International Journal of Food Properties

ISSN: 1094-2912 (Print) 1532-2386 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ljfp20

Comparison of Oxidative Stability among Edible

Oils under Continuous Frying Conditions

Ting-ting Xu, Jing Li, Ya-Wei Fan, Tian-wen Zheng & Ze-Yuan Deng

To cite this article: Ting-ting Xu, Jing Li, Ya-Wei Fan, Tian-wen Zheng & Ze-Yuan Deng (2015)
Comparison of Oxidative Stability among Edible Oils under Continuous Frying Conditions,
International Journal of Food Properties, 18:7, 1478-1490, DOI: 10.1080/10942912.2014.913181

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2014.913181

Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Accepted author version posted online: 27

Oct 2014.
Published online: 27 Oct 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 351

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 5 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ljfp20
International Journal of Food Properties, 18:1478–1490, 2015
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1094-2912 print/1532-2386 online
DOI: 10.1080/10942912.2014.913181

Comparison of Oxidative Stability among Edible Oils

under Continuous Frying Conditions

Ting-ting Xu# , Jing Li# , Ya-Wei Fan, Tian-wen Zheng, and Ze-Yuan Deng
State Key Laboratory of Food Science and Technology, Institute for Advanced Study,
Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China

The stability of camellia oil (saturated fatty acid: monounsaturated fatty acid: polyunsaturated fatty
acid = 1:7:1) after frying potatoes was compared with palm oil (saturated fatty acid: monounsaturated
fatty acid: polyunsaturated fatty acid = 4:4:1) and peanut oil (saturated fatty acid: monounsaturated
fatty acid: polyunsaturated fatty acid = 2:4:4). Oil samples were evaluated for acid value, iodine value,
peroxide value, p-anisidine value, total oxidation value, tocopherols content, and fatty acids composi-
tion. There was the least change in fatty acid composition in camellia oil among the three edible oils.
The α-tocopherol was more vulnerable to heat degradation than γ -tocopherol and δ-tocopherol, and
α-tocopherol was completely degraded before the whole frying process was done for palm and peanut
oils. The oxidative stabilities of the three edible oils were in the order of camellia oil > palm oil >
peanut oil. The oxidative stability was mainly determined by the calculated oxidizability value related to
fatty acid composition, and when calculated oxidizability values were similar, the tocopherol contents of
edible oils would be a key factor in affecting their oxidative stabilities.

Keywords: Camellia oil, Fatty acids, Tocopherol, Frying, Oxidative stability.

INTRODUCTION

Frying is a fast and convenient technique for the production of foods with sensory properties that are
favored by consumers, including a typical flavor, color, taste, and a crispy surface.[1] However, it may
result in a high rate of peroxides degradation because of high temperature, and contribute to radical-
radical polymerization reactions and formation of non-polar dimmers and oligomers because of low
availability of oxygen.[2] These chemical reactions are mainly influenced by the type and quality of
the oil, the food properties, and the food/oil ratio and the frying temperature.[3,4]
Changes occurred in oils after frying food have been extensively reported. Several studies have
verified the variation tendency of different physical and chemical parameters with the increasing
frying cycles. The free fatty acids, peroxide value (POV), p-anisidine value (p-AV), total polar

# These authors contributed equally.

Received 27 October 2013; accepted 5 April 2014
Address correspondence to Ze-Yuan Deng, State Key Laboratory of Food Science and Technology, Institute for Advanced
Study, Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330047, China. E-mail: zeyuandeng@hotmail.com

1478
 COMPARISON OF OXIDATIVE STABILITY AMONG EDIBLE OILS 1479

compounds (TPC) of the oils increased gradually under the frying conditions.[5,6] The total phe-
nols, tocopherols, and fatty acids composition can affect the stability of oils against oxidation and
decomposition in the frying process.[6,7] Abdulkarim[8] evaluated the performance of the high-oleic
Moringa oleifera seed oil saturated fatty acid (SFA; SFA: monounsaturated fatty acid [MUFA]:
polyunsaturated fatty acid [PUFA] = 2:7:0) in deep-frying by comparing its frying stability with
other conventional frying oils (canola [SFA: MUFA: PUFA = 1:6:3], soybean [SFA: MUFA:
PUFA = 1.5:2.5:6], and palm olein [SFA: MUFA: PUFA = 4:4:1]). The free fatty acids of these
four edible oils increased 66.6, 71.4, 60.0, and 65.0%, respectively. And the changes in p-AV and
TOTOX value of Moringa oleifera seed oil were found to be significantly lower than other oils, fol-
lowed by palm olein oil, with the highest values obtained in canola oil and soybean oil. Juárez[9]
investigated the discontinuous deep frying of potatoes, milanesas, and churros in soybean oil, sun-
flower oil, and partially hydrogenated fats. After 80.5 h of deep-frying churros, all the oils exceeded
25% of TPC and the contents of polymeric and dimerized triacylglycerols were higher than 10%
and the losses of tocopherols during frying reached 76.0%.
The oxidative stabilities of different edible oils during the frying cycles were dependent upon the
fatty acids composition, particularly the unsaturated degree, and the content of antioxidants (such
as tocopherols) in the oil.[10] There were several articles reporting the flavor and storage stability of
potato chips after frying in different oils.[11,12] The camellia oil, rich in oleic acid (over 70%) and
tocopherol, has become more and more popular in China. However, little has been known regarding
the oxidative stability of camellia oil compared with common edible oils with different fatty acids
composition and tocopherol contents after frying potatoes. Therefore, the main objective of present
work was to determine the oxidative stability of camellia oil (SFA: MUFA: PUFA = 1:7:1) after
frying potatoes and make comparison with palm oil (SFA: MUFA: PUFA = 4:4:1) and peanut oil
(SFA: MUFA: PUFA = 2:4:4) by the indicators of IV, POV, p-AV, and TOTOX, and to investigate
effect of tocopherols content and fatty acids composition on the oils’ oxidative stabilities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three edible oils, namely palm oil, peanut oil, camellia oil (with no antioxidants added) were pur-
chased from l Edible Oil LTD Nanchang, China. Pre-fried potatoes approximately 10 cm long and
1 cm thick were purchased from a local supermarket.
Standard fatty acid methyl esters (FAME, #463) spiked with a mixture of four positional CLA
isomers (#UC-59 M) were obtained from Nu-Chek Prep Inc. (Elysian, MN). n-hexane used in a gas
chromatograph (GC) was purchased from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany), and other solvents were of
analytical reagent grade. All experiments and analytical determinations were performed at least in
triplicate.

