J Am Oil Chem Soc (2013) 90:199–206

DOI 10.1007/s11746-012-2153-4

ORIGINAL PAPER

Refractive Index and Density Measurements of Peanut Oil

for Determining Oleic and Linoleic Acid Contents
Jack P. Davis • Daniel S. Sweigart • Kristin M. Price •

Lisa L. Dean • Timothy H. Sanders

Received: 15 June 2012 / Revised: 20 September 2012 / Accepted: 25 September 2012 / Published online: 4 November 2012
Ó AOCS (outside the USA) 2012

Abstract Peanut seed are approximately 50 % oil of
which [80 % is either oleic or linoleic acid. The oleic/
linoleic acid (O/L) ratio largely influences oxidative sta-
bility and hence peanut shelf life. Traditional peanut seed
have O/L ratios near 1.5–2.0; however, many new cultivars
are ‘‘high oleic’’ with O/L ratios C9. During peanut seed
handling, contamination among lots may occur. A cost
effective method to rapidly differentiate peanut seed based
The use of trade names or instruments in this publication does not
imply endorsement by the United States Department of
Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service.
J. P. Davis (&)
USDA ARS - Market Quality and Handling Research Unit,
North Carolina State University, Department of Food,
Bioprocessing and Nutrition Sciences, 236C Schaub Hall,
Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
e-mail: jack.davis@ars.usda.gov
D. S. Sweigart
Technical Center, The Hershey Company, 1025 Reese Ave,
Hershey, PA 17033, USA
K. M. Price
USDA ARS - Market Quality and Handling Research Unit,
226 Schaub Hall, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
L. L. Dean
USDA ARS - Market Quality and Handling Research Unit,
North Carolina State University, Department of Food,
Bioprocessing and Nutrition Sciences, 236D Schaub Hall,
Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
T. H. Sanders
USDA ARS - Market Quality and Handling Research Unit,
North Carolina State University, Department of Food,
Bioprocessing and Nutrition Sciences, 236A Schaub Hall,
Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
on O/L ratio is needed across multiple segments of the
industry, and measurements of oil density and oil refractive
index (RI) were evaluated for this potential. Fatty acid
profiles of samples from normal and high oleic seed lots,
and blends of these oils, were determined by traditional gas
chromatography analysis and this data compared to corre-
sponding oil density and RI measurements. Oleic acid
content, linoleic acid content, density and RI were all
strongly linearly (R2 [ 0.98) correlated for oil blends with
O/L ratios from *2 to 16. Threshold density or RI values
both showed excellent potential for rapidly differentiating
samples with an O/L C 9; however, sample volume
requirements preclude density measurements on single
seed.
Keywords Density
Refractive index
Peanut

Peanut oil
High oleic
O/L ratio
Introduction
Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) seed are approximately 50 %
oil, of which oleic acid (C18:1) and linoleic acid (C18:2)
account for greater than 80 % of the total fatty acids present.
Traditional peanuts seed are approximately 50 and 30 %
C18:1 and C18:2, respectively; however the ratio of these two
fatty acids, the oleic/linoleic (O/L) ratio, naturally fluctuates
as a function of seed genetics, maturity, and growing envi-
ronment [1]. Shelf life of peanut based foods, including
peanut butter, roasted snack nuts, confections, and peanut oil
is primarily limited by the oils oxidative stability. In turn, this
oxidative stability is largely a function of the peanut oil fatty
acid profile (FAP), especially the O/L ratio. As the O/L ratio
increases, the total level of unsaturation within the oil
decreases resulting in a more stable product. As such, there

