Evaluation of headspace volatiles of cabernet sauvignon wines sampled by an on-column method

Shimoda, Mitsuya; Shibamoto, Takayuki; Noble, Ann C.

doi:10.1021/jf00034a028

Cited by 36 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We agree with Mistry et al (1997) that the introduction of a trap introduces a bias. These three reasons can explain why almost all the headspace chromatograms of wine do not contain any peak eluted after p-phenylethanol in a polar column, regardless of whether it is static or dynamic (Noble et al 1980;Shimoda et al 1993;Salinas et al 1994;Garda-Jares et al 1995;Salinas and Alonso 1997). In contrast, Table 6.3 clearly shows that heavier compounds can have strong sensory relevance.…”

Section: Headspace or Total Extraction?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Olfactometry and Aroma Extract Dilution Analysis of Wines

Sáenz-Navajas

Aznar

2002

Analysis of Taste and Aroma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Headspace or Total Extraction?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Olfactometry and Aroma Extract Dilution Analysis of Wines

Sáenz-Navajas

Aznar

2002

Analysis of Taste and Aroma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The analysis of volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds that contribute to wine aroma has been carried out following different methodologies, such as liquid-liquid extraction [4,8,9], purge and cold trapping extraction [10], simultaneous distillation-extraction [11], supercritical fluid extraction [12], solid-phase extraction [13] and ultrasound extraction [14]. However, most of these approaches present several disadvantages, including expensive equipment requirements, significant amounts of environmentally unfriendly solvents, multiple handling steps that increase error, and the need for a concentration step to achieve detectable levels.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potentialities of two solventless extraction approaches—Stir bar sorptive extraction and headspace solid-phase microextraction for determination of higher alcohol acetates, isoamyl esters and ethyl esters in wines

Perestrelo

Nogueira

2009

Talanta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tA stir bar sorptive extraction with liquid desorption followed by large volume injection coupled to gas chromatography-quadrupole mass spectrometry (SBSE-LD/LVI-GC-qMS) was evaluated for the simultaneous determination of higher alcohol acetates (HAA), isoamyl esters (IsoE) and ethyl esters (EE) of fatty acids. The method performance was assessed and compared with other solventless technique, the solidphase microextraction (SPME) in headspace mode (HS). For both techniques, influential experimental parameters were optimised to provide sensitive and robust methods. The SBSE-LD/LVI methodology was previously optimised in terms of extraction time, influence of ethanol in the matrix, liquid desorption (LD) conditions and instrumental settings. Higher extraction efficiency was obtained using 60 min of extraction time, 10% ethanol content, n-pentane as desorption solvent, 15 min for the back-extraction period, 10 mL min −1 for the solvent vent flow rate and 10• C for the inlet temperature. For HS-SPME, the fibre coated with 50/30 m divinylbenzene/carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane (DVB/CAR/PDMS) afforded highest extraction efficiency, providing the best sensitivity for the target volatiles, particularly when the samples were extracted at 25• C for 60 min under continuous stirring in the presence of sodium chloride (10% (w/v)). Both methodologies showed good linearity over the concentration range tested, with correlation coefficients higher than 0.984 for HS-SPME and 0.982 for SBES-LD approach, for all analytes. A good reproducibility was attained and low detection limits were achieved using both SBSE-LD (0.03-28.96 g L −1 ) and HS-SPME (0.02-20.29 g L −1 ) methodologies. The quantification limits for SBSE-LD approach ranging from 0.11 to 96.56 g L − and from 0.06 to 67.63 g L −1 for HS-SPME. Using the HS-SPME approach an average recovery of about 70% was obtained whilst by using SBSE-LD obtained average recovery were close to 80%. The analytical and procedural advantages and disadvantages of these two methods have been compared.Both analytical methods were used to determine the HAA, IsoE and EE fatty acids content in "Terras Madeirenses" table wines. A total of 16 esters were identified and quantified from the wine extracts by HS-SPME whereas by SBSE-LD technique were found 25 esters which include 2 higher alcohol acetates, 4 isoamyl esters and 19 ethyl esters of fatty acids. Generally SBSE-LD provided higher sensitivity with decreased analysis time.

show abstract

“…The understanding of the aroma profile will help technologists to enhance the sensory quality of this beverage. Dynamic headspace techniques are widely used for alcoholic beverages analysis (Williams & Strauss, 1977;Shimoda, Shibamoto, & Noble, 1993 Cela-Torrijos, 1995) because the porous polymers, specially Porapak Q, show low retention for ethanol which often obliterates a large part of the chromatograms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%