scholarly journals Comparison and Identification of the Aroma-Active Compounds in the Root of Angelica dahurica

Molecules ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (23) ◽  
pp. 4352
Author(s):  
Die Hu ◽  
Junrui Guo ◽  
Ting Li ◽  
Mu Zhao ◽  
Tingting Zou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Solid Phase Microextraction ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Aroma Compounds ◽  
Dynamic Headspace ◽  
Active Compounds ◽  
Three Samples ◽  
Dynamic Headspace Sampling

Solid-phase microextraction (SPME), purge and trap (P&T), stir bar sportive extraction (SBSE), and dynamic headspace sampling (DHS) were applied to extract, separate and analyze the volatile compounds in the roots of Hangbaizhi, Qibaizhi, and Bobaizhi and the GC-O-MS/MS (AEDA) was utilized for the quantification of key aroma compounds. Totals of 52, 54, and 43 aroma-active compounds extracted from the three samples by the four extraction methods were identified. Among these methods, the SPME effectively extracted the aroma compounds from the A. dahurica. Thus, using the SPME methods for quantitative analysis based on external standards and subsequent dilution analyses, totals of 20, 21, and 17 aroma compounds were detected in the three samples by the sniffing test, and sensory evaluations indicated that the aromas of A. dahurica included herb, spice, and woody. Finally, principal component analysis (PCA) showed that the three kinds A. dahurica formed three separate groups, and partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) showed that caryophyllene, (−)-β-elemene, nonanal, and β-pinene played an important role in the classification of A. dahurica.

scholarly journals Characterization and Discrimination of Chinese Marinated Pork Hocks by Volatile Compound Profiling Using Solid Phase Microextraction Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry/Olfactometry, Electronic Nose and Chemometrics

Molecules ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (7) ◽  
pp. 1385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dong Han ◽  
Si Mi ◽  
Chun-Hui Zhang ◽  
Juan Li ◽  
Huan-Lu Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Gas Chromatography ◽  
Electronic Nose ◽  
Solid Phase Microextraction ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Active Compounds ◽  
Volatile Constituents ◽  
Chromatography Mass Spectrometry

The primary aim of this study was to investigate volatile constituents for the differentiation of Chinese marinated pork hocks from four local brands, Dahongmen (DHM), Daoxiangcun (DXC), Henghuitong (HHT) and Tianfuhao (TFH). To this end the volatile constituents were evaluated by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry/olfactometry (GC-MS/O), electronic nose (E-nose) and chemometrics. A total of 62 volatile compounds were identified and quantified in all pork hocks, and 24 of them were considered as odour-active compounds because their odour activity values (OAVs) were greater than 1. Hexanal (OAV at 3.6–20.3), octanal (OAV at 30.3–47.5), nonanal (OAV at 68.6–166.3), 1,8-cineole (OAV at 36.4–133.3), anethole (OAV at 5.9–28.3) and 2-pentylfuran (OAV at 3.5–29.7) were the key odour-active compounds contributing to the integral flavour of the marinated pork hocks. According to principal component analysis (PCA) and partial least squares-discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) of GC-MS/O and E-nose data, the results showed that the marinated pork hocks were clearly separated into three groups: DHM, HHT, and DXC-TFH. Nine odour-active compounds, heptanal, nonanal, 3-carene, d-limonene, β-phellandrene, p-cymene, eugenol, 2-ethylfuran and 2-pentylfuran, were determined to represent potential flavour markers for the discrimination of marinated pork hocks. This study indicated the feasibility of using GC-MS/O coupled with the E-nose method for the differentiation of the volatile profile in different brands of marinated pork hocks.

Comparison of selected aroma compounds in cultivars of sea buckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides L.)

2015 ◽  
Vol 69 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Vítová ◽  
Kateřina Sůkalová ◽  
Martina Mahdalová ◽  
Lenka Butorová ◽  
Marcela Melikantová
Keyword(s):  
Solid Phase Microextraction ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Aroma Compounds ◽  
Sea Buckthorn ◽  
Hippophae Rhamnoides ◽  
Hippophaë Rhamnoides ◽  
Volatile Aroma ◽  
Hippophae Rhamnoïdes L ◽  
Volatile Aroma Compounds

AbstractThirteen cultivars of sea buckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides L.) berries: Aromat, Botanicky, Buchlovicky, Hergo, Krasavica, Leicora, Ljubitelna, Pavlovsky, Peterbursky, Sluničko, Trofinovsky, Vitaminnaja and Velkoosecky, were tested for the content of volatile aroma compounds using gas chromatography with the solid phase microextraction method during two consequent years (2012- 2013). In total, 69 volatile compounds were identified: 26 alcohols, 12 aldehydes, 11 ketones, 9 acids and 11 esters. Based on principal component analysis, 18 most relevant compounds, best representing the variability of the whole system and suitable for the discrimination of the samples, were selected from all compounds identified. These compounds were then compared using the analysis of variance to confirm differences between the samples. Significant (p < 0.05) differences were found in the varieties in both years, Krasavica and Sluničko cultivars were found to be quite different from other varieties, being rich in the compounds identified and containing most of the selected compounds. Variability within the cultivars (between picking years) was low or not significant.

Coupling of Dynamic Headspace Sampling and Solid Phase Microextraction

2004 ◽  
Vol 60 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 687-691 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. C. Silva ◽  
P. M. S. Aguiar ◽  
F. Augusto
Keyword(s):  
Solid Phase Microextraction ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Headspace Sampling ◽  
Dynamic Headspace ◽  
Dynamic Headspace Sampling

scholarly journals Sampling technique biases in the analysis of fruit fly volatiles: a case study of Queensland fruit fly

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Saeedeh Noushini ◽  
Soo Jean Park ◽  
Ian Jamie ◽  
Joanne Jamie ◽  
Phillip Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Solid Phase Microextraction ◽  
Sampling Methods ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Critical Factor ◽  
Fruit Fly ◽  
Headspace Sampling ◽  
Rectal Gland ◽  
Dynamic Headspace ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Dynamic Headspace Sampling

AbstractDiverse methods have been used to sample insect semiochemicals. Sampling methods can differ in efficiency and affinity and this can introduce significant biases when interpreting biological patterns. We compare common methods used to sample tephritid fruit fly rectal gland volatiles (‘pheromones’), focusing on Queensland fruit fly, Bactrocera tryoni. Solvents of different polarity, n-hexane, dichloromethane and ethanol, were compared using intact and crushed glands. Polydimethylsiloxane, polydimethylsiloxane/divinylbenzene and polyacrylate were compared as adsorbents for solid phase microextraction. Tenax-GR and Porapak Q were compared as adsorbents for dynamic headspace sampling. Along with compounds previously reported for B. tryoni, we detected five previously unreported compounds in males, and three in females. Dichloromethane extracted more amides while there was no significant difference between the three solvents in extraction of spiroacetals except for (E,E)-2,8-dimethyl-1,7-dioxaspiro[5.5]undecane for which n-hexane extracted higher amount than both dichloromethane and ethanol. Ethanol failed to contain many of the more volatile compounds. Crushed rectal gland samples provided higher concentrations of extracted compounds than intact rectal gland samples, but no compounds were missed in intact samples. Of solid phase microextraction fibers, polyacrylate had low affinity for spiroacetals, ethyl isobutyrate and ethyl-2-methylbutanoate. Polydimethylsiloxane was more efficient for spiroacetals while type of fiber did not affect the amounts of amides and esters. In dynamic headspace sampling, Porapak was more efficient for ethyl isobutyrate and spiroacetals, while Tenax was more efficient for other esters and amides, and sampling time was a critical factor. Biases that can be introduced by sampling methods are important considerations when collecting and interpreting insect semiochemical profiles.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document