Next Article in Journal
Antioxidant and Phytochemical Studies of 31 Cowpeas (Vigna unguiculata (L. Walp.)) Genotypes from Burkina Faso
Next Article in Special Issue
Legume Seeds as an Important Component of Human Diet
Previous Article in Journal
Food Safety Analysis Using Electrochemical Biosensors
Previous Article in Special Issue
Production, Quality, and Acceptance of Tempeh and White Bean Tempeh Burgers
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:

Antioxidant Potential of Grass Pea Seeds from European Countries

Wojciech Rybiński
Magdalena Karamać
Katarzyna Sulewska
Andreas Börner
3 and
Ryszard Amarowicz
Institute of Plant Genetics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Strzeszyńska 34, 60-479 Poznań, Poland
Institute of Animal Reproduction and Food Research, Polish Academy of Sciences, 10-748 Olsztyn, Poland
Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, D-06466 Gatersleben, Germany
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Foods 2018, 7(9), 142;
Submission received: 6 July 2018 / Revised: 21 August 2018 / Accepted: 27 August 2018 / Published: 1 September 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Food Legumes: Physicochemical and Nutritional Properties)


Phenolic compounds were extracted from seeds of 30 varieties of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus) into 80% (v/v) methanol. The total phenolics compounds content of the extracts and their antioxidant activity were determined using Folin-Ciocalteu’s phenol reagent and 2,2′-azinobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS) and ferric-reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) methods, respectively. Total phenolic contents ranged from 1.88 to 7.12 mg/g extract and 20.3 to 70.3 mg/100 g seeds. The extracts and seeds were characterized using Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity values of 0.015–0.037 mmol Trolox/g extract and 0.158–0.372 mmol Trolox/100 g seeds, and FRAP values of 0.045–0.120 mmol Fe2+/g extract and 0.487–1.189 Fe2+/100 g seeds. The total phenolics content of grass pea extract was correlated with the results of the ABTS (r = 0.881) and FRAP (r = 0.781) assays. The same correlation was observed between the results of both assays (r = 0.842). Two derivatives of p-coumaric acid were the dominant phenolic compounds of the Derek cultivar of grass pea.

1. Introduction

Grass pea (Lathyrus sativus) is an ideal legume for resource-poor farmers, characterized by drought tolerance and thriving with minimal external inputs [1]. It is cultivated in the Indian subcontinent, Ethiopia, and to a lesser extent in North Africa, Australia, Asia, and Europe [2]. Currently, grass peas, similar to other legumes such as chickpea, lentil, and vetch are beginning to be cultivated in the Old World [3]. Grass pea seeds have a high nutritional value [4]. The protein, starch, lipids, mineral, and energy content in grass peas is similar to those of peas and faba beans [5]. For example, according to literature data, the protein content in grass pea, pea, and faba bean seeds is 26.5, 20.6, and 19–30 g/100 g, respectively [5,6,7]. The fatty acid profile of grass pea lipids is valuable. A high percentage of stearic acid was determined in grass pea lipids by Mehmet [8]. In epidemiologic and clinical studies, stearic acid was found to be associated with lowered low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol in comparison with other saturated fatty acids [9].
Unfortunately, grass pea seeds contain a neurotoxin, β-N-oxalyl-1-α,β-diamino-propionic acid (β-ODAP). This non-protein amino acid causes neurolathyrism, a neurological disease in humans and domestic animals [10]. The β-ODAP content of traditional grass pea cultivars is 0.5–2.5%. Genetic improvement of grass pea has reduced this content to <0.10% [11]. Soaking and boiling considerably reduces the content of β-ODAP in grass pea seeds [12,13]. Grass pea seeds can be used as a high-value protein source after protein extraction and the removal of antinutritional components [14]. Suitable functional properties (water absorption capacity, oil absorption capacity, foaming capacity, and foaming stability) of grass pea proteins were reported by Aletor et al. [15].
Legumes are a potentially valuable crop with high antioxidant potential [16]. The antioxidant and antiradical activities of leguminous seed extracts have been investigated using a variety of methods including liposomes, enhanced chemiluminescence, a β-carotene-linoleate model system, 2,2′-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) and 2,2′-azinobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) ABTS assays, the reducing power assay, LDL cholesterol oxidation, ferric-reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) assay, Fe2+-chelating capacity assay, and the hydrophilic oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORACFL) assay [17].
The reported content of total phenolics of grass pea flour was 0.22 and 0.27 g/100 g [18]. The phenolic content of grass pea extracts was correlated with their antioxidant properties determined using DPPH, FRAP, and β-carotene bleaching methods [19]. Menga et al. [20] reported linear correlations between the content of total phenolics, total flavonoids, and condensed tannins and results of the ABTS assay for grass pea extracts (p < 0.001). Total phenolic and condensed tannin levels were not correlated with seed yield and seed protein content in grass pea [21]. Grass peas extract inhibited α-amylase and α-glucosidase in an in vitro bioassay [19]. Results obtained by Stanisavljević et al. [22] strongly suggest that simple cooking treatment and in vitro digestion of grass pea seed flour applied prior to extraction with methanol could improve the antioxidative activity of the obtained extracts.
The present study aimed to determine the total phenolic content of grass pea extracts and seeds as well their antioxidant activity and potential. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first publication to consider such a broad biological material from several countries.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Material

