The evolution of comprehensive two‐dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC)

Górecki, Tadeusz; Harynuk, James J.; Panić, Ognjen

doi:10.1002/jssc.200301650

Cited by 171 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the case of GC×GC, for example, a sample might be separated first on an apolar column, followed by a polar column. The exact workings of comprehensive multidimensional separations are beyond the scope of this work, and are discussed elsewhere (Górecki et al, 2004;Cortes et al, 2009;François et al, 2009;Kivilompolo et al, 2011;Li et al, 2011). However, these techniques are gaining in popularity, and are capable of separating exceedingly complex mixtures comprising thousands of individual compounds.…”

Section: Wwwintechopencommentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Chemometrics to the Interpretation of Analytical Separations Data

Harynuk¹,

Mata²,

Sinkov³

2012

Chemometrics in Practical Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Wwwintechopencommentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Chemometrics to the Interpretation of Analytical Separations Data

Harynuk¹,

Mata²,

Sinkov³

2012

Chemometrics in Practical Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Pulse times must be carefully selected to minimize peak splitting and to optimize transfer to the second column. GC×GC offers enhanced separation efficiency, reliability in qualitative and quantitative analysis, capability to detect low quantities, and information on the whole sample and its components, as recently reviewed (Dallüge et al 2003, Górecki et al 2004, Ong and Marriott 2002.…”

Section: Multidimensional Separationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Origins of Grape and Wine Aroma. Part 2. Chemical and Sensory Analysis

Robinson

Boss

Solomon

et al. 2014

Am. J. Enol. Vitic.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Part 1 of this review summarized the current state of knowledge with respect to the chemical compounds contributing to grape and wine aroma. Much of our understanding of the chemistry of grape and wine composition comes from advances in analytical and sensory methods for identifying and quantifying the compounds that contribute to flavor. Therefore, Part 2 of this review provides an overview of the chemical and sensory analysis approaches that have been used to deconstruct wine flavor into its component parts with an aim toward relating the chemical composition to the unique sensory properties that are associated with different wine varieties and styles.Key words: gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, multidimensional separations, sample preparation, sample extraction, GC-olfactometry, sensory descriptive analysis Part 1 of this review provided an overview of the chemical components in grapes and wines and the viticultural, winemaking, and storage practices that influence their formation and concentrations. In Part 2 we provide a summary of the analytical chemistry and sensory approaches for assessing wine flavor. As noted previously, we have attempted to be as complete as possible, however, given the numerous publications in these areas, not all research can be covered (e.g., a Google Scholar search for the phrase "analysis of wine flavor" returns >6,600 publications from the years 2012-2013; the phrase "sensory analysis of wine flavor" returns >5,600 publications over the same period). Therefore, we have chosen to focus on selected recent applications to demonstrate the power and types of information that can be obtained with current analytical and sensory approaches. The reader is also referred to several reviews for more detailed discussions of selected topics (Francis and Newton

show abstract

“…Compared to one-dimensional GC, this technique brings dramatically increased peak capacity, improved peak resolution, and up to an order of magnitude increase in compounds' detectability. In contrary to heart-cutting variety, in GC × GC all effluent from the primary column passes through the secondary column, maximizing sample resolution throughout the entire analysis (Gorecki & Harynuk, 2004;Beans & Brinkman, 2005). A theoretical and practical comparison of one-dimensional GC and GC × GC in terms of peak capacity has been published by Blumberg et al, 2008. In GC × GC, two basic orthogonality rules should be kept: (i) independence of separation mechanisms, i.e.…”

Section: Basic Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%