Abstract
The identification and correction of negative factors, such as 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol, is important to comply with food safety regulations and avoid economic losses to wineries. A simple amperometric measurement procedure that facilitates the simultaneous quantification of both compounds in the gas phase has been developed using fullerene and cobalt (II) phthalocyanine-modified dual screen-printed electrodes coated with a room temperature ionic liquid-based gel polymer electrolyte. The replacement of the typical aqueous supporting electrolyte by low-volatility ones improves both operational and storage lifetime. Under the optimum conditions of the experimental variables, Britton Robinson buffer pH 5 and applied potentials of + 0.86 V and + 0.40 V for each working electrode (vs. Ag ref. electrode), reproducibility values of 7.6% (n = 3) for 4-ethylphenol and 6.6% (n = 3) for ethanethiol were obtained, as well as capability of detection values of 23.8 μg/L and decision limits of 1.3 μg/L and 9.2 μg/L (α = β = 0.05), respectively. These dual electrochemical devices have successfully been applied to the headspace detection of both compounds in white and red wines, showing their potential to be routinely used for rapid analysis control in wineries.
Graphical Abstract
![](http://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00604-024-06220-8/MediaObjects/604_2024_6220_Figa_HTML.png)
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Find the latest articles, discoveries, and news in related topics.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The production of high-quality wines that do not contain any faults or defects is a priority for winemakers. In addition, to comply with food safety regulations, the identification and correction of negative factors, such as off-odors, can avoid economic losses, since pleasure on consumption and reputation strongly influence the image of a wine and its purchase. Among them, volatile phenols, such as 4-ethylphenol reminiscent of stables and sweaty saddles, and volatile sulfur compounds, such as ethanethiol reminiscent of rotten-onion at threshold levels and fecal odor at higher levels, clearly have a negative influence on a wine quality [1, 2]. On the one hand, contaminated wines by Brettanomyces yeast can suffer the enzymatic transformation of grape hydroxycinnamic acids into ethylphenols [3, 4]. On the other hand, the formation of traces of mercaptans can be considered only a small anomaly in the biochemistry of fermentation, but their sensory impact can even alter the aroma of bottled wines [5, 6]. Thus, simple measurement procedures that facilitate the simultaneous quantification of these notable and harmful compounds are necessary in wine quality control, with the aim of making early preventive diagnoses. In addition to chromatographic procedures [7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14], analytical instrumentation based on the use of electrochemical sensors has also been developed to detect electroactive redox species in a matrix as complex as wine [15]. The latter stand out for their high sensitivity, low cost, and, above all, for their compact size given their ability to be miniaturized, which makes them ideal portable instruments for in situ measurements. In this way, the voltammetric currents of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol, representing mercaptans, have been registered at hanging mercury drop electrodes [6], graphite epoxy composites [16], molecularly imprinted polypyrrole-based glassy carbon electrodes [17, 18] or screen-printed carbon electrodes (SPCEs) modified by gold nanoparticles [19], fullerene (C60) [20, 21], and cobalt (II) phthalocyanine (CoPh) [22]. Electrochemical gas sensors, which are based on the detection of electron transferred during the oxidation or reduction of volatile targets at the working electrode, are quite attractive for this aim since the number of species that can interfere the analytical signal is reduced. Moreover, these sensors hold improving practices in wine analysis given that the sample is not altered [20, 22]. Activated C60-modified SPCEs (AC60/SPCEs) and CoPh-modified SPCEs (CoPh/SPCEs) have already highlighted their ability to individually quantify 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol in wine samples, using a two-step procedure in which the voltammetric measurements are carried out in solution after an incubation process in gas phase [20] or directly at the headspace of a sealed cell [22]. The main drawbacks of these sensors are related to their operational and storage lifetime, limited due to the evaporation of the nonreactive electrolyte in which the electrodes must be immersed (supporting electrolyte), which were pre-loaded by adsorption at the devices. As it has been described at the bibliography, the typical aqueous supporting electrolyte can be replaced by low-volatility materials, such as Nafion [23] or room temperature ionic liquids (RTILs) [24, 25]. Up to now, diverse approaches have been attempted for the implementation of solid supporting electrolytes onto electrochemical devices, ranging from the use of direct Nafion [23], RTIL [26] or RTIL/ethanol mixtures [27] drop-casted onto the sensor surface, RTILs dried at 60 °C for 1 day [28], to blends of RTILs, poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF), and organic solvents such as 1-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP) [29] or N,N-dimethylformamyde (DMF) [30, 31]. In this work, the performance of the simultaneous headspace amperometric quantification of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol, associated to important organoleptic defects, has been studied using AC60 and CoPh-modified dual SPCEs coated with different solid-state supporting electrolytes. These dual electrochemical devices have successfully been applied to the headspace detection of both compounds in white and red wines, showing their potential to be routinely used for rapid analysis control in wineries, that is, as a kind of point-of-care application.
