4.7 Article

Volatile Profile of Two-Phase Olive Pomace (Alperujo) by HS-SPME-GC-MS as a Key to Defining Volatile Markers of Sensory Defects Caused by Biological Phenomena in Virgin Olive Oil

期刊

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 69, 期 17, 页码 5155-5166

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.1c01157

关键词

virgin olive oil classification; panel test; olive oil volatile organic compounds; olive oil by-products; HS-SPME-GC-MS; alperujo; fusty/muddy sediment defect

资金

  1. FOODOLEAPLUS project - Tuscany region [6762 (396)]
  2. COMPETiTiVE-Claims of Olive oil to iMProvE the market ValuE project (AGER 2 Project) [2016-0174]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The volatile fraction of olive oil, specifically markers for defects of microbiological origin, was analyzed to discriminate among olive oils with different quality categories. These markers, composed of esters, alcohols, ketones, and α-hydroxy-ketones, but not carboxylic acids, were able to distinguish EVOOs from defective samples.
An olive pomace from the two-phase decanter stored in different conditions was used as a model to simulate the detrimental biological phenomena occurring during olive oil processing and storage. A group of EVOO and defective oils were also analyzed. The volatile fraction was studied with HS-SPME-GC-MS; 127 volatiles were identified (55 of which tentatively identified) and evaluated over time. Seven volatiles were tentatively identified for the first time in olive oil; the role of C6 alcohols in detrimental biological phenomena was highlighted. Suitable volatile markers for defects of microbiological origin were defined, particularly the fusty/muddy sediment. They were then applied to olive oils with different quality categories; one of the markers was able to discriminate among EVOOs and all the defective samples, including the borderline ones. The marker was constituted by the sum of concentrations of 10 esters, 4 alcohols, 1 ketone, and 1 alpha-hydroxy-ketone but no carboxylic acids.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据