English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In this study, 41 tomato samples were investigated by means of stable isotope ratios (δ 13 C, δ 18 O and δ 2 H), elemental content, phenolic compounds and pesticides in order to classify them, according to growing conditions and geographical origin. Using investigated parameters, stepwise linear discriminant analysis was applied and the differences that occurred between tomato samples grown in greenhouses compared to those grown on field, and also between Romanian and abroad purchased samples were pointed out. It was shown that Ti, Ga, Te, δ 2 H and δ 13 C content were able to differentiate Romanian tomato samples from foreign samples, whereas Al, Sc, Se, Dy, Pb, δ 18 O, 4,4'-DDT could be used as markers for growing regime (open field vs. greenhouse). For the discrimination of different tomato varieties (six cherry samples and fourteen common sorts) grown in greenhouse, phenolic compounds of 20 samples were determined. In this regard, dihydroquercetin, caffeic acid, chlorogenic acid, rutin, rosmarinic acid, quercetin and naringin were the major phenolic compounds detected in our samples. The phenolic profile showed significant differences between cherry tomato and common tomato. The contents of the chlorogenic acid and rutin were significantly higher in the cherry samples (90.27-243.00 µg/g DW and 160.60-433.99 µg/g DW respectively) as compared to common tomatoes (21.30-88.72 µg/g DW and 24.84-110.99 µg/g DW respectively). The identification of dihydroquercetin is of particular interest, as it had not been reported previously in tomato fruit.

Differentiation of tomatoes based on isotopic, elemental and organic markers