These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Effectiveness of high-throughput miniaturized sorbent- and solid phase microextraction techniques combined with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis for a rapid screening of volatile and semi-volatile composition of wines--a comparative study.
    Author: Mendes B, Gonçalves J, Câmara JS.
    Journal: Talanta; 2012 Jan 15; 88():79-94. PubMed ID: 22265473.
    Abstract:
    In this study the feasibility of different extraction procedures was evaluated in order to test their potential for the extraction of the volatile (VOCs) and semi-volatile constituents (SVOCs) from wines. In this sense, and before they could be analysed by gas chromatography-quadrupole first stage masss spectrometry (GC-qMS), three different high-throughput miniaturized (ad)sorptive extraction techniques, based on solid phase extraction (SPE), microextraction by packed sorbents (MEPS) and solid phase microextraction (SPME), were studied for the first time together, for the extraction step. To achieve the most complete volatile and semi-volatile signature, distinct SPE (LiChrolut EN, Poropak Q, Styrene-Divinylbenzene and Amberlite XAD-2) and MEPS (C(2), C(8), C(18), Silica and M1 (mixed C(8)-SCX)) sorbent materials, and different SPME fibre coatings (PA, PDMS, PEG, DVB/CAR/PDMS, PDMS/DVB, and CAR/PDMS), were tested and compared. All the extraction techniques were followed by GC-qMS analysis, which allowed the identification of up to 103 VOCs and SVOCs, distributed by distinct chemical families: higher alcohols, esters, fatty acids, carbonyl compounds and furan compounds. Mass spectra, standard compounds and retention index were used for identification purposes. SPE technique, using LiChrolut EN as sorbent (SPE(LiChrolut EN)), was the most efficient method allowing for the identification of 78 VOCs and SVOCs, 63 and 19 more than MEPS and SPME techniques, respectively. In MEPS technique the best results in terms of number of extractable/identified compounds and total peak areas of volatile and semi-volatile fraction, were obtained by using C(8) resin whereas DVB/CAR/PDMS was revealed the most efficient SPME coating to extract VOCs and SVOCs from Bual wine. Diethyl malate (18.8±3.2%) was the main component found in wine SPE(LiChrolut EN) extracts followed by ethyl succinate (13.5±5.3%), 3-methyl-1-butanol (13.2±1.7%), and 2-phenylethanol (11.2±9.9%), while in SPME(DVB/CAR/PDMS) technique 3-methyl-1-butanol (43.3±0.6%) followed by diethyl succinate (18.9±1.6%), and 2-furfural (10.4±0.4%), are the major compounds. The major VOCs and SVOCs isolated by MEPS(C8) were 3-methyl-1-butanol (26.8±0.6%, from wine total volatile fraction), diethyl succinate (24.9±0.8%), and diethyl malate (16.3±0.9%). Regardless of the extraction technique, the highest extraction efficiency corresponds to esters and higher alcohols and the lowest to fatty acids. Despite some drawbacks associated with the SPE procedure such as the use of organic solvents, the time-consuming and tedious sampling procedure, it was observed that SPE(LiChrolut EN), revealed to be the most effective technique allowing the extraction of a higher number of compounds (78) rather than the other extraction techniques studied.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]