Experimental
Chemicals and instrumentation
All chemicals were used of analytical reagent grade. Solutions were prepared in Milli-Q water (Millipore, Bedford, MA, USA). Britton Robinson buffer, 0.04 M phosphoric acid (Panreac, Barcelona, Spain), acetic acid 0.04 M (VWR Chemical, Fontenay, France) and boric acid 0.04 M (Panreac, Barcelona, Spain), and 0.1 M potassium chloride (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) solutions were used. A 1 M NaOH solution (Ecros, Barcelona, Spain) was used to adjust the pH.
Standard solutions of 4-ethylphenol (Alfa Aesar, Haverhill, Massachusetts, USA) and ethanethiol (VWR Chemicals, Rosny-sous-Bois, France) were prepared by dissolving the adequate amount of each reagent in Milli-Q water.
C60 (Acros Organics, Geel, Belgium) and CoPh (Alfa Aesar, Karlsruhe, Germany) solutions were prepared in dichloromethane (Panreac, Barcelona, Spain) and ethanol (VWR Chemicals, Rosny-sous-Bois, France), respectively. 1.0 M potassium hydroxide solutions (Carlo Erba, Val de Reuil, France) were used to activate C60.
Nafion (Sigma-Aldrich, Steinheim am Albuch, Germany), 1-methyl-3-octylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([OMIM]PF6, Sigma-Aldrich, San Luis, MO, USA), 1-n-butyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([BMIN]PF6, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), PVDF (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), and NMP (VWR International, Radnor, Pennsylvania, USA) were used as solid supporting electrolytes.
A potentiostat PalmSens4 (PalmSens, BV, Houten, The Netherlands) and SPCEs based on a 3-electrode configuration (DRP-C11L, Metrohm DropSens, Oviedo, Spain) and dual SPCEs (ED-D2PE-C, MicruX Technologies, Gijón, Spain) contain a silver reference, a carbon auxiliary and 2-carbon working electrodes were used for the electrochemical measurements. All the working potentials in this work were applied vs this reference electrode.
Dual SPCE modification
The 2-working electrodes were individually modified using C60 and CoPh in order to build a sensitive and selective sensor for both 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol, one-to-one, according to previously described procedures (Fig. 1a) [20, 22]. Forty microliters of a 0.1 mg/mL solution of C60 in dichloromethane was coated on the carbon working electrode surface and allowed to dry at room temperature. It has been reported a low electrochemical activity of C60 in aqueous solution, so an activation step was carried out in order to enhance its electron transfer capacity to the electrode surface. Fifty microliters of a 1 M KOH solution was dropped onto the device and a cyclic voltammogram between 0 and − 1.5 V was recorded at 10 mV/s. The partially reduced C60-modified electrode (AC60/SPCE1) becomes conducting in this way [20, 32]. The second working electrode was modified by drop-casting a volume of 10 μL of a 5% w/v solution of CoPh in ethanol and left to dry at room temperature (CoPh/SPCE2) [22].