Plant material consisted of a collection of 30 grass pea varieties obtained in a field experiment conducted in Cerekwica (51°55′ N, 17°21′ E) derived from Italian, Spanish, French, German, and Polish lines. Descriptors for Lathyrus sativus were used (IPGRI 2000) for the evaluation and characterization of the phenotypic features of the new lines. The growth habit of each line was recorded at 50% flowering and scored as prostrate, spreading, semi-erect or erect. Flower colors were scored as blue, pink, red, white, or various combination of these colours. Pod shapes were scored as oblong, medium, oblong elliptical, curved, broad, broad-linear/elliptical, or a combination of these shapes. Seed coat color and shape were recorded on 100 randomly selected seeds immediately after threshing. Seed shape was generally classified as angled or wedge-shaped. After harvest, 10 randomly selected plants from each accession were chosen for estimation of quantitative traits (yield structure parameters). The weight of 100 seeds was calculated from weighing and counting at least 200 seeds. Until extraction, the seeds were stored in a refrigerator closed in vacuum bags. The characteristics of those seeds are reported in Table 1.

2.2. Chemicals

Sodium persulfate, ferrous chloride, Folin-Ciocalteau’s phenol reagent, 2,2′-azinobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS), 2,4,6-tri(2-pyridyl)-s-triazine (TPTZ), 6-hydroxy-2,5,7,8-tetramethyl-chroman-2-carboxylic acid (Trolox), and (+)-catechin were purchased from Sigma (Poznań, Poland). Acetonitrile high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) grade and methanol were obtained from P.O.Ch. Company (Gliwice, Poland).

2.3. Extraction

Phenolic compounds were extracted from ground seeds using 80% (v/v) methanol at a solids to solvent ratio of 1:10 (w/v) for 15 min at 50 °C [23]. The extraction was repeated twice, the supernatants were filtered and combined, and methanol was evaporated under vacuum in a R-200 rotary evaporator (Büchi Labortechnik AG, Flawil, Switzerland). The remaining aqueous solution was lyophilized.

2.4. Total Phenolic Compounds Content

The method described by Naczk and Shahidi [24] was used to determine the total phenolic compounds content of the extracts. Briefly, a 0.5-mL aliquot of seed extract dissolved in methanol was pipetted into a test tube containing 8 mL distilled water. After mixing the contents, 0.5 mL Folin-Ciocalteu’s phenol reagent and 1 mL saturated sodium carbonate solution were added. The contents were vortexed for 15 s and then left to stand at room temperature for 30 min. Absorbance measurements were recorded at 725 nm using a Beckman DU 7500 Spectrophotometer (Beckman Poland, Warsaw, Poland). Estimation of the phenolic compounds was carried out in triplicate. The results are expressed as (+)-catechin equivalents per g of the extract or 100 g seeds.

2.5. Condensed Tannins

Condensed tannins were determined using a vanillin/HCL colorimetric method [25]. The results obtained are reported as absorbance units at 500 nm per 1 mg extract.

2.6. ABTS Assay

The Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEAC) was determined using a method described by Re et al. [26]. Here, ABTS+ solution was prepared by mixing an ABTS stock solution in water with 2.45 mM sodium persulphate. This mixture was allowed to stand with shaking for 12–16 h at room temperature in the dark until reaching a stable oxidative state. For analysis, the ABTS+ stock solution was diluted with methanol to an absorbance of 0.720 at 734 nm. For the spectrophotometric assay, 2 mL ABTS+ reagent and 20 µL plant extract were mixed and the absorbance was read at 734 nm at 37 °C for 10 min. A calibration curve was plotted using Trolox standard solution. The results are expressed as mmol Trolox equivalent per g extract or 100 g seeds.