123
200
have been extensive research efforts to breed peanut seed
with increased O/L ratios [2]. In the late 1980s, scientists at
the University of Florida documented a natural mutant which
had a FAP close to 80 % oleic acid and\3 % linoleic acid [3].
This ‘‘high oleic’’ peanut, which is generally defined as a
peanut with an O/L ratio greater than 9, was in turn patented
[4]. Since then, high oleic peanut seed have been released on
the commercial level and most breeding programs in the US
are actively releasing new high oleic varieties. The US peanut
industry generally differentiates high oleic peanuts as having
an O/L ratio of C9 and normal oleic as\9: however, non-high
O/L peanuts commonly produced in the US have an O/L ratio
of about 1.5–2.0. High oleic seed have a substantially
increased shelf life compared to conventional peanut seed [5–
7]; however, as many varieties are not high oleic, segregation
during handling of high oleic seed is a challenge facing
multiple segments of the industry. Accordingly, a rapid,
simple and inexpensive method that could differentiate pea-
nut seed based on O/L chemistry would benefit the peanut and
other oilseed industries.
The definitive method for determining the FAP of a
peanut or other oilseed is by oil extraction, derivatization
and gas chromatography (GC) analyses. Despite efforts to
simplify and speed up this GC approach [8], this meth-
odology remains time consuming, requires a dedicated
and skilled operator, and is expensive. For these reasons,
analysis of FAP is not practical, nor economical, for many
segments of the peanut industry. Previous work by our
group showed that measurements of oil density, using a
high precision density meter, had excellent correlations
with oleic and linoleic acid contents for oil from nine
different commercial cultivars [9]. This method was not
considered in the specific context of segregating seed in
an industrial setting. Additionally, measurements of oil
refractive index (RI) have been used for 60? years to
characterize seed oil chemistry with limited success
[10–12]. Advances in commercially available RI instru-
mentation, could improve the utility of RI data in pre-
dicting O/L chemistry of peanut seed, but no such work
has been published. This study was designed to better
understand the potential of oil density and oil RI data to
predict peanut seed O/L chemistry.
Materials and Methods
Materials
Samples of high oleic, Spanish peanut seed (culti-
var = AT-9899) and normal oleic, Runner peanut seed
(cultivar = GA-06C) were received from a commercial
supplier. Both samples were from the USA 2010 harvest
and stored at refrigeration temperature when not in use.
123
J Am Oil Chem Soc (2013) 90:199–206
Oil Extraction: Multiple Seed
Seed samples were ground using a commercially available
coffee grinder, the ground seed were wrapped in two layers
of cheese cloth, and oil was mechanically pressed using a
Carver Press. Expressed oils were collected in labeled
tubes for future experiments.
Oil Extraction: Single Seed
Single seed were placed between 2 Teflon plates, with one
of the plates having slight indentations to stabilize the seed.
Plates were compressed using a manual jack. Oil from
crushed single seed was sampled for RI measurement as
described below; whereas, the remaining oil/crushed seed
was transferred to glass test tubes for overnight hexane
extraction prior to derivatization and GC analysis to
determine FAP.
Fatty Acid Profile Analyses
Fatty acids of expressed or extracted oils were determined
by GC as previously described [9].
Density Determination
Oil density was measured at 20 °C using an Anton-Paar
(Graz, Austria) DMA 5000 oscillating tube density meter
[9]. A minimum of two replications were collected for each
sample and the average value was used in subsequent
analyses.
Refractive Index
The refractive index of seed oil was measured at 20 °C
using an Anton-Paar (Graz, Austria) Abbemat 550 refrac-
tometer. For expressed oils from multiple seed, droplets
were added to the measuring prism using a disposable
pipette. For single seed measurements, the periphery oil
surrounding the crushed seed was manually sampled using
a glass cover slip being careful to avoid seed particulates.
The measurement prism was cleaned between measure-
ments using a nonabrasive wipe.
Sampling Plan and Statistical Analyses for Single Seed
Measurements
From each lot, a representative subsample of 100 seed
was taken using a riffle divider. RI and FAP were
determined as described above. The percentage of con-
tamination for a given lot, i.e. normal oleic seed in a high
oleic lot or vice versa, was determined by comparing the
O/L ratios of the various seed. A threshold RI value was
J Am Oil Chem Soc (2013) 90:199–206
used to differentiate normal and high oleic seed. Using
this threshold RI value and comparing to actual O/L
ratios, the percentage of seed from both lots misclassified
as either normal oleic and high oleic was computed. For
all normal oleic seed and all high oleic seed, linear cor-
relations among RI, oleic acid content, linoleic acid
content and O/L ratio were determined.
Results and Discussion
Distributions of oleic acid, linoleic acid and the resulting
O/L ratio from 100 single seed sampled from each of the
normal and high oleic lots are presented in Fig. 1. Using,
the industrially accepted O/L ratio of C9 as a cutoff to be
classified as ‘‘high oleic’’, the sample from the high oleic
lot had 9 % (9/100) contamination with ‘‘normal oleic’’
(O/L \ 9) seed, whereas the normal oleic lot had 2 %
(2/100) contamination with high oleic seed (O/L C 9).
Across the data sets for the two bulk lots, oleic acid content
ranged from 41.7 to 83.4 % and linoleic acid content ran-
ged from 2.0 to 39.0 % (Table 1). For the normal oleic lot,
C18:1 and C18:2 contents changed more gradually across
the 100 seed compared to that of the high oleic seed
(Fig. 1). In contrast, the calculated O/L ratio changed more
gradually across the 100 single seed sampled from the high
oleic lot compared to that of the normal oleic lot.
The majority of oil in a peanut seed is either oleic or
linoleic acid, and totals for these two fatty acids were
80.4 ± 1.0 % and 84.3 ± 0.7 %, for normal oleic (all
samples with O/L \ 9) and high oleic (all samples with
O/L [ 9), respectively (Table 1). A plot of C18:2 versus
C18:1 contents for these 200 samples revealed an inverse
linear (R2 = 0.99) relationship between the two fatty acids
(Fig. 2). Oleic acid is converted to linoleic acid via
desaturase enzymes [13, 14], explaining the linearity
between these two fatty acids. This linearity is important,
as it means that after determination of C18:1 content,
C18:2 content can be readily predicted, or vice versa.
Additionally, the calculated O/L ratio can also be predicted
by only knowing either C18:1 or C18:2 content. As this
ratio increases above approximately 9, the mathematical
sensitivity to relatively small changes in C18:1 and C18:2
content make prediction of the O/L ratio less reliable.
To illustrate this point, all 93 single seed sampled with an
O/L [ 9 had C18:1 and C18:2 contents ranging from
approximately 77.9–83.4 % and 2.0–4.8 %, respectively;
however, the calculated O/L ratios ranged from 16.6 to 40.1
despite the fatty acid contents only changing approximately
3–5 % (Table 1). These 93 high oleic seed are seen to
cluster at the bottom right of Fig. 2. Related to these points,
when considering only normal or high oleic seed, as
expected, the correlation between oleic and linoleic acid
201
contents for the normal oleic seed was greater (0.97) than
that of all high oleic seed (0.18) (Table 2), due to the
discussed ranges of these fatty acids for normal and high
oleic seed.
An initial experiment to establish the potential of den-
sity and RI measurements to predict O/L chemistry was
conducted. Three subsamples, 50 seed each, from both the
normal and high oleic lots were mechanically pressed to
collect oils. Oils from the normal and high oleic lots were
then blended at the following ratios: 100/0, 75/25, 50/50,
25/75, and 0/100, and FAP, density and RI of blends were
then measured. With either increasing density (Fig. 3a) or
RI (Fig. 3b), oleic acid content linearly (R2 [ 0.98)
decreased and linoleic acid content linearly (R2 [ 0.98)
increased. O/L ratios of the oil blends ranged from
approximately 16–2.0, and when this ratio was plotted
against either oil density (Fig. 3c) or RI (Fig. 3d) curvi-
linear relationships were observed across this range for
both plots.
Vegetable oil density is dependent on fatty acid content
[15, 16]. Current observations with measured oleic and
linoleic acid contents versus oil density (Fig. 3a) agree
with earlier findings on peanut oil [9]. In a test of nine
cultivars of peanut (6 normal and 3 high oleic), oleic acid
content decreased linearly (R2 [ 0.95) and linoleic acid
content increased linearly (R2 [ 0.98) with increasing oil
density [9]. Reasons for the excellent correlations in C18:1
and C18:2 contents and oil density include: (1) C18:1 and
C18:2 account for [80 % of peanut oil mass, averaging
82.9 ± 1.9 % across 300 single seed for the current study;
(2) as seen in Fig. 2 the ratio of these two fatty acids within
peanut seed is extremely predictable (R2 [ 0.99); and (3)
the geometry of these fatty acids is distinct due to the
differing numbers of double bonds within the fatty acids
[17, 18]. Double bonds induce nonlinearity in fatty acid
chains and the single double bond of oleic acid results in a
geometry that is more expanded than that of linoleic acid,
which has two double bonds [18].
The refractive index (RI) is the ratio of the speed of light
in a vacuum to the speed of light through a given material.
This physical property has been used extensively in many
applications to identify and characterize materials, includ-
ing lipids. Relationships between RI and fatty acid chem-
istry, including chain length and degree of unsaturation
have been observed for many years [10–12]. With
increasing concentrations of unsaturated fatty acids, as
commonly expressed by the iodine value, the RI of a given
oil will increase [10, 12], and this trend is in agreement
with RI data measured on oil blends (Fig. 3b, d). In a
survey of over 4,000 pure materials including organics,
inorganics, liquids, solids, etc., RI and mass density were
shown to be directly proportional [19]. This relationship
approached linearity when samples were much less dense
123
202 J Am Oil Chem Soc (2013) 90:199–206

Fig. 1 Oleic acid (%), linoleic Normal Oleic Lot High Oleic Lot
acid (%) and O/L Ratio for 100 100
individual single seed sampled
from both normal (left panels)
and high oleic (right panels) 80
seed lots

Oleic Acid (%)

60

40

20

40

30
Linoleic Acid (%)

20

10

40

30
O/L Ratio

20

10

0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90

0
0

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90

0
0
10
11

10
11

than 1 g cm-3 [19], and this agrees with data in Fig. 4, in
which a direct, linear (R2 [ 0.99) correlation between
density and RI was observed for oil blends.
In the case of segregating normal and high oleic peanut
seed, there are instances where information on O/L chem-
istry at the single seed level is required. Current commer-
cially available high precision density meters typically
require *2 mL of liquid sample per measurement.
Assuming a typical seed mass is 0.6 g of which approxi-
mately half is oil, it is not possible to obtain enough oil
from a single seed for a density measurement. As such,
experiments were conducted to: (1) understand the minimal
number of seed necessary to reliably express 2? mL of oil,
and this was determined to be 11 seed; and (2) better
understand how FAP/density data on oil from these ‘‘11
seed samples’’ related to the single seed FAP distributions
as plotted in Fig. 1. Accordingly, from each of the normal
and high oleic lots, 20 ‘‘11 seed samples’’ were taken, the
oils mechanically expressed, and from these expressed oils
the FAPs and densities were measured. Additionally,

123
J Am Oil Chem Soc (2013) 90:199–206 203

Table 1 Minimum, maximum, average, standard deviation, and Table 2 Linear correlations among various single seed measure-
coefficient of variation for various factors measured on 200 individual ments for normal and high oleic seed
seed: 100 individual seed were sampled from each of the normal and
high oleic lots RI O L O?L O/L

Refractive index (ND) O (%) L (%) O ? L (%) O/L Normal oleic seed = 107 samples
RI – 0.57 0.61 0.07 0.52
Normal oleic seed = 107 samples
O 0.57 – 0.97 0.32 0.95
Min 1.4682 41.7 14.7 77.5 1.1
L 0.61 0.97 – 0.18 0.92
Max 1.4721 67.4 39.0 82.4 4.6
O?L 0.07 0.32 0.18 – 0.31
Avg 1.4699 56.5 23.9 80.4 2.5
O/L 0.52 0.95 0.92 0.31 –
SD 0.0005 5.7 5.2 1.0 0.8
CV 0.04 10.0 21.6 1.3 31.2 High oleic seed = 93 samples
RI – 0.01 0.01 0.0005 0.01
High oleic seed = 93 samples
O 0.01 – 0.18 0.63 0.23
Min 1.4063 77.9 2.0 81.9 16.6
L 0.01 0.18 – 0.05 0.94
Max 1.4689 83.4 4.8 88.2 40.1
O?L 0.0005 0.63 0.05 – 0.02
Avg 1.4681 81.5 2.8 84.3 29.7
O/L 0.01 0.23 0.94 0.02 –
SD 0.0013 0.8 0.5 0.7 4.3
CV 0.09 1.0 17.5 0.9 14.6 RI refractive index, O oleic acid content, L linoleic acid content, O?L
sum of oleic and linoleic acid contents, O/L ratio of oleic acid content
Nine samples from the high oleic lot were determined to be low oleic, to linoleic acid content
and two samples from the low oleic lot were determined to be high
oleic. These ‘contaminated’ seed were grouped according to actual
measured oleic and linoleic acid contents for this summary lots as true bulk averages for the two lots are approached
(Fig. 5). Reasons for these observations are attributed to
40
natural sampling variability, considering that there was
normal oleic lot contamination of normal oleic seed in the bulk high oleic
high oleic lot
lot and vice versa (Fig. 3).
30
The potential of density measurements (accurate to the
Linoleic Acid (%)

R2 = 0.99 4th decimal point) to predict C18:1 content or C18:2

20
10
0
40 50 60 70
Oleic Acid (%)
Fig. 2 Linoleic acid content versus oleic acid content for 100 single
seed sampled from both high oleic and normal oleic seed lots.
Straight line is best linear fit through all 200 data points
samples of ‘‘25 seed’’ and ‘‘50 seed’’ from the 2 bulk lots
were taken, oils mechanically expressed, and FAP/density
measured. Oleic and linoleic acid contents versus oil den-
sity are plotted in Fig. 5, where linear (R2 [ 0.98) trends
with oleic and linoleic acid contents and oil density were
observed. In general, oil density of samples from the 2 bulk
lots of peanut seed were distinct; however, across the 40
(20 normal oleic; 20 high oleic) ‘‘11 seed samples’’ from
each of the bulk lots, there were 2 data points that over-
lapped (Fig. 5). As the number of seed in a sample
increased above 25, no overlap was observed between the 2
content of peanut oil is promising (Fig. 5). The predicted
O/L ratio, especially for values [*9, from density mea-
surements would be less accurate than corresponding
C18:1 or C18:2 contents for reasons previously discussed.
The exact accuracy/precision for determining C18:1 con-
tent, C18:2 content and O/L ratio would have to be deter-
mined over an expanded data set, but it appears likely that a
80 90 threshold density value could be set to use as a ‘‘yes/no’’
screen for determining if an unknown sample oil was high
oleic, i.e. O/L [ 9. Density measurements with the current
instrumentation are quite simple, as the liquid (oil in this
case) is injected into a measuring cell and the measured
value is automatically determined and displayed via the
instrumental software. Density measurements are very
temperature sensitive [9], but modern, commercially
available instruments as utilized in this study have auto-
mated temperature control (set by the user) which essen-
tially negates this source of error. Density measurements
were rapid, taking less than 1 min after oil injection for
samples first equilibrated at room temperature. Further-
more, current commercially available density meters are
robust and need minimal maintenance. A solvent, such as
hexane, is needed to keep the measuring cell clean in the
case of oil injections, but overall solvent usage is minimal.
The primary limitation for using a density meter to rapidly

123
204 J Am Oil Chem Soc (2013) 90:199–206

Fig. 3 Oleic and linoleic acid 100

contents versus oil density A B
(a) and RI (b); O/L ratio versus
oil density (c) or refractive 80
index (d). Data were collected

Fatty Acid (%)

for oil blends as described in the
text. Straight lines are best 60
linear fits through the data
C18:1
40
C18:2

20

18

16
C D
14

12
O/L Ratio

10

0
05

10

15

20

25

30

35

84

86

88

90

92

94

96

98

00

02
91

91

91

91

91

91

91

46

46

46

46

46

46

46

46

47

47
0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.
Density (g/mL) Refractive Index (nD)

0.9135 In the case of RI measurements, the microliters of oil

needed for the assay can be collected from a single seed.
0.9130
Accordingly, RI data (Fig. 6) were collected simulta-
2
neously with FAP data (Fig. 1) for the 100 single seed
Density (g/mL)

R = 0.99
0.9125
sampled from both the normal and high oleic lots. In plots
0.9120 of either oleic (Fig. 6a) or linoleic acid (Fig. 6b) contents
vs. RI, limited regions of linearity were observed. RI
0.9115 decreased linearly as C18:1 content increased from *40
to 75 %, but for seed with higher concentrations of C18:1,
0.9110
i.e. high oleic seed, the RI plateaued (Fig. 6a). Compli-
0.9105 mentary to the RI versus C18:1 comparison, RI increased
1.4684 1.4686 1.4688 1.4690 1.4692 1.4694 1.4696 1.4698 1.4700 1.4702
linearly as C18:2 content increased from *15 to 40 %,
Refractive Index (nD)
but for seed with lower concentrations of C18:2, i.e. high
Fig. 4 Density versus refractive index for oil blends (see text for oleic seed, the RI plateaued (Fig. 6b). These observations
details). Straight line is the best linear fit of limited linearity are reflected in the stronger correla-
tions with RI and oleic or linoleic acid contents for all
normal oleic seed compared to corresponding correlations
estimate O/L chemistry is that a minimum of *2 mL of oil for all high oleic seed (Table 2). Two general groupings
is needed per measurement. This volume requirement for single seed were observed in the plot of O/L ratio and
precludes measurements on single seed, and as inferred RI: (1) high oleic seed which had lower RIs and (2)
from Fig. 5, data for oils expressed from multiple seed normal oleic seed which had higher RIs (Fig. 6c). Using a
samples cannot be extrapolated to the single seed level. cutoff RI of 1.46895, these two groupings could be

123
J Am Oil Chem Soc (2013) 90:199–206 205

100 differentiated such that all but 2/200 seed (99 % success)
with an O/L less than 9 would be correctly classified as
80
either normal or high oleic. Expanded data sets would be
needed to understand if this cutoff value would be
C18:1
appropriate for all cultivars, growing conditions, etc. A
60
caveat for RI measurements of oil from single seed is that
Fatty Acid (%)

care must be taken to minimize solids content of the

40 high oleic lot low oleic lot expressed oil. After crushing a single seed, there is a
periphery of expressed oil surrounding the crushed seed
solids, and at times this oil was visually determined to
20
C18:2
contain dispersed seed particulates. It was empirically
determined that excess levels of these solids were a
0 source of variation in RI measurements. For data pre-
sented in Fig. 6, care was taken to minimize solid par-
ticulates in the collected oil, but such particulates are a
0.9100 0.9105 0.9110 0.9115 0.9120 0.9125 0.9130 0.9135
potential source of variation.
Density (g/ml) RI measurements are extremely simple, the liquid (oil in
Fig. 5 Oleic and linoleic acid (%) versus density for oil expressed this case) is transferred to the measurement prism and the
from samples of both normal oleic (triangles) and high oleic (circles) measured value is automatically determined. RI measure-
seed lots. Open colored symbols are from 11 seed samples, grey ments are highly temperature sensitive and many com-
symbols are from 25 seed samples and black symbols are from 50 seed mercially available instruments, such as the one used in this
samples

Fig. 6 Oleic acid content (a), 90 50

linoleic acid content (b) and A B
calculated O/L ratio (c), for 80
single seed sampled from 40
Linoleic Acid (%)

normal (dark circles) and high

Oleic Acid (%)

70
oleic (white triangles) lots 30
versus oil RI. Dashed straight
line in c is a reference RI value 60
of 1.4689 20
50

10
40

30 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 58 .460 .462 .464 .466 .468 .470 .472 .474
1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Upper specification

50
C high oleic lot
normal oleic lot
40

30
O/L Ratio

20

10

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74
1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4
Refractive Index

123
206
study, have automated temperature control which essen-
tially negates this source of variation. Based on temperature
ramps of individual peanut oils (normal and high oleic)
which showed the response of RI to temperature to be
highly linear (R2 [ 0.99) from 10 to 85 °C (data not
shown), a temperature control of at least 0.1 °C is recom-
mended for the purposes of differentiating peanut oils
according to oleic and linoleic acid contents. In general, RI
measurements accurate to at least four decimal points seems
necessary to differentiate peanut oils according to oleic and
linoleic acid contents. RI measurements were rapid (\30 s)
for samples held at room temperature prior to measurement
at 20 °C. RI instrumentation is robust and requires minimal
maintenance. Considering the data in Fig. 6, the potential of
RI measurements to accurately differentiate normal and
high oleic seed is promising. In practice, a threshold RI
value could differentiate whether or not a seed was high
oleic (O/L C 9). Using such a threshold RI value, samples
from bulk lots could be screened to determine single seed
distributions meeting the specified ‘‘yes/no’’ criteria. Rela-
ted to these efforts, appropriate sampling plans for deter-
mining single seed oil chemistry, similar to sampling plans
developed for mycotoxins and food [20], are critical to
accurate assess O/L chemistry of a peanut lot. Larger data
sets will be needed to properly validate RI measurements
for differentiating peanut seed based on oleic and linoleic
acid contents.
Conclusion
Data in this publication establishes relationships among
oleic acid, linoleic acid, density and refractive index of
peanut oil, and the excellent potential of using measure-
ments of refractive index, or density, to rapidly and cost
effectively differentiate peanut seed based on oleic and
linoleic acid contents. Both methods showed excellent
potential for rapidly differentiating oil samples with an
O/L C 9; however, sample volume requirements do not
allow density measurements to be conducted on oil
expressed from a single seed. In the case of segregating
normal and high oleic peanut seed lots, often times infor-
mation on O/L chemistry at the single seed level is
required. As such, RI measurements can be readily adapted
to rapidly screen lots of seed to determine if a specified
percentage of single seed is meeting the designated O/L
criteria. Related to these efforts, appropriate sampling
plans for determining single seed oil chemistry, similar to
sampling plans developed for mycotoxins and food [20],
are critical to accurately assess O/L chemistry of a peanut
lot. In the future, larger data sets will be needed to properly
validate RI measurements for differentiating peanut seed
based on oleic and linoleic acid contents.
123
J Am Oil Chem Soc (2013) 90:199–206
References
1. Young CT, Worthing Re, Hammons RO, Matlock RS, Waller GR,
Morrison RD (1974) Fatty-acid composition of Spanish peanut oils
as influenced by planting location, soil-moisture conditions, variety
and season. J Am Oil Chem Soc 51:312–315
2. Worthington RE, Allison JR, Hammons RO (1972) Varietal
differences and seasonal effects on fatty acid composition and
stability of oil from 82 peanut genotypes. J Agric Food Chem
20:727–730
3. Norden AJ, Gorbet DW, Knauft DA, Young CT (1987) Vari-
ability in oil quality among peanut genotypes in the Florida
breeding program. Peanut Sci 14:7–11
4. Knauft DA, Gorbet DW, Norden AJ (2000) Enhanced peanut
products and plant lines. U.S. Patent 6063984
5. Bolton GE, Sanders TH (2002) Effect of roasting oil composition
on the stability of roasted high-oleic peanuts. J Am Oil Chem Soc
79:129–132
6. Mugendi JB, Sims CA, Gorbet DW, O’Keefe SF (1998) Flavor
stability of high-oleic peanuts stored at low humidity. J Am Oil
Chem Soc 75:21–25
7. Okeefe SF, Wiley VA, Knauft DA (1993) Comparison of oxi-
dative stability of high-oleic and normal-oleic peanut oils. J Am
Oil Chem Soc 70:489–492
8. Young CT, Waller GR (1972) Rapid oleic/linoleic microanalyt-
ical procedure for peanuts. J Agric Food Chem 20:1116–1118
9. Davis JP, Dean LO, Faircloth WH, Sanders TH (2008) Physical
and chemical characterizations of normal and high-oleic oils from
nine commercial cultivars of peanut. J Am Oil Chem Soc
85:235–243
10. Majors KR, Milner RT (1939) Relation between the iodine
number and refractive index of crude soybean oil. J Am Oil Chem
Soc 16:228–231
11. Mattil KF, Longenecker HE (1944) The use of refractive index
measurements in fatty acid ester analyses. J Am Oil Chem Soc
21:16–19
12. Vandenheuvel FA, Farmer EH (1951) The hydrogen value—
refractivity relationship of unsaturated fatty acids of natural ori-
gin. J Am Oil Chem Soc 28:512–513
13. Jung S, Swift D, Sengoku E, Patel M, Teule F, Powell G, Moore
K, Abbott A (2000) The high oleate trait in the cultivated peanut
Arachis hypogaea L. I. Isolation and characterization of two
genes encoding microsomal oleoyl-PC desaturases. Mol Gen
Genet 263:796–805
14. Ray TK, Holly SP, Knauft DA, Abbott AG, Powell GL (1993)
The primary defect in developing seed from the high oleate
variety of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is the absence of
beta(12)-desaturase activity. Plant Sci 91:15–21
15. Noureddini H, Teoh BC, Clements LD (1992) Densities of veg-
etable-oils and fatty-acids. J Am Oil Chem Soc 69:1184–1188
16. Rodenbush CM, Hsieh FH, Viswanath DS (1999) Density and
viscosity of vegetable oils. J Am Oil Chem Soc 76:1415–1419
17. deMan JM (1990) Lipids. Principles of food chemistry. Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp 36–88
18. Oda M, Ueno T, Kasai N, Takahashi H, Yoshida H, Sugawara F,
Sakaguchi K, Hayashi H, Mizushina Y (2002) Inhibition of tel-
omerase by linear-chain fatty acids: a structural analysis. Bio-
chem J 367:329–334
19. Liu Y, Daum PH (2008) Relationship of refractive index to mass
density and self-consistency of mixing rules for multicomponent
mixtures like ambient aerosols. J Aerosol Sci 39:974–986
20. Whitaker TB (2006) Sampling foods for mycotoxins. Food Addit
Contam 23:50–61