Journal of Chemistry
Volume 2018 (2018), Article ID 2861541, 7 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/2861541

Research Article

Physicochemical Parameters, Mineral Composition, and Nutraceutical Properties of Ready-to-Drink Flavored-Colored Commercial Teas

Daniel Flores-Martínez,¹ Vania Urías-Orona,² Luis Hernández-García,³ Werner Rubio-Carrasco,⁴ Korev Silva-Gutiérrez,¹ Michelle Guevara-Zambrano,¹ Julio Prieto-Cadena,¹ Teresa Serna-Méndez,¹ Dolores Muy-Rangel,⁴ and Guillermo Niño-Medina¹

¹Laboratorio de Química y Bioquímica, Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Francisco Villa S/N, Col. Ex-Hacienda El Canadá, 66050 General Escobedo, NL, Mexico
²Laboratorio de Química de Alimentos, Facultad de Salud Pública y Nutrición, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Av. Dr. Eduardo Aguirre Pequeño y Yuriria, Col. Mitras Centro, 64460 Monterrey, NL, Mexico
³Catedrático CONACYT-Centro de Investigación e Innovación Tecnológica, Instituto Tecnológico de Nuevo León, Av. De la Alianza No. 507, PIIT, Carretera Monterrey-Aeropuerto Km. 10, 66628 Apodaca, NL, Mexico
⁴Laboratorio de Tecnología de Alimentos, Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C. Coordinación Culiacán, Carretera a Culiacán-El Dorado, km. 5.5, 80129 Culiacán, SIN, Mexico

Correspondence should be addressed to Dolores Muy-Rangel; mdmuy@ciad.mx and Guillermo Niño-Medina; guillermo.ninomd@uanl.edu.mx

Received 16 February 2018; Revised 14 May 2018; Accepted 11 June 2018; Published 2 August 2018

Academic Editor: Branca Silva

Copyright © 2018 Daniel Flores-Martínez et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract.

The physicochemical parameters, mineral composition, and nutraceutical properties of ready-to-drink flavored-colored commercial teas were analyzed in the present study. The pH of samples was slightly acidic (3.72 to 4.11), titratable acidity was low (0.092 to 0.174%), and color parameters were wide variable (pink, yellow, brown, and red). Citrus-flavored tea obtained the highest content of manganese (0.281 mg·L⁻¹), zinc (0.069 mg·L⁻¹), magnesium (2.92 mg·L⁻¹), potassium (62.65 mg·L⁻¹), and sodium (271.74 mg·L⁻¹), while lemon-, peach-, and blueberry-flavored teas obtained the highest levels of copper (0.035 mg·L⁻¹), iron (0.246 mg·L⁻¹), and calcium (18.21 mg·L⁻¹), respectively. Citrus, lemon-, sangria-, and rose petal-flavored teas obtained the highest content in total phenols (211.56 mg·L⁻¹), total flavonoids (65.46 mg·L⁻¹), total catechins (640.79 mg·L⁻¹), and total anthocyanins (640.79 mg·L⁻¹), respectively. Lemon- and rose petal-flavored teas showed the highest and lowest antioxidant capacity levels in DPPH (1096.00 to 118.77 μmolTE·L⁻¹), ABTS (1048.84 to 232.00 μmolTE·L⁻¹), and FRAP (1269.20 to 147.70 μmolTE·L⁻¹) assays. The levels of sodium reported in labels of all samples were lower than data obtained in our analysis. Also the levels observed for total phenols in blueberry-, citrus-, and rose petal-flavored teas were lower than our analysis, but total phenols of lemon-, peach-, and sangria-flavored teas were higher than the content reported in their labels. The results obtained in the present work give information to consumers for choosing flavored-colored ready-to-drink tea based on the physicochemical, nutritional, and nutraceutical properties.

1. Introduction

Tea (Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze) belongs to the genus Camellia, family Theacea and is native of Southeast Asia. It is the oldest nonalcoholic beverage and the most consumed plant-based beverage in the world. The chemical composition of tea varies with the species, season, age of the leaves, climate, and horticultural practices [1, 2]. Tea is classified into white, green, oolong tea, black, and red (pu-erh tea) according to the production process. White tea is produced from very young immature leaves and buds that have not yet turned green and once harvested is simply withered and dried by steaming. Green tea is produced from mature leaves with minimal processing; the tea leaves are usually heated with rolling immediately after harvest to inactivate the enzyme polyphenol oxidize. Black tea is produced from fully fermented mature leaves; the enzyme is allowed to act in a way that the leaves are fully fermented to give aroma and color. Oolong tea is produced from partially fermented mature leaves and is allotted limited time of oxidation and is thus less fermented than black tea [2–4]. In the production of red tea (Pu-erh tea), the dried green tea leaves are artificially postfermented with microorganisms for several months to one year to produce ripened Pu-erh tea [5]. The regular consumption of tea contributes significantly to the required daily total water intake, and if sugar is not added, the intake of calories is insignificant. The contribution of minerals and phenolics from tea is more relevant than other nonalcoholic beverages widely consumed, and their concentration in brewed products varies with solvent used for extraction [6, 7]. The consumption of tea is equally divided between the hot and the ready-to-drink products in most of the Western countries, but this balance shifts drastically to an increase in the consumption of ready-to-drink tea during the spring and summer [8]. In addition, the global ready-to-drink tea market increased from 26 billion liters in 2011 to 37 billion liters in 2016 and is expected to reach 45 billion liters in 2021. Lemon is the most popular ready-to-drink tea flavor followed by peach, but the use of new flavors (exotic flavors specially) is increasing globally. Asia has the 72% of the ready-to-drink global market, followed by North America with 15%, Europe with 9%, and Middle East, Africa, and Latin America together accounted for the 4% [9].

