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: Comparison of the sensitivity of different aroma extraction techniques in combination with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry to detect minor aroma compounds in wine.
    Author: Gamero A, Wesselink W, de Jong C.
    Journal: J Chromatogr A; 2013 Jan 11; 1272():1-7. PubMed ID: 23245586.
    Abstract:
    MicroVinification platforms are used for screening purposes to study aroma development in wine. These high-throughput methodologies require flavor analysis techniques that allow fast detection of a high number of aroma compounds which often appear in very low concentrations (μg/l). In this work, a selection of aroma extraction techniques in combination with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) were evaluated to detect minor wine aroma compounds in low sample volume. The techniques evaluated were headspace (HS), headspace solid-phase dynamic extraction (HS-SPDE), headspace solid-phase microextraction (HS-SPME), direct immersion solid-phase microextraction (DI-SPME), stir bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) and monolithic material sorptive extraction (MMSE). DI-SPME showed the highest sensitivity as expressed by detection of the highest percentage of total aroma compounds at concentrations around 0.1 μg/l. SBSE and MMSE followed DI-SPME in terms of sensitivity. HS-SPME was less sensitive but considered sensitive enough for detection of most of the volatile compounds present in highly aromatic wines. Matrix effect was shown to strongly affect aroma extraction and therefore the sensitivity of the different extraction methods.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]