2.7. Ferric-Reducing Antioxidant Power (FRAP) Assay

The ferric-reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) assay was performed as previously described by Benzie and Strain [27]. The sample solution was first diluted with deionized water to fit within the linearity range. The working FRAP reagent was prepared by mixing 10 volumes of 300 mM acetate buffer, pH 3.6, with 1 volume of 10 mM TPTZ in 40 mM HCL, and with 1 volume of 20 mM FeCl3 × 6H2O. A volume of 2.25 mL of a working FRAP reagent was warmed to 37 °C. Then, 75 μL of the sample and 225 μL of deionized water were added to the FRAP reagent and the absorbance was measured at 593 nm against a reagent blank after 30 min incubation. The FRAP values were calculated and are expressed as mmol of Fe2+ equivalent per g extract or 100 g of seeds.

2.8. HPLC Analysis

Methanolic extract (20 mg) of Derek cultivar was dissolved in 2 mL of 80% methanol and filtered through a 0.45 μm cellulose acetate filter (Millipore, Warsaw, Poland). Phenolic compounds were analysed using a Shimadzu HPLC system (Shimadzu Corp., Kyoto, Japan) consisting of two LC-10AD pumps, a SCTL 10A system controller, and a SPD-M 10A photodiode array detector. The chromatography was performed using a pre-packed Luna C18 column (4 × 250 mm, 5 μm; Phenomenex, Torrance, CA, USA). Elution proceeded for 50 min in a gradient system of 5–40% acetonitrile in water adjusted to pH 2.5 with trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) [28]; the detector was set at 320, the injection volume was 20 μL, and the flow rate was 1 mL/min.

2.9. Statistical Analysis

The results obtained in this study are reported as the mean values of three estimates ± standard deviation. Pearson correlation was used to determine the relationship between total phenolics content, TEAC, and FRAP. Principal component analysis (PCA) and hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) with Ward’s method using Euclidean distances were also used. Statistical and chemometric data analyses were performed using Statistica (Windows software package 8.0, Dell Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Content of Total Phenolics Compounds

The total phenolics contents of the extracts were determined using a Folin-Ciocalteu’s phenol reagent. The results are expressed as (+)-catechin equivalents per g of the extract or 100 g seeds (Table 2). The total phenolic content ranged from 1.88 (LAT 4065/01) to 7.12 mg/g extract (LAT 4054/99) and from 20.3 (LAT 4065/01) to 70.3 mg/100 g seeds (LAT 4065/01). These concentrations are low and can be compared to those obtained previously for white bean [28] and pea [16]. Very similar total phenolic contents (20.6 and 21.3 mg/100g) were reported by Fratianni et al. [29] in two Italian varieties of grass pea, and by Wang et al. [21].in nine varieties of Canadian grass pea (16.2–37.5 mg/100 g). Higher total phenolic compounds contents in grass pea were reported by Wiszniewska and Piwowarczyk [30] and Carbonaro et al. [18].

3.2. Content of Condensed Tannins

The extracts obtained from samples 5, 10, 12, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, and 28 contained small amounts of condensed tannins. The results expressed as absorbance at 500 nm per mg extract ranged from 0.001 to 0.004. The contents of condensed tannins reported previously for extracts of lentil, abzuki bean, faba bean, broad bean, and red bean were much higher [16].

3.3. Antioxidant Activity

The results of the ABTS and FRAP assays are presented in Table 2. The extracts and seeds were characterized by the Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEAC) values, ranging from 0.015 (LAT 4051/99 and LAT 4065/01) to 0.037 mmol Trolox/g extract (LAT 4054/99) and from 0.158 (LAT 4068/01) to 0.372 mmol Trolox/100 g seeds (LAT 4054/99). Ferric-reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) values varied from 0.045 (LAT 4065/01) to 0.120 mmol Fe2+/g extract (LAT 4054/99) and from 0.487 (LAT 4068/01) to 1.189 Fe2+/100 g seeds (LAT 4054/99). The results were compared to those reported previously for white bean [16,23]. Some papers reported the antioxidant capacity of grass pea seeds or their extracts determined using DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP assays, β-carotene bleaching, and H2O2 scavenge [22,31,32,33]. In general, the results were lower relative to the results reported for other leguminous seeds. For example, extracts of cow pea were characterised by TEAC and TRAP values of 0.285–0.665 TE/g extract and 0.487–1.560 mmol Fe2+/g extract [34].

