Comparison of extracting solvents for typical volatile components of eastern wines in model aqueous-alcoholic systems

Cobb, Christine S.; Bursey, Maurice M.

doi:10.1021/jf60215a053

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(7 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The viscosity of the extracting agent will considerably influence two aspects that affect this process: agitation and separation of the phases [35]. Cobb and Bursey [19], comparing various extraction solvents for typical volatile components in model aqueous alcoholic systems, indicate that more of the model compounds are extracted and made available for analysis using freon-ll and dichloromethane, and that substantial losses could occur during the isolation process, especially for diethyl ether. The density of the extraction solvent is another important parameter that should be considered.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…b) Liquid-liquid extraction: is the oldest and most widely used procedure [12,13]. The most frequently employed are trichlorofluoromethane (freon-ll) [14,15], n-pentane [16,17], nhexane [18], diethyl ether [19], dichloromethane [6,20,21] or a mixture of these [22 241 . The most frequently employed are trichlorofluoromethane (freon-ll) [14,15], n-pentane [16,17], nhexane [18], diethyl ether [19], dichloromethane [6,20,21] or a mixture of these [22 241 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of solvents for determination of monoterpenes in wine using liquid-liquid extraction

Falqué¹,

Gómez²

2000

Chromatographia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The extraction capacity of seven solvents for volatile compounds in a model aqueous alcohol system was investigated. The five major terpenes usually found in grapes and wines (linalool, ~-terpineol, citronellol, nerol and geraniol) were studied in a model wine. Liquid-liquid extraction with dichloromethane, diethyl ether, freon-11, ether-pentane (1:1), ether-hexane (1:1), pentane and hexane as extracting solvents are compared. Dichloromethane and diethyl etherpentane (1:1, v/v) were the best solvents for a quantitation of these aromatic compounds.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of solvents for determination of monoterpenes in wine using liquid-liquid extraction

Falqué¹,

Gómez²

2000

Chromatographia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2001). Analysis of volatile compounds from wine can be accomplished by several methods including solvent extraction (Cobb and Bursey 1978), absorbance resins such as XAD‐2 (Edwards and Beelman 1990; Wada and Shibamoto 1997), static headspace (Jelen et al. 1998) or more recently, variations of solid phase microextraction (SPME) (De la Calle García et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COMPARISON OF HEADSPACE SOLID PHASE MICROEXTRACTION AND XAD‐2 METHODS TO EXTRACT VOLATILE COMPOUNDS PRODUCED BY SACCHAROMYCES DURING WINE FERMENTATIONS

Bohlscheid

Wang

Mattinson

et al. 2006

Journal of Food Quality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A modified headspace solid phase microextraction (HS‐SPME) method was compared with Amberlite® XAD‐2 resin for the extraction of volatile compounds. In the HS‐SPME method, volatiles were extracted using an 85 μm polyacrylate fiber from wines that contained a standardized amount of ethanol (10% v/v), NaCl (0.325 g/mL) and internal standards (dodecanol and nonanoic acid). Both extraction procedures yielded high relative recoveries (>92%) and reproducibilities (coefficient of variations ≤ 11%) for the different higher alcohols, esters and medium‐chain fatty acids. Overall, limits of detection for the HS‐SPME and XAD‐2 methods were below sensory threshold concentrations. HS‐SPME and XAD‐2 performed similarly in the analysis of a Riesling wine; however, the HS‐SPME method did not require organic solvents and was generally quicker to perform. In applying the HS‐SPME method, differences in concentrations of volatile compounds produced in Riesling and Chenin blanc wines by 11 different yeast strains were noted.

show abstract

“…It is obvious that neither solvent gave 100% recovery of all aroma constituents and that dichloromethane extraction gave quite a different aroma isolate from that using pentane. Cobb and Bursey (1978) have made dichloromethane) on recovery of volatiles. 1, ethanol; 2, propanol; 3, butanol; 4, octane; 5, decane; 6, ethyl propanoate; 7, ethyl butanoate; 8, ethyl pentanoate; 9, 2-heptanone; 10, acetophenone; 11, benzyl acetate; 12, methyl salicylate; 13, L-carvone; 14, ␤-ionone; 15, methyl anthranilate; 16, ethylmethylphenyl glycidate; 17, isoeugenol.…”

Section: Aroma Isolation Methods Using Solvent Extractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pawliszyn's group (1997) was the first to develop this method and apply it in Table 9.2 Recovery of model compounds from an alcohol-water (12% v/v) system (Cobb and Bursey, 1978). environmental analysis.…”

Section: Solid-phase Micro-extractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Instrumental Methods of Analysis

Reineccius

2010

Food Flavour Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter provides an insight into how one approaches the instrumental analysis of flavour. Only the aroma component of flavour is discussed; this excludes both taste and chemesthetic effects that are also universally considered to be components of flavour. The aim is to provide an understanding of the unique challenges faced in this analysis and how and why particular analytical approaches are taken to solve a particular flavour problem. Issues of sample preparation, aroma isolation, compound selection (when an objective), quantification and identification are discussed. Since this topic is very broad, one cannot provide much detail, thus reviews (e.g.

show abstract

Comparison of extracting solvents for typical volatile components of eastern wines in model aqueous-alcoholic systems

Cited by 18 publications

References 6 publications

Comparison of solvents for determination of monoterpenes in wine using liquid-liquid extraction

Comparison of solvents for determination of monoterpenes in wine using liquid-liquid extraction

COMPARISON OF HEADSPACE SOLID PHASE MICROEXTRACTION AND XAD‐2 METHODS TO EXTRACT VOLATILE COMPOUNDS PRODUCED BY SACCHAROMYCES DURING WINE FERMENTATIONS

Instrumental Methods of Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About