## 3 Results and Discussion
### Comparison of TAG Profiles  
The relative abundances of TAGs in different types of camellia oils, including _C. oleifera_ (C.O), _C. semiserrata_ (C.S), _C. gauchowensis_ (C.G), and commercially refined _C. oleifera_ (C-C.O), were analyzed to compare the differences among the varieties, as summarized in Table 1. The dominant TAG across all camellia oils was OOO, constituting 43.42% to 49.14% of the total TAG content, representing nearly half of the total TAG levels. This is consistent with the range reported in the literature (28.50-69.80%) [16; 17; 45]. Additionally, TAGs in all camellia oils were primarily composed of UUU and SUU, with relatively lower levels of SUS and SSS. These findings aligned with a previous study [17], where the sum of UUU and SUU accounted for 91.32% of the total TAGs, significantly higher than the sum of the SUS and SSS content (8.76%) (\(p<0.05\)), suggesting that TAGs in vegetable oils are primarily composed of UUU and SUU, while the levels of SUS and SSS are comparatively lower [16; 17; 45]. In addition, the distinct differences in TAG profiles were observed. In the LLL category, C.O exhibited the highest relative abundance of 0.9%, while C.S had the lowest at 0.57%. Similarly, in the OLL and PLL categories, C.O showed higher abundances compared to other varieties. Conversely, C.S displayed higher levels of OOL and SOO/SSL categories, suggesting that C.S may be a suitable choice for individuals seeking oils with a high monounsaturated fatty acid content, such as oleic acid. Of particular interest, C.G demonstrated a distinct TAG profile, with the highest levels of PPL, POL, PPL, POO, PPO, and POS categories compared to other varieties. The higher levels of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids, such as palmitic (P) and oleic (O) acids, in specific TAG species, like PPL and POL, may contribute to a more stable oil composition. This stability could be advantageous for dietary applications that require specific fatty acid profiles. Additionally, these TAG species are commonly linked to skin-conditioning properties, which position C.G. oil as a promising candidate for cosmetic formulations [46]. Notably, C-C.O displayed the highest abundance of OOO at 49.14%. However, it showed intermediate values across most categories, except for OOO, indicating a balanced TAG profile. The differences in TAG abundances among the varieties can be attributed to genetic factors, environmental conditions, and processing methods [20]. For example, the higher abundance of OOO in C-C.O compared to other varieties may be due to either processing methods or specific genetic traits that influence the synthesis of oleic acid [20; 47]. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline
**TAG 1** & **ECN 2** & _C. oleifera_ & _C. semiserrata_ & _C. gauchowensis_ & _Commercial C. oleifera_ \\ \hline LLL & 42 & 0.96 \(\pm\) 0.14 a  & 0.57 \(\pm\) 0.04 b  & 0.62 \(\pm\) 0.04 b  & 0.69 \(\pm\) 0.03 b  \\ OLL & 44 & 3.06 \(\pm\) 0.04 a  & 2.51 \(\pm\) 0.03 c  & 2.76 \(\pm\) 0.02 b  & 2.74 \(\pm\) 0.00 b  \\ PLL & 44 & 1.34 \(\pm\) 0.13 a  & 0.89 \(\pm\) 0.02 b  & 1.28 \(\pm\) 0.01 a  & 1.07 \(\pm\) 0.05 b  \\ OOL & 46 & 11.99 \(\pm\) 0.03 b  & 12.77 \(\pm\) 0.28 a  & 10.14 \(\pm\) 0.02 c [FONOTE:a]Footnote a: L, Ionic; O, oleic; P, palmitic; S, stearic. 2 Equivalent carbon number (ECN) = carbon number – 2 \(\times\) double bonds. Mean values with a different letters within a row are significantly different from each other at \(p<0.05\). [ENDFOOTNOTE] & 10.80 \(\pm\) 0.25 c [FONOTE:a]Footnote a: L, Ionic; O, oleic; P, palmitic; S, stearic. 2 Equivalent carbon number (ECN) = carbon number – 2 \(\times\) double bonds. Mean values with a different letters within a row are significantly different from each other at \(p<0.05\). [ENDFOOTNOTE] \\ POL & 46 & 4.80 \(\pm\) 0.15 a  & 4.11 \(\pm\) 0.03 b  & 0.50 \(\pm\) 0.09 a  & 0.42 \(\pm\) 0.21 c [FONOTE:a]Footnote a: L, Ionic; O, oleic; P, palmitic; S, stearic. 2 Equivalent carbon number (ECN) = carbon number – 2 \(\times\) double bonds.