AC60 and CoPh-modified dual SPCEs coated with gel polymer electrolytes based on the use of RTILs
The four electrodes must be immersed in supporting electrolyte to make up the electrochemical cell completely. The gel polymer electrolyte was prepared by dispersing PVDF in NMP at a mass ratio of 1:10 and stirred at 500 rpm for 10 min at 60 °C. Then, this mixture was added to [OMIM]PF6 or [BMIN]PF6 in a mass ratio of 1:2 and stirred until homogenization for a few minutes at 60 °C [33]. Finally, 3 μL of the gel mixture was deposited onto the four electrodes, forming a thin and reproducible film. The developed devices were kept at room temperature until use (Fig. 1b).
Electrochemical measurements
Modified dual SPCEs were placed on top of a sealed cell containing 1 mL of Britton Robinson buffer pH 5, except for the optimization process, avoiding contact. The cell was manufactured using a UV resin for 3D printers with a side hole that allows the introduction of samples (Figure S1). Amperometric measurements were performed by applying a potential of + 0.86 V to AC60/SPCE1 and + 0.40 V to CoPh/SPCE2, except for the optimization process. Once constant intensities were recorded, a volume of 50 μL of a 0.5 mg/L solution of both ethanethiol and 4-ethylphenol was added to the cell, recording the corresponding increase in current due to the oxidation process that takes place on the surface of both electrodes.
Commercial wine samples, analyzed without any kind of sample pre-treatment, and fortified wine samples at 23.8 μg/L or 43.6 μg/L of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol, prepared by adding the corresponding amount of solutions of each analyte to the wine sample, were analyzed as well by the standard addition method [34]. Thus, once constant intensities were recorded, a volume of 50 μL of the corresponding wine sample (unknown sample) was first added to the electrochemical cell, following by additions of a solution of known concentration of both ethanethiol and 4-ethylphenol.
Results
The simultaneous headspace amperometric quantification of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol was attempted using modified dual SPCEs, containing AC60/SPCE1 and CoPh/SPCE2 as it has been described above. Careful choice of the composition of the supporting electrolyte should improve the performance of this device in terms of operational and storage stability, so low-volatility materials were studied to replace the typical aqueous supporting electrolyte.
The behavior of AC60 and CoPh-modified dual SPCEs covered with Nafion was studied [23]. A volume of 5 μL of a mixture of a Nafion solution (2% in ethanol) and buffer, in different percentages (100:0, 50:50, and 25:75), was dropped onto the modified dual SPCEs and left to dry at room temperature. The obtained results were similar in all the three experiences: while nice signals for ethanethiol were obtained, no oxidation currents were registered for 4-ethylphenol due to a kind of blocked effect of the AC60/SPCE1 by the Nafion membrane.
As an alternative, RTILs can also be used as electrolytes on solid supports considering their non-volatility and the high ionic conductivity [24]. So, RTILs such as [OMIM]PF6 and [BMIM]PF6 were directly deposited by drop-casting onto the modified dual devices, but no reproducible currents were recorded due to their leakage. Consequently, the RTIL-modified devices were left to dry at 100 °C for 1 h and washed to remove the excess of electrolyte prior to use. In the case of AC60 and CoPh-modified SPCEs covered with [OMIM]PF6, the most influential experimental variables, pH of the supporting electrolyte and applied potential, were individually optimized to obtain the highest current for the detection of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol.
22 central composite designs were carried out taking as response to the oxidation current of 9.8 µg/L solutions of both analytes. The analysis of the variance of the obtained data, performed using the Statgraphics software [35], showed that the values that maximize the oxidation response of 4-ethylphenol were + 0.76 V and pH 2.8, and + 0.55 V and pH 5.1 in the case of ethanethiol. However, poor results were obtained either at pH 2.8 or at 5.1 when AC60 and CoPh-modified dual SPCEs covered with [OMIM][PF6] or [BMIM]PF6 were used, since the response was similar in both electrodes although a different potential was applied to each one. This was attributed to the fact that a mixture of both modifications was possibly produced when covering the electrodes with the RTILs.
Thus, solid polymer electrolytes based on the use of both RTILs were also attempted. Membranes were prepared by combining different ratios of a RTIL, PVDF as polymer matrix and NMP as solvent (Table S1), stirring them until a homogeneous mixture was formed and left to dry at 100 °C during 60 min [29]. It was observed that the greater the amount of polymer used in the mixture, the worse the adhesion of the membrane to the device. On many occasions, this membrane even ended up falling into the solution. In the cases where the membrane was well adhered to the surface, no quantifiable oxidation signals for both analytes were recorded, which was attributed to a scarce diffusion of the volatile analytes to the working electrodes (Figure S2). It has already been reported that the thermal treatment of PVDF-based solid polymer electrolytes influences the sensitivity, since higher crystallization temperature resulted in lower porosity [29, 33].
So, a gel polymer electrolyte was built using a lower PVDF concentration and a lower drying temperature, according to the procedure described in “AC60 and CoPh-modified dual SPCEs coated with gel polymer electrolytes based on the use of RTILs” section, reaching in this way both nice membrane adhesion and oxidation currents for both 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol when [OMIM]PF6 was used. In order to obtain the best signal for the simultaneous detection of both analytes, different pH values in the range from 2 to 5 and applied potentials from + 0.1 to + 1.0 V were studied. The optimum values that led to the maximum oxidation currents were Britton Robinson buffer pH 5 and applied potential of + 0.86 V for AC60-SPCE1 and + 0.4 V for CoPh-SPCE2 (Fig. 2). Under these conditions, increasing oxidation currents were registered with increasing concentrations of ethanethiol at the CoPh-SPCE2, while the AC60-SPCE1 was only able to record the effect of the addition of the solution into the electrochemical cell. On the contrary, increasing oxidation currents were registered with increasing concentrations of 4-ethylphenol at the AC60-SPCE1, but no signals were recorded at the CoPh-SPCE2.
Different calibration curves were constructed to study the performance of this procedure in terms of precision and capability of detection, under these optimum conditions, by adding both 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol simultaneously into the electrochemical cell, in such a way that their concentration ranges from 23.8 to 83.3 μg/L (Fig. 3). Outliers’ points with a studentized residual above 2.5 in absolute value were removed to provide a proper evaluation of the calibration parameters obtained by ordinary least squares regression [35]. In the case of the reproducibility, the slopes of calibration curves recorded using different AC60 and CoPh-modified dual SPCEs coated with a [OMIM]PF6-based gel polymer electrolyte were evaluated in terms of relative standard deviation (RSD), reaching a value of 7.6% (n = 3) for the AC60/SPCE1 and 6.6% (n = 3) for the CoPh/SPCE2 (Table 1 and figure S3). When these kinds of measurements were carried out using a single AC60 and CoPh-modified dual SPCEs coated with a [OMIM]PF6-based gel polymer electrolyte, it already observed a decrease in the slope of the third calibration curve (Table S2 and figure S4). Although the repeatability of these devices was slightly worse than their reproducibility, this was not considered a major drawback considering their disposable nature and ease of construction. Decision limit (CCα) and capability of detection (CCβ) were also estimated on the base of the validated calibration curves, according to the ISO 11843 approach [36], using the DETARCHI program [37]. CCα of the procedure is defined as the lowest concentration level at which the method can discriminate if the analyte of interest is in the sample with a probability of 1–α, where α is the probability of false positive. In this way, limit of decisions of 1.3 μg/L and 9.2 μg/L were achieved for 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol, respectively. Likewise, CCβ is estimated as the lowest concentration level of analyte that the method can detect with a probability of 1–β, where β is the probability of false negative. When using α = β = 0.05 values, both results were under the concentration of the first standard, 23.8 μg/L, so this value was taken as the capability of detection for both analytes from an analytical point of view [38]. This performance is as good as that achieved using individual electrochemical gas sensors (Table S3), with the great advantage that the sensors developed in this work allow the simultaneous detection of both analytes and their use for a longer time, due to the use of gel polymer electrolytes. In fact, it was possible to use these devices at least 15 days after their manufacture, having been stored at room temperature.
