European Food Research and Technology

, Volume 245, Issue 10, pp 2293–2301 | Cite as

Determination of physicochemical parameters, phenolic content, and antioxidant capacity of wild cherry plum (Prunus divaricata Ledeb.) from the walnut-fruit forests of Kyrgyzstan

  • Jamila SmanalievaEmail author
  • Janyl Iskakova
  • Zhyldyz Oskonbaeva
  • Florian Wichern
  • Dietrich Darr
Original Paper


Wild fruits and berries from the walnut-fruit forests of Kyrgyzstan may hold nutritional and health benefits for humans. Since information on their nutritional value is scarce, physical properties and nutritional value of naturally occurring red, black, and yellow cherry plum fruits (Prunus divaricata Ledeb.) were evaluated. The wild cherry plums featured moisture contents between 81.07 and 85.87%, reducing sugar contents of 6.83–8.42%, alimentary fiber of 0.78–1.38%, ash contents of 0.48–0.74%, acidity levels of 0.97–2.31%, and ascorbic acid concentrations of 16.00–30.25 mg/100 g. The total phenolic concentrations of wild cherry plum fruits was determined at 177–365 mg/100 g expressed as gallic acid equivalents. The black wild cherry plum contained the highest amounts of polyphenols and anthocyanins among the analyzed samples as well as the domesticated Prunus varieties. The essential mineral profile indicated that zinc (Zn) featured the lowest concentrations with 0.05–0.18 mg/100 g, while potassium (K) was the most abundant mineral at 127.97–188.74 mg/100 g in all cherry plum samples. 100 g fresh wild cherry plum can contribute up to 26.4% of iron (Fe) to recommended dietary allowance. All these results indicate that wild cherry plum fruits can be beneficial for human nutrition. The determination of physical attributes and chemical composition of these fruits is essential to facilitate the establishment of product standards and to further promote the use of these products in the food industry.


Food composition Total phenolic Content antioxidant activity Walnut-fruit forest Wild cherry plum 



We thank Lia Moreno Codinachs and Conor Watson for technical support, and Katie Meinhold for proofreading of the manuscript. Further, we thank the Federal Ministry of Education and Research Germany (BMBF) [Grant number 01DK17016] for funding as the study was conducted within the SUSWALFOOD project.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Compliance with ethics requirements

This paper does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects.


