Fresh and grilled eel volatile fingerprinting by e-Nose, GC-O, GC–MS and GCxGC-QTOF combined with purge and trap and solvent-assisted flavor evaporation

You are here:
< All Topics

Authors: Xu-Hui Huang, Xu Zheng, Zeng-Hui Chen, Yu-Ying Zhang, Ming Du, Xiu-Ping Dong, Lei Qin, Bei-Wei Zhu


Fresh and grilled eel were investigated with respect to their volatile compounds and different fingerprinting techniques. An electronic nose (e-Nose) was applied to distinguish the odor between fresh and grilled eels. Purge and trap (P&T) and solvent-assisted flavor evaporation (SAFE) method were used to extract volatile compounds and further analyzed by a gas chromatographic combined with quadrupole mass spectrometry (GC–MS) and a two-dimensional gas chromatographic combined with hybrid quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GC × GC-QTOF). SAFE extracted more ketone, alcohol and high boiling volatiles in eels than P&T. Considering some distinct compounds extracted by P&T, a P&T and SAFE combined method was chosen. There were 155 volatiles detected in fresh and grilled eels, 93 volatiles were identified. Due to the higher peak capacity, GC × GC-QTOF detected 39 compounds more than GC–MS. The key characteristic volatiles of grilled eel were methyl propyl disulfide, dimethyl trisulfide, heptane, octane, and camphene. Volatile fingerprinting can be a reference benchmark for identification and quality appraisal of fresh and grilled eel products.

Read full study:

Previous Article Flavoromics approach in monitoring changes in volatile compounds of virgin rapeseed oil caused by seed roasting
Next Article Health risks posed to infants in rural China by exposure to short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins in breast milk
Table of Contents