Frying Procedure
Deep frying was carried out in an electrical fryer (Multi-function Fryer, Guangzhou, China). The
temperature of the oil in the fryer was monitored by a thermo recorder. It was equipped with a
thermostat and supplied with an insert cross-linked steel wire-mesh which allowed the food to be
dipped into the oil, without coming in contact with the fryer’s inner surface. The ratio of potatoes to
frying oil was set at 1/25 (w/v), in the first frying batch, 80 g potatoes were deeply fried for 3 min at
170◦ C in 2000 mL oil, and every frying batch was conducted for 5 min. After each of the five frying
cycles, 50 mL of oil and all potatoes were taken out and stored at –20◦ C until analysis.[13] Frying
experimental series consisted of 75 frying batches conducted in three consecutive days. At the end
of the experiment, there was 1002 mL oil left.
1480 XU ET AL.

Determination of Chemical Parameters

Acid value (AV)
AV was determined according to AOCS Official Method Ca 5a–40. The titration of an accurate
sample solution, dissolved in ethanol/water (95:5, v/v), with 0.1 M KOH solution, was used, with
phenolphthalein as an indicator.

Iodine value (IV)

IV was measured according to the AOAC Official Method 920.158. The titration of an accurate
sample solution, dissolved in cyclohexane/glacial acetic acid (1:1, v/v), with 0.2 M sodium thio-
sulfate pentahydrate, was used, with starch as an indicator. Before the titration, 25 mL Wijs reagent
was added to the mixture and incubated in the darkness for 1–2 h, and then 20 mL potassium iodide
solution (100 g/L) and 150 mL water were added immediately.

POV
POV was measured by AOCS Official Method Cd 8–53. The titration of an accurate sample
solution, dissolved in acetic acid glacial/2, 2, 4-trimethylpentane (60:40, v/v), with 0.01 M sodium
thiosulfate pentahydrate, was used, with starch as an indicator. Before the titration, 0.5 mL saturated
solution of potassium iodide was added to react with the sample solution for 1 min, and 30 mL water
added immediately.

p-AV
p-AV was determined according to AOCS Official Method Cd 18-90. This measurement is based
on the absorbance increase per gram of oil, measured at 350 nm (722G visible spectrophotometer,
China) of the three oil solutions in isooctane, before and after reaction with p-anisidine reagent in
the darkness for 8 min.

Total oxidation value (TOTOX)

TOTOX measures oil deterioration and is calculated from the formula: TOTOX = 2POV + p-
AV.[14]

Tocopherols
The content of tocopherols was measured using a Agilent 1100 High Performance Liquid
Chromatograph, coupled with fluorescence detector (excitation at 295 nm; emission at 325 nm),
Hypersil ODS2-C18 (5 µm, 4.6 µm × 150 mm) column. The mobile phase was HPLC- grade mix-
ture of methyl alcohol: water = 98:2, at a flow rate of 0.8 mL/min and the sample amount was 3 µL
at the room temperature.[15] The determinations of the samples were carried out in triplicate.

Analysis of Fatty Acids Composition

The FAME was analyzed by a GC equipped with a flame ionization detector and a fused silica
capillary column (100 m × 0.25 mm × 0.2 µm) coated with 100% cyanopropyl polysiloxane (CP-
Sil 88, Chrompack; Middelburg, The Netherlands). The temperature program (86 min in total) was
as follows: The initial temperature of the oven was 45◦ C for 4 min, increased to 175◦ C at a rate
of 13◦ C/min, maintained for 27 min, further raised to 215◦ C at a rate of 4◦ C/min, and finally kept
at this temperature for 35 min.[16] Analysis of all peaks was accomplished by comparison of their
retention time with FAME standards. All samples were carried out in triplicate.
 COMPARISON OF OXIDATIVE STABILITY AMONG EDIBLE OILS 1481

Statistical Analysis
All the values were analyzed with one-way analysis of variance, and mean values were compared
using the least significant difference test. The significance level was set at p < 0.05. Pearson’s
Correlation Coefficient was used for the correlation analyses. All statistical analyses were carried
out using IBM SPSS Statistics 19 software for Windows.

