11274 J. Agric. Food Chem., Vol. 58, No. 21, 2010
Gaspar et al.
Figure 1. Sinapic acid and its alkyl esters under study.
using different analytical methods. In addition, the redox poten-
tials and partition coefficients of sinapic acid and its derivatives
properties were also acquired to test their influence in the
antioxidant performance of the phenolic compounds.
Synthesis. General Synthetic Procedure. The alkyl esters of the phe-
nolic acid were obtained using the following general procedure: Sinapic
acid (1.0 g) was dissolved in 75 mL of the corresponding alcohol
(methanol, ethanol, n-propanol, or butanol) containing 1 mL of H2SO4,
and the solution was stirred, at room temperature, during ca. 5 days. The
solvent was partially evaporated under reduced pressure. The mixture was
then extracted with diethyl ether (3 ꢀ 75 mL), and the organic phases were
combined, washed with 10% Na2CO3 solution, and dried over Na2SO4.
The solvent was evaporatedunder reduced pressure, and the crude product
was purified by column chromatography and then recrystallized.
Methyl sinapate ((E)-methyl 3-(4-hydroxy-3,5-dimethoxyphenyl )propenoate):
yield, 79%; FTIR, 3522, 3460, 3062, 2946, 2845, 1704, 1631, 1604, 1515,
1461, 1428, 1384, 1339, 1287, 1260, 1233, 1181, 1152, 1120; 1H NMR, 8.98
(1 H, s, 4-OH), 7.57 (1H, d, J = 15.9, H ( β)), 7.03 (2H, s, H(2), H(6)), 6.54
(1H, d, J = 15.9, H(R)), 3.80 (6H, s, 2 ꢀ OCH3), 3.72 (3H, s, CH3); 13C
NMR, 167.1 (CdO), 148.0 (C(3), C(5)), 145.5 (C( β)), 138.3 (C;OH), 124.4
(C(1)), 114.6 (C (R)), 106.2 (C(2), C(6)), 56.1 (2 ꢀ OCH3), 51.3 (CH3);
EI-MS, 238 (100, M•þ), 207 (32), 175 (20), 163 (21), 135 (16), 121 (14), 119
(13), 77 (17), 65 (19), 59 (13), 56 (36), 53 (18), 51 (17).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
General. Linoleic acid (LA, cis,cis- 9,12-octadecadienoic acid, 99%),
2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH•), quercetin, sinapic acid, and Tro-
lox were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO. 2,4,6-Tripyridyl-
s-triazine (TPTZ), dimethyl-d6 sulfoxide (99.8%), and tetramethylsilane
(TMS) were obtained from Merck, Darmstadt, Germany. All other
reagents and solvents were of pro analysis grade and used without
additional purification. Deionized water (conductivity < 0.1 μS cm-1
)
was used throughout all of the experiments.
Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) was carried out on precoated silica
gel 60 F254 (Merck) with a layer thickness of 0.2 mm. For analytical
control the following systems were used: ethyl ether/petroleum ether and
chloroform/methanol. The spots were visualized under UV detection
(254 and 366 nm) and iodine vapor. Normal-phase chromatography
was performed using Merck silica gel 60, 0.2-0.5 or 0.040-0.063 mm.
Ethyl sinapate ((E)-ethyl 3-(4-hydroxy-3,5-dimethoxyphenyl )propenoate):
yield, 83%; FTIR, 3654, 3496, 3090, 2938, 2841, 1690, 1636, 1600, 1515,
1461, 1425, 1373, 1340, 1287, 1259, 1222, 1187, 1151, 1116; 1H NMR, 8.97
(1 H, s, 4-OH), 7.55 (1H, d, J = 15.9, H ( β)), 7.02 (2H, s, H(2), H(6)), 6.53
(1H, d, J = 15.9, H(R)), 4.16 (2H, q, J = 7.0, CH2), 3.79 (6H, s, 2 ꢀ OCH3),
1.24 (3H, t, J= 7.0, CH3); 13C NMR, 166.6 (CdO), 148.0 (C(3), C(5)), 145.2
(C( β)), 138.2 (C;OH), 124.4 (C(1)), 115.0 (C (R)), 106.2 (C(2), C(6)), 59.7
(CH2), 56.1 (2 ꢀ OCH3), 14.3 (CH3); EI-MS, 252 (100, M•þ), 207 (34), 180
(48), 175 (22), 163 (13), 121 (16), 119 (13), 91 (14), 77 (15), 65 (20), 58 (20), 53
(15), 51 (14).
€
Solvents were evaporated in a Buchi Rotavapor (Flawil, Switzerland).
Apparatus. 1H and 13C NMR data were acquired, at room tempera-
€
ture, on a Bruker AMX 300 spectrometer operating at 300.13 and 75.47
MHz, respectively. Dimethyl-d6 sulfoxide was used as a solvent; chemical
shifts are expressed in δ (ppm) values relative to TMS as internal reference;
coupling constants (J ) are given in hertz. Assignments were also made
from distortionless enhancement by polarization transfer (DEPT)
(underlined values). Electron impact mass spectra (EI-MS) were carried
out on a VG AutoSpec instrument; the data are reported as m/z (% of
relative intensity of the most important fragments). Infrared spectra were
recorded on an ATI Mattson Genesis series FTIR spectrophotometer
using potassium bromide disks; only the most significant absorption bands
are reported (νmax, cm-1).
Voltammetric studies were performed using an Autolab PGSTAT
12 potentiostat/galvanostat (Eco-Chemie, The Netherlands) and a one-
compartment glass electrochemical cell. Voltammetric curves were
recorded at room temperature using a three-electrode system. A glassy
carbon working electrode (GCE) (d = 2 mm), a platinum wire counter
electrode, and an Ag/AgCl saturated KCl reference electrode were used. A
Crison pH-meter with glass electrode was used for the pH measurements
(Crison, Spain).
Spectrophotometric measurements of the absorbance of DPPH free
radical were carried out using a UV-vis spectrophotometer (Bio-Tek,
model Uvikon XL). The absorbance of Fe2þ/TPTZ complex in the FRAP
assay was determined by a microplate reader (Bio-Rad, model 680).
A Netzsch DSC 204 calorimeter (Netzsch, Germany) was employed for
the thermoxidation stability measurements. The temperature scale was
calibrated using In, Bi, Sn, Zn, and KNO3, and the enthalpy calibration
has been carried out to the heat of fusion of the same standards. The
oxidation induction temperature (OIT) of pure and spiked linoleic acid
was analyzed by heating the samples at 5 K min-1 under constant oxygen
flow (50 mL/min). A computer-generated plot of heat flow (W/g) versus
temperature was used to graphically determine OIT. OIT was determined
by the onset of the oxidation process that is characterized by an exothermic
peak in the heat flow-temperature plot.
Propyl sinapate ((E)-propyl 3-(4-hydroxy-3,5-dimethoxyphenyl )propenoate):
yield, 82%; FTIR, 3532, 3425, 2968, 2938, 2880, 2840, 1682, 1634, 1598,
1513, 1459, 1424, 1378, 1340, 1314, 1283, 1222, 1193, 1152, 1118; 1H NMR,
8.95 (1 H, s, 4-OH), 7.55 (1H, d, J = 15.9, H ( β)), 7.03 (2H, s, H(2), H(6)),
6.53 (1H, d, J = 15.9, H(R)), 4.08 (2H, t, J = 6.6, CH2), 3.79 (6H, s, 2 ꢀ
OCH3), 1.68-1.63 (2H, m, CH2), 0.93 (3H, t, J = 7.4, CH3); 13C NMR,
166.7 (CdO), 148.0 (C(3), C(5)), 145.3 (C( β)), 138.2 (C;OH), 124.4 (C(1)),
114.9 (C (R)), 106.2 (C(2), C(6)), 65.2 (CH2), 56.1 (2 ꢀ OCH3), 21.7 (CH2),
10.4 (CH3); EI-MS, 266 (100, M•þ), 224 (55), 207 (42), 180 (51), 175 (26), 147
(13), 121 (13), 119 (14), 91 (12), 65 (12).
Butyl sinapate ((E)-butyl 3-(4-hydroxy-3,5-dimethoxyphenyl )propenoate):
yield, 94%; FTIR, 3592, 3511, 2968, 2937, 2895, 2873, 1692, 1636, 1601,
1515, 1456, 1424, 1376, 1343, 1286, 1261, 1223, 1184, 1151, 1117; 1H NMR,
8.94 (1 H, s, 4-OH), 7.55 (1H, d, J = 15.9, H ( β)), 7.03 (2H, s, H(2), H(6)),
6.53 (1H, d, J = 15.9, H(R)), 4.12 (2H, t, J = 6.4, CH2), 3.80 (6H, s, 2 ꢀ
OCH3), 1.64-1.56 (2H, m, CH2), 1.42-1.33 (3H, m, CH2), 0.91 (3H, t, J =
7.3, CH3); 13C NMR, 166.7 (CdO), 148.0 (C(3), C(5)), 145.3 (C( β)), 138.3
(C-OH), 124.4 (C(1)), 115.0 (C(R)), 106.2 (C(2), C(6)), 63.4 (CH2), 56.1
(2 ꢀ OCH3), 30.4 (CH2), 18.8 (CH2), 13.6 (CH3); EI-MS, 280 (88, M•þ), 225
(13), 224 (100), 209 (15), 207 (45), 181 (12), 180 (58), 175 (27), 167 (17), 165
(12), 163 (12), 149 (16), 147 (16), 135 (12), 133 (12), 121 (21), 119 (17), 91
(22), 77 (21), 65 (26), 58 (46), 57(13), 55 (15), 53 (19), 51 (16).
Electrochemical Measurements. Stock solutions of the sinapic acid
and derivatives (10 mM) were prepared by dissolving an appropriate
amount in ethanol. The voltammetric working solutions were prepared, in
the electrochemical cell, by diluting 0.1 mL of the stock solution in 10 mL
of supporting electrolyte to get a final concentration of 0.1 mM.