Due to the increasing interest of consumers in the consumption of ready-to-drink teas with different flavors and colors, it is necessary to know about their physicochemical, nutritional, and nutraceutical characteristics. The aim of this work was to evaluate the physicochemical parameters, mineral composition, and nutraceutical properties of six ready-to-drink flavored-colored commercial teas available in Mexico.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Ready-to-Drink Tea Samples

Three samples of 485 mL from different lot number of six commercial ready-to-drink flavored-colored teas (blueberry, citrus, lemon, peach, rose petal and sangria) were purchased in a local supermarket in the first week of February 2017. Composition of ready-to-drink teas according to their nutrition fact labels is presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Composition of ready-to-drink flavored-colored commercial teas.

Tea flavor
Composition reported in label

Blueberry
Water, white tea extract (Camellia sinensis), citric acid, sodium citrate, sucralose, colorant (anthocyanins and carmine), white tea flavor, blueberry flavor, sodium 100 mg·L⁻¹, and polyphenols 125 mg·L⁻¹.

Citrus
Water, green tea extract (Camellia sinensis), citric acid, sodium citrate, concentrated lemon juice, colorant (class IV caramel), green tea flavor, lemon flavor, sodium 150 mg·L⁻¹, and polyphenols 225 mg·L⁻¹.

Lemon
Water, black tea extract (Camellia sinensis), citric acid, sodium citrate, sucralose, concentrated lemon juice, colorant (class IV caramel and anthocyanins), black tea flavor, lemon flavor, sodium 150 mg·L⁻¹, and polyphenols 125 mg·L⁻¹.

Peach
Water, black tea extract (Camellia sinensis), citric acid, sodium citrate, sucralose, colorant (class IV caramel and anthocyanins), black tea flavor, peach flavor, sodium 50 mg·L⁻¹, and polyphenols 55 mg·L⁻¹.

Rose petal
Water, red tea extract (Camellia sinensis), citric acid, sodium citrate, sucralose, colorant (class IV caramel and anthocyanins), red tea flavor, rose petal flavor, sodium 125 mg·L⁻¹, and polyphenols 50 mg·L⁻¹.

Sangria
Water, red tea extract and black tea extract (Camellia sinensis), citric acid, sodium citrate, sucralose, colorant (class IV caramel and anthocyanins), red tea flavor, sangria flavor, sodium 150 mg·L⁻¹, and polyphenols 50 mg·L⁻¹.

2.2. Physicochemical Parameters

For the measurement of pH and titratable acidity, 10 mL of sample was diluted with 40 mL of distilled water, and the pH was read. After that, samples were titrated with 0.1 M·NaOH to a pH of 8.2 (citric acid as predominant) using a Mettler-Toledo automatic T50 titrator (Greifensee, Switzerland) according to the Association of Official Analytical Chemists methods [10].

For color determination, a 1.5 mL spectrophotometric cuvette was filled with sample, and color was determined using a CR-20 Konica Minolta Color Reader (Tokyo, Japan). Chromatic parameters were obtained using CIELAB (L, a, b) and CIELCH (L, C, h) color systems according to Commission Internationale De L’ecleirage [11]. L defines lightness (0 = black, 100 = white), a indicates red (positive a) or green value (negative a) and b indicates yellow (positive b) or blue value (negative b), C (chroma; saturation level of h) and h (hue angle: 0° = red, 90° = yellow, 180° = green, 270° = blue). Color view was obtained by online software ColorHexa color converter using L, a, and b values [12].

2.3. Mineral Composition

Mineral analysis was done based on AOAC [10] methods using an Agilent Atomic Absorption 240FS spectrometer (Santa Clara, United States). Briefly, 5 mL of 3 M·HCl was added to 50 mL of tea sample and digested-evaporated at boiling temperature until 20 mL of sample was obtained. Afterwards, samples were filtered and used for mineral analysis. Potassium and sodium were detected by emission at wavelengths of 589.6 and 769.9 nm, respectively, while calcium, magnesium, iron, zinc, copper, and manganese were determined by absorption at wavelengths of 422.7, 285.2, 248.3, 213.9, 324.7, and 279.5 nm, respectively.