RESULTS

Changes in Chemical Parameters during Frying Cycles

The AV indicates the amounts of free fatty acid produced in oil hydrolysis. The changes in AV
during frying cycles were shown in Fig. 1a. The AV was higher in peanut oil than in palm oil and
camellia oil during the frying process. However, the change of AV was the largest in palm oil, with
an increase from 0.11 mg KOH/g to 0.40 mg KOH/g (the growth rate was about 263.6%). The AV
of peanut oil was very high before frying, and it rose gradually with a rate of 40.5% (from 0.74 to
1.04 mg KOH/g). The AV in camellia oil increased from 0.17 to 0.55 mg KOH/g with a rate of
223.5%. These results suggested that more hydrolysis reaction occurred in palm oil and camellia oil
than peanut oil under the frying conditions.
IV indicates the degree of unsaturation in oils. As shown in Fig. 1b, IV in peanut oil was the
highest among these three oils. It decreased from 104.74 to 80.52 g/100 g with the increasing fry-
ing cycles. Least changes occurred in palm oil: 53.83 to 45.36 g/100 g while the slight change
of camellia oil was from 65.40 to 55.29 g/100 g. These results indicated that the decrease of
unsaturated fatty acids in peanut oil was the largest among these three oils.
POV indicates the formation of peroxides due to oxidation during frying cycles. Therefore, it is
widely used for the measurement of oxidative rancidity in oils and fats.[17] The determination of
POV can be used as oxidative index during the early stage of lipid oxidation as hydroperoxide is
the primary product of lipid oxidation.[18] The changes in POV during frying cycles are shown in
Fig. 1c. The overall variation trend of POV was increasing for three vegetable oils. The change of
POV in palm oil was the largest, with an increase from 4.98 to 18.86 meq/kg (the growth rate was
about 278.7%). The POV of peanut oil and camellia oil increased from 4.75 to 13.24 meq/kg with
a rate of 178.7% and from 4.68 to 11.58 meq/kg with a rate of 147.4%, respectively.
p-AV reflected the amounts of aldehyde (principally 2-alkenals and 2,4-alka-dienals) in animal
fats and vegetable oils.[1] The changes in p-AV during frying cycles are shown in Fig. 1d. There
were substantial increases in p-AV for the three edible oils. The change of p-AV in camellia oil was
the least (from 1.70 to 51.78) while the change in peanut oil was the largest (from 2.25 to 84.71) with
the increasing frying cycles. Moderate change was observed in palm oil (from 1.36 to 60.00).
Generally speaking, the lower the TOTOX of oil, the better stability of this oil. Changes in
TOTOX during frying cycles were shown in Fig. 1e. The results showed that the change of TOTOX
in camellia oil was the least (from 11.07 to 74.93), followed by palm oil (from 11.31 to 97.73), and
peanut oil (from 11.76 to 111.20). Camellia oil had the lowest TOTOX as the oil contained high
amounts of monounsaturated fatty acids.

Changes of Vitamin E Contents in Three Edible Oils during Frying Cycles

It is well known that vitamin E, especially α-tocopherol, is an important vegetable oil com-
ponent contributing to the antioxidant properties. They are believed to protect PUFA against
peroxidation.[19] As shown in Table 1, palm oil was only characterized by α-tocopherol while both
peanut oil and camellia oil contained γ and δ-tocopherol besides α-tocopherol. They exert their
antioxidant effects by numerous biochemical and biophysical mechanisms, including scavenging
1482 XU ET AL.

FIGURE 1 Changes of five chemical parameters during frying cycles; (a) changes in acid values; (b) changes in
iodine values; (c) changes in peroxide values; (d) changes in p-anisidine values; (e) changes in total oxidation values;
Mean values with standard deviations plotted as bars.
 TABLE 1
Changes in vitamin E contents during frying cycles

The content of vitamin E in palm oil (mg/kg) The content of vitamin E in peanut Oil (mg/kg) The content of vitamin E in camellia oil (mg/kg)
Frying
  
cycles α-VE β-VE γ -VE δ-VE -VE α-VE β-VE γ -VE δ-VE -VE α-VE β-VE γ -VE δ-VE -VE

0 201.94 ± 0.04 ND ND ND 201.94 327.24 ± 0.16 ND 86.63 ± 0.30 95.66 ± 0.10 509.52 439.22 ± 0.10 ND 8.02 ± 0.00 10.77 ± 0.05 458.01
5 193.31 ± 0.36 ND ND ND 193.31 302.46 ± 0.24 ND 74.50 ± 0.23 86.60 ± 0.18 463.56 350.15 ± 0.08 ND 6.92 ± 0.01 9.35 ± 0.03 366.42
10 171.79 ± 0.27 ND ND ND 171.79 271.29 ± 0.07 ND 64.86 ± 0.16 79.63 ± 0.15 415.78 258.75 ± 0.08 ND 4.89 ± 0.02 9.24 ± 0.00 272.87
15 151.42 ± 0.24 ND ND ND 151.42 257.01 ± 0.16 ND 60.60 ± 0.30 78.59 ± 0.25 396.21 206.68 ± 0.16 ND 4.01 ± 0.00 8.57 ± 0.00 219.26
20 134.52 ± 0.06 ND ND ND 134.52 254.06 ± 0.24 ND 59.85 ± 0.21 75.98 ± 0.32 389.89 174.42 ± 0.27 ND 3.67 ± 0.01 8.18 ± 0.01 186.27
25 116.87 ± 0.20 ND ND ND 116.87 250.21 ± 0.01 ND 55.24 ± 0.07 74.72 ± 0.22 380.16 160.05 ± 0.10 ND 3.22 ± 0.01 7.81 ± 0.01 171.08
30 89.99 ± 0.09 ND ND ND 89.99 245.61 ± 0.11 ND 50.32 ± 0.31 72.70 ± 0.15 368.63 132.53 ± 0.15 ND 2.63 ± 0.02 6.70 ± 0.04 141.86
35 66.66 ± 0.22 ND ND ND 66.66 238.73 ± 0.09 ND 42.08 ± 0.15 70.46 ± 0.33 351.27 76.12 ± 0.19 ND 1.86 ± 0.02 5.85 ± 0.04 83.83
40 58.64 ± 0.00 ND ND ND 58.64 218.71 ± 0.01 ND 36.73 ± 0.20 67.64 ± 0.19 323.08 45.54 ± 0.04 ND 1.28 ± 0.02 5.05 ± 0.04 51.87
45 50.34 ± 0.14 ND ND ND 50.34 168.22 ± 0.01 ND 30.04 ± 0.09 62.81 ± 0.24 261.08 35.29 ± 0.10 ND 0.83 ± 0.02 4.85 ± 0.01 40.98
50 36.49 ± 0.03 ND ND ND 36.49 136.70 ± 0.23 ND 25.55 ± 0.15 59.57 ± 0.15 221.82 21.43 ± 0.29 ND 0.59 ± 0.00 3.95 ± 0.00 25.97
55 27.92 ± 0.23 ND ND ND 27.92 118.38 ± 0.23 ND 21.24 ± 0.11 56.11 ± 0.08 195.74 15.78 ± 0.05 ND 0.36 ± 0.00 3.00 ± 0.01 19.14
60 19.99 ± 0.07 ND ND ND 19.99 86.56 ± 0.21 ND 15.58 ± 0.04 54.11 ± 0.11 156.25 8.49 ± 0.25 ND 0.10 ± 0.00 2.14 ± 0.01 10.74
65 0.00 ± 0.00 ND ND ND 0.00 62.37 ± 0.22 ND 13.02 ± 0.15 50.09 ± 0.07 125.48 4.37 ± 0.00 ND 0.00 ± 0.00 2.02 ± 0.03 6.40
70 0.00 ± 0.00 ND ND ND 0.00 0.00 ± 0.00 ND 8.81 ± 0.05 48.42 ± 0.17 57.23 4.78 ± 0.00 ND 0.00 ± 0.00 1.57 ± 0.01 6.35
75 0.00 ± 0.00 ND ND ND 0.00 0.00 ± 0.00 ND 7.87 ± 0.04 47.65 ± 0.30 55.52 4.36 ± 0.00 ND 0.00 ± 0.00 1.64 ± 0.01 6.00

Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3);

The values within each column are significantly different (P < 0.05);
ND refers the β-VE, γ -VE or δ-VE to be not detected.

1483
1484 XU ET AL.

active oxygen species and free radicals, and acting as efficient chain terminators in lipid autoxidation
reactions.[20]
Palm oil was only characterized by α-tocopherol while both peanut oil and camellia oil contained
γ and δ-tocopherol besides α-tocopherol. In these three edible oils, camellia oil had the highest con-
centration of α-tocopherol, while peanut oil had the highest contents of γ and δ-tocopherol. Peanut
oil contained higher amount of total vitamin E (509.52 mg/kg) than the other two oils. It decreased
from 509.52 to 55.52 mg/kg during frying cycles. The change of α-tocopherol level was the largest
in three types of tocopherols for the three edible oils. The amount of α-tocopherol decreased to
0 before the frying cycles ended in palm oil and peanut oil (palm oil: from 201.94 mg/kg to 0;
peanut oil: from 327.24 mg/kg to 0) and it decreased from 439.22 to 4.36 mg/kg in camellia oil.
Juárez[9] noticed that there were significant losses of tocopherols, especially α-tocopherol after fry-
ing. The main reason is that α-tocopherol degrades more quickly at high temperatures than at room
temperature.[21] Furthermore, the effectiveness of an antioxidant mainly relies on its chemical reac-
tivity, how it interacts with other food components and its concentration and especially its physical
location in different homogeneous or heterogeneous food systems.[17] Due to its largest biological
activity, α-tocopherol is the most unstable among all the tocopherols.

Changes of Fatty Acids Composition during Frying Cycles

The main constituent of oils is fatty acids, and the unsaturation degree is the most important factor
determining the oxidative stability among all the factors.[7] As shown in Table 2, the content of
SFA in palm oil increased (from 43.77 to 45.22%); the contents of MUFA, PUFA, and trans-fatty
acids (TFAs) were decreased. For the peanut oil, the contents of SFA and MUFA were increased
from 18.67 to 23.54% and 39.21 to 40.19%, respectively, while the contents of PUFA and TFAs
were decreased from 39.23 to 34.53% and 2.77 to 1.74%, respectively. Minor changes occurred in
camellia oil during frying cycles. The content of SFA increased (from 12.18 to 18.81%) and MUFA,
PUFA, TFA decreased slightly.
On the whole, there was a clear reduction of unsaturated fatty acids with the consequent increase
in SFA, compared to the relative percentage of fatty acids during the increasing frying cycles.[22]
The decrease was particularly noticeable in PUFA contributing to their multiple unsaturated bonds’
instability. In our study, TFAs decreased in frying oils with increased frying cycles although there
was a slight increase of TFAs in the fried potatoes. The formation of TFAs is usually under severe
conditions.[23,24] To our knowledge, frying process has not been reported to produce TFAs. However,
most TFAs found in foods would come from the oil and not from the process itself.[25] Furthermore,
the fatty acids composition of fried potatoes was very similar to the fatty acid composition of the
frying oil. This indicated that the changes of fatty acids composition include TFAs for fried potatoes
were mainly dependent on the frying oils.

Correlation between Chemical Parameters and Fatty Acids Composition

Table 3 shows the correlation between chemical parameters and fatty acids composition in three
edible oils. There were significant correlations 
between fatty acids composition and the chemi-
cal parameters in three edible oils, except the MUFA in peanut oil. Fatty acids composition
was positively
 correlated with AV, POV, p-AV, and TOTOX, while it was negatively correlated
with IV. TFAs were highly correlated with AV, POV, IV, p-AV, and TOTOX (p < 0.05),
the correlation coefficients were –0.426, –0.378, 0.360, –0.375, and –0.379, respectively. These
results indicated that the changes of chemical parameters were closely related to the fatty acids
composition.
 TABLE 2
Changes in fatty acids composition during frying cycles for three edible oils (%)

