BUSCADOR RECOLECTA

Table S1: Chemical compositions of the control wines without oenological additives (average values); Table S2: Chemical compositions of the oenological additives used in this study., Peer reviewed

Table S1. Columns used for the optimization of the HILIC × RP method used in the present research. Table S2. Identification proposed for the anthocyanins evaluated in the grape samples during ripening for a 10-week period. Figure S1. C18-RP 1DLC analysis of grape W9 (A) and wine (B). Blue: separation acquired at 280 nm; red: separation acquired at 520 nm. Figure S2. Chromatograms (280 nm) obtained for the HILIC separations obtained from a grape sample after optimization in a Zic-HILIC (A), diol (B) and silica (C) columns. Separation conditions are shown in inserts. Figure S3. Chromatograms (280 nm) obtained for the RP-based separations obtained from a grape sample after optimization in a PFP (A) and C18 (B) columns. Separation conditions are: flow rate 2 ml min-1 (Panel A) or 3 ml min-1 (panel B); elution with water (0.1% formic acid, solvent A) and acetonitrile (solvent B) as mobile phases. Specific gradients were shown in the respective chromatogram. Figure S4. 2D contour plots from the polyphenolic fraction of a grape sample (W10) obtained using different gradients and mobile phases composition in the second dimension, as indicated. Figure S5. 2D plots obtained under the optimum separation conditions for the grape samples of different ripening degree (W1 to W10)., Peer reviewed

Figure S1: C30 reversed-phase chromatograms of carotenoids at 450 nm obtained from Sweet Mary papaya (Carica papaya L.) peel encapsulated by O/W emulsions in (a) carotenoid-enriched soybean oil (vegetable oil + papaya carotenoid extract (carotenoid μg/g vegetable oil), (b) carotenoid-enriched sunflower oil (vegetable oil + papaya carotenoid extract (μg carotenoid μg/g vegetable oil), (c) O/W soybean emulsion with encapsulated carotenoid extract, (d) O/W sunflower emulsion with encapsulated carotenoid extract, and in the digesta fractions during the in vitro digestion of (e) O/W soybean emulsion and (f) O/W sunflower oil emulsion in the oral phase, (g) O/W soybean emulsion and (h) O/W sunflower oil emulsion in the gastric phase, and (i) O/W soybean emulsion and (j) O/W sunflower oil emulsion in the intestinal phase. Peak identities in Table S1; Figure S2: C30 reversed-phase chromatograms of carotenoids at 450 nm obtained from Sweet Mary papaya (Carica papaya L.) peel encapsulated by O/W emulsions in the micellar fractions during the in vitro digestion of (a) soybean microemulsion and (b) sunflower oil microemulsion in the oral phase, (c) soybean microemulsion and (d) sunflower oil microemulsion in the gastric phase, and (e) soybean microemulsion and (f) sunflower oil microemulsion in the intestinal phase. Peak identities in Table S1; Figure S3: Stability of main papaya carotenoids (μg carotenoids/g emulsion) ((all-E)-β-cryptoxanthin, (all-E)-β-carotene, (all-E)-β-cryptoxanthin laurate, and (all-E)-lycopene) in (a) O/W soybean oil and (b) O/W sunflower oil emulsions before and after in vitro gastrointestinal digestion. Non-digested values refer to the content of each carotenoid in the carotenoid-enriched oil extract before encapsulation by O/W emulsions; Figure S4: Images taken with confocal microscope of (a) soybean and (b) sunflower final emulsions after being processed through high-pressure homogenization (HPH) at 100 MPa for 5 cycles. Scale bars are 5 μm long. Table S1: Percentage (%) fatty acid composition of edible vegetable oils (Dubois et al., 2007) [18]; Table S2: Chromatographic identification a of carotenoids and carotenoid esters from Sweet Mary papaya (Carica papaya L.) peel to formulate soybean oil and sunflower oil carotenoid-enriched emulsions. Table S3: Content of individual carotenoids and carotenoid esters in Sweet Mary papaya (Carica papaya L.) peel extracts., Peer reviewed

Table S1: Phenolic compounds identified in yarrow samples by using HPLC-ESI-QTOF-MS., Peer reviewed