The results were expressed as milligrams per liter of sample (mg·L⁻¹) based on calibration curves prepared with standards of each mineral (0 to 100 mg·L⁻¹ for sodium and potassium; 0–10 mg·L⁻¹ for calcium, magnesium, iron, and manganese; and 0 to 5 mg·L⁻¹ for zinc and copper).

2.4. Nutraceutical Properties

Total phenols, total flavonoids, total catechins, DPPH, and ABTS were carried out according to Niño-Medina et al. [13], and total anthocyanins content was measured according to Abdel-Aal and Hucl [14], while FRAP was carried out according to López-Contreras et al. [15]. Phenolics and antioxidant capacity assays were performed in a Barnstead International Turner SP-830 Plus spectrophotometer (Dubuque, United States).

The content of total phenols was determined based on the reaction of Folin–Ciocalteu reagent. Briefly, 0.2 mL of tea sample was placed in 2.6 mL of distilled water, oxidized with 0.2 mL of Folin–Ciocalteu reagent, and after 5 min, neutralized with 2 mL of 7% Na₂CO₃ solution. The reaction was left for 90 min, and finally, the absorbance of sample was measured at 750 nm. Gallic acid was used as the standard (0 to 200 mg·L⁻¹), and the results were expressed as milligrams of gallic acid equivalent per liter of sample (mgGAE·L⁻¹).

The content of total flavonoids was evaluated based on the reaction of aluminum chloride. Briefly, 0.2 mL of phenolic extract was placed in 3.5 mL of distilled water, followed by 0.15 mL of 5% NaNO₂. After 5 min, 0.15 mL of 10% AlCl₃ was added, and 5 min later, 1.0 mL of 1 M·NaOH was added. Reaction was left for 15 min, and finally, the absorbance of sample was measured at 510 nm. Catechin was used as the standard (0 to 200 mg·L⁻¹), and the results were expressed as milligrams of catechin equivalents per liter of sample (mgCatE·L⁻¹).

The content of total catechins was determined based on the reaction of vanillin-H₂SO₄. Briefly, 0.25 mL of phenolic extract was mixed with 0.65 mL of 1% vanillin solution and 0.65 mL of 25% H₂SO₄ (both dissolved in methanol). Reaction was left for 15 min at 30°C, and finally, the absorbance of sample was measured at 500 nm. Catechin was used as the standard (0 to 200 mg·L⁻¹), and the results were expressed as milligrams of catechin equivalents per liter of sample (mgCatE·L⁻¹).

For anthocyanins content, 200 μL of tea sample was mixed with 10 mL of ethanol-HCl (85 : 15 v/v, pH 1, 4°C) and shaken at 200 rpm for 30 min. Afterwards, the sample was centrifuged at 1000 rpm for 15 min, and finally, 3.5 mL of sample was measured at 535 nm. The content of anthocyanins was reported as milligrams of cyanidin-3-glucoside (C3G) per liter of sample (mgC3GE·L⁻¹) using the following formula:

where C = concentration in mgC3GE·L⁻¹, A = absorbance of sample, ɛ = molar absorptivity (C3G = 26965 cm⁻¹·mol⁻¹), V = volume of sample, and MW = molecular weight of C3G (449.2 g mol⁻¹).

The DPPH (2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl) antioxidant capacity was evaluated using a working solution 60 μM (in methanol) with an absorbance adjusted to 0.7 at 517 nm. The assay was carried out by mixing 0.2 mL of tea sample with 3.3 mL of the DPPH working solution, the reaction was left for 30 min in the dark, and the absorbance was determined.

The ABTS (3-ethyl-benzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) antioxidant capacity was carried out using a working solution obtained by mixing one mL 7.4 mM of ABTS and one mL of 2.6 mM of K₂S₂O₈ and allowing them to react for 12 h in the dark. After that, the absorbance of working solution was adjusted to 0.7 at 734 nm diluting with methanol. The ABTS assay was performed by mixing 0.2 mL of the tea sample with 3.3 mL of ABTS working solution; the reaction was left for 30 min in the dark, and the absorbance was measured.

The FRAP (ferric reducing antioxidant power) antioxidant capacity was determined using a working solution prepared by mixing 300 mM·C₂H₃NaO₂·3H₂O (pH 3.6), 10 mM·TPTZ (2,4,6-tripyridyl-s-triazine, in HCl 40 mM), and 20 mM FeCl₃·6H₂O in 10 : 1 : 1 (V : V : V) proportion. The FRAP assay was prepared by mixing 0.2 mL of tea sample with 3.3 mL of FRAP working solution, the reaction was left for 30 min in the dark at 37°C, and the absorbance of samples was taken at 593 nm.