Palm oil Peanut oil Camellia oil

Frying
           
cycles SFA MUFA PUFA TFA SFA MUFA PUFA TFA SFA MUFA PUFA TFA

0 43.77 ± 0.10 42.69 ± 0.08 11.83 ± 0.07 1.60 ± 0.08 18.67 ± 0.06 39.21 ± 0.23 39.23 ± 0.35 2.77 ± 0.17 12.18 ± 0.46 74.56 ± 0.67 10.21 ± 0.13 2.98 ± 0.33
5 43.90 ± 0.01 42.68 ± 0.02 11.65 ± 0.05 1.64 ± 0.02 19.47 ± 0.29 39.11 ± 0.03 38.49 ± 0.29 2.81 ± 0.02 12.26 ± 0.06 74.70 ± 0.23 10.12 ± 0.07 2.86 ± 0.24
10 44.01 ± 0.01 42.52 ± 0.03 11.71 ± 0.05 1.63 ± 0.06 19.12 ± 0.12 39.25 ± 0.06 38.75 ± 0.05 2.76 ± 0.01 12.56 ± 0.00 74.43 ± 0.47 10.10 ± 0.00 2.84 ± 0.46
15 44.14 ± 0.19 42.64 ± 0.13 11.66 ± 0.10 1.60 ± 0.04 19.59 ± 0.03∗ 39.24 ± 0.06 38.09 ± 0.19∗ 2.96 ± 0.15 13.36 ± 0.21 73.80 ± 0.36 10.10 ± 0.14 2.66 ± 0.30
20 44.15 ± 0.05 42.45 ± 0.02 11.60 ± 0.10 1.65 ± 0.08 19.97 ± 0.15∗ 39.22 ± 0.09 37.90 ± 0.10∗ 2.79 ± 0.04 13.37 ± 0.02 73.86 ± 0.12 10.16 ± 0.06 2.53 ± 0.08
25 44.12 ± 0.07 42.57 ± 0.03 11.65 ± 0.06 1.53 ± 0.10 20.24 ± 0.01∗ 39.27 ± 0.01 37.70 ± 0.27∗ 2.68 ± 0.26 13.91 ± 0.09 73.45 ± 0.01 10.06 ± 0.01 2.50 ± 0.07
30 44.34 ± 0.01 42.42 ± 0.03 11.46 ± 0.07 1.68 ± 0.10 20.49 ± 0.00∗ 39.25 ± 0.01 38.08 ± 0.08∗ 1.94 ± 0.07∗ 13.97 ± 0.00 73.35 ± 0.04 10.14 ± 0.05 2.47 ± 0.07
35 44.55 ± 0.01 42.16 ± 0.18 11.49 ± 0.14 1.69 ± 0.04 20.78 ± 0.01∗ 39.28 ± 0.02 37.99 ± 0.16∗ 1.89 ± 0.12∗ 14.66 ± 0.26 72.60 ± 0.55 10.01 ± 0.07 2.67 ± 0.35
40 44.37 ± 0.01 42.54 ± 0.07 11.48 ± 0.01 1.51 ± 0.04 21.20 ± 0.00∗ 39.22 ± 0.02 37.55 ± 0.03∗ 1.92 ± 0.01∗ 14.91 ± 0.01 72.40 ± 0.41 9.97 ± 0.01 2.65 ± 0.39
45 44.69 ± 0.08 42.29 ± 0.07 11.35 ± 0.05 1.57 ± 0.04 21.53 ± 0.01∗ 39.31 ± 0.00 37.20 ± 0.06∗ 1.81 ± 0.08∗ 15.57 ± 0.06 71.75 ± 0.25 9.90 ± 0.01 2.71 ± 0.29
50 44.82 ± 0.05 42.21 ± 0.08 11.21 ± 0.10 1.64 ± 0.12 21.94 ± 0.23∗ 39.44 ± 0.09 36.98 ± 0.15∗ 1.60 ± 0.15∗ 15.81 ± 0.02 71.85 ± 0.01 9.87 ± 0.01 2.40 ± 0.00
55 44.73 ± 0.06 42.37 ± 0.06 11.21 ± 0.04 1.57 ± 0.03 22.25 ± 0.27∗ 39.90 ± 0.11∗ 36.09 ± 0.19∗ 1.72 ± 0.03∗ 18.52 ± 0.48 69.65 ± 0.47 9.57 ± 0.04 2.20 ± 0.03
60 44.80 ± 0.03 42.37 ± 0.03 11.15 ± 0.03 1.55 ± 0.02 22.41 ± 0.16∗ 39.92 ± 0.08∗ 36.13 ± 0.16∗ 1.52 ± 0.05∗ 17.60 ± 0.28 70.37 ± 0.13 9.72 ± 0.05 2.24 ± 0.37
65 45.04 ± 0.05 42.23 ± 0.03 11.00 ± 0.02 1.60 ± 0.00 22.76 ± 0.01∗ 39.96 ± 0.12∗ 35.65 ± 0.33∗ 1.62 ± 0.20∗ 17.50 ± 0.08 70.53 ± 0.23 9.70 ± 0.01 2.21 ± 0.17
70 45.04 ± 0.03 42.35 ± 0.02 11.00 ± 0.09 1.47 ± 0.08 23.28 ± 0.09∗ 40.08 ± 0.01∗ 34.98 ± 0.04∗ 1.67 ± 0.04∗ 17.79 ± 0.06 69.72 ± 0.43 9.64 ± 0.07 2.79 ± 0.31
75 45.22 ± 0.02 42.16 ± 0.06 10.97 ± 0.00 1.53 ± 0.08 23.54 ± 0.02∗ 40.19 ± 0.02∗ 34.53 ± 0.05∗ 1.74 ± 0.05∗ 18.81 ± 0.12 69.26 ± 0.20 9.46 ± 0.02 2.41 ± 0.06

Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3);

SFA: saturated fatty acids, MUFA: monounsaturated fatty acids, PUFA: polyunsaturated fatty acids, TFA: trans-fatty acids;
Mean values within each column followed by ∗ are significantly different (P < 0.05).

1485
1486 XU ET AL.

TABLE 3
Pearson correlation coefficients between chemical parameters and fatty acids composition in three edible oils
   
Oil types Parameters SFA MUFA PUFA TFAs

Palm oil AV 0.859∗∗ −0.281 −0.766∗∗ −0.426∗

IV −0.920∗∗ 0.266 0.806∗∗ 0.360∗
POV 0.958∗∗ −0.263 −0.847∗∗ −0.378∗
p–AV 0.974∗∗ −0.308 −0.880∗∗ −0.375∗
TOTOX 0.973∗∗ −0.295 −0.873∗∗ −0.379∗
Peanut oil AV 0.964∗∗ 0.829∗∗ −0.933∗∗ −0.828∗∗
IV −0.977∗∗ −0.771∗∗ 0.922∗∗ 0.858∗∗
POV 0.933∗∗ 0.713∗∗ −0.891∗∗ −0.770∗∗
p–AV 0.993∗∗ 0.783∗∗ −0.930∗∗ −0.890∗∗
TOTOX 0.993∗∗ 0.779∗∗ −0.933∗∗ −0.880∗∗
Camellia oil AV 0.960∗∗ −0.900∗∗ −0.900∗∗ −0.498∗∗
IV −0.912∗∗ 0.916∗∗ 0.852∗∗ 0.423∗
POV 0.810∗∗ −0.800∗∗ −0.746∗∗ −0.472∗∗
p–AV 0.942∗∗ −0.931∗∗ −0.884∗∗ −0.536∗∗
TOTOX 0.924∗∗ −0.913∗∗ −0.865∗∗ −0.526∗∗

AV: acid value, IV: iodine value, POV: peroxide value, p-AV: p-anisidine value, TOTOX: the total oxidation value;
∗ Correlation is significant at the p < 0.05 level;
∗∗ Correlation is significant at the p < 0.01 level.