3.4. HPLC Analysis

The phenolic compounds contained in grass pea of the Derek cultivar were separated by HPLC, and the resulting chromatogram showed the presence of two major peaks (1 and 2) with retention times of 20.5 and 26.4 min, respectively (Figure 1). The UV-diode array detector (UV-DAD) spectra of compound 1 were characterized by maxima at 309 nm and were very similar to the spectrum of p-coumaric acid (Figure 2). The contents of compounds 1 and 2 in the extract and seeds of Derek cultivar are reported in Table 3. The presence of p-coumaric acid and its derivatives have been reported for lentil, broad bean, adzuki bean, and faba bean [35,36,37,38]. The high content of p-coumaric acid in grass pea was reported by Carbonaro et al. [18].

3.5. Statistical Analysis

In this work, for the first time, a correlation was calculated between the content of phenolic compounds in the grass pea extracts and their antioxidant activity. The correlation coefficients between the total phenolics content and the results of the ABTS and FRAP assays were 0.881 and 0.781, respectively. This correlation was also observed in the results of both assays (r = 0.842) (Figure 3). A similar relationship between the content of total phenolics in leguminous extracts and their antioxidant activities was previously reported by Amarowicz et al. [39] and Orac et al. [28,40].
In the principal component analysis (PCA) (Figure 4), the two first components accounted for 90.3% of the total variability between the grass pea varieties. The considerable variability in terms of the analyzed traits expressed jointly with the greatest Mahalanobis distance was recorded for Italian samples 3, 4, 9, 10, and 13 (LAT 4053/99, LAT 4054/99, LAT 4064/01, LAT 4065/01, and LAT 4070/01, respectively). According to Figure 2, discrimination of the sample geographical origin by PCA was rather difficult.
The hierarchical cluster analysis (Figure 5) shows several pairs of grass pea accessions (e.g., LAT 4053/99 and LAT 448; LAT 4061/01 and LAT 4006/84). Several of these pairs are, in turn, similar to each other (e.g., pair LAT 4061/01 and LAT 4006/84 and pair LAT 4063/10 and LAT 1706/92), whereas LAT 4054/99 is entirely different from all the others. The presence of similar pairs of grass peas accessions from different countries confirms the limitation of the hierarchical cluster analysis for the discrimination of the sample geographical origin.

4. Conclusions

Grass pea seeds with reduced content of β-ODAP after technological processing can be a source of phenolic compounds in a vegetarian or vegan diet, and in the general population. The contents of total phenolics in grass pea extract are correlated, as demonstrated by the results of the ABTS and FRAP assays. The correlation was also observed between results of both assays. Two derivatives of p-coumaric acid were the dominant phenolic compounds of the Derek cultivar of grass pea. In future studies, the bioavailability of grass pea phenolic compounds will be investigated in vitro.

Author Contributions

W.R. Conceptualization, produced and contributed plant material, wrote the study; M.K. Performed the statistical analysis and wrote the study; K.S. Formal analysis; A.B. Produced and contributed plant material; R.A. Conceptualization and wrote the study.


This research received no external funding.


The technical assistance of Kamila Penkacik is acknowledged.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


  1. Hillocks, R.J.; Maruthi, M.N. Grass pea (Lathyrus sativus): Is there a case for further crop improvement? Euphytica 2012, 186, 647–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Hanbury, C.D.; White, C.L.; Mullan, B.P.; Siddique, K.H.M. A review of the potential of Lathyrus sativus L. and L. cicera L. grain for use as animal feed. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2000, 87, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Mikić, A.; Mihailović, V.; Ćupina, B.; Ethurić, B.; Krstić, D.; Vasić, M.; Vasiljević, S.; Karagi, D.; Dorthević, V. Towards the re-introduction of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus) in the West Balkan countries: The case of Serbia and Srpska (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Food Chem. Toxicol. 2011, 49, 650–654. [Google Scholar]
  4. Ennenking, D. The nutritive value of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus) and allied species, their toxicity to animals and the role of malnutrition in neurolathyrism. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2011, 49, 694–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Mullan, B.P.; Pluske, J.R.; Trezona, M.; Harris, D.J.; Allen, J.G.; Siddique, K.H.M.; Hanbury, C.D.; van Barneveld, R.J.; Kim, J.C. Chemical composition and standardised ileal digestible amino acid contents of Lathyrus (Lathyrus cicera) as an ingredient in pig diets. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2009, 150, 139–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wozniak, A.; Soroka, M.; Stepniowska, A. Chemical composition of pea (Pisum sativum L.) seeds depending on tillage systems. J. Elementol. 2014, 14, 1143–1152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kumar, A.; Nidhi, P.; Sinha, S.K. Nutritional and antinutritional attributes of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) germ plasms growing in Bihar, India. Physiol. Mol. Biol. Plants 2015, 21, 159–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Mehmet, A. Fatty acid characteristics of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus) in an East Mediterranean environment. Cogent Chem. 2017, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hunter, J.E.; Zhang, J.; Kris-Etherton, P.M. Cardiovascular disease risk of dietary stearic acid compared with trans, other saturated, and unsaturated fatty acids: A systematic review. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2009, 91, 46–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Getahun, H.; Lambein, F.; Vanhoorne, M.; Van der Stuyft, P. Pattern and associated factors of the neurolathyrism epidemic in Ethiopia. Trop. Med. Int. Health 2002, 7, 118–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  11. Kumar, S.; Bejiga, G.; Ahmed, S.; Nakkoul, H.; Sarker, A. Genetic improvement of grass pea for low neurotoxin (β-ODAP) content. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2011, 49, 589–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Khandare, A.L.; Kumar, R.H.; Meshram, I.I.; Arlappa, N.; Laxmaiah, A.; Venkaiah, K.; Rao, P.A.; Validandi, V.; Toteja, G.S. Current scenario of consumption of Lathyrus sativus and lathyrism in three districts of Chhattisgarh State, India. Toxicon 2018, 150, 228–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Srivastava, S.; Khokhar, S. Effect of processing on the reduction of β-ODAP (β-N-Oxalyl-l-2,3-diaminopropionic acid) and anti-nutrients of khesari dhal, Lathyrus sativus. J. Sci. Food Agric. 1996, 71, 50–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Pastor-Cavada, E.; Jua, R.; Pastor, J.E.; Alai, M.; Vioque, J. Protein isolates from two Mediterranean legumes: Lathyrus clymenum and Lathyrus annuus. Chemical composition, functional properties and protein characterization. Food Chem. 2010, 122, 533–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Aletor, O.; Onyemem, C.E.; Aletor, V.A. Nutrient constituents, functional attributes and in vitro protein digestibility of the seeds of the Lathyrus plant. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 2011, 152, 145–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Amarowicz, R.; Pegg, R.B. Legumes as a source of natural antioxidants. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 2008, 110, 865–878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Vaz Patto, M.C.; Amarowicz, R.; Aryee, A.N.A.; Boye, J.I.; Chung, H.