Table 2.

Significantly different metabolites between Fagaceae and Asteraceae analyzed by UHPLC-LTQ-IT-MS/MS.

No.	Putative Identification a	RT b (min)	UHPLC-LTQXL-IT-MS/MS					p-Value	Id g
			m/z Posi c	m/z Nega d	M.W. e	MSn Fragment Patterns f	UV (nm)
1	Quinic acid	1.02	-	191	192	173	214, 279	4.00E-04	Ref. [33]
3	6-Hydroxykaempferol-O-galloylhexoside	7.09	617	615	616	463 > 301	221, 265, 352	2.89E-02	Ref. [32]
4	Quercetin-3-O-arabinoside	7.89	435	433	434	301	239, 368	2.53E-02	Ref. [35]
5	Quercetin-3-O-rhamnoside	8.08	449	447	448	301 > 151	232, 277	4.70E-03	Ref. [35]
6	Dicaffeoylquinic acid	8.28	517	515	516	353 > 191	214, 322	4.76E-02	Ref. [33]
7	Kaempferol-3-O-rhamnoside	8.61	433	431	432	285	228, 280	3.95E-02	Ref. [35]
8	Kaempferol derivative	8.63	479	477	478	431 > 285	271, 281	3.63E-02	Ref. [35]
13	Kaempferol-7-O-rutinoside	9.34	595	593	594	447 > 285	276	9.00E-04	Ref. [33]
14	Quercetin	9.69	303	301	302	151	214, 274	9.00E-04	STD
17	Kaempferol	10.63	287	285	286		279	1.97E-02	STD
20	N.I. 4	11.96	309	307	308	289 > 235	214, 279	1.95E-02
25	Quercetin-O-pentoside	7.83	435	433	434	301	217, 268	3.50E-03	Ref. [32]
26	Apigenin	10.47	271	269	270	269, 151	285, 318	4.01E-02	STD
27	N.I. 9	10.74	661	659	660		202, 280	3.20E-03

^a Putative metabolites based on variable importance projection (VIP) analysis with cutoff value of 0.7 and a p-value <0.05. ^b Retention time. ^c Molecular ion detected in positive mode, [M + H]⁺. ^d Molecular ion detected in negative mode, [M − H]⁻. ^e Molecular weight. ^f MSⁿ fragment patterns detected in negative ion mode. ^g Identification: STD, standard compound/Ref., references.