Trolox (6-hydroxy-2,5,7,8-tetramethylchroman-2-carboxylic acid) was used as standard (0 to 200 µmol·L⁻¹) for DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP assays, and the results were expressed as micromoles of trolox equivalent per gram of sample (µmol·L⁻¹).

2.5. Statistical Analysis

Results were expressed as mean values of three samples ± standard deviation. Statistical significance between samples was evaluated by analysis of variance followed by Tukey’s test using Minitab 14.0. A probability of (5%) was deemed to be statistically significant.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Physicochemical Parameters

The pH and titratable acidity are analytically determined in separate ways, and each has its own particular impact on food quality [16].

Titratable acidity is a better predictor of the impact of acid content on flavor of food, and the pH is a better predictor of the ability of a microorganism to grow in a specific food [17]. On the other hand, color is the first notable characteristic of a food and often predetermines our expectation. Natural and synthetic colors play several roles in foods and beverages. Consumers use color as a way to identify a food and a way to judge the quality of a food [18].

There were statistical differences () between tea samples in physicochemical parameters (Table 2). The values of pH in tea samples were slightly acidic and ranged from 3.72 to 4.11 while titratable acidity ranged from 0.0092 to 0.174%. Chromatic values ranged from 25.1 to 53.9, 12.3 to 30.5, 18.1 to 32.0, 25.3 to 36.9, and 27.0 to 68.3 in L, a, b, C, and h, respectively, and color views were wide variable with samples in pink, yellow, brown, and red colors.

Table 2: Physicochemical parameters of ready-to-drink flavored-colored commercial teas.

Tea flavor
pH
TA (%)
Chromatic characteristics

h
View

Blueberry
4.11 ± 0.007a
0.105 ± 0.0014d
49.8 ± 0.14b
22.6 ± 0.07b
11.5 ± 0.07e
25.3 ± 0.07c
27.0 ± 0.21e

Citrus
4.09 ± 0.003a
0.135 ± 0.0007c
53.9 ± 0.99a
4.7 ± 0.65d
26.1 ± 0.64c
26.6 ± 0.64c
79.1 ± 0.28a

Lemon
3.85 ± 0.009c
0.174 ± 0.0014a
39.3 ± 0.42c
12.7 ± 0.14c
32.0 ± 0.35a
34.4 ± 0.28a
68.3 ± 0.28b

Peach
3.72 ± 0.007d
0.151 ± 0.0014b
38.0 ± 0.35c
12.3 ± 0.07c
28.2 ± 0.21b
30.7 ± 0.14b
66.5 ± 0.14c

Rose petal
3.97 ± 0.018b
0.092 ± 0.0007e
26.7 ± 0.78d
30.5 ± 1.20a
20.3 ± 1.91d
36.6 ± 1.84a
33.6 ± 0.35d

Sangria
3.82 ± 0.005c
0.147 ± 0.0007b
25.1 ± 0.14d
28.0 ± 0.78a
18.1 ± 0.78d
33.3 ± 1.06ab
32.9 ± 0.49d

Values with different letters within same evaluation are significantly different (, ).

The results of the present study show higher pH values than data reported by Lunkes and Hashizume [19], whom analyzed 11 commercial ready-to-drink flavored teas available in Brazil market and found pH values ranging from 2.89 to 3.41. In addition, the titratable acidity reported by these authors was higher than our observations, since they found values ranging from 0.193 to 0.325%.

On the other hand, Lin et al. [20] prepared green tea infusions from cold and hot brewed-parched or brewed-steamed green tea at 2, 6, and 10% (w/v) and obtained pH values from 5.47 to 5.88 which are higher values than all of the samples analyzed in the present study. They also measured the chromatic properties of tea infusions, and their data in b values were close to our observations (7.40 to 34.7), most of their L values (75.9 to 92.9) were higher than our samples, and most of their a values (−0.76. to 9.52) were lower than our results.

The differences in the pH and titratable acidity values between these authors and our study are attributed to the fact that commercial available ready-to-drink teas contain citric acid as acidifier and sodium citrate as pH stabilizer to extend the shelf life of product. On the other hand, all samples analyzed in our study reported the use of colorants in their formulations (anthocyanins, carmine, and class IV caramel) which modify the original color of the beverage lowering the L value.

3.2. Mineral Composition

Minerals are crucial for the interaction between genetic and physiological factors. If a dietary deficiency of these elements exists, it will lead to physiological and structural abnormalities that are preventable and which may be reversed by administration of the element. Calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, iron, and zinc are essential elements, while copper and manganese are trace elements [21].