-J.; Martín-Cabrejas, M.A.; Domoney, C. Achievements and challenges in improving the nutritional quality of food legumes. Crit. Rev. Plant. Sci. 2015, 34, 105–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Carbonaro, M.; Nardini, M.; Maselli, P.; Nucara, A. Chemico-physical and nutritional properties of traditional legumes (lentil, Lens culinaris L., and grass pea, Lathyrus sativus L.) from organic agriculture: An explorative study. Org. Agric. 2015, 5, 179–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Talukdar, D. Antioxidant potential and type II diabetes related enzyme inhibition properties of raw and processed legumes in Indian Himalayas. J. Appl. Pharm. Sci. 2013, 3, 13–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Menga, V.; Codianni, P.; Fares, C. Agronomic management under organic farming may affect the bioactive compounds of lentil (Lens culinaris L.) and grass pea (Lathyrus communis L.)? Sustainability 2014, 6, 1059–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wang, X.; Warkentin, T.D.; Briggs, C.J.; Granese, T.; Albanese, D.; Di Matteo, M.; Zaccardelli, M.; Campbell, C.G.; Woods, S. Total phenolics and condensed tannins in field pea (Pisum sativum L.) and grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.). Euphytica 1998, 101, 97–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Stanisavljević, N.; Jovanović, Z.; Čupić, T.; Lukić, J.; Miljuš Dukić, M.J.; Radović, S.; Mikić, A. Extractability of antioxidants from legume seed flour after cooking and in vitro gastrointestinal digestion in comparison with methanolic extraction of the unprocessed flour. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2013, 48, 2096–2104. [Google Scholar]
  23. Amarowicz, R.; Raab, B. Antioxidative activity of leguminous seed extracts evaluated by chemiluminescence methods. Z. Naturforsch. 1997, 52, 709–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Naczk, M.; Shahidi, F. The effect of methanol-ammonia-water treatment on the content of phenolic acids of canola. Food Chem. 1989, 31, 159–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Price, M.L.; van Scoyoc, S.; Butler, L.G. A critical evaluation of the vanillin reaction as an assay for tannin in sorghum grain. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1978, 26, 1214–1218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Re, R.; Pellegrini, N.; Proteggente, A.; Pannala, A.; Yang, M.; Rice-Evans, C. Antioxidant activity applying an improved ABTS radical cation decolorization assay. Free Rad. Biol. Med. 1999, 26, 1231–1237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Benzie, I.E.F.; Strain, J.J. Ferric reducing/antioxidant power assay: Direct measure of total antioxidant activity of biological fluids and modified version for simultaneous measurement of total antioxidant power and ascorbic acid concentration. Methods Enzymol. 1990, 299, 15–27. [Google Scholar]
  28. Orak, H.-H.; Karamać, M.; Orak, A.; Amarowicz, R. Aantioxidant potential and phenolic compounds of some widely consumed Turkish white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) varieties. Pol. J. Food Nutr. Sci. 2016, 66, 253–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Fratianni, F.; Cardinale, F.; Cozzolino, A.; Granese, T.; Albanese, D.; Di Matteo, M.; Zaccardelli, M.; Coppola, R.; Nazzaro, F. Polyphenol composition and antioxidant activity of different grass pea (Lathyrus sativus), lentils (Lens culinaris), and chickpea (Cicer arietinum) ecotypes of the Campania region (Southern Italy). J. Funct. Foods 2014, 7, 551–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wiszniewska, A.; Piwowarczyk, B. Activity of selected components of antioxidant system in grass pea and yellow lupine protoplasts after enzymatic isolation. Biotechnologia 2015, 96, 285–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Talukdar, D. Total flavonoids, phenolics, tannins and antioxidant activity in seeds of lentil and grass pea. Int. J. Phytomed. 2012, 4, 2096–2104. [Google Scholar]
  32. Tamburino, R.; Guida, V.; Pacifico, S.; Rocco, M.; Zarelli, A.; Parente, A.; Di Maro, A. Nutritional values and radical scavenging capacities of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.) seeds in Valle Agricola district, Italy. Austr. J. Crop. Sci. 2012, 6, 149–156. [Google Scholar]
