Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of two quantitative GC–MS methods for analysis of tomato aroma based on purge-and-trap and on solid-phase microextraction

  • Special Issue Paper
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two analytical procedures, one based on purge-and-trap and the other on solid phase microextraction, both followed by GC–MS measurement using an ion-trap mass spectrometer in the electron impact mode, have been developed for determination and quantitation of up to 39 aroma compounds in fresh tomatoes. The method based on purge-and-trap for isolation of the volatile compounds uses Tenax as adsorbent and a hexane–diethyl ether mixture as solvent for elution. The method was validated for linearity, precision (better than 20% for most compounds), and limit of detection, which was approximately 1 ng g−1. This method enabled identification of up to 30 compounds in real samples. Use of SPME was considered as an alternative, to simplify sample treatment while maintaining the information level for the samples (e.g. the number of compounds detected) and quality of quantitation. A procedure based on SPME using a Carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane fibre was developed and validated for determination of 29 aroma compounds; precision was better than 20% and limits of detection ranged from 4 to 30 ng g−1.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Buttery RG, Teranishi R, Ling LC (1987) J Agric Food Chem 35:540–544

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Petro-Turza M (1987) Food Rev 2:309–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Buttery RG, Seifert RM, Guadagni DG, Ling LC (1971) J Agric Food Chem 19:524–529

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Buttery RG, Teranishi R, Ling LC, Flath RA, Stern DJ (1988) J Agric Food Chem 36:1247–1250

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Tandon KS, Baldwin EA, Schewfelt RL (2000) Postharvest Biol Technol 20:261–268

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Baldwin EA, Scott JW, Einstein MA, Malundo TMM, Carr BT, Schewfelt RL, Tandon KS (1998) J Am Soc Hort Sci 125:906–915

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gocmen D, Gurbuz O, Rousef RL, Smoot JM, Dagdelen AF (2004) Eur Food Res Technol 218:573–578

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Abegaz EG, Tandon KS, Scott JW, Baldwin EA, Schewfelt RL (2004) Postharvest Biol Technol 34:227–235

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Williams A, Ryan D, Guasca AO, Marriott P, Pang E (2005) J Chromatogr B 817:97–107

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Zabetakis I, Holden MA (1997) J Sci Food Agric 74:421

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Song J, Fan L, Beaudry RM (1998) J Agric Food Chem 46:3721–3726

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Holt RU (2001) J Chromatogr A 937:107

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Krumbein A, Peters P, Bruckner B (2004) Postharvest Biol Technol 32:15–28

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Arthur CL, Pawliszyn J (1990) Anal Chem 62:2145–2148

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Berna AZ, Lammertyn J, Saevels S, Natale C, Nicolai BM (2004) Sens actuators 97:324–333

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Bezman Y, Mayer F, Takeoka GR, Buttery RG, Ben-Oliol G, Rabinowitch HD, Naim M (2003) J Agric Food Chem 51:722–726

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Servili M, Selvaggini R, Taticchi A, Begliomini AL, Montedoro G (2000) Food Chem 71:407–415

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Azondalou R, Darbellay C, Luisier J-L, Villettaz J-C, Amado R (2003) Lebensm Wiss U Technol 36:223–233

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Verzera A, Ziino M, Condurso C, Romeo V, Zappala M (2004) Anal Bioanal Chem 380:930–936

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Pinho O, Ferreira IMPLVO, Ferreira MA (2002) Anal Chem 74:5199–5204

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Reid LM, O’Donnell CP, Downey G (2004) J Agric Food Chem 52:421–427

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Alves RF, Nascimento AMD, Nogueira JMF (2005) Anal Chim Acta 546:11–21

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Bonino M, Schellino R, Rizzi C (2003) Food Chem 80:125–133

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Augusto F, Leite A, Alcaraz C (2003) Trends Anal Chem 22:160–169

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Buttery RG, Ling LC (1996) In: Takoka GR, Teranishi R, Williams PJ, Kobayashi A (eds) Biotechnology for improved foods and flavours, ACS Symposium Series 637, Washington DC

  26. Dirink P, de Pooter H, Willaert G, Schamp N (1984) In: Schreier P (ed) Analysis of volatiles, Walt de Gruyter, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  27. Chang C, Seitz LM, Chambers E (1995) Cereal Chem 72:237

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. SANCO/3029/99 rev4 (Residues: Guidance for generating and reporting methods of analysis in support of pre-registration data requirements for Annex II and Annex III of Directive 91/414)

  29. Lee YC (2004) In: Chan CC, Lam H, Lee YC, Zhang X (eds) Analytical method validation and instrument performance verification, Wiley, New Jersey, USA

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work has been developed with financial support from the Ministry of Science and Technology (Project AGL2002-04224-C02-01) of Spain. The Purchase of the Varian GC–MS system was financed by the Generalitat Valenciana (INFRAEXTRUCTURA04/022).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Institute for Pesticides and Water, University Jaume I, P.O. Box 8029 AP, 12080, Castellón, Spain

    J. Beltran, E. Serrano, F. J. López & A. Peruga

  2. Vegetable Crops, Department Experimental Sciences, University Jaume I, P.O. Box 8029 AP, 12080, Castellón, Spain

    M. Valcarcel & S. Rosello

Authors
  1. J. Beltran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E. Serrano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. F. J. López
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Peruga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Valcarcel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. S. Rosello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Beltran.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Beltran, J., Serrano, E., López, F.J. et al. Comparison of two quantitative GC–MS methods for analysis of tomato aroma based on purge-and-trap and on solid-phase microextraction. Anal Bioanal Chem 385, 1255–1264 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-006-0410-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-006-0410-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation