## 3 Results and Discussion
### Phenolic Compounds
#### 3.4.2. Phenolic Profile
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{|c c c c c c c|} \hline  & **Fresh** & **SD** & **Oven 65\({}^{\circ}\)** & **Oven 85\({}^{\circ}\)** & **CC** & **CF** \\ \hline Gallic acid & 0.21 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm h\times}\) & 0.07 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.40 \(\pm\) 0.16 \({}^{\rm a\times b\times}\) & 0.64 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\rm a\times b}\) & 0.59 \(\pm\) 0.15 \({}^{\rm a\times b}\) & 0.66 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm a}\) \\ \hline Protocatechic acid & 0 \({}^{\rm d}\) & 0 \({}^{\rm d}\) & 0.12 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.33 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.47 \(\pm\) 0.07 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.36 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm b}\) \\ \hline Total Hydroxybenzoic acids & 0.21 & 0.07 & 0.52 & 0.97 & 1.06 & 1.02 \\ \hline Chlorogenic acid & 2.96 \(\pm\) 0.12 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 1.78 \(\pm\) 0.11 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 2.60 \(\pm\) 0.17 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 2.98 \(\pm\) 0.09 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 1.85 \(\pm\) 0.21 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 1.08 \(\pm\) 0.14 \({}^{\rm c}\) \\ \hline Coumaric acid & 0.62 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.29 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.54 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.61 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.27 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm d}\) & 0.33 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm c}\) \\ \hline Total Hydrocrimamic Acids & 3.58 & 2.07 & 3.14 & 3.59 & 212 & 1.41 \\ \hline Procyanidin B1 & 0.36 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.20 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.29 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.17 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.03 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm d}\) \\ \hline Procyanidin B2 & 0.77 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.15 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.60 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0 \({}^{\rm d}\) & 0.07 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\rm c}\) \\ \hline Procyanidin trimer & 0.16 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.15 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a\times b}\) & 0.10 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm b\times c}\) & 0.09 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm b\times c}\) & 0.08 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.05 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) \\ \hline Total Procyanidins & 1.29 & 0.50 & 0.99 & 0.32 & 0.11 & 0.18 \\ \hline (+)-catechin & 0.36 \(\pm\) 0.07 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.17 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.36 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.10 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b\times c}\) & 0 \({}^{\rm d}\) & 0.02 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) \\ \hline (\(-\))-epicatechin & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.03 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.05 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a\times b}\) & 0.04 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b\times c}\) \\ \hline Other Flavonols &It is also consistent across all samples that the groups with the lowest concentration of phenolics are anthocyanins and flavonoids. Regarding anthocyanins, this may be due to the fact that we were only able to identify one compound, cyanidin-3-glucose. In the case of flavonoids, although we identified three different compounds--rutin, quercetin I, and quercetin II--the low concentration found can be attributed to the fact that quercetin and their derivatives are primarily located in the peel, as noted by [PERSON] et al. [21] and [PERSON] et al. [58]. Thus, while these compounds are present because we used the entire apple, they have low representation due to the higher proportion of pulp [20]. Comparing the phenolic profile with the total phenolic content results, a correlation between the concentrations can be observed. Fresh apples have the highest amount of phenolics in both analyses. They are followed by the oven-dried samples at 85 \({}^{\circ}\)C, 65 \({}^{\circ}\)C and solar-dried samples, suggesting that the variation in concentration is not only related to temperature but also with the drying method. For the commercial samples, the total phenolic content in CF is higher than in CC. However, in the phenolic profile analysis, CC shows a higher phenolic concentration than CF. For the confirmation of the presence of 5-HMF, HPLC was conducted again, with a standard compound. The samples from a new extraction were evaluated.