact of Thermal Treatment on Physicochemical, Antioxidative, and Rheological Properties of White-Flesh and Red-Flesh Dragon Fruit (Hylocereus spp.) Purees. Food Bioprocess Technology 2013, 6, 416–430.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar