Análisis metabolómico de los componentes bioactivos de los alimentos

Genómica nutricional desde la oficina de farmacia

Madrid, 4 de Junio 2014Rosa M Lamuela Raventós

BIOLOGÍA INTEGRAL Lo que la planta (el alimento)

Genómica Genes, ADN puede hacer(Potencial)

Transcriptómica Transcritos, ARN planea hacer(Estrategia)

Proteómica Enzimas, Proteínas está haciendo (Trabajo)

Metabolómica Metabolitos está produciendo(Resultados)

Targeted and untargeted food metabolomics

¿Por qué buscar los polifenoles?

Son los antioxidantes que consumimos en mayor cantidad en los alimentosde origen vegetal.

Renaud and De Logeril, Lancet, 1992

French Paradox

Dairy fat (calories) (1980-1985)

CH

D m

orta

lity

(19

87

) (m

en+

wom

en) Finland

Irland

Sweeden

NorwayGermany

Holand

Switzerland

France

DenmarkEngland

Austria

Belgium

Australia

Italy

Spain

Yugoslavia

Portugal

r= 0.73p <0.001

300

200

100

00 200 400 600 800 1000

Relation Between Age-standardized Death Rate from CHD (men and women) and Consumption of Dairy Fat in Countries Reporting Wine Consumption

In 1991, key word: polyphenolsOnly 23 papers about:

Presence in food

Antitumoral properties

Antioxidanteffects in vitro

On June 2, 2014. Key word:polyphenols1318 papers in 12 months

Lose of weight

Antibactericide

Hair growth

Cosmoceutical

Effect ontestosteroneInflammation

Apoptosis

Arthritis

…

Polifenoles y mortalidad

Tresserra-Rimbau et al. BMC Medicine 2014 12:77

Phenolic compoundsNowadays they are not considered nutrients however

they are bioactive compounds, since they perform important physiological functions in the organism.

O

OH

HO

OH

OH

OH

Epicatechin

O

R1

R2

OH

OH

OH

HO

O

R1

R2

OH

OH

OH

HO

O

R1

R2

OH

OH

OH

HO

n

Procyanidins: n=0 (dimer) up to 10 (decamer)

OH

HO

HO

Resveratrol

OOH

HO O

OH Naringin

¿Por qué en los tomates?

ANTECEDENTES

http://www.magrama.gob.es

En 2013

Methodology

HPLC-LTQ-Orbitrap-MS

HCD

Orbitrap

Exact mass measurements and elucidation of the structures of unknown compounds. Single-stage mass analysis, two-stage mass analysis (MS/MS) and multi-stage massanalysis (MSn). Very good mass accuracies both in MS and MS/MS. Unambiguous assignment of all fragment ions with fewer experiments and easier

interpretation than previous methods.

Methodology

HPLC-QToF-MS

QToF technologies allows the exact mass measurements of both MS and MS/MS ions. Following chromatographic alignment and peak detection, metabolomic analysis wasperformed to identify metabolites that may serve as markers to differentiate betweentomato-based products.

Methodology

HPLC-MS/MS

MRM mode

Accurate quantification Better sensitivity

Objective:to identify the polyphenol compounds of raw tomatoes, by HPLC-LTQ-Orbitrap-MS and

HPLC-MS/MS

Anna Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Improved characterization of tomato polyphenols usingliquid chromatography/electrospray ionization linear ion trap quadrupole Orbitrap massspectrometry and liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization tandem massspectrometry. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry. 2010. 24, 2986-2992.

Targeted metabolomics

Compound Acc. mass mDa MS/MS ionsProtocatechuic acid 153.0193 0.11 153 (30), 109 (100)Caffeic acid-O-hexoside 1 341.0877 0.12 341(25), 179 (100), 135 (10)Neochlorogenic acid (3-caffeoylquinic acid) 353.0877 0.02 191 (100), 179 (80),135 (45)Homovanillic acid-O-hexoside 343.1034 0.07 181 (100), 137 (20), 121 (5)Feruoylquinic acid-O-hexoside 529.1561 0.21 529 (100), 367 (25), 191 (10)Ferulic acid-O-hexoside 355.1034 0.04 355(40), 193 (100), 178 (30)Coumaric acid-O-hexoside 325.0928 0.95 325 (70), 187 (40), 163(100)Caffeic acid 179.0349 0.34 179 (40), 135 (100)Chlorogenic acid (5-caffeoylquinic acid) 353.0877 0.03 191 (100), 179 (<5)Cryptochlorogenic acid (4- caffeoylquinic acid) 353.0877 0.02 191 (40), 179 (70), 173 (100), 135 (25)Naringenin-O-dihexoside 1 595.1665 0.33 595 (20), 433 (100), 271 (30)Rutin-O-hexoside-pentoside 903.2411 0.58 741 (100), 609 (70), 300 (100)Naringenin-O-dihexoside 2 595.1665 0.30 595 (20), 433 (100), 271 (30)Rutin-O-hexoside 771.1989 0.42 771 (100), 609 (50)Naringenin-C-diglycoside 595.1667 0.13 595 (100), 475 (30), 385 (45), 355 (30)Coumaroylquinic acid 337.0930 0.13 191 (100), 163 (10)Ferulic acid 193.0506 0.41 193 (20), 178 (70), 149 (20), 134 (100)Kaempferol-O-rutinoside-hexoside 755.2039 0.40 593 (100), 285 (5)Naringenin-O-hexoside 1 433.1140 0.10 433 (45), 271 (100)Phloridzin-C-diglycoside 759.2346 0.70 741 (20), 669 (30), 639 (80), 621 (20), 579 (60), 549 (100), 519 (65)Rutin-O-pentoside 741.1883 0.85 609 (60), 300 (100)Rutin(quercetin 3-O-rhamnosyl-glucoside) 609.1460 0.49 609 (100), 300 (50)Phloretin-C-diglycoside 597.1819 0.10 597 (30), 477 (50),417 (40) 387 (90), 357 (100)Kaempferol-3-O-rutinoside 593.1511 0.58 593 (100), 285 (80)Prunin (Naringenin-7-O-glucoside) 433.1140 0.10 433 (45), 271 (100)Eriodictyol-O-hexoside 449.1089 0.12 449 (20), 287 (100), 151 (30)Dicaffeoylquinic acid 1 515.1194 0.03 515 (65), 353 (50), 191 (100)Naringenin-O-hexoside 3 433.1140 0.09 433 (45), 271 (100)O-acetylprunin 475.1245 0.07 433 (15), 271 (100)Kaempferol-3-O-glucoside 447.0932 0.14 447(100), 285 (20)Naringenin 271.0611 0.03 271 (100), 177 (20), 151(100), 119 (30)Quercetin 301.0353 0.15 301(60), 151(100)

Rutin-O-hexoside-pentoside

Phloridzin-C-diglycoside

O-acetylprunin

Targeted metabolomicsAnna Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry. 2010. 24, 2986-2992.

Objective: To identify the polyphenol compounds on processed tomatoes: gazpachos,

ketchups and tomato juices.

Anna Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Screening of polyphenol content of tomato-based productsthrough accurate-mass spectrometry (HPLC-QTOF-MS). Food Chemistry. 2011. 129, 877-833.

Targeted metabolomics

Compoud Acc. Mass mDa MS/MS ionsProtocatechuic acid-O-hexoside 315.0721 0.90 153(100),109(40)Protocatechuic acid 153.0193 0.50 153(100), 109 (100)Caffeic acid-O-dihexoside 503.1406 1.10 341(80), 179(100)Caffeic acid-O-hexoside 1 341.0877 1.60 179(100),135(20)Neochlorogenic acid 353.0877 0.70 191(100), 179(80), 135(30)Homovanillic acid-O-hexoside 1 343.1034 1.10 343(100),137(70), 109(40)Ferulic acid-O-hexoside 355.1034 2.50 193(65), 178(30), 149(100)Chlorogenic acid 353.0877 1.50 191(100)Caffeic acid 179.0349 1.40 135(100), 107(20)Cryptochlorogenic acid 353.0877 0.80 191(50),173 (100),135(20)Naringenin-C-diglycoside 595.1667 0.70 595(100), 505(25), 475(50), 385(50), 415(25), 355(45)Rutin-O-hexoside 771.1989 1.60 771(100), 609(70), 300(20)Coumaric acid 163.0400 0.86 163(20), 119 (100)Coumaroylquinic acid 337.0930 1.50 191(100), 163(10)Apigenin-C-hexoside-hexoside 593.1511 0.30 503(25), 473(25), 383(65), 353(20)Feruloylquinic acid 367.1034 0.10 193(15), 191(100)Rutin-O-pentoside 741.1883 0.70 741(100), 609(80), 300(20)Apigenin-C-hexoside-pentoside 563.1406 0.90 563(80), 503(40),473 (20), 443(30), 353(30)Quercetin-O-dihexoside 625.1410 1.60 463(100), 300(30)Rutin 609.1460 0.50 609(100), 300(30)Quercetin-O-hexoside 463.0881 2.80 463(100), 300(20)Phloretin-C-diglycoside 597.1819 0.30 477(30), 387(100), 357(85), 417(15)Naringenin-C-hexoside 433.1140 0.60 433(40), 343(20), 313(40)Kaempferol-3-O-rutinoside 593.1511 0.70 593(100), 285(60)Kaempferol-C-hexoside 447.0932 0.60 357(15), 327(100), 285(<5)Dicaffeoylquinic acid 1 515.1194 0.10 515(20), 353(100), 335(20), 191(35), 173(60)Apigenin-7-O-glucoside 431.0983 0.80 431(25), 269(50), 161(75)Kaempferol-3-O-glucoside 447.0932 1.80 447(50), 285(100)Eriodictyol-O-dihexoside 611.1606 1.10 611(20), 449(100), 287(30)Naringenin-7-O-glucoside (prunin)* 433.1140 1.10 433(10), 271(100)Eriodyctiol-O-hexoside 449.1089 2.50 449(10), 287(100)Tricaffeoylquinic acid 1 677.1511 1.40 677 (45), 515(100), 353(40), 191(15)Eriodictyol 287.0560 1.20 151(70), 135(100)Quercetin 301.0353 0.40 301(10), 151(100)Naringenin 271.0611 1.50 151(80), 119(100)

Protocatechuic acid-O-hexoside

Apigenin-C-hexoside-hexoside

Apigenin-7-O-glucoside

Apigenin-C-hexoside-pentoside

Kaempferol-C-glucoside

Quercetin-O-dihexoside

Eriodictyol-O-dihexoside

Targeted metabolomicsAnna Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Food Chemistry. 2011. 129, 877-833.

Some Factors may Affect the Content of Bioactive Compounds Present in Tomatoes

Factors that May Affect the Bioactive Compounds

Variety:.

ObjectiveTo different varieties of tomato using targeted metabolomics.

Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Phenolic profile and hydrophilic antioxidant capacity aschemotaxonomic markers of tomato varieties. Journal of Agricultural and FoodChemistry. 2011. 59, 3994-4001.

Targeted metabolomics

Seven TOMATO VARIETIES: malva, H-9661, H-9776, H-9997, albastro, guadiva and elegy

Vegas Bajas del Guadiana, Badajoz (Spain)

Produced during two harvet 2008 and 2009

Maturity: 4.3-5 ºBrix

Normal-sized: 75-80 g.

Transplantation period: April-May

Maximum temperature: 25-30 ºC

Minimum temperature: 15-20 ºC

Fertilization: fertigation (application of fertilizers,

soil amendments or other water soluble products

through an irrigation system)

Targeted metabolomicsAnna Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2011. 59, 3994-4001.

Phenolic Compounds searched in TomatoVarieties (MRM mode)

Compound MRM transition

Chlorogenic acid 353191

Caffeic acid 179135

Caffeic acid-O-hexoside 341179

Protocatechuic acid 153109

Gallic acid 169125

Ferulic acid 193134

Rutin 609300

Kaempferol-3-O-glucoside 477285

Quercetin 301151

Naringenin 271151

Previous identification of tomato polyphenols in LTQ-Orbitrap-MS

Direct analysis quantificationHPLC-MS/MS

Internal standard method

Targeted metabolomicsAnna Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2011. 59, 3994-4001.

Total polyphenols(mg GAE/100g FW)

Hydrophilic antioxidant capacity (mmol TE/100g FW)

malva 10.04 ± 0.30 1.79 ± 0.10

H-9661 13.32 ± 0.70 2.80 ± 0.20

H-9776 8.64 ± 0.20 1.29 ± 0.10

H-9997 9.01 ± 0.40 1.40 ± 0.10

albastro 8.60 ±0.30 1.25 ± 0.09

guadiva 9.06 ± 0.20 1.63 ± 0.08

elegy 12.69 ± 0.40 1.98 ± 0.10

Other analysis Hydrophilic antioxidant capacity analysis Total polyphenol analysis

Ferulic acid

Chlorogenic acid

Caffeic acid

Caffeic acid-O-hexoside Quercetin Rutin Protocatechuic

acidGallic acid Naringenin Kaempferol-

3-O-glucosidemalva <LQ 0.36 ± 0.01 0.68 ± 0.01 0.26 ± 0.01 0.73 ± 0.02 19.79 ± 0.77 0.20 ± 0.02 <LQ 3.03 ± 0.21 <LQ

H-9661 0.35 ± 0.03 0.46 ± 0.01 1.02 ± 0.05 0.94 ± 0.04 0.76 ± 0.04 20.44 ± 0.47 0.46 ± 0.02 <LQ 6.90 ± 0.19 <LQH-9776 0.10 ± 0.05 0.40 ± 0.01 0.53 ± 0.01 0.32 ± 0.01 0.42 ± 0.01 2.68 ± 0.05 <LQ <LQ 0.75 ± 0.04 <LQH-9997 <LQ 0.38 ± 0.03 0.53 ± 0.04 0.47 ± 0.08 0.47 ± 0.04 4.65 ± 0.04 <LQ <LQ 0.50 ± 0.01 0.27 ± 0.03albastro 0.20 ± 0.01 0.39 ± 0.02 0.55 ± 0.02 0.38 ± 0.02 0.63 ± 0.04 0.79 ± 0.06 <LQ 0.96 ± 0.04 1.59 ± 0.25 <LQguadiva <LQ 0.38 ± 0.03 1.25 ± 0.01 0.44 ± 0.06 0.69 ± 0.06 6.07 ± 0.51 <LQ <LQ 1.71 ± 0.06 <LQelegy 0.21 ± 0.01 0.40 ± 0.02 0.63 ± 0.01 0.83 ± 0.02 0.69 ± 0.05 21.80 ± 0.68 <LQ 0.93 ± 0.01 0.70 ± 0.01 0.59 ± 0.01

H-9661 0.35 ± 0.03 0.46 ± 0.01 1.02 ± 0.05 0.94 ± 0.04 0.76 ± 0.04 20.44 ± 0.47 0.46 ± 0.02 <LQ 6.90 ± 0.19 <LQ

H-9661 13.32 ± 0.70 2.80 ± 0.20

Amount (µg/g FW± SD, n=6)

Targeted metabolomicsVallverdú-Queralt et al. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2011. 59, 3994-4001.

elegy

H-9661malva

guadiva

albastroH-9997

H-9776

Phenolic profile and hydrophilic antioxidant capacity can be used as chemotaxonomic tomato

markers to distinguish between tomatoes according to variety.

Targeted metabolomicsVallverdú-Queralt et al. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2011. 59, 3994-4001.

Type of cultivation

receive herbicides and otherpesticides approved by CE Nº395/2005 utilize fertilizers containingsoluble inorganic nitrogen andother nutrients, which are moredirectly available to plants.

receive only organically pesticidessuch as sulfur and benzothiophenecompounds approved by CE Nº2092/91 emphasize the accumulation ofsoil organic matter and fertility overtime through the use of cover crops,manures and composts.

Conventional Organic

Objective To evaluate the differences between organic and conventional tomatoes and tomato

juices using targeted (HPLC-MS/MS) and untargeted approach

Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Evaluation of a method to characterize the phenolic profile oforganic and conventional tomatoes. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2012.60, 3373-3380.

Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Is there any difference between the phenolic content of organic and conventional tomato juices? Food Chemistry. 2012. 130, 222-227.

Targeted metabolomics

Conventional vs Organic Tomatoes

Targeted metabolomicsAnna Vallverdú-Queralt et al.. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2012. 60, 3373-3380.

Anna Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Food Chemistry. 2012. 130, 222-227.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Conventional

Organic

Previous identification of tomatopolyphenols in QToF-MS

Direct analysis quantificationHPLC-MS/MS

Internal standard method

Phenolic Compounds searched in Organic and Conventional Tomato Products (MRM mode)

Compound MRM transition

Chlorogenic acid 353191

Caffeic acid 179135

p-Coumaric acid 163119

Ferulic acid 193134

Apigenin-7-O-glucoside 431269

Rutin 609300

Kaempferol-3-O-rutinoside 477285

Quercetin 301151

Naringenin 271151

Naringenin-7-O-glucoside 433271

Targeted metabolomicsVallverdú-Queralt et al.. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2012. 60, 3373-3380.

Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Food Chemistry. 2012. 130, 222-227.

Analytes Conventional tomatoes Organic tomatoesEstimated quantity

μg/g FW ± SD

Lowest Spiked level

Recovery± SD

RSD (%)Estimated quantity

μg/g FW ± SDLowest

Spiked levelRecovery

± SDRSD (%)

Caffeic acid 22.88 ± 0.45 46.60 98.40 ± 3.22 3.27 41.70 ± 0.81 93.16 97.04 ± 2.95 3.05

Chlorogenic acid

36.87 ± 0.61 69.90 96.23 ± 2.89 3.00 56.99 ± 0.90 116.50 96.12 ± 3.10 3.23

Ferulic acid 21.69 ± 0.40 69.90 94.15 ± 4.49 4.77 35.11 ± 0.63 69.90 96.88 ± 4.01 4.15

p-Coumaric acid20.59 ± 0.36 46.60 94.89 ± 2.87 3.02 34.25 ± 0.55 69.90 97.65 ± 2.90 2.97

Naringenin 36.46 ± 0.69 116.50 85.11 ± 3.97 4.69 87.38 ± 0.98 163.00 88.10 ± 3.51 3.98

Naringenin-7-O-glucoside

7.68 ± 0.15 23.30 87.02 ± 3.14 3.58 13.91 ± 0.28 23.30 88.63 ± 3.02 3.41

Rutin 119.82 ± 1.49 233.00 93.44 ± 4.72 5.05 272.75 ± 2.98 465.80 95.11 ± 4.51 4.74

Quercetin 5.69 ± 0.12 11.70 77.81 ± 3.88 5.00 11.42 ± 0.18 23.30 78.20 ± 3.41 4.36

Kaempferol-3-O-rutinoside

6.03 ± 0.11 11.70 89.15 ± 3.27 3.67 12.70 ± 0.24 23.30 91.34 ± 3.02 3.31

Apigenin-7-O-glucoside

28.28 ± 0.63 46.60 91.05 ± 2.65 2.90 31.63 ± 0.52 46.60 93.54 ± 2.87 3.07

Estimated quantities and recoveries (relative standard deviations, n=4) of polyphenols from organic and conventional tomatoes

Mean recovery of all spiked levels (50%, 100%, 150%, 200%).RSD: relative standard deviation.

Conventional vs Organic Tomatoes

22.88 ± 0.45

36.87 ± 0.61

21.69 ± 0.40

20.59 ± 0.36

36.46 ± 0.69

7.68 ± 0.15

119.82 ± 1.495.69 ± 0.12

6.03 ± 0.11

28.28 ± 0.63

41.70 ± 0.81

56.99 ± 0.90

35.11 ± 0.63

34.25 ± 0.55

87.38 ± 0.98

13.91 ± 0.28

272.75 ± 2.98

11.42 ± 0.18

12.70 ± 0.24

31.63 ± 0.52

Targeted metabolomics

Phenolic acids Flavonones Flavones Flavonols

Conventional vs Organic Tomato Juices

The tendency of higher polyphenol concentrations in organically produced tomato juices

Targeted metabolomics

Objective

To study the differences between organic and conventional ketchups using non-targeted (HPLC-QToF-MS)

analysis

Vallverdú-Queralt et al. A Metabolomic approach differentiates between conventionaland organic ketchups. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2012. 59, 11703-11710.

Untargeted metabolomics

Untargeted metabolomics

ANTIOXIDANT CAPACITY: Conventional vs Organic Ketchups

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

5

Ketchupconventional 1

Ketchupconventional 2

Ketchupconventional 3

Ketchupconventional 4

Ketchupconventional 5

Ketchuporganic 1

Ketchuporganic 2

Ketchuporganic 3

Ketchuporganic 4

Ketchuporganic 5

mm

ol tr

olox

/100

g F

W

ConventionalO

Vallverdú-Queralt et al. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2012. 59, 11703-11710.

Organic

VOLCANO PLOT was generated to determine statistically significant differences

between organic and conventional ketchups.

Metabolites with statisticallysignificant differences lie above thehorizontal threshold line.

Removal of the adduct ions, isotopic variants and in-source fragmentation.

The significantly different [M-H]- ions were searched on Metabolite Databases.

Untargeted metabolomics

METABOLOMIC ANALYSIS: Conventional vs Organic Ketchups

Compound [M-H]- m/z ions Acc. mass mDa MFRatio mean conventional/mean organic

Glutamylphenylalanine 293 164 (70), 147 (100), 103(40) 293.1143 0.4 C14H18N2O5--

n-malonyl tryptophan 289 203 (40), 159 (20), 142 (40) 289.083 0.9 C14H14N2O5--

Caffeic acid-O-hexoside 1 341 179(100), 135(20) 341.0877 1.6 C15H18O9 0.7033Caffeic acid-O-hexoside 2 341 179(100), 135(20) 341.0877 0.7 C15H18O9 0.6139

Caffeic acid 179 135(100), 107(20) 179.0349 1.4 C9H8O4 0.6366Neochlorogenic acid 353 191(100), 179(80), 135(30) 353.0877 0.7 C16H18O9 0.3912

Cryptochlorogenic acid 353 191(50)173 (100), 135(20) 353.0877 0.8 C16H18O9 0.3894Chlorogenic acid 353 191(100) 353.0877 1.5 C16H18O9 0.6468

Ferulic acid-O-hexoside 355 193(65), 178(30), 149(100) 355.1034 2.5 C16H20O9 0.6240Rutin 609 609(100), 300(30) 609.1460 0.5 C27H30O16 0.7101

Quercetin 301 301(10), 151(100) 301.0353 0.4 C15H10O7 0.4419

Kaempferol-3-O-rutinoside 593 593(100), 285(60) 593.1511 0.7 C27H30O150.6540

Naringenin 271 151(80), 119(100) 271.0611 1.5 C15H12O5 0.6790

Naringenin-7-O-glucoside 433 433(10), 271(100) 433.1140 1.1 C21H22O100.6503

Dicaffeoylquinic acid 1 515 515(20), 353(100), 191(50) 515.1194 0.1 C25H24O12 0.7028Dicaffeoylquinic acid 2 515 515(20), 353(100), 191(50) 515.1194 0.1 C25H24O12 0.6065

Glutamylphenylalanine 293 164 (70), 147 (100), 103(40) 293.1143 0.4 C14H18N2O5 -

n-Malonyl tryptophan 289 203 (40), 159 (20), 142 (40) 289.083 0.9 C14H14N2O5 -

Untargeted metabolomicsVallverdú-Queralt et al. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2012. 59, 11703-11710.

Conventional vs Organic Crops

Organic crops

Conventionalcrops

SOLUBLE INORGANICNITROGEN

ACTIVATION OF NATURAL DEFENCE

MECHANISMS

POLYPHENOL LEVELS INCREASE

SOLUBLE INORGANICNITROGEN

LARGER QUANTITIES OF NITROGEN-RICH BIOMOLECULES WERE DETECTED

En análisis metabolómico, tanto dirigido como no dirigido, es una muy

buena herramienta para la caracterización de los componentes bioactivos de

los alimentos.

La metabolómica está permitiendo reconocer nuevos componentes y

biomarcadores diferenciadores tanto en bromatología como en nutrición,

abriendo un gran campo en el descubrimiento de nuevas moléculas

bioactivas.

Conclusions

Group director Rosa Mª Lamuela Raventós

Board Committee Ramón Estruch Riba

Postdoctoral researchers Anna Vallverdú Alex Medina Sara Arranz

Predoctoral researchers

Miriam Martínez Mariel Colman Gemma Sasot Palmira ValderasAnna Tresserra Paola Quifer Guo Xiao Hui Naiara Orrego

CollaboratorsMónica Vázquez Montse Illán Xavier Torrado

Visit our website: http//www.polyphenolresearch.com

Centro de Investigación Biomédica En RedFisiopatología de la Obesidad y Nutrición

Centro de Investigación Biomédica En RedFisiopatología de la Obesidad y Nutrición

RETICS RD06/0045/0003

AGL2007-66638-C02

AGL2010-22319-C03

-AGL2013-49083-C3-1-R

Acknowledgments

lamuela@ub.edu

NUTRIENTES

Macronutrientes: Hidratos de Carbono Fibra Lípidos Proteínas

MicronutrientesVitaminasMinerales