Correlation between Chemical Parameters and Contents of Tocopherols

There were significant relationships between tocopherol contents and the chemical parameters in
the three edible oils (Table 4). The tocopherol contents were negatively correlated with AV, POV,
p-AV, and TOTOX (p < 0.01), but were positively correlated with IV (p < 0.01). The correlation
coefficients between TOTOX and the total tocopherols contents were –0.987 for palm oil, –0.984 for
peanut oil, and –0.950 for camellia oil (p < 0.01). These results indicated that the tocopherol content
was also an important factor affecting the oxidative stability of oil.

DISCUSSION

Fatty Acids
In this study, camellia oil (SFA: MUFA: PUFA = 1:7:1) was found to have the highest stability
among three edible oils. Camellia oil has been consumed for 2000 years in China, and it contains
over 70% of MUFA which is quite similar to olive oil. Wamer[26] and Zenis[27] also reported that
potato chips fried in oil with 60–70% oleic acid, 20% linoleic acid and 3–10% linolenic acid showed
higher flavor quality and stability than other oils. Lolos[28] reported that the fatty acids composi-
tion of frying oils affected the oxidative deterioration during storage of potato chips. The higher
C18:2 and C18:3 content of the oil resulted in a greater rate of increase in POV and TOTOX num-
ber while the olive kernel oil with higher C18:1 content contained low POV and TOTOX value.
Dobarganes[29] also indicated that the high-oleic sunflower oils showed an excellent behavior with
regard to thermal-oxidation and frying process.
The fatty acids composition and content of oil did not change significantly during frying process.
The SFA, MUFA, and PUFA of potatoes were very similar to the oil after frying process. The TFAs
were detected in the three oils as well. Interestingly, the TFAs content in the three oils decreased,
 COMPARISON OF OXIDATIVE STABILITY AMONG EDIBLE OILS 1487

TABLE 4
Pearson correlation coefficients between chemical parameters and contents of tocopherols in three edible oils

Oil types Parameters α-VE γ -VE δ-VE -VE

Palm oil AV −0.794∗∗ — — −0.794∗∗

IV 0.877∗∗ — — 0.877∗∗
POV −0.969∗∗ — — −0.969∗∗
p–AV −0.989∗∗ — — −0.989∗∗
TOTOX −0.987∗∗ — — −0.987∗∗

Peanut oil AV −0.969∗∗ −0.950∗∗ −0.954∗∗ −0.973∗∗

IV 0.960∗∗ 0.978∗∗ 0.971∗∗ 0.973∗∗
POV −0.909∗∗ −0.943∗∗ −0.949∗∗ −0.927∗∗
p–AV −0.970∗∗ −0.992∗∗ −0.988∗∗ −0.984∗∗
TOTOX −0.969∗∗ −0.993∗∗ −0.991∗∗ −0.984∗∗

Camellia oil AV −0.896∗∗ −0.923∗∗ −0.983∗∗ −0.900∗∗

IV 0.914∗∗ 0.927∗∗ 0.961∗∗ 0.917∗∗
POV −0.902∗∗ −0.904∗∗ −0.887∗∗ −0.903∗∗
p–AV −0.948∗∗ −0.962∗∗ −0.980∗∗ −0.950∗∗
TOTOX −0.947∗∗ −0.960∗∗ −0.971∗∗ −0.950∗∗

AV: acid value, IV: iodine value, POV: peroxide value, p-AV: p-anisidine value, TOTOX: the total oxidation value;
∗∗ Correlation is significant at the p < 0.01 level.

however, the TFAs level in potatoes increased from 0.80 to 1.30–1.74% after frying. Tsuzuki[24]
also reported that the TFAs were usually formed under severe condition, not by the frying process.
The fatty acids composition and contents in the frying potatoes were mainly influenced by frying oil
since the ratio of potato and frying oil was 1/25 (w/v).

Tocopherols
Apart from fatty acids composition, tocopherol content is another important factor to determine
the oxidative stability of vegetable oils. Tocopherols play an important role in trapping the hydro-
peroxide intermediates and stopping the autoxidation chain reaction and α-tocopherol is the most
efficient on scavenging peroxyl radicals in homogenous tocopherols.[30] In our study, the original
α-tocopherol contents of palm oil, peanut oil, camellia oil were 201.94, 327.24, and 439.22 mg/kg,
respectively. And the growth rates of POV were 278.7, 178.7, and 147.4%, respectively. It indicated
that in the certain range, the lower concentration of α-tocopherol content, the faster the POV grew.
Ruiz[31] reported that the increase of POV in sunflower oil B (from 26 to 323 meq O2 /kg) with
390 mg/kg α-tocopherol content was larger than sunflower oil A (from 12 to 120 meq O2 /kg) with
545 mg/kg α-tocopherol content during the storage period. Fuster[32] studied the antioxidant effects
of α- and γ -tocopherols in a model system based on the auto-oxidation of high oleic sunflower
oil and rapeseed oil. The POV of high oleic sunflower oil with 445 mg/kg α-tocopherol content
increased from 0 to 300 meq O2 /kg, while the POV of rapeseed oil with 224 mg/kg α-tocopherol
content increased from 0 to 600 meq O2 /kg after seven days of oxidation. These results agreed with
ours.
Different patterns of tocopherols showed different roles: α-tocopherols affected human nutri-
tion and health, γ -tocopherols in seed showed a strong activity at protecting compounds, such as
fatty acids, while δ-tocopherols showed less active than other tocopherols.[33] Generally, most oils
contained three types of tocopherol, α-, γ -, and δ-tocopherol. In our study, all three oils contained
1488 XU ET AL.

α-tocopherol, peanut oil, and camellia oil also contained γ - and δ-tocopherol with much lower con-
centrations than α-tocopherol. During the frying process, the tocopherols showed degradation, and
the decrease of tocopherols level in the three oils was in this order: α > γ > δ, after 75 frying
cycles (almost 7.5 h). The results were consistent with those of Warner,[21] who found that α-
tocopherol was preferentially lost compared to γ - and δ-tocopherols. Sliva reported that the decrease
of γ -tocopherol was faster than the decrease of α-tocopherol in corn oil and soy oil after frying at
180◦ C for 1 h.[33] It was found that the γ -tocopherol levels in corn oil (393.9 mg/kg) and soy oil
(348.8 mg/kg) were higher than α- and δ-tocopherol level of those two oils in Saliva’s study, which
was the reverse case in our study. In addition, the change in tocopherols concentration showed a close
relationship with fatty acids composition in oils. The α-tocopherol concentrations in palm oil with
11.83% PUFA, peanut oil with 39.23% PUFA, and camellia oil with 10.21% PUFA were decreased
by 9.93, 42.46, and 5.96% at the 60th frying cycle, respectively, indicating that α-tocopherol was lost
rapidly in more polyunsaturated oil during frying process. This result was consistent with a previous
study.[34] Casal pointed out that vitamin E and the highly monounsaturated nature of the olive oils
played the main role for the reduced thermal degradation under frying conditions.[7] Fatemi reported
that the relative oxidation rates of methyl oleate, linoleate, and linolenate in mixtures were 1, 10.3,
and 21.6.[35] Therefore, the calculated oxidizability (COX) value was calculated by the percentage
of unsaturated C18 fatty acids, namely COX = (1 [18:1%] + 10.3 [18:2%] + 21.6 [18:3%])/100.
In this study, the COX values of fresh palm oil, peanut oil, camellia oil were 1.615, 4.631, and 1.772,
respectively. And the total tocopherol contents in palm oil, peanut oil, and camellia oil were 201.94,
509.52, and 458.01 mg/kg, respectively. The oxidative stabilities of three edible oils were in the
order: camellia oil > palm oil > peanut oil. Hence, it was concluded that fatty acids composition
(COX value) determined the oils’ oxidative stabilities, but the tocopherol contents of the oils would
play a critical role when COX values were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this work showed that the oxidative stability of camellia oil (SFA: MUFA: PUFA =
1:7:1)was the best in three edible oils, followed by palm oil and peanut oil. There was a least change
of fatty acids composition in camellia oil among all the edible oils, with a lowest TOTOX. The fatty
acids composition and tocopherol contents were two important factors of oils’ oxidative stabilities.
The fatty acids composition (COX value) mainly determined the oils’ oxidative stabilities, and the
tocopherol contents of edible oils would be an important factor to affect their oxidative stabilities
when the COX values were similar.

FUNDING

We are grateful to National Natural Science Foundation of China (31071561), Research Program
of State Key Laboratory of Food Science and Technology, Nanchang University (Project Nos.
SKLF-ZZA-201303 and SKLF-QN-201109), PhD Subject Fund from Education Department
(20113601120004), Natural Science Fund from Science and Technology Department of Jiangxi
Province (20114BAB214016) for financial support.

REFERENCES

1. Bou, R.; Navas, J.A.; Tres, A.; Codony, R.; Guardiola, F. Quality assessment of frying fats and fried snacks during
continuous deep-fat frying at different large-scale producers. Food Control 2012, 27, 254–267.
 COMPARISON OF OXIDATIVE STABILITY AMONG EDIBLE OILS 1489

2. Nawar, W. Lipids. In: Food Chemistry; Fennema, O.R.; Eds.; Dekker M Inc.: New York, NY, 1996; 225–319.
3. Saguy, I.S.; Dana, D. Integrated approach to deep fat frying: Engineering, nutrition, health, and consumers aspects.
Journal of Food Engineering 2003, 56, 143–152.
4. Tao, N.G.; Liu, Y.J. Chemical composition and antimicrobial activity of the essential oil from the peel of shatian
pummelo (Citrus grandis Osbeck). International Journal of Food Properties 2012, 15, 709–716.
5. Wang, F.; Jiang, L.Z.; Zhu, X.Q.; Hou, J.C. Effects of frying on polar material and free fatty acids in soybean oils.
International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2013, 48, 1218–1223.
6. Karakaya, S.; Simsek, S. Changes in total polar compounds, peroxide value, total phenols, and antioxidant activity of
various oils used in deep fat frying. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society 2011, 88, 1361–1366.
7. Casal, S.; Malheiro, R.; Sendas, A.; Oliveira, B.P.P.; Pereira, J.A. Olive oil stability under deep-frying conditions. Food
and Chemical Toxicology 2010, 48, 2972–2979.
8. Abdulkarim, S.M.; Long, K.; Lai, O.M.; Muhammad, S.K.S.; Ghazali, H.M. Frying quality and stability of high-oleic
Moringa oleiferaseed oil in comparison with other vegetable oils. Food Chemistry 2007, 105, 1382–1389.
9. Juárez, M.D.; Osawa, C.C.; Acuña, M.E.; Sammán, N.; Gonçalves, L.A.G. Degradation in soybean oil, sunflower oil,
and partially hydrogenated fats after food frying, monitored by conventional and unconventional methods. Food Control
2010, 22, 1920–1927.
10. Rohman, A.; Che Man, Y.B. Authentication of extra virgin olive oil from sesame oil using FTIR spectroscopy and gas
chromatography. International Journal of Food Properties 2012, 15, 1309–1318.
11. Masson, L.; Robert, P.; Dobarganes, M.C.; Urra, C.; Romero, N.; Ortiz, J.; Goicoechea, E.; Pérez, P.; Salamé, M.T.
Stability of potato chips fried in vegetable oils with different degree of unsaturation. Effect of ascorbyl palmitate during
storage. Grasas Y Aceites 2002, 53, 190–198.
12. Petukhow, I.; Malcolmson, L.J.; Przybylski, R. Storage stability of potato chips fried in genetically modified canola oils.
Journal of the American oil Chemists’ Society 1999, 76, 889–896.
13. Romero, A.; Bastida, S.; Sanchez-Muniz, F.J. Cyclic fatty acid monomer formation in domestic frying of frozen foods
in sunflower oil and high oleic acid sunflower oil without oil replenishment. Food and Chemical Toxicology 2006, 44,
1674–1681.
14. Shahidi, F.; Wanasundara, U.N. Methods for measuring oxidative rancidity in fats and oils. In: Food Lipids: Chemistry,
Nutrition, and Biotechnology; Akoh, C.C.; Min, D.B.; Eds.; Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York, NY, 2002; 465–482.
15. Wang, R.Y.; Tang, J.; Zhang, L.J.; Wang, Q. Determination of vitamin E contents of a variety of plant oils by high
performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Journal of Xinjiang University 2003, 20, 393–395.
16. Cruz-Hernandez, C.; Deng, Z.Y.; Zhou, J.Q.; Hill, A.R.; Yurawecz, M.P.; Delmonte, P.; Mossoba, M.M.; Dugan, M.E.R.;
Kramer, J.K.G. Methods for analysis of conjugated linoleic acids and trans-18:1 isomers in dairy fats by using a
combination of gas chromatography, silver-ion thin-layer chromatography/gas chromatography, and silver-ion liquid
chromatography. Journal of AOAC International 2004, 87, 545–562.
17. Ramadan, M.F. Healthy blends of high linoleic sunflower oil with selected cold pressed oils: Functionality, stability, and
anti-oxidative characteristics. Industrial Crops and Products 2013, 43, 65–72.
18. Ramadan, M.F.; Moersel, J.T. Oxidative stability of black cumin (Nigella sativaL.), coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.),
and niger (Guizotia abyssinica Cass.) upon stripping. European Journal of Lipid Science Technology 2004, 106, 35–43.
19. Afaf, K.E.; Andersson, R. A multivariate study of the correlation between tocopherol content and fatty acid composition
in vegetable oils. Journal of the American oil Chemists’ Society 1997, 74, 375–380.
20. Afaf, K.E.; Lars-Åke, A. The chemistry and antioxidant properties of the tocopherols and tocotrienols. Lipids 1996, 31,
671–701.
21. Warner, K.; Su, C.; White, P.J. Role of antioxidants and polymerization inhibitors in protecting frying oils. In: Frying
Technology and Practices Champaign; Gupta, M.K.; Warner, K.; White, P.J.; Eds.; AOCS Press: 2004; 37–49.
22. Bansal, G.; Zhou, W.B.; Tan, T.W.; Neo, F.L.; Lo, H.L. Analysis of trans-fatty acids in deep frying oils by three different
approaches. Food Chemistry 2009, 116, 535–541.
23. Liu, W.H.; Inbaraj, B.S.; Chen, B.H. Analysis and formation of trans-fatty acids in hydrogenated soybean oil during
heating. Food Chemistry 2007, 104, 1740–1749.
24. Tsuzuki, W.; Matsuoka, A.; Ushida, K. Formation of trans-fatty acids in edible oils during the frying and heating process.
Food Chemistry 2010, 123, 976–982.
25. Romero, A.; Cuesta, C.; Sanchez-Muniz, F.J. Trans fatty acid production in deep fat frying of frozen foods with different
oils and frying modalities. Nutrition Research 2000, 20, 599–608.
26. Warner, K.; Orr, P.; Parrott, L.; Glynn, M. Effects of frying oil composition on potato chip stability. Journal of the
American oil Chemists’ Society 1994, 1, 1117–1121.
27. Zenia, J.H.; Karen, E.; Sangsook, K.; Hardm, R.T. Quality and stability of potato chips fried in canola, partially
hydrogenated canola, soybean, and cottonseed oils. Journal of Food Quality 1996, 19, 107–120.
1490 XU ET AL.

28. Lolos, M.; Oreopoulou, V.; Tzia, C. Oxidative stability of potato chips: Effect of frying oil type, temperature, and
antioxidants. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 1999, 79, 1524–1528.
29. Dobarganes, M.C.; Máquez-Ruiz, G.; Pérez-Camino, M.C. Thermal stability and frying performance of genetically
modified sunflower seed (Helianthus annuus L.) oils. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 1993, 41, 678–681.
30. Kamal-Eldin, A. Effect of fatty acids and tocopherols on the oxidative stability of vegetable oils. European Journal of
Lipid Science and Technology 2006, 108, 1051–1061.
31. Ruiz, G.M.; Polvillo, M.M.; Jorge, N.; Ruiz Méndez, M.V.; Dobarganes, M.C. Influence of used frying oil quality and
natural tocopherol content on oxidative stability of fried potatoes. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society 1999,
76, 421–425.
32. Fuster, M.D.; Lampi, A.M.; Hopia, A.; Kamal-Eldin, A. Effects of α-and γ -tocopherols on the autooxidation of purified
sunflower triacylglycerols. Lipids 1998, 33, 715–722.
33. Silva, L.; Pinto, J.; Carrola, J.; Paiva-Martins, F. Oxidative stability of olive oil after food processing and comparisons
with other vegetable oils. Food Chemistry 2010, 121, 1177–1187.
34. Yuki, E.; Ishikawa, Y. Tocopherol contents of nine vegetable frying oils and their changes under simulated deep fat
frying conditions. Journal of the American oil Chemists’ Society 1976, 53, 673–676.
35. Fatemi, S.H.; Hammond, E.G. Analysis of oleate, linoleate, and linolenate hydroperoxides in oxidized ester mixtures.
Lipids 1980, 15, 379–385.