Direct Thermal Desorption in the Analysis of Cheese Volatiles by Gas Chromatography and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry: Comparison with Simultaneous Distillation-Extraction and Dynamic Headspace

Valero, E.; Sanz, J.; Martı́nez-Castro, I.

doi:10.1093/chromsci/39.6.222

Cited by 23 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To the best of my knowledge, this is the first report concerning the analysis of impurities in drugs of abuse by direct TD, although analyses of versatile volatiles by direct TD have been reported previously [20][21][22][23][24][25][26]. In previous reports [21,23], principal component analysis (PCA) was applied to the evaluation of discrimination among groups.…”

Section: Comparison Of Extraction Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contribution of thermal desorption and liquid–liquid extraction for identification and profiling of impurities in methamphetamine by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Kuwayama

Inoue

Kanamori

et al. 2007

Forensic Science International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impurity profiling of methamphetamine (MA) using thermal desorption (TD) and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) was examined. Using TD/GC-MS, impurities were extracted and separated under various conditions. Optimal chromatograms were obtained when a 20 mg MA sample was extracted at 120˚C for 3 min using a TD instrument, followed by separation of the extracts using a nonpolar capillary column coated with (5%-phenyl)-methylpolysiloxane.MA samples from nine different batches were analyzed under optimized conditions.Compounds related to the structure of MA, such as benzaldehyde, benzyl alcohol, amphetamine, cis-and trans-1,2-dimethyl-3-phenylaziridine, dimethylamphetamine, and N-acetylephedrine, were detected in the chromatograms without any laborious extraction procedure. Compounds such as ethanol, diethyl ether, and acetic acid, which are considered reagents and solvents for MA synthesis, were also detected in some of the chromatograms. The numbers and intensities of the peaks detected were different among the samples. Impurity profiling of MA using TD was compared with that using liquid-liquid extraction (LLE). Better reproducibility of peak areas was obtained using LLE, whereas higher intensities and numbers of peaks were detected using TD. Solvents were 2 extracted more effectively using TD. The nine batches of MA were classified using both extraction procedures. The nine batches were divided roughly into two groups using data from LLE. Subsequently, the groups were classified in detail using data from TD.TD can be used to provide supplemental information for LLE, and the combination of these extraction methods can be helpful for impurity profiling of MA.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Extraction Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because a TD instrument enables the direct introduction of a sample without any laborious extraction procedure, it is effective for analyzing trace amounts of compounds, particularly volatiles. The analysis by direct sample introduction is applied to versatile fields [20][21][22][23][24][25][26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contribution of thermal desorption and liquid–liquid extraction for identification and profiling of impurities in methamphetamine by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Kuwayama

Inoue

Kanamori

et al. 2007

Forensic Science International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One critical aspect for cheese researchers Dynamic headspace methods and cheese volatiles 493 is to select the most suitable extraction technique which allows one to obtain a volatile profile most closely related to the sensory properties of the cheese [28]. Numerous techniques such as simultaneous distillation-extraction [13,21], high-vacuum distillation [20,38], supercritical fluid extraction [26], static headspace [14,41], dynamic headspace (DHS) [49,51], solidphase microextraction [30,31], and direct thermal desorption [50] have been used for the extraction of flavour compounds in cheese [32]. Nowadays DHS is being frequently used [2,17,28,47,48,51].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thermal desorption of the trap by ultrafast microwave heating (MWH) has also been used to very rapidly transfer the volatile components into the capillary column without the need for cryofocusing [1,3,5,45]. P&T-RH has been compared with other techniques, particularly with SDE, for the analysis of volatiles of cheese [8,27,50]. However, few studies have focused on the comparison between different DHS methods.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of dynamic headspace methods used for the analysis of the volatile composition of Spanish PDO ewe’s raw milk cheeses