Table S1: Analysis of Variance of extraction yield variable for response surface modeling showing linear, quadratic and interaction relations, and coefficient for model prediction; Table S2: Analysis of Variance of TPC variable for response surface modeling showing linear, quadratic and interaction relations, and coefficient for model prediction; Table S3: Analysis of Variance of ROS variable for response surface modeling showing linear, quadratic and interaction relations, and coefficient for model prediction; Table S4: Analysis of Variance of AChE variable for response surface modeling showing linear, quadratic and interaction relations, and coefficient for model prediction; Table S5: Annotated compounds and their total compound contribution (%) in pracaxi SFE extract after HPLC-CSH-Q-TOF MS/MS ESI (−) analysis; Table S6: Annotated compounds and their total compound contribution (%) in pracaxi SFE extract after HPLC-CSH-Q-TOF MS/MS ESI (+) analysis; Table S7: Annotated compounds and their total compound contribution (%) in pracaxi SFE extract after GC-Q-TOF MS analysis; Table S8: PLE conditions, desirability and predicted response values at the optimum conditions predicted by the model, and experimental response values for the selected optimum conditions; Table S9: Tentative identified compounds in pracaxi nuts PLE extracts after HPLC-C18-Q-TOF MS/MS ESI (+/−) analyses; Figure S1: Estimated response surfaces for each response variable, and their corresponding Standardized Pareto charts: (A) Extraction yield (%); (B) TPC (mg GAE/mL); (C) IC50 ROS (µg/mL); (D) IC50 AChE (µg/mL); Figure S2: Desirability response surface to optimize response variables: (A) including extraction yield as response variable; (B) excluding extraction yield as response variable; Figure S3: PCA score plots of pracaxi nuts PLE extracts data obtained by: (A) HPLC-C18-Q-TOF MS/MS ESI (+); (B) HPLC-C18-Q-TOF MS/MS ESI (−); Figure S4: PLS-DA score plots of pracaxi nuts PLE extracts data obtained by: (A) HPLC-C18-Q-TOF MS/MS ESI (+); (B) HPLC-C18-Q-TOF MS/MS ESI (−)., Peer reviewed

Supplementary material: Table S1. Alpha-diversity is expressed as Observed Species, Shannon, and Simpson indexes. Letters denote statistically significant differences between samples and times. Differences regarding the control that are statistically significant (p < 0.05) are marked in gray. Table S2. Genus level. Mean relative abundances (%) and standard deviation. Only genus with a mean relative abundance >0.5% and/or statistically significant were considered. Statistical differences (p-adjust < 0.05) regarding the control and PLAg/PLAm for each volunteer are highlighted, in gray if they appear only for one volunteer or in orange if they are common to at least two volunteers. Table S3. Concentration (µM) of short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) at different colonic fermentation times. Table S4. Lactate concentration (µg/mL) at different colonic fermentation times. Table S5. Predicted bacterial pathways present in PLAm and PLAg samples from colonic fermentation simulations for the three volunteers. Only statistically different features comparing to control (q-value<0.05) and with a mean relative abundance >0.01% are shown. met. = metabolism. deg. = degradation. Table S6. Predicted bacterial genes (i.e., enzymes and proteins) present in PLAm and PLAg samples from colonic fermentation simulations for the three volunteers. Only statistically different features comparing to control (q-value<0.05). and with a mean relative abundance >0.01% are shown. Figure S1. Beta-diversity plots of the three volunteers (0, 24, 48, and 72 h) and the different conditions tested (control, PLAg, and PLAm)., Peer reviewed

Table S1: Consumption of the pharmacological supplements during pregnancy and the lactation of the human milk donors (n = 113); Table S2: Diet survey: five-day dietary record. Daily nutrient intake of the human milk donors; Table S3: Prevalence of inadequate intake of specific nutrients in human milk donors; Table S4: Diet survey: five-day dietary diaries. Number of food servings per day consumed by the participants, healthy eating index (HEI), and records of supplement and iodized salt intake among the human milk donors; Table S5: Diet survey: food frequency questionnaire (FFQ, the number of food servings per day or week consumed by the participants) results for the human milk donors; Table S6: Erythrocyte and plasma fatty acid compositions (g/100 g of total FAs) for the human milk donors; Table S7: Erythrocyte, plasma, and urine concentrations of nutrients and biochemical determinations for the human milk donors., Peer reviewed

Explanation of the mechanism of NP formation, general scheme of the synthesis of copper nanohybrids, viable bacterial concentration, measured as colony count per mL (CFU/mL) in the absence of the bionanohybrid and in the presence of the bionanohybrid, and table collecting their different characteristics., Peer reviewed

The supplemental material contains the computational details, as well as some figures and discussions that reflect the results presented in the main part., Peer reviewed

9 páginas, introducción con método y referencias, 5 tablas y 1 figura, Peer reviewed