Headspace amperometric measurements performed for the simultaneous detection of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol in Britton Robinson buffer pH 5 using a dual AC60/SPCE1 (applied potential, + 0.86 V) and CoPh/SPCE2 (applied potential, + 0.40 V) device modified by a gel polymer electrolyte based on [OMIM]PF6. Each addition corresponds to 50 μL of a 500 μg/L of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol solution
The selectivity of the developed method was studied, considering the possibility that other volatile phenols and thiols present in the wine matrix could alter the amperometric response of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol. For this purpose, two volatile phenols were selected: 4-ethylguaiacol, which has a structure like 4-ethylphenol and 4-vinylphenol, a precursor of 4-ethylphenol; and a thiol, 4-mercaptobenzoic acid. Under the optimum measurements’ conditions for the simultaneous determination of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol, no alteration in the amperometric response was obtained due to the presence of these compounds, so they were not considered interferents.
The applicability of the method was verified by the simultaneous determination of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol in different wine samples. Four different commercial samples from different grape variety were studied without finding the presence of analyte in any of them. Recovery experiments were also performed by the analysis of fortified wine samples at two levels by the standard addition method (Table 2), obtaining values from 91 to 105%, which highlights the applicability of the developed analytical method to be routinely used for rapid analysis control in wineries [34].
Conclusions
AC60 and CoPh-modified dual SPCEs coated with a [OMIM]PF6-based gel polymer electrolyte enable the simultaneous quantification of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol in the gas phase. The use of this gel polymer electrolyte to immerse the four electrodes instead of the typical aqueous ones improves the performance of this device in terms of operational and storage lifetime. In this way, it has been possible to build reproducibility sensors, with RSD of 7.6% (n = 3) for 4-ethylphenol and 6.6% (n = 3) for ethanethiol, and to use them at least 15 days after their manufacture, having been stored at room temperature, for the quantification of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol in white and red wines, obtaining recovery values greater than 91% for both analytes. Headspace amperometric measurements of these notable and harmful compounds, associated to important organoleptic defects in wine, are quite attractive since not only the number of species that can interfere the analytical signal is reduced, but also wine samples are not altered. Considering this successful application, these dual amperometric sensors are promising candidates for use in rapid analysis control in wineries, with the aim of making early preventive diagnoses routinely.
Data availability
Data available upon request.
References
Jackson RS (2020) Wine science: principles and spplications, 5th edn. Elsevier Science, Burlington
Ribéreau-Gayon P, Glories Y, Maujean A, Dubourdieu D (2000) The chemistry of wine stabilization and treatments. In: Handbook of enology. 205–230
Eder Reinhard (2006) Defectos del vino: reconocimiento, prevención, corrección. Editorial Acribia
Morata A, Vejarano R, Ridolfi G et al (2013) Reduction of 4-ethylphenol production in red wines using HCDC+ yeasts and cinnamyl esterases. Enzyme Microb Technol 52:99–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enzmictec.2012.11.001
Boulton RB, Singleton VL, Bisson LF et al (2002) Teoría y práctica de la elaboración del vino. In: Acribia DL. Zaragoza
Guarda A, Maciel JV, Wiethan BA et al (2017) Simultaneous determination of ethanethiol, inorganic sulfide, and sulfite in wines by cathodic stripping voltammetry. Food Anal Methods 10:837–844. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-016-0640-1
Liu ZQ, Ezernieks V, Reddy P, et al (2020) A simple GC-MS/MS method for determination of smoke taint-related volatile phenols in grapes. Metabolites 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/metabo10070294
Yang R, Alcazar-Magana A, Qian YL, Qian MC (2021) Smoked-derived volatile phenol analysis in wine by stir bar sorptive extraction-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Molecules 26:1–8. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26185613
Fang Y, Qian MC (2005) Sensitive quantification of sulfur compounds in wine by headspace solid-phase microextraction technique. J Chromatogr A 1080:177–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2005.05.024
Lopez R, Lapena AC, Cacho J, Ferreira V (2007) Quantitative determination of wine highly volatile sulfur compounds by using automated headspace solid-phase microextraction and gas chromatography-pulsed flame photometric detection - critical study and optimization of a new procedure. J Chromatogr A 1143:8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2006.12.053
Herszage J, Ebeler SE (2011) Analysis of volatile organic sulfur compounds in wine using headspace solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography with sulfur chemiluminescence detection. Am J Enol Vitic 62:1–8. https://doi.org/10.5344/ajev.2010.10099
Ullrich S, Neef SK, Schmarr HG (2018) Headspace solid-phase microextraction and gas chromatographic analysis of low-molecular-weight sulfur volatiles with pulsed flame photometric detection and quantification by a stable isotope dilution assay. J Sep Sci 41:899–909. https://doi.org/10.1002/JSSC.201700649
Philipp C, Sari S, Brandes W et al (2022) Reduction in off-flavors in wine using special filter layers with integrated zeolites and the effect on the volatile profile of Austrian wines. Appl Sci-Basel 12:4343. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12094343
Bates TL, Sacks GL (2023) Rapid headspace solid-phase microextraction sheets with direct analysis in real time mass spectrometry (SPMESH-DART-MS) of derivatized volatile phenols in grape juices and wines. Anal Chim Acta 1275:341577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2023.341577
Domínguez-Renedo O, Navarro-Cuñado AM, Meléndez-Álvarez ME, Alonso-Lomillo MA (2023) Current state of electrochemical sensors in wine analysis for early diagnosis. TrAC, Trends Anal Chem 168:117349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2023.117349
González-Calabuig A, del Valle M (2018) Voltammetric electronic tongue to identify Brett character in wines. On-site quantification of its ethylphenol metabolites. Talanta 179:70–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TALANTA.2017.10.041
Domínguez-Renedo O, Navarro-Cuñado AM, Arnáiz-Lozano V, Alonso-Lomillo MAA (2020) Molecularly imprinted polypyrrole based electrochemical sensor for selective determination of 4-ethylphenol. Talanta 207:120351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2019.120351
Alonso-Lomillo MA, Domínguez-Renedo O (2023) Molecularly imprinted polypyrrole based electrochemical sensor for selective determination of ethanethiol. Talanta 253:123936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2022.123936
Alonso-Lomillo MA, López-Gil S, del Campo-García FJ, Domínguez-Renedo O (2021) Electrochemical detection of mercaptans in wine using gold nanoparticle-modified carbon electrodes. J Electrochem Soc 168:086509. https://doi.org/10.1149/1945-7111/ac1fae
Portugal-Gómez P, Asunción Alonso-Lomillo M, Domínguez-Renedo O (2022) 4-Ethyphenol detection in wine by fullerene modified screen-printed carbon electrodes. Microchem J 180:107599. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MICROC.2022.107599
Portugal-Gómez P, Navarro-Cuñado AM, Alonso-Lomillo MA, Domínguez-Renedo O (2023) Electrochemical sensors for the determination of 4-ethylguaiacol in wine. Microchim Acta 190:141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00604-023-05729-8
Portugal-Gómez P, Domínguez-Renedo O, Alonso-Lomillo MA (2023) Headspace detection of ethanethiol in wine by cobalt phthalocyanine modified screen-printed carbon electrodes. Talanta 260:124583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2023.124583
Hayes PE, Glennon JD, Buzid A, Luong JHT (2020) Simultaneous electroanalysis of guaiacol and its analogs based on their differential complexation with α-cyclodextrin on Nafion modified boron-doped diamond electrode. Electroanalysis 32:119–127. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201900403
