4.6 Article

High-throughput analysis of bergamot essential oil by fast solid-phase microextraction-capillary gas chromatography-flame ionization detection

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1103, 期 1, 页码 162-165

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2005.11.073

关键词

solid-phase microextraction; headspace SPME; gas chromatography; Bergamot essential oil; fast GC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The advantages of using a narrow-bore column in headspace solid-phase microextraction-gas chromatographic (HS-SPME-GC) analysis are investigated. An automated rapid HS-SPME-GC method for the determination of volatile compounds in a complex sample (bergamot essential oil) was developed. A low-capacity (7 mu m) SPME fibre was employed, enabling a short equilibration time (15 min). The absorbed volatile compounds were then separated in 12.5 min on a 10 m x 0.1 mm I.D. capillary. The fast GC method was characterized by relatively moderate GC parameters (head pressure: 173 kPa; temperature program rate: 12 degrees C/min). The employment of the low-capacity fibre also suited the reduced sample capacity of the capillary employed, hence column overloading was avoided. Analytical repeatibility was determined in terms of retention times (maximum RSD: 0.32%) and peak areas (maximum RSD: 9.80%). The results obtained were compared to those derived from a conventional HS-SPME-GC (a 30 mu m SPME fibre and 0.25 mm I.D. capillary were used) application on the same sample. In this respect, a great reduction of analytical time was obtained both with regard to the conventional SPME equilibration and GC run times, which both required 50 min. Peak resolution was altogether comparable in both applications. Although a slight loss in terms of sensitivity was observed in the rapid approach (generally within the 25-50% range), this did not impair the detection of all peaks of interest. Finally, the selectivities of the 30 and 7 mu m fibres were evaluated and, as expected, these were in good agreement. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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