Skip to main content
. 2023 Nov 15;12(2):1046–1055. doi: 10.1002/fsn3.3818

TABLE 1.

Comparisons of mean acrylamide, acrylamide precursors (amino acids and sugars) after thermal treatment, moisture, and pH by synthetic potato models and potato cultivars.

Acrylamide (μg kg−1) Glutamine (g kg−1) Asparagine (g kg−1) Fructose (g kg−1) Glucose (g kg−1) Sucrose (g kg−1) Moisture (g kg−1) pH
Mean ± SD
Synthetic potato models
Prototype control model (—) 2.2 ± 1.6 4.8 ± 1.0 0.2 ± 0.0 0.1 ± 0.0 (—) 192 ± 9.2 6.22 ± 1.6
Asn‐GFS (Model 1) 516.7 ± 29.67 5.2 ± 2.2 (—) 0.1 ± 0 0.4 ± 0.3 0.2 ± 0.0 195 ± 8.9 6.30 ± 1.9
Gln‐GFS (Model 2) (—) 0.2 ± 0.1 0.7 ± 0.3 0.2 ± 0 0.3 ± 0.1 0.2 ± 0.1 190 ± 9.5 6.29 ± 2.7
Glu‐Fru (Model 3) 438.9 ± 29.78 9.1 ± 1.6 1.0 ± 0.2 0.2 ± 0.1 0.1 ± 0.0 (—) 197 ± 8.5 6.25 ± 1.4
316.7 ± 94.9 10.0 ± 1.4 (—) (—) (—) (—) 205 ± 7.9 6.27 ± 2.1
Glutamine‐Glucose (Model 5) (—) 3.7 ± 0.7 0.7 ± 0.4 (—) (—) (—) 200 ± 9.1 6.30 ± 1.8
Glutamine‐Fructose (Model 6) (—) 3.1 ± 0.5 1.0 ± 0.7 (—) (—) (—) 191 ± 7.7 6.32 ± 2.3
Glutamine‐Sucrose (Model 7) (—) 3.0 ± 1.3 0.9 ± 0.5 (—) (—) (—) 200 ± 8.8 6.34 ± 2.0
Asparagine‐Glucose (Model 8) (—) 6.1 ± 4.8 1 ± 0.5 (—) (—) (—) 198 ± 8.2 6.38 ± 1.5
Asparagine‐Fructose (Model 9) (—) 10.1 ± 1.7 0.8 ± 0.5 (—) (—) (—) 203 ± 9.3 6.36 ± 1.8
Asparagine‐Sucrose (Model 10) (—) 2.4 ± 4.5 0.9 ± 0.8 (—) (—) (—) 200 ± 5.7 6.40 ± 2.2
Potato cultivars
Kennebec 338.7 ± 6.5 8.4 ± 8.5 8.1 ± 1.6 (—) (—) 0.7 ± 0.0 205 ± 7.2 5.89 ± 0.9
Monalisa 205.6 ± 19.4 8.0 ± 3.1 4.7 ± 2.4 1.4 ± 0.1 0.3 ± 0.4 0.7 ± 0.1 202 ± 9.6 6.2 ± 2.1
Agria 441.6 ± 20.8 2.4 ± 2.7 7.8 ± 0.3 0.5 ± 0.8 (—) 1.0 ± 0.1 199 ± 8.3 6.3 ± 1.4

Note: Acrylamide limit of quantification (LOQ) using gas chromatography flame‐ionized‐detectors for potato models was 0.5 g kg−1. Sugars limit of quantification (LOQ) using high‐performance liquid chromatography is 0.1 g kg−1. (—) Means ingredient not present.