Comparison of two extraction methods for evaluation of volatile constituents patterns in commercial whiskeys: Elucidation of the main odour-active compounds

An analytical procedure based on manual dynamic headspace solid-phase microextraction (HS-SPME) method and the conventional extraction method by liquid–liquid extraction (LLE), were compared for their effectiveness in the extraction and quantification of volatile compounds from commercial whiskey samples. Seven extraction solvents covering a wide range of polarities and two SPME fibres coatings, has been evaluated. The highest amounts extracted, were achieved using dichloromethane (CH2Cl2) by LLE method (LLECH2Cl2)(LLECH2Cl2) and using a CAR/PDMS fibre (SPMECAR/PDMS) in HS-SPME. Each method was used to determine the responses of 25 analytes from whiskeys and calibration standards, in order to provide sensitivity comparisons between the two methods. Calibration curves were established in a synthetic whiskey and linear correlation coefficient (r ) were greater than 0.9929 for LLECH2Cl2LLECH2Cl2 and 0.9935 for SPMECAR/PDMS, for all target compounds. Recoveries greater than 80% were achieved. For most compounds, precision (expressed by relative standard deviation, R.S.D.) are very good, with R.S.D. values lower than 14.78% for HS-SPME method and than 19.42% for LLE method. The detection limits ranged from 0.13 to 19.03 μg L−1 for SPME procedure and from 0.50 to 12.48 μg L−1 for LLE. A tentative study to estimate the contribution of a specific compound to the aroma of a whiskey, on the basis of their odour activity values (OAV) was made. Ethyl octanoate followed by isoamyl acetate and isobutyl alcohol, were found the most potent odour-active compounds.

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

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 (C2, C8, C18, Silica and M1 (mixed C8-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 (SPELiChrolut 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 C8 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 SPELiChrolut 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 SPMEDVB/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 MEPSC8 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 SPELiChrolut 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.