  1. 1.
    Hemery GE, Popov SI (1998) The walnut (Juglans regia L.) forests of Kyrgyzstan and their importance as a genetic resource. Common For Rev 77(4):272–276Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Orozumbekov A, Cantarello E, Newton AC (2015) Status, distribution and use of threatened tree species in the walnut-fruit forests of Kyrgyzstan. For Trees Livelihoods 24(1):1–17. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mamadjanov D (2006) Study of varieties and diversity of walnut forms in Kyrgyzstan. Swiss For J 157(11):499–506. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zohary D (1992) Is the European plum, Prunus domestica L., a P. cerasifera Ehrh. X P. spinosa L. allo-polyploid? Euphytica 60(7):5–77. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wu SL, Zhang J, Sun XM (2004) Basic analysis about the composition of rare wild fruit Prunus divaricata. Chin Wild Plant Resour 5:35–36Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gil MI, Tomas-Barberan FA, Hess-Pierce B, Kader AA (2002) Antioxidant capacities, phenolic compounds, carotenoids, and vitamin C contents of nectarine, peach, and plum cultivars from California. J Agric Food Chem 50(17):4976–4982. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rahimi R, Nikfar S, Larijani B, Abdollahi MA (2005) Review on the role of antioxidants in the management of diabetes and its complications. Biomed Pharmacother 59(7):365–373. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cevallos-Casals BA, Byrne D, Okie WR, Cisneros-Zevallos L (2006) Selecting new peach and plum genotypes rich in phenolic compounds and enhanced functional properties. Food Chem 96:273–280. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tinker L, Schneeman B, Davis P, Gallaher D, Waggoner C (1991) Consumption of prunes as a source of dietary fiber in men with mild hypercholesterolemia. Am J Clin Nutr 53:1259–1265. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kayano SI, Kikuzaki H, Fukutsuka N, Mitani T, Nakatani N (2002) Antioxidant activity of prune (Prunus domestica L.) constituents and a new synergist. J Agric Food Chem 50:3708–3712. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kültür Ş (2007) Medicinal plants used in Kýrklareli province (Turkey). J Ethnopharmacol. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Minaiyan M, Ghannadi A, Movahedian A, Ramezanlou P, Osooli FS (2014) Effect of the hydroalcoholic extract and juice of Prunus divaricata fruit on blood glucose and serum lipids of normal and streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. Res Pharm Sci 9(6):421–429 PubMed PMID: 26339257 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mohsenin NN (1986) Physical properties of plant and animal materials: structure, physical characteristics, and mechanical properties. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    AOAC (2011) In: Horwitz W, Latimer GW Jr (eds) Official methods of analysis of AOAC International, 18th Edition, Revision 4. AOAC International, GaithersburgGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pegg RB, Eitenmiller RR (2017) In: Nielsen (ed) Vitamin analysis, vol 20, 5th edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kalt W, Forney CF, Martin A, Prior RL (1999) Antioxidant capacity, vitamin C, phenolics and anthocyanins after fresh storage of small fruits. J Agric Food Chem 47:4638–4644. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Waterhouse L (2001) Determination of total phenolic. Handbook of food analytical chemistry. Wiley, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hangun-Balkir Y, McKenney ML (2012) Determination of antioxidant activities of berries and resveratrol. Green Chem Lett Rev 5(2):147–153. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Giusti MM, Wrolstad RE (2001) In: Wrolstad RE (ed) Anthocyanins. Characterization and measurement with UV–visible spectroscopy. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ayanoğlu S, Bayazit G, İnan M, Bakır AE, Akpınar K, Kazan A, Ergül A (2007) AFLP analysis of genetic diversity in Turkish green plum accessions (Prunus cerasifera L.) adapted to the Mediterranean region. Sci Hortic Amsterdam 114(44):263–267. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Saridaş MA, Kafkas E, Zarifikhosroshahi M, Bozhaydar O, Paydaş Kargi S (2016) Quality traits of green plums (Prunus cerasifera Ehrh.) at different maturity stages. Turk J Agric For 40:655–663. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Potor DC, Dobrin A, Georgescu MI, Hoza D (2018) Physical and chemical parameters of the fruit in four Prunus domestica local populations from buzău county. Sci Pap Ser B Hortic 62:65–69Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moser R, Raffaelli R, Thilmany-McFadden D (2011) Consumer preferences for fruit and vegetables with credence-based attributes: a review. Int Food Agribus Man 14(2):121–142Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Martínez-Esplá A, Zapata PJ, Castillo S, Guillén F, Martínez-Romero D, Valero D, Serrano M (2014) Preharvest application of methyl jasmonate (MeJA) in two plum cultivars. 1. Improvement of fruit growth and quality attributes at harvest. Postharvest Biol Tec 98:98–105. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    USDA (2018) US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 1. Accessed 04 Mar 2019
  26. 26.
    Wang Y, Chen X, Zhang Y, Chen X (2012) Antioxidant activities and major anthocyanins of myrobalan plum (Prunus cerasifera Ehrh.). J Food Sci 77(4):388–393. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kim DO, Jeong SW, Lee CY (2003) Antioxidant capacity of phenolic phytochemicals from various cultivars of plums. Food Chem 81(3):321–327. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Miletić N, Popović B, Mitrović O, Kandić M (2012) Phenolic content and antioxidant capacity of fruits of plum cv. ‘Stanley’ (Prunus domestica L.) as influenced by maturity stage and on -tree ripening. Aust J Crop Sci 6(4):681–687Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sahamishirazi S, Moehring J, Claupein W, Graeff-Hoenninger W (2017) Quality assessment of 178 cultivars of plum regarding phenolic, anthocyanin and sugar content. Food Chem 214:694–701. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tomas-Barberan FA, Gil MI, Cremin P, Waterhouse AL, Hess-Pierce B, Kader AA (2001) HPLC-DAD-ESIMS analysis of phenolic compounds in nectarines, peaches and plums. J Agric Food Chem 49:4748–4760. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Guerrero-Chavez G, Scampicchio M, Andreotti C (2015) Influence of the site altitude on strawberry phenolic composition and quality. Sci Hortic 192:21–28. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Navarro M, Moreira I, Arnaez E, Quesada S, Azofeifa G, Vargas F, Alvarado D, Chen P (2018) Polyphenolic characterization and antioxidant activity of Malus domestica and Prunus domestica cultivars from Costa Rica. Foods 7(155):1–19. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    NRC (1989) National Research Council. Recommended daily allowance. National Academy Press, Washington (DC)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Food Engineering Department, Engineering FacultyKyrgyz-Turkish Manas UniversityBishkekKyrgyzstan
  2. 2.Environmental Engineering Department, Engineering FacultyKyrgyz-Turkish Manas UniversityBishkekKyrgyzstan
  3. 3.Faculty of Life SciencesRhine-Waal University of Applied SciencesKleveGermany

Personalised recommendations