Barrón

Redondo

Ortigosa

et al. 2005

Lait

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Different dynamic headspace (DHS) methods used for determination of volatile compounds in cheeses were compared. Three different laboratories using gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry carried out the analyses of volatile compounds of Spanish Protected Designation of Origin ewe's raw milk cheeses. One laboratory used "purge and trap" (P&T) with thermal desorption of the trap by ultrafast microwave heating (MWH) and the other two laboratories used P&T with thermal desorption of the trap by resistive heating (RH). Each method detected around 78-85 different individual compounds which belonged to different chemical groups, namely, acids, alcohols, ketones, esters, aldehydes, sulphur compounds, hydrocarbons and terpenes. Using the P&T-MHW method, larger percentages of acids and aldehydes in the cheeses were found compared with the P&T-RH methods, whereas the contrary occurred for the percentages of alcohols and ketones. Differences in the percentages of some volatile compounds such as ketones, alcohols and acids between the laboratories using P&T-RH under different analytical conditions were also recorded. The results pointed out differences in the selectivity for the extraction of various volatile compounds from cheese samples according to the DHS methods used, particularly when using tenax or graphitised carbon as trap absorbents. In spite of these differences, both P&T-MWH and P&T-RH methods were equally satisfactory for the comparison of the different cheese varieties. However, each of the DHS methods was more suitable for the characterisation of the volatile compounds of a particular cheese type. De plus, des différences dans les pourcentages de certains composés volatils, tels que cétones, alcools et acides ont également été observées entre les laboratoires utilisant le système de P&T-CR dans des conditions différentes. Les résultats soulignent des différences en termes de sélectivité d'extraction des volatils à partir des échantillons de fromage selon la technique d'extraction employée, et en particulier selon la nature de l'absorbant du piège (tenax ou charbon). Malgré ces différences, les deux méthodes P&T-CMO et P&T-CR se sont révélées également satisfaisantes pour comparer différentes variétés de fromages. Cependant, chacune des méthodes d'extraction était plus appropriée pour caractériser les composés volatils pour un type de fromage en particulier.fromage / composé volatil / espace de tête dynamique / étude inter-laboratoire

show abstract

“…DTD has important advantages over the other methods such as direct coupling to GC and MS [13], the requirement of only a small amount of sample and of course the fact that it is a rapid method. According to previous literature, the DTD method has been applied to various systems such as beef [14], plant material [11], sugar [15] and cheese [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of the volatile components of Cheddar cheese by direct thermal desorption‐GC×GC‐TOF/MS

Göğüş

Özel

Lewis

2006

J of Separation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analysis of the volatile components of Cheddar cheese by direct thermal desorption-GC6GC-TOF/MSVolatile compounds were isolated from Cheddar cheese using direct thermal desorption (DTD) and analysed using comprehensive 2-D GC (GC6GC) coupled with TOF MS (TOF/MS). In total 12 aldehydes, 13 acids, 13 ketones, 5 alcohols, 3 hydrocarbons and 9 miscellaneous compounds were identified at desorption temperatures of 100, 150, 200 and 2508C using mature Cheddar cheese. A temperature of 1508C was found to be optimum for the DTD of volatiles from mature Cheddar cheese. The major components were acetic acid, butanoic acid, 3-hydroxy-2-butanone and 2,3-butanediol. A DTD temperature of 1508C was used to observe the effect of maturation (mild, medium or mature) on the volatiles of Cheddar cheese. The major components of the volatiles of mild, medium and mature Cheddar cheese were almost the same. However, their percentage compositions were found to change with the stage of maturity. DTD is simple, fast and requires only a small amount of sample (approximately 10 mg) and works well with comprehensive GC6GC-TOF/MS. Comprehensive GC also separated a number of components which remained overlapped on the single column, such as octane and hexanal.

show abstract

Direct Thermal Desorption in the Analysis of Cheese Volatiles by Gas Chromatography and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry: Comparison with Simultaneous Distillation-Extraction and Dynamic Headspace

Cited by 23 publications

References 16 publications

Contribution of thermal desorption and liquid–liquid extraction for identification and profiling of impurities in methamphetamine by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Contribution of thermal desorption and liquid–liquid extraction for identification and profiling of impurities in methamphetamine by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Comparison of dynamic headspace methods used for the analysis of the volatile composition of Spanish PDO ewe’s raw milk cheeses

Analysis of the volatile components of Cheddar cheese by direct thermal desorption‐GC×GC‐TOF/MS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About