  33. Starzyńska-Janiszewska, A.; Stodolak, B. Effect of inoculated lactic acid fermentation on antinutritional and antiradical properties of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus “Krab”) flour. Pol. J. Food Nutr. Sci. 2011, 61, 245–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Siddhuraju, P.; Becker, K. The antioxidant and free radical scavenging activities of processed cowpea (Vigna unuguiculata (L.) Walp.) seed extracts. Food Chem. 2007, 101, 10–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Amarowicz, R.; Shahidi, F. Antioxidant activity of broad bean seed extract and its phenolic composition. J. Funct. Foods 2017, 38, 656–662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Amarowicz, R.; Shahidi, F. Antioxidant activity of faba bean extract and fractions thereof. J. Food Bioact. 2018, 1, 112–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Amarowicz, R.; Estrella, I.; Hernández, T.; Troszyńska, A. Antioxidant activity of extract of adzuki bean and its fractions. J. Food Lipids 2008, 15, 119–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Amarowicz, R.; Estrella, I.; Hernández, T.; Robredo, S.; Troszyńska, A.; Kosińska, A.; Pegg, R.B. Free radical-scavenging capacity, antioxidant activity, and phenolic composition of green lentil (Lens culinaris). Food Chem. 2010, 121, 705–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Amarowicz, R.; Troszyńska, A.; Baryłko-Pikielna, N.; Shahidi, F. Polyphenolics extracts from legume seeds: Correlations between total antioxidant activity, total phenolics content, tannins content and astringency. J. Food Lipids 2004, 11, 278–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Orak, H.H.; Karamać, M.; Amarowicz, R. Antioxidant activity of phenolic compounds of red bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Oxid. Commun. 2015, 38, 67–76. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) chromatogram of Lathyrus sativus Derek cultivar extract.
Figure 1. High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) chromatogram of Lathyrus sativus Derek cultivar extract.
Foods 07 00142 g001
Figure 2. UV-diode array detector (UV-DAD) spectra of compound 1 and 2 separated using HPLC method and standard of p-coumaric acid.
Figure 2. UV-diode array detector (UV-DAD) spectra of compound 1 and 2 separated using HPLC method and standard of p-coumaric acid.
Foods 07 00142 g002
Figure 3. Correlation between (a) the total phenolics content and the results of 2,2′-azinobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS) assay, (b) total phenolics content and the results of the ferric-reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) assay, and (c) results of the two antioxidant assays.
Figure 3. Correlation between (a) the total phenolics content and the results of 2,2′-azinobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS) assay, (b) total phenolics content and the results of the ferric-reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) assay, and (c) results of the two antioxidant assays.
Foods 07 00142 g003
Figure 4. Results of the principal component analysis (PCA).
Figure 4. Results of the principal component analysis (PCA).
Foods 07 00142 g004
Figure 5. The hierarchical cluster analysis.
Figure 5. The hierarchical cluster analysis.
Foods 07 00142 g005
Table 1. Characteristic of grass seeds investigated in this study.
Table 1. Characteristic of grass seeds investigated in this study.
No.Accession CodeCountry of OriginSeeds Coat ColorWeight of 100 Seeds (g)
1LAT 4051/99ItalyCream to bright green37.8
2LAT 4052/99ItalyCream to bright green42.6
3LAT 4053/99ItalyCream to bright green28.2
4LAT 4054/99ItalyCream, mottled with brown edge25.7
5LAT 4055/99ItalyCream, slightly mottled and flattened46.5
6LAT 4056/99ItalyGreen29.0
7LAT 4061/99ItalyGreyed-white with brown edge32.1
8LAT 4063/01ItalyCream-white29.1
9LAT 4064/01ItalyBrick-red, dark mottled30.0
10LAT 4065/01ItalyGreyed-white with brown edge24.9
11LAT 4068/01ItalyBrick-red, dark mottled29.4
12LAT 4069/01ItalyCream slightly flattened30.4
13LAT 4070/01ItalyBrick-red, dark mottled24.7
14LAT 4071/01ItalyCream20.1
15LAT 4074/01ItalyGreyed-white with brown edge30.0
16LAT 4075/00ItalyCream with brown edge31.3
17LAT 4078/00ItalyCream to bright green with brown edge48.0
18LAT 4079/01ItalyCream with brown edge40.9