There were statistical differences () between tea samples as in minor and as in major elements (Table 3). Different from the rest of the elements, manganese was detected only in citrus-flavored (0.281 mg·L⁻¹) and lemon-flavored teas (0.0036 mg·L⁻¹). Citrus-flavored tea obtained the highest content of manganese, zinc, magnesium, potassium, and sodium, while lemon, peach, and blueberry teas obtained the highest levels of copper, iron, and calcium, respectively. Sodium (180 to 271 mg·L⁻¹) was the mineral found in highest amount in samples followed by potassium (20 to 62 mg·L⁻¹) and calcium (14 to 18 mg·L⁻¹), while copper (0.018 to 0.035 mg·L⁻¹) was the lower element in all samples.

Table 3: Mineral composition of ready-to-drink flavored-colored commercial teas.

Tea flavor
Minor elements (mg·L⁻¹)
Major elements (mg·L⁻¹)

Cu
Mn
Zn
Fe
Ca
Mg
K
Na

Blueberry
0.013 ± 0.004bc
ND
0.039 ± 0.003bc
0.134 ± 0.007ab
18.21 ± 0.27a
1.33 ± 0.01c
20.27 ± 0.17e
210.60 ± 0.77b

Citrus
0.030 ± 0.001ab
0.281 ± 0.003a
0.069 ± 0.001a
0.072 ± 0.008bc
15.05 ± 0.07b
2.92 ± 0.01a
62.65 ± 0.28a
271.74 ± 3.64a

Lemon
0.035 ± 0.001a
0.036 ± 0.007b
0.037 ± 0.006bc
0.142 ± 0.048abc
14.59 ± 0.02c
1.83 ± 0.05b
53.38 ± 0.62b
259.17 ± 9.77a

Peach
0.033 ± 0.003ab
ND
0.043 ± 0.007bc
0.246 ± 0.040a
14.49 ± 0.67bc
1.45 ± 0.18bc
30.93 ± 0.40d
183.68 ± 2.95c

Rose petal
0.024 ± 0.001b
ND
0.049 ± 0.001b
0.061 ± 0.001c
15.45 ± 0.17bc
0.84 ± 0.01d
20.64 ± 0.43e
180.70 ± 2.82c

Sangria
0.018 ± 0.003b
ND
0.036 ± 0.001c
0.100 ± 0.021b
15.79 ± 0.36bc
0.99 ± 0.04d
44.56 ± 0.29c
194.51 ± 7.48bc

Values with different letters within same evaluation are significantly different (, ). ND = not detected.

A wide range of selected micronutrient in made tea has been found in literature. The difference in micronutrient content of made teas could be attributed to the tea produced in different growing areas of the world having high variation in micronutrient contents, which resulted in differential micronutrient uptake by tea plants [22].

There is no literature available for comparison with the current report as there are no studies on the evaluation of mineral content of commercially ready-to-drink teas. Nevertheless, several studies have evaluated the mineral composition of prepared tea infusions. Reto et al. [23], prepared tea infusions by boiling 1.5 g of green tea in 250 mL of boiling water for 10 min obtaining levels of calcium (1.9 to 3.5 mg·L⁻¹), potassium (92 to 15 mg·L⁻¹), sodium (35 to 69 mg·L⁻¹), and iron (0.02 to 0.12 mg·L⁻¹). These values were lower than the flavored teas analyzed in the present study, but the content of manganese (0.5 to 1.9 mg·L⁻¹) reported by these authors was higher than all our samples.

Gallaher et al. [24], prepared green tea infusions (Chinese, decaffeinated, and authentic) by stirring 2 g of tea material in 236 mL of boiling water for 0.5 min and steeped samples for 5.5 more minutes; after that, samples were evaporated to dryness, ashed at 480°C, and HCl-treated for mineral analysis. These authors found lower content than our samples in calcium (2.24 to 3.72 mg·L⁻¹), potassium (66.22 to 81.98 mg·L⁻¹), and sodium (3.89 to 7.37 mg·L⁻¹), but their content in copper (0.036 to 0.074 mg·L⁻¹), magnesium (3.85 to 5.29 mg·L⁻¹), manganese (1.86 to 2.48 mg·L⁻¹), and zinc (0.091 to 0.137 mg·L⁻¹) was higher. On the other hand, their content of iron (0.161 to 0.203 mg·L⁻¹) was in the range of our study.

According to the Official Mexican Standard for food labeling (NOM-051-SCFI/SSA1-2010), sodium is the only mandatory mineral that has to be reported in a food product label. The labels of all ready-to-drink teas evaluated in this study reported the content of sodium (Table 1), but the levels reported in labels were lower than data obtained in our analysis (Table 3). For instance, blueberry-, citrus-, lemon-, peach-, rose petal-, and sangria-flavored teas were 2.10-, 1.81-, 1.72-, 3.67-, 1.44-, and 1.24-fold higher than the content reported in label, respectively. We attribute these differences to the method use in determination of sodium. In addition, the Official Mexican Standard for nonalcoholic beverages (NOM-218-SSA1-2011) indicates 600 mg·L⁻¹ as a maximum content of sodium in these products, and all the samples were low than this level.

3.3. Nutraceutical Properties

Phenolic compounds are receiving interest because of the recognition of their antioxidant properties, their abundance in the human diet, and their probable prevention of several diseases associated with oxidative stress [25]. In addition, it is of great interest from consumers, nutritional experts, and food science researchers to know the antioxidant capacity of the foods that we consume [26].

There were statistical differences () between tea samples in all phenolic evaluations (Table 4). The range values of total phenols, total flavonoids, total catechins, and total anthocyanins were 32 to 211 mgGAE·L⁻¹, 20 to 65 mgCatE·L⁻¹, 165 to 640 mgECat·L⁻¹, and 6.52 to 182.19 mgC3GE·L⁻¹, respectively. It was not a surprise that all samples were specially rich in total catechins as these compounds are the major phenolic group in tea infusions, accounting for 40% of total water-soluble solids in tea infusions [4]. The content of total catechins was higher than the content of total phenols, and although this behavior is very rare, it has been reported previously in some legumes by Xu and Chang [27] and Zia-Ul-Haq et al. [28]. The explanation of this behavior is that acid treatment of vanillin-HCl method has an effect on depolymerization of catechins, and they are quantified in more quantity than the phenolics quantified by Folin–Ciocalteu method where phenolics are not depolymerized.

Table 4: Nutraceutical properties of ready-to-drink flavored-colored commercial teas.

Tea flavor
Phenolics (mg·L⁻¹)
Antioxidant capacity (μmolTE·L⁻¹)

Total phenols
Total flavonoids
Total catechins
Total anthocyanins
DPPH
ABTS
FRAP

Blueberry
110.87 ± 0.95c
26.10 ± 0.70d
224.35 ± 8.54c
10.44 ± 1.23d
1029.21 ± 13.67b
1030.65 ± 7.79a
1143.00 ± 72.5a

Citrus
211.56 ± 3.01a
40.55 ± 2.8bc
280.68 ± 23.71c
15.22 ± 0.61c
995.81 ± 8.70b
1044.43 ± 2.33a
1170.60 ± 69.7a

Lemon
128.12 ± 2.54b
65.46 ± 2.81a
168.02 ± 2.85d
6.52 ± 0.61d
1096.00 ± 3.73a
1048.84 ± 0.78a
1269.20 ± 18.1a

Peach
75.02 ± 1.58d
20.62 ± 1.41e
165.33 ± 4.74d
7.39 ± 0.61d
754.14 ± 2.49c
904.98 ± 7.79b
766.40 ± 79.00b

Rose petal
32.35 ± 1.11f
37.06 ± 0.70c
552.27 ± 13.28b
182.19 ± 10.45a
118.77 ± 3.53e
232.00 ± 11.69d
147.70 ± 9.70d

Sangria
56.99 ± 0.16e
46.02 ± 2.11b
640.79 ± 5.69a
136.97 ± 5.53b
405.26 ± 2.83d
544.52 ± 3.12c
459.10 ± 33.40c

Values with different letters within same evaluation are significantly different (, n = 3).

Anthocyanins are not a phenolic group presented naturally in tea; nevertheless, they were quantified in all samples. This is because of the use of exogenous anthocyanins that give the characteristic color of each flavored-colored tea. The content of total anthocyanins was higher in rose petal- and sangria-flavored teas than in the rest of the samples.

There were statistical differences () between tea samples in all antioxidant capacity evaluations (Table 4). The values of antioxidant capacity were 118 to 1096 μmolTE·L⁻¹, 232 to 1048 μmolTE·L⁻¹, and 147 to 1269 μmolTE·L⁻¹ in DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP, respectively. Rose petal- and lemon-flavored teas were the lower and higher in antioxidant capacity, respectively, in the three assays tested. The major antioxidant capacity was found in lemon-flavored tea, and this could be attributed to the antioxidant vitamins content of the concentrated lemon juice used.

To the best of our knowledge, few studies have reported the phenolic content and antioxidant capacity of commercial ready-to-drink teas. For instance, Kodama et al. [29] analyzed the phenolic content and antioxidant capacity of four ready-to-drink commercial teas available in Brazil, and they reported values around 1050 to 1705 mgCatE·L⁻¹ and 140,000 to 545,000  μmolTE·L⁻¹ in total phenols and DPPH antioxidant capacity, respectively, being these results greatly higher than those of ours. In addition, Chen et al. [30] studied the catechin content of 14 canned and bottled green tea drinks by HPLC, and they reported values from 0.9 to 341.7 mg·L⁻¹ which are within the ranged content found in our samples.

On the other hand, other works have evaluated the phenolic content and antioxidant capacity of tea infusions. Lin et al. [31] prepared infusion of green, oolong, and black teas by mixing 3 g of tea dried tea leaves with 150 mL of boiling water for 5 min, and after that, the sample was cooled to room temperature to measure the total phenols content and antioxidant capacity levels. Results obtained by these authors were higher than our results with 920, 745, and 669 mg·L⁻¹ of total phenols in of green, oolong, and black teas, respectively. In addition, Lin et al. [20] also obtained higher values than our tea samples with values ranged from 749 to 5610 mg·L⁻¹ in green tea infusions from cold and hot brewed-parched or brewed-steamed green tea at 2, 6, and 10% (w/v). These authors also obtained higher values than ours in infusions prepared from cold and hot brewed-parched or brewed-steamed green tea at 2% with values ranging around 332 to 781 mg·L⁻¹ in infusions at prepared 2%.

Other studies have reported higher values than ours, and this is because teas are prepared directly from tea product at laboratory scale without the thermal process (sterilization) and dilution that is carried on the commercial industry of ready-to-drink tea.

Although the polyphenols content in food label is not mandatory in the Official Mexican Standard for food labeling (NOM-051-SCFI/SSA1-2010), all the analyzed teas reported the content of these compounds in their labels, and this is may be to make an impact on the consumers about the functional food ingredients in the product. Comparing the content reported in label against our data in total phenols, blueberry-, citrus-, and rose petal-flavored teas were 1.12, 1.06, and 1.54% lower than the content reported in their labels. On the contrary, our data in total phenols of lemon-, peach-, and sangria-flavored teas were 1.02, 1.36, and 1.13 higher than the content reported in their labels, respectively, and these differences could be attributed to the method use in determination of the phenolics.

4. Conclusions

Because of the increasing interest of consumers in the consumption of ready-to-drink teas with different flavors, it is necessary to know about their physicochemical and nutritional characteristics. There were differences between ready-to-drink flavored-colored commercial teas in physicochemical parameters, mineral composition, and nutraceutical properties. The pH values of tea samples were slightly acidic with values around pH 4, titratable acidity was low with values near to 0.1%, and color parameters of tea samples were wide variable with samples in pink, yellow, brown, and red colors. Citrus-flavored tea obtained the highest content of manganese, zinc, magnesium, potassium, and sodium, while lemon-, peach-, and blueberry-flavored teas obtained the highest levels of copper, iron, and calcium, respectively. In addition, manganese was detected only in citrus- and lemon-flavored teas. Citrus-, lemon-, sangria-, and rose petal-flavored teas obtained the highest content in total phenols, total flavonoids, total catechins, and total anthocyanins, respectively, while, lemon- and rose petal-flavored teas showed the highest and lowest antioxidant capacity in DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP assays. The levels of sodium reported in labels of all samples were lower than those in data obtained in our analysis. The same was observed for total phenols in blueberry-, citrus-, and rose petal-flavored teas, but total phenols of lemon-, peach-, and sangria-flavored teas were higher than the content reported in their labels. Finally, the results obtained in the present work give information to consumers for choosing flavored-colored ready-to-drink tea based on the physicochemical, nutritional, and nutraceutical properties.

Data Availability

Data are available by request to corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors’ Contributions

Dolores Muy-Rangel and Guillermo Niño-Medina contributed equally to this work.

References

T. K. Mondal, A. Bhattacharya, M. Laxmikumaran, and P. S. Ahuja, “Recent advances of tea (Camellia sinensis) biotechnology,” Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 195–254, 2004.

M. G. Sajilata, P. R. Bajaj, and R. S. Singhal, “Tea Polyphenols as nutraceuticals,” Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 229–254, 2008.

R. Horanni and U. H. Engelhardt, “Determination of amino acids in white, green, black, oolong, pu-erh teas and tea products,” Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 94–100, 2013.

W. C. Reygaert, “An update on the health benefits of green tea,” Beverages, vol. 3, no. 4, p. 6, 2017.

M. Chen, Y. Zhu, H. Zhang et al., “Phenolic compounds and the biological effects of Pu-erh teas with long-term storage,” International Journal of Food Properties, vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 1715–1728, 2017.

C. Cabrera, R. Artacho, and R. J. Gimenez, “Beneficial effects of green tea—a review,” Journal of the American College of Nutrition, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 79–99, 2006.

D. Pasrija and C. Anandharamakrishna, “Techniques for extraction of green tea polyphenols: a review,” Food and Bioprocess Technology, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 935–950, 2015.

D. Del Rio, L. Calani, F. Scazzina, L. Jechiu, C. Cordero, and F. Brighenti, “Bioavailability of catechins from ready-to-drink tea,” Nutrition, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 528–533, 2010.

R. Arthur, 2017, https://www.beveragedaily.com/Article/2017/03/10/RTD-tea-high-growth-trajectory-predicted-to-continue.

Association of Official Analytical Chemist (AOAC), Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International, Association of Official Analytical Chemist (AOAC), Rockville, MD, USA, 16th edition, 1998.

Commission Internationale De L’ecleirage, Cie 15: Technical Report: Colorimetry, Commission Internationale De L’ecleirage, Vienna, Austria, 3rd edition, 2004.

ColorHexa, Color Encyclopedia: Information and Conversion: Computer Software, ColorHexa, 2017, http://www.colorhexa.com/.

G. Niño-Medina, J. D. Romo-Longoria, I. V. Ramírez-González, O. O. Martínez-Reyna, and V. Urías-Orona, “Phenolic content and antioxidant capacity level in commercial Mexican lager beers,” Journal of the American Society of Brewing Chemists, vol. 75, no. 2, pp. 156–158, 2017.

E. S. M. Abdel-Aal and P. Hucl, “A rapid method for quantifying total anthocyanins in blue aleurone and purple pericarp wheats,” Cereal Chemistry Journal, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 350–354, 1999.

J. J. López-Contreras, F. Zavala-García, V. Urías-Orona, G. C. G. Martínez-Ávila, R. Rojas, and G. Niño-Medina, “Chromatic, phenolic and antioxidant properties of Sorghum bicolor genotypes,” Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca, vol. 43, no. 2, p. 366, 2015.

S. D. Sadler and P. A. Murphy, Food Analysis, Springer Science, Basel, Switzerland, 1st edition, 2010, Chapter 13.

C. Tyl and G. D. Sadler, Food Analysis, Springer Science, Basel, Switzerland, 5th edition, 2017, Chapter 22.

J. C. Griffiths, “Coloring food and beverages,” Food Technology-Chicago, vol. 59, no. 5, p. 38, 2005.

L. B. F. Lunkes and L. N. Hashizume, “Evaluation of the pH and titratable acidity of teas commercially available in Brazilian market,” RGO–Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 59–64, 2014.

S. D. Lin, J. H. Yang, Y. J. Hsieh, E. H. Liu, and J. L. Mau, “Effect of different brewing methods on quality of green tea,” Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, vol. 38, no. 3, p. 1234, 2014.

N. Zand, T. Christides, and E. Loughrill, Handbook of Mineral Elements in Food, John Wiley and Sons, London, UK, 1st edition, 2015, Chapter 2.

T. Karak, F. R. Kutu, J. R. Nath et al., “Micronutrients (B, Co, Cu, Fe, Mn, Mo, and Zn) content in made tea (Camellia sinensis L.) and tea infusion with health prospect: a critical review,” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, vol. 57, no. 14, p. 2996, 2017.

M. Reto, M. E. Figueira, H. M. Filipe, and C. M. M. Almeida, “Chemical composition of green tea (Camellia sinensis) infusions commercialized in Portugal,” Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, vol. 62, no. 4, p. 139, 2007.

R. N. Gallaher, K. Gallaher, A. J. Marshall, and A. C. Marshal, “Mineral analysis of ten types of commercially available tea,” Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, vol. 19, pp. S53–S57, 2006.

C. Manach, A. Scalbert, C. Morand, C. Rèmèsy, and L. Jiménez, “Polyphenols: food sources and bioavailability,” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, vol. 79, no. 5, pp. 727–747, 2004.

D. Huang, B. Ou, and R. L. Prior, “The chemistry behind antioxidant capacity assays,” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, vol. 53, no. 6, pp. 1841–1856, 2005.

B. J. Xu and S. K. C. Chang, “A comparative study on phenolic profiles and antioxidant activities of legumes as affected by extraction solvents,” Journal of Food Science, vol. 72, no. 2, p. S159, 2007.

M. Zia-Ul-Haq, S. Ahmad, S. A. Bukhari, R. Amarowicz, S. Ercisli, and H. Z. E. Jaafar, “Compositional studies and biological activities of some mash bean (Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper) cultivars commonly consumed in Pakistan,” Biological Research, vol. 47, no. 1, p. 23, 2014.

D. H. Kodama, A. E. S. S. Gonçalves, F. M. Lajolo, and M. I. Genovese, “Flavonoids, total phenolics and antioxidant capacity: comparison between commercial green tea preparations,” Ciência e Tecnologia de Alimentos, vol. 30, no. 4, p. 1077, 2009.

Z. Y. Chen, Q. Y. Zhu, D. Tsang, and Y. Huang, “Degradation of green tea catechins in tea drinks,” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 477–482, 2001.

S. D. Lin, P. Udompornmongkol, J. H. Yang, S. Y. Chen, and J. L. Mau, “Quality and antioxidant property of three types of tea infusions,” Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 1401–1408, 2014.