## 3 Results
### Phenolic Profile Evolution over Ripening  
Along the olive fruit maturation process, a total of six sampling periods were evaluated. OLE and HT were the main PCs of interest, due to their bioactive properties and oxidative protection conferred to the VOOs, as well as VERB, due to its relatively high amounts. The evolution of these specific PCs was measured along the ripening process of both cultivars (Table 3). Regarding HT, for both cultivars considerably lower amounts were registered during ripening. Highest values were observed for 'Cobrancosa' starting at S4 (130 \(\pm\) 35 mg/kg) until the last collection point (156 \(\pm\) 46 mg/Kg). 'Galega Vulgar' also presented higher HT amounts at harvest (126 \(\pm\) 31 mg/Kg). Since HT mainly results from an enzymatic hydrolysis of OLE, the increase of HT towards harvest could be expected. On the other hand, VERB was present at considerably higher amounts during ripening for both cultivars. With a general decreasing tendency over time for both cultivars, 'Cobrancosa' registered its maximum VERB accumulation at S1, with an average of 4514 \(\pm\) 712 mg/Kg, while 'Galega Vulgar' showed it at S3, with an average amount of 4247 \(\pm\) 361 mg/Kg. OLE presented the most distinguished profile along the ripening stage regarding both cultivars. Within much lower concentrations, OLE was registered with its higher amounts at S6 for 'Cobrancosa' (average value of 3268 \(\pm\) 2731 mg/Kg) and S3 for 'Galega Vulgar' (average value of 26,304 \(\pm\) 10,930 mg/Kg). While for 'Cobrancosa' OLE was maximum at S6, 'Galega Vulgar' showed its minimum concentration (average value of 1908 \(\pm\) 468 mg/Kg) at the same time, affirming the distinct particularity that OLE profile presented for each cultivar. The range of variability, registered for these quantifications, is also noteworthy. As shown, both cultivars presented a notorious variability among sampling periods, mainly regarding OLE, which registered standard deviations in the extreme ranges of \(\pm\)2731 mg/Kg for 'Cobrancosa' at S6 (Figure 4a) and \(\pm\)15,173 mg/Kg for 'Galega Vulgar' at S1 (Figure 4b). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Cultivar** & **Sampling Reference** & **HT** & **VERB** & **OLE** \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{Cobrancosa} & S1 & 105 \(\pm\) 24 1  & 4514 \(\pm\) 712 1  & 1236 \(\pm\) 684 1  \\  & S2 & 108 \(\pm\) 11 1  & 3604 \(\pm\) 421 1  & 1689 \(\pm\) 880 1  \\  & S3 & 118 \(\pm\) 23 1  & 3394 \(\pm\) 481 1  & 1619 \(\pm\) 527 1  \\  & S4 & 130 \(\pm\) 35 1  & 3179 \(\pm\) 458 1  & 1790 \(\pm\) 1084 1  \\  & S5 & 157 \(\pm\) 46 1  & 2979 \(\pm\) 473 1  & 1387 \(\pm\) 652 1  \\  & S6 & 156 \(\pm\) 46 1  & 2886 \(\pm\) 618 1  & 3268 \(\pm\) 2731  \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Quantification of hydroxytyrosol (HT), oleuropein (OLE) and verbascoside (VERB) (mg/Kg of olive pulp) over six different ripening stages (S), for ‘Cobrancosa’ and ‘Galega Vulgar’ cultivars (mean \(\pm\) standard deviation). As described, samples were collected from four different blocks randomly selected within the olive orchards (Figure 1). Results showed a great variability on PCs, mainly OLE concentrations, within the different sampling blocks, despite of belonging to the same cultivar, in a similar water regime and being subjected to the same agronomic practices and edaphoclimatic conditions. To better visualize the sampling block effect on OLE variability, a discriminate approach was applied, where distinct sampling blocks (I to IV) were analyzed separately for both 'Cobrancosa' and 'Galega Vulgar' cultivars in regard to MI (Figure 5a,c, respectively) and OPDW (Figure 5b,d, respectively). Figure 4: Mean value \(\pm\) standard error (SE) and mean value \(\pm\) standard deviation (SD) representation for oleuropein (OLE) concentrations regarding ‘Cobrancosa’ (**a**) and ‘Galega Vulgar’ (**b**) along ripening (S).