...
首页> 外文期刊>Talanta: The International Journal of Pure and Applied Analytical Chemistry >Comparison of ultrasound-assisted extraction and direct immersion solid-phase microextraction methods for the analysis of monoterpenoids in wine
【24h】

Comparison of ultrasound-assisted extraction and direct immersion solid-phase microextraction methods for the analysis of monoterpenoids in wine

机译:超声辅助萃取与直接浸没固相微萃取方法对葡萄酒中单萜类化合物的分析比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE) and direct immersion solid-phase microextraction (DI-SPME) were evaluated for the monoterpenic compounds determination in wine samples. The wine extracts obtained were analyzed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). The optimization of the variables affecting UAE and SPME methods was carried out in order to achieve the best extraction efficiency. Both UAE and SPME are quantitative (recoveries in the range 93-97% and 71.8-90.9%, respectively), precise (coefficients of variation below 5.5%), sensitive (limits of detection between 30-39 mu g L-1 and 11-25 mu g L-1, respectively) and linear over one order of magnitude. The application of both methods to red wine samples showed that UAE provided higher extraction of monoterpenic compounds than SPME. Although SPME remains an attractive alternative technique due to its speed, low sample volume requirements and solvent free character. (C) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
机译:评估了超声辅助萃取(UAE)和直接浸没固相微萃取(DI-SPME)来测定葡萄酒样品中的单萜类化合物。通过气相色谱-质谱法(GC-MS)分析获得的酒提取物。为了达到最佳提取效率,对影响阿联酋和SPME方法的变量进行了优化。阿联酋和SPME都是定量的(回收率分别在93-97%和71.8-90.9%范围内),精确的(变异系数低于5.5%),敏感的(检出限在30-39μg L-1和11之间)分别为-25微克L-1)和线性的一个数量级。两种方法在红酒样品中的应用表明,阿联酋比SPME提供更高的单萜类化合物提取率。尽管SPME因其速度快,样品量要求低和无溶剂特性而仍然是一种有吸引力的替代技术。 (C)2005 Elsevier B.V.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号