19LAT 4081/00ItalyCream18.2
20LAT 4082/00ItalyCream with brown edge21.4
21LAT 456/75SpainCream with dark edge28.5
22LAT 1706/92SpainCream with short black edge27.7
23LAT 4006/84SpainCream with brown edge23.5
24LAT 4007/84SpainCream25.3
25LAT 4085/73SpainCream26.1
26LAT 444/73GermanyCream, brown edge, slightly mottled16,7
27LAT 478GermanyGray, dark brown edge, slightly mottled19.5
28LAT 447FranceCream, slightly brick-red16.4
29LAT 448FranceCream17.9
30Cultivar DerekPolandBridge-cream11.8
LAT means “Lathyrus”. Seed size (100 seeds): below 15 g: small; 15–25 g: medium, and above 25 g: large.
Table 2. Characteristics of the grass pea seeds and their extracts: content of total phenolics and antioxidant activity.
Table 2. Characteristics of the grass pea seeds and their extracts: content of total phenolics and antioxidant activity.
No.Total Phenolics 1ABTS 2 AssayFRAP 3 Assay
mg/g Extractmg/100 g Seedsmmol TE/g Extractmmol TE/100 g Seedsmmol Fe2+/g Extractmmol Fe2+/100 g Seeds
13.49 ± 0.0740.6 ± 0.80.015 ± 0.0000.170 ± 0.0010.074 ± 0.0010.859 ± 0.009
23.85 ± 0.0441.6 ± 0.40.020 ± 0.0000.214 ± 0.0010.080 ± 0.0020.861 ± 0.021
32.63 ± 0.0330.5 ± 0.40.016 ± 0.0000.186 ± 0.0030.061 ± 0.0010.713 ± 0.017
47.12 ± 0.1073.0 ± 1.10.037 ± 0.0010.372 ± 0.0140.120 ± 0.0011.028 ± 0.012
53.12 ± 0.0436.1 ± 0.40.022 ± 0.0000.253 ± 0.0010.073 ± 0.0020.851 ± 0.021
62.40 ± 0.0327.2 ± 0.40.016 ± 0.0000.176 ± 0.0010.058 ± 0.0010.654 ± 0.010
73.66 ± 0.0448.2 ± 0.50.018 ± 0.0000.241 ± 0.0030.059 ± 0.0010.780 ± 0.015
83.68 ± 0.0241.6 ± 0.20.019 ± 0.0000.210 ± 0.0040.059 ± 0.0010.662 ± 0.004
96.35 ± 0.1065.5 ± 1.00.031 ± 0.0010.319 ± 0.00130.115 ± 0.0011.189 ± 0.008
101.88 ± 0.0720.3 ± 0.80.015 ± 0.0000.232 ± 0.0020.045 ± 0.0030.487 ± 0.002
113.97 ± 0.1741.6 ± 1.80.022 ± 0.0000.158 ± 0.0020.084 ± 0.0020.889 ± 002
121.99 ± 0.0522.1 ± 0.60.017 ± 0.0000.191 ± 0.0040.101 ± 0.0020.557 ± 0.008
135.68 ± 0.1061.8 ± 1.10.033 ± 0.0010.229 ± 0.0020.069 ± 0.0021.105 ± 0.002
144.11 ± 0.0942.4 ± 0.90.026 ± 0.0010.232 ± 0.0020.069 ± 0.0010.707 ± 0.024
154.45 ± 0.0745.0 ± 0.70.031 ± 0.0010.309 ± 0.0020.083 ± 0.0020.835 ± 0.018
163.94 ± 0.0338.6 ± 0.30.023 ± 0.0000.225 ± 0.0020.074 ± 0.0010.724 ± 0.006
173.24 ± 0.0337.4 ± 0.40.020 ± 0.0000.229 ± 0.0010.063 ± 0.0020.728 ± 0.021
184.18 ± 0.0747.2 ± 0.70.020 ± 0.0000.227 ± 0.0010.062 ± 0.0020.698 ± 0.021
195.37 ± 0.0756.8 ± 0.70.025 ± 0.0010.263 ± 0.0040.073 ± 0.0010.769 ± 0.006
204.84 ± 0.0349.5 ± 0.70.028 ± 0.0010.284 ± 0.0060.073 ± 0.0010.740 ± 0.012
213.27 ± 0.0435.7 ± 0.40.016 ± 0.0000.179 ± 0.0010.060 ± 0.0030.524 ± 0.030
224.24 ± 0.0746.9 ± 0.80.024 ± 0.0010.269 ± 0.0010.062 ± 0.0010.678 ± 0.09
234.55 ± 0.0748.0 ± 0.30.022 ± 0.0000.230 ± 0.0040.060 ± 0.0010.655 ± 0.010
243.50 ± 0.0436.9 ± 0.30.019 ± 0.0000.196 ± 0.0030.053 ± 0.0020.557 ± 0.018
252.45 ± 0.0337.4 ± 0.50.016 ± 0.0000.180 ± 0.0030.059 ± 0.0020.687 ± 0.030
264.40 ± 0.0641.4 ± 0.70.021 ± 0.0000.212 ± 0.0040.062 ± 0.0020.622 ± 0.024
274.82 ± 0.1059.1 ± 0.70.027 ± 0.0010.293 ± 0.0060.062 ± 0.0030.683 ± 0.028
282.49 ± 0.0749.7 ± 0.30.020 ± 0.0000.205 ± 0.0070.070 ± 0.0030.723 ± 0.031
294.77 ± 0.1132.5 ± 0.40.025 ± 0.0010.244 ± 0.0040.066 ± 0.0010.659 ± 0.010
302.26 ± 0.0241.3 ± 0.70.019 ± 0.0000.180 ± 0.0010.065 ± 0.0010.638 ± 0.007
1 As (+)-catechin equivalents; 2 2,2′-azinobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid); 3 Ferric-Reducing Antioxidant Power.
Table 3. Content of two main phenolic compounds in Derek cultivar of grass pea.
Table 3. Content of two main phenolic compounds in Derek cultivar of grass pea.
Phenolic CompoundContent 1
mg/g Extractmg/g 100 g Seeds
11.15 ± 0.0520.7 ± 2.7
20.48 ± 0.038.64 ± 0.54
1p-coumaric acid equivalents.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Rybiński, W.; Karamać, M.; Sulewska, K.; Börner, A.; Amarowicz, R. Antioxidant Potential of Grass Pea Seeds from European Countries. Foods 2018, 7, 142.

AMA Style

Rybiński W, Karamać M, Sulewska K, Börner A, Amarowicz R. Antioxidant Potential of Grass Pea Seeds from European Countries. Foods. 2018; 7(9):142.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rybiński, Wojciech, Magdalena Karamać, Katarzyna Sulewska, Andreas Börner, and Ryszard Amarowicz. 2018. "Antioxidant Potential of Grass Pea Seeds from European Countries" Foods 7, no. 9: 142.

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop