Application of comprehensive two dimensional gas chromatography to wine analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focused on the potential of comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography coupled to time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GCGC-TOF-MS) for the improved analysis of volatile wine constituents.Solid phase microextraction (SPME) in combination with GCGC-TOF-MS was successfully used for the detailed investigation of the impact of three commercial Oenococcus oeni lactic acid bacteria (LAB) strains on the volatile composition of Pinotage wines subjected to malolactic fermentation (MLF).Due to increased separation power and enhanced sensitivity obtained by using two orthogonal separations coupled with the structural information provided by deconvoluted TOF-MS spectra, GCGC-TOF-MS allowed for the identification and semi-quantitative analysis of much larger numbers of compounds compared to previous studies applying one-dimensional gas chromatography.The combination of univariate and multivariate statistical assessment was used as a powerful tool for data interpretation.The obtained results contribute significantly to the understanding of the impact of MLF on the volatile composition of Pinotage wine Some compounds have been linked to MLF for the first time.Moreover, the impact of these commercial starter cultures on the composition of volatile sulfur and nitrogen compounds in the same wines was studied by one-dimensional gas chromatographic methods with headspace injection and solid supported liquid-liquid extraction together with sulfur selective detection and tandem mass spectrometry.This study demonstrated also for the time, the impact of MLF on the composition of volatile sulfur and nitrogen compounds in Pinotage wine.GCGC-TOF-MS was further used for the evaluation of the suitability of a new phase for stir bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) analysis of wine volatiles.Despite instrumental complications, beneficial extraction properties of the new stir bar phase for especially more polar compounds could be demonstrated.In addition, the extraction ability of this novel phase was evaluated for the analysis of selected thiazoles in wine using heart-cutting two dimensional gas chromatography in combination with nitrogen selective detection.Advantageous extraction performance of the new stir bar phase compared to a conventional polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) phase for the determined thiazoles was demonstrated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".