Rehman A, Zeng X (2015) Methods and approaches of utilizing ionic liquids as gas sensing materials. RSC Adv 5:58371–58392. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5ra06754e
Xiong L, Compton RG (2014) Amperometric gas detection: a review. Int J Electrochem Sci 9:7152–7181. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1452-3981(23)10957-6
Wan H, Gan Y, Sun J et al (2019) High sensitive reduced graphene oxide-based room temperature ionic liquid electrochemical gas sensor with carbon-gold nanocomposites amplification. Sens Actuators B Chem 299:126952. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SNB.2019.126952
Mu X, Wang Z, Zeng X, Mason AJ (2013) A robust flexible electrochemical gas sensor using room temperature ionic liquid. IEEE Sens J 13. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2013.2262932
Nagles E, García-Beltrán O, Calderón JA (2017) Evaluation of the usefulness of a novel electrochemical sensor in detecting uric acid and dopamine in the presence of ascorbic acid using a screen-printed carbon electrode modified with single walled carbon nanotubes and ionic liquids. Electrochim Acta 258:512–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2017.11.093
Kuberský P, Altšmíd J, Hamáček A et al (2015) An electrochemical NO2 sensor based on ionic liquid: influence of the morphology of the polymer electrolyte on sensor sensitivity. Sensors 15:28421–28434. https://doi.org/10.3390/s151128421
Gao J, Hua Z, Xu S et al (2021) Amperometric gas sensors based on screen printed electrodes with porous ceramic substrates. Sens Actuators B Chem 342:130045. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SNB.2021.130045
Gao W, Zhi Z, Fan S et al (2022) Amperometric hydrogen sensor based on solid polymer electrolyte and titanium foam electrode. ACS Omega 7:24895–24902. https://doi.org/10.1021/ACSOMEGA.2C03610/SUPPL_FILE/AO2C03610_SI_001.PDF
Goyal RN, Gupta VK, Bachheti N, Sharma RA (2008) Electrochemical sensor for the determination of dopamine in presence of high concentration of ascorbic acid using a fullerene-C60 coated gold electrode. Electroanalysis 20:757–764. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.200704073
Lee J, Hussain G, López-Salas N et al (2020) Thin films of poly(vinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene)-ionic liquid mixtures as amperometric gas sensing materials for oxygen and ammonia. Analyst 145:1915–1924. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9AN02153A
Thompson M, Ellison SLR, Wood R (2002) Harmonized guidelines for single-laboratory validation of methods of analysis (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure Appl Chem 74:835–855. https://doi.org/10.1351/pac200274050835
STATGRAPHICS Centurion 19 -X64 (2022) Statpoint technologies
ISO 11843 (2000) Capability of detection (part i: terms and definitions ,1997. Part 2: methodology in the linear calibration case). Geneva, Switzerland
Sarabia L, Ortiz MC (1994) DETARCHI: A program for detection limits with specified assurance probabilities and characteristic curves of detection. TrAC - Trends Anal Chem 13:1–6
Ortiz MC, Sarabia LA, Herrero A et al (2003) Capability of detection of an analytical method evaluating false positive and false negative (ISO 11843) with partial least squares. Chemom Intell Lab Syst 69:21–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7439(03)00110-2
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the collaboration of Dr. M.E. Meléndez-Álvarez from Estación Enológica de Haro (La Rioja, Spain).
Funding
Open Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature. This research was supported by the Agencia Estatal de Investigación/Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (PID2020-117095RB-I00/AEI/https://doi.org/10.13039/501100011033).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Portugal-Gómez, P., Domínguez-Renedo, O. & Alonso-Lomillo, M.A. Gel polymer electrolyte-based dual screen-printed electrodes for the headspace quantification of 4-ethylphenol and ethanethiol simultaneously in wines. Microchim Acta 191, 208 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00604-024-06220-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00604-024-06220-8