Abstract
The analytical performance of three extraction procedures based on cold liquid–liquid extraction using dicloromethane (LLE), solid phase extraction (SPE) using a styrene–divinylbenzene copolymer and headspace solid phase microextraction (SPME) using a carboxen–polydimethylsiloxane coated fibre has been evaluated based on the analysis of 30 representative wine volatile compounds. From the comparison of the three procedures, LLE and SPE showed very good linearity covering a wide range of concentrations of wine volatile compounds, low detection limits, high recovery for most of the volatile compounds under study and higher sensitivity compared to the headspace-SPME procedure. The latter showed in general, poor recovery for polar volatile compounds. Despite some drawbacks associated with the LLE and SPE procedures such as the more tedious sampling treatment and the use of organic solvents, the analytical performance of both procedures showed that they are more adequate for the analysis of wine volatiles.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
