Acetaldehyde (ethanal) (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-01 Acetaldehyde
Type IV method
- Principle
Acetaldehyde (ethanal) in carbon decolorized wine, reacts with sodium nitroferricyanide and piperidine and causes a green to violet color change whose intensity is measured at 570 nm.
- Apparatus
Spectrophotometer permitting measurement of absorbance at a wavelength of 570 nm with a 1 cm optical cell path.
- Reagents
3.1. Piperidine solution, ( 10% (v/v).
Prepare just before use by mixing 2 mL of piperidine with 18 mL of distilled water.
3.2. Sodium nitroferricyanide solution, 0.4% (m/v).
In a 250 mL glass volumetric flask, dissolve 1 g of pulverized sodium nitroferricyanide, in distilled water and make up to volume.
3.3. Activated carbon
3.4. Dilute hydrochloric acid, 25% (v/v)
3.5. Alkaline solution
Dissolve 8.75 g of boric acid in 400 mL sodium hydroxide solution, 1 M. Make up to 1 L with distilled water.
-
Procedure
- Sample
Place approx. 25 mL of wine in a 100 mL Erlenmeyer flask, add 2 g of activated charcoal. Shake vigorously for a few seconds, allow to stand for 2 minutes and filter through a fluted slow filter to obtain a clear filtrate.
Place 2 mL of the clear filtrate into a 100 mL Erlenmeyer flask, add, while shaking, 5 mL of the sodium nitroferricyanide solution (3.2) and 5 mL of the piperidine solution (3.1). Mix and place the mixture immediately into a 1 cm optical cell. The coloration produced, which varies from green to violet, is measured with reference to air at a wavelength of 570 nm. This color change increases then decreases rapidly; measure immediately and record the maximum value of the absorbance that is obtained after about 50 seconds. The concentration of acetaldehyde in the liquid analyzed is obtained using a calibration curve.
Note: If the liquid analyzed contains excess free acetaldehyde, it will be necessary, before beginning the total acetaldehyde determination, to first combine it with sulfur dioxide. To achieve this, add a small amount of excess free SO2 to a portion of the liquid to be analyzed and wait for an hour before proceeding.
4.2. Preparation of the calibration curve
4.2.1. Solution of acetaldehyde combined with sulfur dioxide
Prepare a solution of between 5 to 6% (m/v) sulfur dioxide and determine the exact strength by titrating with 0.05 M iodine solution.
In a 1 L glass volumetric flask, add a volume of this solution which corresponds to 1500 mg of sulfur dioxide. Introduce into the flask, using a funnel, about 1 mL of acetaldehyde distillate recently distilled and collected in a cooling mixture. Make up to 1 liter with distilled water. Mix and allow to stand overnight.
The exact concentration of this solution is determined as follows:
Place in a 500 mL Erlenmeyer flask, 50 mL of the solution; add 20 mL of dilute hydrochloric acid (3.4) and 100 mL water. Titrate the free sulfur dioxide using a solution of 0.05 M iodine with starch as indicator, stopping at a faint blue end point. Add 100 mL of the alkaline solution, and the blue coloration will disappear. Titrate the combined sulfur dioxide and acetaldehyde with 0.05 M iodine until a faint blue end point is reached: let n be the volume used.
The acetaldehyde solution combined with SO2 contains 44.05 n mg of acetaldehyde per liter.
4.2.2. Preparation of the calibration standards
In five 100 mL glass volumetric flasks, place respectively 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 mL of the stock solution. Make up to volume with distilled water. These solutions correspond to acetaldehyde concentrations of 40, 60, 120, 160 and 200 mg/L. The exact concentration of the dilutions must be calculated from the acetaldehyde concentration of the stock solution (4.2.1) previously determined.
Proceed with the determination of acetaldehyde on 2 mL of each of these dilutions as indicated in 4.1. The graph of the absorbance of these solutions as a function of acetaldehyde content is a straight line that does not pass through the origin.
Bibliography
- REBELEIN H., Dtsch. Lebensmit. Rdsch., 1970, 66, 5-6.
Ethyl Acetate (GC) (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-02A Ethyl acetate
Type IV method
- Principle of the method
Ethyl acetate is determined by gas chromatography on wine distillate using an internal standard.
-
Method
- Apparatus (see chapter Volatile Acidity).
- Procedure
Prepare an internal standard solution of 4-methyl-2-pentanol, 1 g/L, in ethanol solution, 10% (v/v).
Prepare the sample solution to be determined by adding 5 mL of this internal standard solution to 50 mL of wine distillate obtained as indicated in the chapter on Alcoholic Strength.
Prepare a reference solution of ethyl acetate, 50 mg/L, in ethanol, 10% (v/v). Add 5 mL of the internal standard to 50 mL of this solution.
Analyze 2 μL of the sample solution and the reference solution using gas chromatography.
Oven temperature is 90°C and the carrier gas flow rate is 25 mL per minute.
2.3. Calculation
S = the peak area of ethyl acetate in the reference solution.
= the peak area of the ethyl acetate in the sample solution.
I = the peak area of the internal standard in the sample solution.
I = the peak area of the internal standard in the reference solution.
The concentration of ethyl acetate, expressed in milligrams per liter, is given by:
|
Ethyl Acetate (titrimetry) (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-02B Ethyl acetate
Type IV method
- Principle of the method
Ethyl acetate is separated by distillation of wine brought to pH 6.5. After saponification and suitable concentration in an alkaline environment, the distillate is acidified and the vapor condensed to separate the acetic acid liberated by saponification; the acid portion is titrated with the alkaline solution.
- Method
2.1 Reagents
2.1.1. Sodium hydroxide solution, 1 M
2.1.2. pH 6.5 Buffer solution
Potassium di-hydrogen phosphate, |
5 g |
Sodium hydroxide solution 1 M |
50 mL |
Water to |
1 L |
2.1.3. Crystalline tartaric acid
2.1.4. Sodium hydroxide solution, 0.02 M
2.1.5. Neutral phenolphthalein solution, 1%, in alcohol, 96% (v/v).
2.2. Usual method
Into a 500 mL volumetric flask, place 100 mL of non-decarbonated wine neutralized with n mL of 1 M sodium hydroxide solution, n being the volume of sodium hydroxide solution, 0.1 M, used for measuring the total acidity of 10 mL of wine. Add 50 mL of pH 6.5 buffer solution and distill. The distillation must be conducted using a tapered tube into a 500 mL round-bottom flask containing 5 mL of 1 M sodium hydroxide solution, on which a mark has been made indicating a volume of approximately 35 mL. Collect 30 mL of distillate.
Stopper the flask and allow to stand for one hour. Concentrate the contents of the flask to approximately 10 mL by placing it in a boiling water bath and blowing a rapid stream of air into the bowl of the flask. Allow to cool. Add 3 g tartaric acid (2.1.3). Eliminate carbon dioxide by shaking under a vacuum. Transfer the liquid from the concentrating flask to the bubbling chamber of a steam distillation apparatus and rinse the flask twice with 5 mL of water. Steam distill and recover at least 250 mL of distillate.
Titrate with a 0.02 M sodium hydroxide solution, in the presence of phenolphthalein.
2.3. Calculation
Let n be the number of milliliters of sodium hydroxide solution, 0.02 M (2.1.4) used. 1 mL corresponds to 1.76 mg ethyl acetate.
The concentration of ethyl acetate in milligrams per liter is given by:
|
Bibliography
Usual method:
- PEYNAUD E., Analyse et contrôle des vins, Librairie Polytechnique Ch.- Béranger, 1958.
Malvidin Diglucoside (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-03 Malvidin diglucoside
Type IV method
- Principle
Malvidin diglucoside, oxidized by nitric acid, is converted to a substance that, in an ammonium medium, emits a vivid green fluorescence in ultraviolet light.
The intensity of the fluorescence of the compound formed is measured by comparison with the fluorescence of a solution titrated with quinine sulfate whose intensity of fluorescence is standardized with the malvidin diglucoside reference.
Free sulfur dioxide, which attenuates the fluorescence, must previously be combined with excess acetaldehyde.
-
Qualitative Examination
-
Apparatus
- Ultraviolet lamp permitting measurement at 365 nm.
-
Apparatus
2.2. Reagents
2.2.1. Acetaldehyde solution
Crystallizable paraldehyde |
10 g |
Ethanol 96% (v/v) |
100 mL |
2.2.2. Hydrochloric acid, 1.0 M.
2.2.3. Sodium nitrate solution, 10 g/L.
2.2.4. Ethanol, 96% (v/v), containing 5% concentrated ammonia solution (ρ20 = 0.92 g/mL).
2.2.5. Control wine containing 15 mg of malvidin diglucoside per liter.
2.2.6. Wine containing no malvidin diglucoside.
2.3. Method
Into a test tube add:
- 10 mL of wine
- 1.5 mL of acetaldehyde solution
wait 20 minutes.
Into a 20 mL centrifuge tube place:
- 1 mL of wine reacted with acetaldehyde
- 1 drop of hydrochloric acid
- 1 mL sodium nitrate solution
Stir; wait 2 minutes (5 minutes maximum); add:
- 10 mL ammoniacal ethanol
Treat similarly 10 mL of wine containing 15 mg/L malvidin diglucoside (The control wine). Stir. Wait 10 minutes and centrifuge.
Decant the clear liquids from the top into calibrated test tubes. Observe the difference in green fluorescence between the test wine and the control wine under ultraviolet light at 365 nm.
For rose wines, it is possible to increase the sensitivity using:
- 5 mL of wine treated with acetaldehyde (2.3)
- 0.2 mL hydrochloric acid, 1 M (2.2.2)
- 1 mL sodium nitrate solution, 10 g/L (2.2.3)
- 5.8 mL ammoniacal ethanol (2.2.4)
Treat the control wine in a similar manner.
2.4. Interpretation
Wines that do not fluoresce, or have a distinctly lower fluorescence, than the control, may be considered to have no malvidin diglucoside. Those whose fluorescence is slightly less than, equal to, or greater than the control should have a quantitative determination.
-
Quantitative Determination
-
Apparatus
- Equipment for measuring fluorescence:
-
Apparatus
- excitation wavelength 365 nm;
-
wavelength of fluorescent radiation 490 nm.
- Optical quartz cell (1 cm path length)
3.2. Reagents
3.2.1. See qualitative examination
3.2.2. 2 mg/L quinine sulfate solution
Prepare a solution containing 10 mg very pure quinine sulfate in 100 mL sulfuric acid, 0.1 M. Dilute 20 mL of this solution to 1 liter with sulfuric acid solution, 0.1 M.
3.3. Procedure
Treat the wine by the method described in Qualitative examination (2), except that the aliquot of acetaldehyde treated wine is each case (red wines and roses) 1 mL.
Place the 2 mg/L solution of quinine sulfate in the cell, adjust the fluorometer to the full range (transmission T, equal to 100%) by adjusting the slit width or the sensitivity.
Replace this tube with the one containing the test wine: this is the T1 value.
If the percentage of transmission, T1 is greater than 35, dilute the wine with wine without malvidin diglucoside whose fluorescence must be less than 6% (this should be ascertained by previous testing.)
Remarks:
- Salicylic acid (sodium salicylate) added to the wine for stabilization before analysis, causes a spurious fluorescence which can be eliminated by an extraction with ether.
- Spurious fluorescence is caused by the addition of caramel.
3.4. Calculation
A fluorescence intensity of 1, for wine without SO2, for the operating conditions above with the exception of the acetaldehyde treatment, corresponds to 0.426 mg malvidin diglucoside per liter of wine.
On the other hand, red and rose wines, containing no malvidin diglucoside, give fluorescence corresponding to a T value of the order of 6%.
The amount of malvidin diglucoside in wine in milligrams per liter is therefore:
|
If the wine is diluted, multiply the result by the dilution factor.
3.5. Expression of the Results
The amount of malvidin diglucoside is expressed in milligrams per liter of wine to the nearest whole number.
Bibliography
- Dorier P., Verelle L., Ann. Fals. Exp. Chim., 1966, 59, 1.
- Garoglio P.G., Rivista Vitic. Enol., 1968, 21, 11.
- Bieber H., Deutsche Lebensm. Rdsch., 1967, 44-46.
- Clermont Mlle S., Sudraud P., F.V., O.I.V., 1976 n° 586.
Ethyl Carbamate (Type-II)
OIV-MA-AS315-04 Ethyl carbamate
Type II method
Ethyl carbamate analysis in alcoholic beverages: selective detection method by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry
(Applicable to the determination of ethyl carbamate concentrations between 10 and 200 μg/l).
(Caution: respect safety measures when handling chemical products, ethanol, acetone and carcinogenic products: ethyl carbamate and dichloromethane. Get rid of used solvants in a suitable way, compatible with applicable environmental rules and regulations).
- Principle
Propyl carbamate is added to a sample as an internal standard, the solution is diluted with water and placed in a 50 mL solid phase extraction column. Ethyl carbamate and propyl carbamate are eluted with dichloromethane. The eluate is concentrated in a rotary evaporator under vacuum. The concentrate is analyzed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry using selected ion monitoring mode.
- Apparatus
2.1. Gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer (GC/MS). With selected ion monitoring (SIM), and data handling system. An autosampler is desirable.
2.2. Capillary fused silica column: 30m[1] 0.25 mm int., 0.25 μm of Carbowax 20M type.
2.3. Operating conditions: injector 180°C, helium carrier gas at 1 mL/min at 25°C, splitless injection. Temperature program: 40°C for 0.75 min, then program 10°C/min to 60°C, then 3°C[2]/min to 150°C, post run: go up to 220°C and maintain for 4.25 min at 220°C. The retention time for ethyl carbamate is 23-27 min., that of propyl carbamate is 27-31 min.
GC/MS interface: transfer line 220°C. Mass spectrometer parameters set up manually with perfluorotributylamine and optimized for a lower mass sensitivity, SIM acquisition mode, solvent delay and time for the start of acquisition 22 min., dwell time/ion 100 ms.
2.4. Rotary evaporator under vacuum or concentration system similar to Kuderna Danish. (Note: the recovery of the ethyl carbamate test sample, (3.7) must be between 90-110% during the process).
2.5. Flask - pear-shaped, 300 mL, single neck, 24/40 standard taper joint.
2.6. Concentrator tube - 4 mL, graduated, with a standard taper 19/22 Teflon coated joint and stopper.
- Reagents
3.1. Acetone - HPLC quality. Note: Check each batch by GC/MS before use with regard to the absence of response for m/z 62, 74 and 89 ions.
3.2. Dichloromethane - Note: Analyze each batch before use by GC/MS after 200 fold concentration to check the absence of response for m/z 62, 74 and 89 ions.
3.3. Ethanol – anhydrous
3.4. Ethyl carbamate (EC) standard solutions
- Stock solution - 1.00 mg/mL. Weigh 100 mg EC ( 99% purity) in a volumetric flask of 100 mL and dilute to mark with acetone.
-
(2) Standard working solution- 10.0 g/mL. Transfer 1 mL of the EC stock solution to a 100 mL volumetric flask and dilute with acetone to the mark.
- n-Propyl carbamate (PC), standard solutions.
- Stock solution - 1.00 mg/mL. Weigh 100 mg PC (reagent quality) in a 100 mL volumetric flask and dilute with acetone to the mark.
- (2) Standard working solution- 10.0 μg/mL. Transfer 1 mL of the PC stock solution to a volumetric flask of 100 mL and dilute with acetone to the mark.
-
(3) Internal standard solution PC - 400 ng/mL. Transfer 4 mL of the standard PC working solution to a volumetric flask of 100 mL and dilute with water to the mark.
- EC - nPC standard calibration solutions - Dilute the standard working solutions of EC, 3.4 (2), and PC 3.5 (2), with dichloromethane in order to obtain:
- (1) 100 ng EC and 400 ng nPC/mL,
- (2) 200 ng EC and 400 ng nPC/mL,
- (3) 400 ng EC and 400 ng nPC/mL,
- (4) 800 ng EC and 400 ng nPC/mL,
-
(5) 1600 ng EC and 400 ng nPC/mL.
- Practice sample - 100 ng EC/mL in 40 % ethanol. Transfer 1 mL of the standard EC working solution, 3.4 (2) in a 100 mL volumetric flask and dilute with 40 % of ethanol to the mark.
- Solid phase extraction column - Disposable material, pre-packed with diatomaceous earth, capacity 50 mL.
(Note: Before analysis, check each batch of extraction columns for the recovery of EC and nPC and the absence of response for ions of m/z 62,74 and 89.) Prepare 100 ng EC/mL of test sample 3.7.
Analyze 5.00 mL of the test sample as described in 4.1, 4.2, 5, and 6. The recovery of 90-110 ng of EC/mL is satisfactory. Adsorbents whose particle diameter is irregular can lead to a slow flow that affects the recovery of EC and nPC.
If, after several trials, 90-110 % of the test sample value is not obtained, change the column or use a corrected calibration recovery curve to quantify EC.
To obtain the corrected calibration curve, prepare standard solutions as described in 3.6 by using 40 % ethanol instead of dichloromethane.
Analyze 1 mL of the standard calibration solution as described in 4, 5, and 6.
Establish a new standardization curve by using the EC/nPC ratio of the extracted standards.
- Preparation of the test sample
Place the test material in 2 separate 100 mL beakers using the following quantities:
4.1. Wines containing over 14 % vol. alcohol: 5.00 mL 0.01 mL.
4.2. Wines containing maximum 14% vol. of alcohol: 20.00 mL 0.01 mL.
In each beaker, add 1 mL of internal standard PC solution, 3.5 (3) and water, in order to obtain a total volume of 40 mL (or 40 g).
- Extraction
(Note: Carry out the extraction under a fume hood with adequate ventilation.)
Transfer diluted test portion from 4 to the extraction column.
Rinse the beaker with 10 mL of water and transfer the rinsing water to the column. Let the liquid be absorbed in the column for 4 minutes. Elute with 2 x 80 mL of dichloromethane.
Collect the eluate in a 300 mL pear-shaped flask.
Evaporate the eluate to 2 to 3 mL in a rotary evaporator in a water bath at 30°C (Note: do not let extract evaporate to dryness).
Transfer the concentrated residue to a 4 mL graduated concentrator tube, with a 9 in Pasteur pipette.
Rinse the flask with 1 mL of dichloromethane and transfer the rinsing liquid to the tube.
Concentrate the sample to 1 mL under a slight nitrogen stream.
If an autosampler is used, transfer the concentrate to a vial for GC/MS analysis.
- GC/MS Analysis
6.1. Calibration curve - Inject 1 μl of each calibration standard solution 3.6, into GC/MS. Plot the graph of the EC-nPC area ratio for the response to m/z 62 ion on the y-axis and the quantity of EC in ng/mL on the x-axis (i.e., 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 ng/mL).
6.2. EC quantification - Inject 1 μl of concentrated extract from 5 in the GC/MS system and calculate the EC-nPC area ratio for m/z 62 ion. Determine the concentration of EC (ng/mL) in the extract by using the internal standard standardization curve. Calculate the EC concentration in the test sample (ng/mL) by dividing the quantity of EC (ng/mL) in the extract by the test sample volume 3.7.
6.3. Confirmation of EC identity. Determine if the response for m/z 62, 74 and 89 ions appear at the EC retention time. These responses characteristic respectively of the main fragments (M - and (M - and molecular ion (M). The presence of EC is confirmed if the relative ratio of these ions does not exceed 20% of the ratios of the EC standard. The extract may need to be further concentrated in order to obtain a sufficient response for the m/z 89 ion.
- Method performance.
Sample |
Mean EC found, ng/g |
Recovery of added EC, % |
sr |
SR |
RSDr % |
RSDR% |
Wine over 14 % alcohol (v/v) |
40 |
1.59 |
4.77 |
4.01 |
12.02 |
|
80 |
89 |
3.32 |
7.00 |
4.14 |
8.74 |
|
162 |
90 |
8.20 |
11.11 |
5.05 |
6.84 |
|
Wine under 14% alcohol (v/v) |
11 |
0.43 |
2.03 |
3.94 |
18.47 |
|
25 |
93 |
1.67 |
2.67 |
6.73 |
10.73 |
|
48 |
93 |
1.97 |
4.25 |
4.10 |
8.86 |
[1] For certain wines which are particularly rich, it may be desirable to use a 50m long capillary column
[2] For certain wines which are particularly rich, it may be desirable to carry out a temperature program of 2°C per minute.
Hydroxymethylfurfural (colorimetry) (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-05A Hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF)
Type IV method
- Principle of the method
Aldehydes derived from furan, the main one being hydroxymethylfurfural, react with barbituric acid and para-toluidine to give a red compound which is determined by colorimetry at 550 nm.
Free sulfurous acid interferes with the determination. When its amount exceeds 10 mg/L, it must be previously eliminated by combining it with acetaldehyde whose excess does not interfere with the determination.
- Colorimetric method
2.1. Apparatus
2.1.1. Spectrophotometer for making measurements between 300 and 700 nm.
2.1.2. Glass cells with optical paths of 1 cm.
2.2. Reagents
2.2.1. Barbituric acid solution, 0.5% (m/v)
Dissolve 500 mg of barbituric acid in distilled water by heating slightly over a water bath at 100°C. Make up to 100 mL with distilled water. This solution keeps for about a week.
2.2.2. Para-toluidine solution, 10% (m/v).
Place 10 g of para-toluidine in a 100 mL volumetric flask; add 50 mL of iso-propanol,, and 10 mL of glacial acetic acid, (ρ20 = 1.05 g/mL). Make up to 100 mL with iso-propanol. This solution should be renewed daily.
2.2.3. Acetaldehyde (ethanal) solution, 1% (m/v).
Prepare just before use.
2.2.4. Hydroxymethylfurfural solution, 1 g/L.
Prepare dilutions of the above solution to containing 5, 10, 20, 30 and 40 mg hydroxymethylfurfural/L. The 1 g/L solution and its dilutions must be freshly prepared.
2.3. Procedure
2.3.1. Preparation of sample
- Free sulfur dioxide less than 10 mg/L:
Perform the analysis on 2 mL of wine or must. If necessary filter the wine or must before analysis.
- Free sulfur dioxide greater than 10 mg/L:
15 mL of the test samples are placed in a 25 mL spherical flask with 2 mL acetaldehyde solution (2.2.3). Stir. Wait 15 minutes. Bring to volume with distilled water. Filter if necessary. Perform the analysis on 2 mL of this solution.
2.3.2. Colorimetric determination
Into each of two 25 mL flasks, a and b, fitted with ground glass stoppers, place 2 mL of the sample prepared as in 2.3.1. Place in each flask 5 mL of para-toluidine solution (2.2.2); mix. Add 1 mL of distilled water to flask b (control) and 1 mL barbituric acid (2.2.1) solution to flask a, shake to mix. Transfer the contents of the flasks into spectrophotometer cells with optical paths of 1 cm. Zero the absorbance scale at a wavelength of 550 nm using the contents of flask b. Follow the variation in the absorbance of the contents of flask a; record the maximum value A, which is reached after 2 to 5 minutes.
Samples with hydroxymethylfurfural concentrations above 30 mg/L must be diluted before the analysis.
2.3.3. Preparation of the calibration curve
Place 2 mL of each of the hydroxymethylfurfural solutions of 5, 10, 20, 30 and 40 mg/L into two sets of 25 mL flasks, a and b, and treat them as described in 2.3.2.
The graph representing the variation of absorbance with the hydroxymethylfurfural concentration in mg/L should be a straight line passing through the origin.
2.4. Expression of results
The hydroxymethylfurfural concentration is obtained by plotting on the calibration curve the absorbance determined on the sample analyzed, taking into account any dilution carried out.
The result is expressed in milligrams per liter (mg/L) to one decimal point.
Hydroxymethylfurfural (HPLC) (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-05B Hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF)
Type IV method
- Principle of the method
Separation through a column by reversed-phase chromatography and determination at 280 nm.
Procedures described below are given as examples.
-
High-performance liquid chromatography
-
Apparatus
- High-performance liquid chromatograph equipped with:
-
Apparatus
- a loop injector, 5 or 10 μL
- spectrophotometric detector allowing measurement at 280 nm
- column of octadecyl-bonded silica (e.g.Bondapak C18-Corasil, Waters Ass)
- a recorder, preferably an integrator
- Flow rate of mobile phase: 1.5 mL/minute
- Membrane filtration system with a pore diameter of 0.45 μm.
2.2. Reagents
2.2.1. Double distilled water
2.2.2. Methanol, distilled or HPLC quality
2.2.3. Acetic acid (ρ20= 1.05 g/mL)
2.2.4. Mobile phase: water + methanol + acetic acid previously filtered through a 0.45 µm membrane filter, (40 mL + 9 mL + 1 mL)
The mobile phase must be prepared daily and degassed before using.
2.2.5. Hydroxymethylfurfural reference solution, 25 mg/L (m/v)
Into a 100 mL volumetric flask, place 25 mg of hydroxymethylfurfural accurately weighed, and bring to volume with methanol. Dilute this solution 1/10 with methanol and filter through a 0.45 μm membrane filter.
If the solution is kept refrigerated in a hermetically sealed brown glass bottle it should keep for two to three months.
2.3. Procedure
Inject 5 (or 10) μL of the sample prepared as described above and 5 (or 10) μL of hydroxymethylfurfural reference solution into the chromatograph. Record the chromatogram.
The retention time of hydroxymethylfurfural is about six to seven minutes.
2.4. Expression of the Results
The hydroxymethylfurfural concentration is expressed in milligrams per liter (mg/L) to one decimal point.
Cyanide Derivatives (Type-II)
OIV-MA-AS315-06 Cyanide derivatives
Type II method
- Principle
Free and total hydrocyanic acid is liberated by acid hydrolysis and separated by distillation. After reaction with chloramine T and pyridine, the glutaconic dialdehyde formed is determined by colorimetry, due to the blue coloration it gives with 1.3-dimethyl barbituric acid.
- Equipment
2.1. Distillation apparatus: Use the distillation apparatus described for the determination of alcohol in wine.
2.2. Round-bottomed 500 mL flask with standard taper joint.
2.3. Water bath, thermostated at 20° C.
2.4. Spectrophotometer permitting the measurement of absorbance at a wavelength of 590 nm.
2.5. Glass cuvette or disposable cuvettes for one use only, with 20 mm optical path.
- Reagents
3.1. Phosphoric acid (H3PO4) at 25 p. 100 (w/v)
3.2. Solution of chloramine T ( 3% (w/v)
3.3. Solution of 1,3-dimethylbarbituric acid: dissolve 3.658 g of 1,3-dimethylbarbituric acid () in 15 mL of pyridine and 3 mL of hydrochloric acid (ρ20 = 1.19 g/mL) and bring to 50 mL with distilled water.
3.4. Potassium cyanide (KCN)
3.5. Solution of potassium iodide (KI) 10% (w/v)
3.6. Solution of silver nitrate (AgNO3), 0.1 M
-
Procedure
- Distillation:
In the 500 mL round-bottomed flask (2.2), place 25 mL of wine, 50 mL of distilled water, 1 mL of phosphoric acid (3.1) and some glass beads.
Immediately place the round-bottomed flask on the distillation apparatus. Collect the distillate through a delivery tube connected to a 50 mL volumetric flask containing 10 ml of water. The volumetric flask is immersed in an iced water bath. Collect 30-35 mL of distillate (a total of about 45 mL of liquid in the volumetric flask). Wash the delivery tube with a few milliliters of distilled water, bring the distillate to 20°C and dilute with distilled water to the mark.
4.2. Measurement:
Place 25 mL of distillate in a 50 mL glass-stoppered Erlenmeyer flask, add 1 mL of chloramine T solution (3.2) and stopper tightly. After exactly 60 seconds, add 3mL of 1,3-dimethylbarbituric acid solution (3.3), stopper tightly and let stand for 10 minutes. Then measure the absorbance relative to the reference blank (25 mL of distilled water instead of 25 mL of distillate) at a wavelength of 590 nm in cuvettes of 20 mm optical path.
-
Establishing the standard curve
- Argentimetric titration of potassium cyanide.
In a 300 mL volumetric flask, dissolve about 0.2 g of KCN (3.4) precisely weighed in 100 mL of distilled water. Add 0.2 mL of potassium iodide solution (3.5) and titrate with the solution of 0.1 M silver nitrate (3.6) until obtaining a stable yellowish color.
In calculating the concentration of KCN in the sample, 1 mL of 0.1 M silver nitrate solution corresponds to 13.2 mg of KCN.
5.2. Standard Curve.
5.2.1. Preparation of the standard solutions:
Knowing the KCN concentration determined in accordance with 5.1, prepare a standard solution containing 30 mg/L of hydrocyanic acid (30 mg HCN = 72.3 mg of KCN). Dilute this solution to 1/10.
Introduce 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 mL of the diluted standard solution in 100 mL volumetric flasks and bring to the mark with distilled water. The prepared standard solutions correspond to 30, 60, 90, and 150 μg/L of hydrocyanic acid, respectively.
5.2.2. Determination:
Using 25 mL of the solutions, continue as indicated above in 4.1 and 4.2.
The values obtained for the absorbance with these standard solutions, reported according to the corresponding levels of hydrocyanic acid, form a line passing through the origin.
- Expression of the results
Hydrocyanic acid is expressed in micrograms per liter (μg/L) without decimal.
6.1. Calculation:
Determine the concentration of hydrocyanic acid from the standard curve. If a dilution was done, multiply the result by the dilution factor.
Repeatability (r) and Reproducibility (R)
White wine |
r=3.1 μg/L |
i.e. approximately 6% . |
R= 12 μg/L |
i.e. approximately 25% . |
|
Red wine |
r=6.4 μg/L |
i.e. approximately 8% . |
R=23 μg/L |
i.e. approximately 29% . |
Xi = average concentration of HCN in the wine.
Bibliography
- JUNGE C., Feuillet vert N° 877 (1990)
- ASMUS E. GARSCHLAGEN H., Z Anal. Chem. 138, 413-422 (1953)
- WÜRDIG G., MÜLLER TH., Die Weinwissenschaft 43, 29-37 (1988)
Artificial sweeteners (TLC : saccharine, cyclamate, Dulcin and P‑4000 ) (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-07A Examination of artificial sweeteners
Type IV method
- Principle of the method
Examination of saccharine (benzoic sulfimide), Dulcin (p-ethoxyphenylurea), cyclamate (cyclohexylsulfamate) and P‑4000 (5-nitro-2-propoxyaniline or 1propoxy-2-amino-4-nitrobenzene).
After concentration of the wine, the saccharine, Dulcin and P‑4000 are extracted in an acid medium with benzene; the cyclamate is extracted from the wine after the benzene extraction using ethyl acetate (the order of extraction is important). The residues after solvent evaporation are submitted to thin layer chromatography.
Saccharine and cyclamate are identified by chromatography on cellulose plates (solvent: acetone-ethyl acetate-ammonium hydroxide), the first the benzene extract, the second in the extract by the ethyl acetate after purification by washing with ether.
These sweeteners are developed by spraying with a solution of benzidine; aniline; cupric acetate, and have the following Rf: 0.29 for cyclamate, 0.46 for saccharine.
The P‑4000 and Dulcin from the benzene extract are separated by chromatography on polyamide plates, (solvent: toluene; methanol; glacial acetic acid). These sweeteners are developed by spraying a solution of p-dimethylaminobenzaldehyde, and have the following Rf: 0.60 for Dulcin, 0.80 for P‑4000.
- Method
Examination of saccharine, cyclamate, Dulcin and the P‑4000.
2.1. Apparatus
2.1.1. Chromatography tank
2.1.2. Micrometry syringes or micropipettes
2.1.3. Separator tube 15 mm in diameter and 180 mm long, with a stopcock
2.1.4. Water bath at 100°C
2.1.5. Regulatable oven, able to reach 125°C
2.2. Reagents
2.2.1. Extraction solvent:
- benzene
-
ethyl acetate
- aChromatography solvents:
Mixture No.1:
acetone |
60 parts |
ethyl acetate |
30 parts |
ammonium hydroxide (ρ20= 0.92 g/mL) |
10 parts |
Mixture No 2.:
toluene |
90 parts |
methanol |
10 parts |
Glacial acetic acid (ρ20= 1.05 g/mL) |
10 parts |
2.2.3. Chromatography plates (20 x 20 cm):
- with layer of cellulose powder (for ex., Whatman CC 41 or Macherey-Nagel MN300)
-
with layer of polyamide powder (for ex., Merck)
- Indicating reagent for saccharine and cyclamate
Prepare:
- alcoholic solution of benzidine at 250 mg in 100 mL ethanol
- saturated solution of cupric acetate, Cu(.H2O
- freshly distilled aniline
Mix: 15 mL of benzidine solution, 1 mL of aniline and 0.75 mL saturated cupric acetate solution.
This solution must be freshly prepared. It corresponds to the volume required for development of a 20 x 20 cm plate.
2.2.5. Hydrochloric acid 50% (v/v),
2.2.6. Nitric acid solution, 25% (v/v),
2.2.7. Indicator reagent for the P‑4000 and Dulcin: dissolve 1 g of 1,4-paradimethylaminobenzaldehyde in 50 mL methanol; add 10 mL 25% nitric acid; bring to 100 mL with methanol. Use 15 mL of this reagent for the development of a 20 x 20 cm plate.
2.2.8. Cyclo-hexylsulfamic acid in water-ethanol solution, 0.10 g/100 mL
Dissolve 100 mg of the sodium or calcium salt of cyclo-hexylsulfamic acid in 100 mL of an equal part mixture of water and ethanol.
2.2.9. Saccharine aqueous solution, 0.05 g/100 mL
2.2.10. Dulcin, 0.05 g/100 mL of methanol.
2.2.11. P‑4000, 0.05 g/100 mL of methanol.
2.3. Procedure
2.3.1. Extraction
100 mL of wine, placed in a beaker, are rapidly evaporated by boiling until the volume is reduced to 30 mL, while directing a current of cold air to the surface of the flask. Allow to cool. Acidify with 3 mL 50% hydrochloric acid (v/v). Transfer to a 500 mL conical flask with a ground stopper, add 40 mL of benzene and stir with a mechanical stirrer for 30 min. Transfer to a separating funnel to separate the organic phase. If an emulsion is formed, it must be separated by centrifugation. Place the organic phase in a conical flask with a ground glass stopper.
Decant the wine previously extracted with benzene, which corresponds to the lower layer in the separating funnel, into a 500 mL conical flask with a ground stopper containing 40 mL of ethyl acetate. Agitate for 30 minutes and separate the organic phase as before taking care to recover only the organic fraction and not the wine.
On a 100°C water bath, evaporate each extraction solvent in 50‑60 mm diameter evaporation dishes, in small amounts while directing a stream of cold air on the surface of the dishes. Continue the evaporation until the residue has a syrupy consistency, stopping before the evaporation is complete.
Re-dissolve the benzene extract residue in the evaporation dish with 0.5 mL ethanol-water (1:1) solution (it is advisable to re-dissolve the residue once with 0.25 mL ethanol-water solution and then to rinse the dish with another portion of 0.25 mL of the same solution). Place the ethanol-water extract into a small tube with a ground stopper (extract B).
The residue of the dish in which the ethyl acetate (containing the cyclamate) has been evaporated, is dissolved with 0.5 mL of water and is poured into a small separator tube. Wash the dish with 10 mL ether and add the ether to the contents of the separator tube. Mix vigorously for 2 minutes and separate the lower layer into a small test tube that contains 0.5 mL ethanol. This comprises a total of 1 mL of ethanol-water solution that contains the possible cyclamate (extract A).
2.3.2. Chromatography
2.3.2.1. Saccharine and cyclamate
For examination of the saccharine and cyclamate, use a cellulose plate, with half of the plate for the identification of cyclamate and the other half for saccharine.
To do this, spot 5 to 10 μL of extract A and 5 μL of the standard cyclamate solution. On the second part of the plate spot 5 to 10 μL of extract B and 5 μL of the standard saccharine solution. Place the prepared plate in the chromatography bath containing solvent No.1 (acetone; ethyl acetate; ammonium hydroxide); allow to migrate until the solvent front reaches 10 to 12 cm. Remove the plate from the bath and dry with warm air. Spray the plate
evenly and gently with the benzidine reagent (17‑18 mL for each plate). Dry the plate with cold air. Place the plate in an oven maintained at 120-125°C for 3 minutes. The spots appear dark gray on a light chestnut background; they turn brownish with time.
2.3.2.2. P-4000 and Dulcin
Deposit 5 μL of extract B and 5 μL of the standard solutions of Dulcin and P-4000 on a polyamide plate. Place the prepared plate in the chromatography tank containing solvent No. 2 (toluene; methanol; acetic acid). Let the solvent front reach a height of 10 to 12cm.
Remove the plate from the tank; dry in cold air. Spray with 15 mL of the pdimethylaminobenzaldehyde reagent, then dry with cold air until the orange-yellow colored spots appear which correspond to Dulcin and P-4000.
2.3.2.3. Sensitivity
The benzidine reagent allows detection of spots corresponding to 2 μg of saccharine and 5 μg of cyclamate. The p-dimethylaminobenzaldehyde reagent reveals 0.3 μg of Dulcin and 0.5 μg of P‑4000.
This method allows determination of (depending upon the efficiency of the extractions):
saccharine |
2-3 mg/L |
cyclamate |
40-50 mg/L |
Dulcin |
1 mg/L |
P-4000 |
1-1.5 mg/L |
Bibliography
- TERCERO C., F.V., O.I.V., 1968, n° 277 and F.V., O.I.V., 1970, n° 352.
- Wine Analysis Commission of the Federal Health Department of Germany, 1969, F.V., O.I.V., n° 316.
- International Federation of Fruit Juice Manufacturers, 1972, F.V., O.I.V., n° 40.
- SALO T., ALRO E. and SALMINEN K., Z. Lebensmittel Unters. u. Forschung, 1964, 125, 20.
Artificial sweeteners (TLC: saccharine, cyclamate and Dulcin) (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-07B Examination of artificial sweeteners
Type IV method
- Principle of the method
Examination of saccharine, Dulcin and cyclamate.
These sweeteners are extracted from wine using a liquid ion exchanger, then re-extracted with dilute ammonia hydroxide, and are separated by thin layer chromatography using a mixture of cellulose powder and polyamide powder (solvent: xylene; n-propanol; glacial acetic acid; formic acid). These sweeteners have a blue fluorescence on a yellow background under ultraviolet light after spraying with a 2,7-dichlorofluorescein solution.
Subsequent spraying with 1,4-dimethylaminobenzaldehyde solution allows differentiation of Dulcin, which gives only one orange spot, from vanillin and the esters of phydroxybenzoic acid which migrate with the same Rf.
- Method
Examination of saccharine, cyclamate and Dulcin.
2.1. Apparatus
2.1.1. Apparatus for expression by thin layer
2.1.2. Glass plate 20 x 20 cm
Preparation of the plates: mix thoroughly 9 g of dry cellulose powder and 6 g of polyamide powder. Add, while stirring, 60 mL methanol. Spread on the plates to a thickness of 0.25 mm. Dry for 10 minutes at 70°C. The quantities prepared are sufficient for the preparation of 5 plates.
2.1.3. Water bath with a temperature regulator or a rotary evaporator,
2.1.4. UV lamp for examination of the chromatography plates.
2.2. Reagents
2.2.1. Petroleum ether (40‑60°)
2.2.2. Ion exchange resin, for example: Amberlite LA‑2
2.2.3. Acetic acid diluted to 20% (v/v)
2.2.4. Ion exchange solution: 5 mL of ion exchanger is vigorously agitated with 95 mL petroleum ether and 20 mL of 20% acetic acid. Use the upper phase.
2.2.5. Nitric acid in solution, 1 M
2.2.6. Sulfuric acid, 10 % (v/v)
2.2.7. Ammonium hydroxide diluted to 25% (v/v)
2.2.8. Polyamide powder, for example: Macherey-Nagel or Merck
2.2.9. Cellulose powder, for example: Macherey-Nagel MN 300 AC
2.2.10. Solvent for chromatography:
Xylene |
45 parts |
n-Propanol |
6 parts |
Glacial acetic acid (ρ20= 1.05 g/mL) |
7 parts |
Formic acid 98‑100% |
2 parts |
2.2.11. Developers:
- solution of 2,7-dichlorofluorescein, 0.2 % (m/v), in ethanol,
-
solution of 1,4-dimethylaminobenzaldehyde: dissolve 1 g of dimethylamino-benzaldehyde placed in a 100 mL volumetric flask with about 50 mL ethanol. Add 10 mL of nitric acid, 25% (v/v), and bring to volume with ethanol.
- Standard solution:
- solution of Dulcin, 0.1 % (m/v), in methanol,
- solution of saccharine at 0.1 g per 100 mL in a mixture of equal parts methanol and water,
- cyclamate solution: solution containing 1 g of the sodium or calcium salt of cyclohexylsulfamic acid in 100 mL of a mixture of equal parts methanol and water,
- solution of vanillin at 1 g /100 mL in a mixture of equal parts methanol and water,
- solution of the ester of p-hydroxybenzoic acid at 1 g /100 mL in methanol.
2.3 Procedure:
50 mL of wine is placed in a separatory funnel, acidified with 10 mL dilute sulfuric acid (2.2.6) and extracted with two aliquots of the ion exchange solution using 25 mL each time. The 50 mL of ion exchange solution is washed three times using 50 mL of distilled water each time, which is discarded, then three times with 15 mL of dilute ammonium hydroxide (2.2.7). The ammonia solutions recovered are then carefully evaporated at 50°C until dry on a water bath or in a rotary evaporator. The residue is recovered with 5 mL of acetone and 2 drops 1 M nitric acid solution, filtered, and again evaporated dry at 70°C on a water bath. It is necessary to avoid heating for too long and above 70°C. The residue is recovered with 1 mL of methanol.
5 to 10 μL of this solution and 2 μL of the standard solutions are spotted on the plate. Let the solvent migrate (xylene: n-propanol: acetic acid: formic acid) (2.2.10) to a height of about 15 cm, which takes about 1 hour.
After air-drying, the dichlorofluorescein solution is thoroughly sprayed on the plate. The saccharine and the cyclamate appear immediately as light spots on a salmon colored background. Under examination in ultraviolet light (254 or 360 nm), the three sweeteners appear as a fluorescent blue on a yellow background.
The sweeteners separate, from the bottom to the top of the plate, in the following order: cyclamate, saccharine, Dulcin.
The vanillin and the esters of p-hydroxybenzoic acid migrate with the same Rf as the Dulcin. To identify Dulcin in the presence of these substances, the plate then must be sprayed with a solution of dimethylaminobenzaldehyde. The Dulcin appears as an orange spot, whereas the other substances do not react.
Sensitivity - The quantity limitation shown on the chromatography plate is 5 µg for the three substances.
This method permits detection of:
Saccharin |
10 mg/L |
Cyclamate |
50 mg/L |
Dulcin |
10 mg/L |
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TERCERO C., F.V., O.I.V., 1968, n° 277 and F.V., O.I.V., 1970, n° 352.
- Wine Analysis Commission of the Federal Health Department of Germany, 1969, F.V., O.I.V., n° 316.
- International Federation of Fruit Juice Manufacturers, 1972, F.V., O.I.V., n° 40.
- SALO T., ALRO E. and SALMINEN K., Z. Lebensmittel Unters. u. Forschung, 1964, 125, 20.
Artificial Colorants (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-08 Examination of artificial colorants
Type IV method
- Principle
The wine is concentrated to 1/3 its original volume, made alkaline with a solution of dilute sodium hydroxide and extracted with ether. The ether phase, after being washed with water, is extracted with a dilute acetic acid solution; this acetic solution, alkalinized with ammonia, is brought to boiling in the presence of a piece of wool thread treated with aluminum sulfate and potassium tartrate. The colorant, if any, is fixed on the wool. The wool on which it is fixed is then placed in a dilute acetic acid solution. After evaporation of the acetic solution, the residue is recovered with a water-alcohol solution and analyzed by thin layer chromatography for characterization of the colorant.
The aqueous phase remaining after the ether extraction contains the acid colorants that may be present. They are extracted by using their affinity for animal fibers that markedly absorb the color: they are fixed on a wool plug in a mineral acid medium.
To concentrate the coloring material, carry out a double fixation and/or several successive fixations on increasingly smaller wool plugs.
Coloring of the wool plug indicates that an artificial colorant was added to the wine; the colorant is then identified by thin layer chromatography.
- Apparatus
2.1. 20 x 20 glass plates covered with cellulose powder,
2.2. Chromatography tank
- Reagents
3.1. Ethyl ether
3.2. Sodium hydroxide solution, 5% (m/v)
3.3. Glacial acetic acid (ρ20= 1.05 g/mL)
3.4. Dilute acetic acid, containing one part glacial acetic acid to 18 parts water
3.5. Dilute hydrochloric acid: to one part hydrochloric acid (ρ20 = 1.19 g/mL), add 10 parts distilled water
3.6. Ammonium hydroxide (ρ20 = 0.92 g/mL)
3.7. White wool threads, previously washed, degreased with ether and dried
3.8. White wool threads, previously washed, degreased with ether, dried and acidified
Acidulant: Dissolve 1 g crystallized aluminum sulfate and 1.2 g acid potassium tartrate in 500 mL water. Place 10 g of the white wool threads, previously washed, degreased with ether and dried in the solution and stir about 1 hour. Let stand 2 to 3 hours; drain, let dry at room temperature.
3.9. Solvent No.1 for chromatography of colorants with basic characteristics:
n-Butanol |
50 mL |
Ethanol |
25 mL |
acetic acid (ρ20 = 1.05 g/mL) |
10 mL |
distilled water |
25 mL |
3.10. Solvent No.2 for chromatography of colorants with acidic characteristics:
n-Butanol |
50 mL |
ethanol |
25 mL |
ammonium hydroxide (ρ20 = 0.92 g/mL) |
10 mL |
distilled water |
25 mL |
- Procedure
4.1. Examination of colorants with basic characteristics.
4.1.1. Extraction of the coloring materials.
Place 200 mL of wine in a 500 mL glass conical flask and boil until reduced to 1/3 its volume.
After cooling, neutralize with 5% sodium hydroxide solution until the natural color of wine shows a marked change.
Extract twice using 30 mL ether. The ether phases are recovered, containing basic colorants to be determined; the extraction residue must be saved for the analysis of acidic colorants.
Wash the extracted ether twice with 5 mL of water to eliminate the sodium hydroxide; mix with 5 mL dilute acetic acid. The acidic aqueous phase obtained is colored in the presence of a basic colorant.
The presence of the colorant may be confirmed by fixation on acidified wool. Make the acidic aqueous phase obtained alkaline using 5% ammonia. Add 0.5 g acidified wool and boil for about 1 minute. Rinse the wool under running water. If the wool is colored, the wine contains some basic colorant.
4.1.2. Characterization by thin-layer chromatography.
The aqueous acetic phase containing the basic colorant is concentrated to 0.5 mL. If the colorant is fixed on the acidic wool, the wool plug is treated by boiling with 10 mL distilled water and a few drops of acetic acid (ρ20 = 1.05 g/mL). Remove the wool fragment after wringing out liquid. Concentrate the solution to 0.5 mL.
Deposit 20 μL of this concentrated solution on the cellulose plate 3 cm from the lateral edge and 2 cm from the lower edge of the plate.
Place the plate in the tank containing solvent No.1 so that the lower edge is immersed in the solvent to a depth of 1 cm.
When the solvent front has migrated to a height of 15 to 20 cm, remove the plate from the tank. Allow to air dry.
Identify the colorant by means of a solution of known artificial colorants of basic characteristics deposited simultaneously on the chromatogram.
4.2. Examination of colorants with acidic characteristics
4.2.1. Extraction of the coloring material.
Use the residue from the wine used for examining colorants with basic characteristics, concentrated to 1/3 and neutralized after extraction with ether.
If the first part of the procedure has not been conducted, start with 200 mL wine, place in a conical flask, boil until reduced to 1/3.
In either case, add 3 mL of dilute hydrochloric acid and 0.5 g of white wool: boil for 5 minutes, decant the liquid and wash the wool under running water.
In the conical flask which contains the wool, add 100 mL water and 2 mL dilute hydrochloric acid; boil for 5 minutes, separate the acidic liquid and repeat this procedure until the liquid used to wash is colorless.
After the wool has been thoroughly washed to eliminate the acid completely, recover in a conical flask with 50 mL distilled water and a few drops of ammonium hydroxide (ρ20 = 0.92 g/mL): bring to a gentle boil for 10 minutes in order to dissolve any artificial coloring matter fixed on the wool.
Remove the wool from the flask, bring the liquid volume to 100 mL and boil until the ammonia completely evaporates. Acidify with 2 mL of dilute hydrochloric acid (check that the reaction of the liquid is definitely acidic by placing 1 drop of this liquid on indicator paper).
Add to the flask 60 mg (about 20 cm of standard thread) of white wool and boil for 5 minutes; remove the wool and rinse it under running water.
If, after this procedure, the wool is colored red, when it involves red wine, or yellow if it pertains to white wine, the presence of artificial organic coloring matter of an acidic nature is proven.
If the color is weak or uncertain, repeat the ammonia treatment and do a second fixation using a 30 mg wool thread.
If, during the course of the second fixation a weak but distinct pink color is obtained, assume the presence of an acidic colorant.
If necessary for a more definite determination, carry out new fixations-elutions (up to 4 or 5) using a procedure identical to that used for the second fixation until a faint but distinct pink color is obtained.
4.2.2. Characterization by thin layer chromatography.
The plug of colored wool is treated by boiling with 10 mL distilled water and few drops of ammonium hydroxide (ρ20 = 0.92 g/mL). Recover the piece of wool after wringing. Concentrate the ammonium hydroxide solution to 0.5 mL.
Deposit 20 μL of this solution on a cellulose plate to within 3 cm of the lateral edge and 2 cm of the lower edge of the plate.
Put the plate in place in the tank so that the lower edge is immersed in the solvent to a depth of 1 cm.
When the solvent front has migrated to a height of 15 to 20 cm, remove the plate from the tank and let dry in the air.
Identify the colorant by means of known artificial coloring solutions deposited simultaneously on the chromatogram.
Bibliography
- TERCERO C., F.V., O.I.V., 1970, n° 356.
- Arata P., Saenz-Lascano-Ruiz, Mme I., F.V., O.I.V., 1967, n° 229.
Diethylene glycol (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-09 Diethylene glycol (2-hydoxy-ethxyethanol)
Type IV method
- Objective
The detection of diethylene glycol,, in wine where its concentration is equal to or greater than 10 mg/L.
- Principle
Separation of diethylene glycol from other constituents in wine by gas chromatography using a capillary column, after extraction with ether.
Note: The operating conditions described below are provided as an example.
- Apparatus
3.1. Gas chromatograph equipped with:
- split-splitless injector,
- flame ionization detector,
- capillary column coated with a film of polyethyleneglycol (Carbowax 20 M), 50 m x 0.32 mm I.D.
Operating conditions:
- Injector temperature: 280°C.
- Detector temperature: 270°C.
- Carrier gas: hydrogen.
- Flow rate of carrier gas: 2 mL/min.
- Flow rate: 30 mL/min.
- Injection: splitless.
- Injection volume: 2 μL.
- Injection 35°C - flow closed after 40 seconds.
-
Temperature program: 120°C to 170°C at 3°C/min.
- Centrifuge
- Reagents
4.1. 1,3-propanediol, 1 g/L, in alcohol, 20% (v/v), (internal standard).
4.2. Aqueous solution of diethyleneglycol 20 mg/L.
- Procedure
Into a 50 mL flask, place:
- 10 mL of wine
- 1 mL of 1,3-propanediol solution
- 25 mL diethyl ether.
Shake and add sufficient quantity of neutral potassium carbonate to saturate the mixture. Shake. Separate the two phases by centrifugation.
Carry out a second extraction. Eliminate the diethyl ether by evaporation and recover the residue with 5 mL ethanol.
The yield of the extraction must be at least 90%.
Carry out the chromatography according to the conditions given in 3.1.
- Results
The diethylene glycol is identified by comparing its retention time to the time of the reference solution, analyzed under the same conditions as the wine.
The amount is determined by comparison to the reference solution using the internal standard method.
It is recommended, if the concentration is equal to or less than 20 mg/l, to confirm the presence by mass spectrometry.
Bibliography
- Bandion F., VALENTA M. & KOHLMANN H., Mitt. Klosterneuburg, Rebe und Wein, 1985, 35, 89.
- Bertrand A., Conn. vigne vins, 1985, 19, 191.
- Laboratoire de la répression des fraudes et du contrôle de la qualité de Montpellier, F.V., O.I.V., 1986, n° 807.
Ochratoxin A (Type-II)
OIV-MA-AS315-10 Measuring ochratoxine A in wine after going through an immunoaffinity column and HLPC with fluorescence detection
Type II method
- Field of application
This document describes the method used for determining ochratoxine A (OTA) in red, rosé, and white wines, including special wines, in concentrations ranging up 10 µg/l using an immunoaffinity column and high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) [1].
This method was validated following an international joint study in which OTAs were measured in white and red wines during the analysis of naturally contaminated wines and wines with toxins ranging from 0.01 µg/l to 3.00 μg/l.
This method can apply to semi-sparkling wines and sparkling wines as long as the samples have been degassed beforehand, through sonication, for example.
- Principle
Wine samples are diluted with a solution containing polyethylene glycol and sodium hydrogen carbonate. This solution is filtered and purified on the immunoaffinity column.
OTA is eluted with methanol and quantified by HPLC in inverse state with fluorimetric detection.
- Reagents
3.1. Reagents for separation of the OTA on an immunoaffinity column
The reagents listed below are examples. Suppliers of immunoaffinity columns may offer dilution solutions and eluents suitable for their products. If so, it is preferable to use these products.
3.1.1. Sodium hydrogen phosphate dihydrate() CAS [10028-24-7]
3.1.2. Sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate ( ) CAS [10049-21-5]
3.1.3. Sodium chloride (NaCl) CAS [7647-14-5]
3.1.4. Purified water for laboratories, for example EN ISO 3696 quality (water for analytical laboratory use – Specification and test method [ISO 3696:1987]).
3.1.5. Phosphate buffer (dilution solution)
Dissolve 60g of (3.1.1) and 8.8g of (3.1.2) in 950ml of water and add more water to make up to 1 litre.
3.1.6. Phosphate buffer saline (washing solution)
Dissolve 2.85g of (3.1.1), 0.55g of (3.1.2) and 8.7g of NaCl in 950ml of water and add more water to make up to 1 litre.
3.1.7. Methanol () CAS [67-56-1]
3.2. Reagents for HPLC
3.2.1. Acetonitrile for HPLC () CAS [75-05-8]
3.2.2. Glacial acetic acid (COOH) CAS [64-19-7]
3.2.3. Mobile phase: water: acetonitrile: glacial acetic acid, 99:99:2, v/v/v
Mix 990 ml of water with 990 ml of acetonitrile (3.2.2) and 20 ml of glacial acetic acid (3.2.3). In the presence of undissolved components, filter through a 0.45µm filter. Degas (with helium, for example) unless the HPLC equipment used includes a degassing step.
3.3. Reagents for the preparation of the OTA stock solution
3.3.1. Toluene () CAS [108-88-3]
3.3.2. Mixture of solvents (toluene: glacial acetic acid, 99:1, v/v).
Mix 99 parts in volume of toluene (3.3.1) with one part volume of glacial acetic acid (3.2.2).
3.4. OTA stock solution
Dissolve 1 mg of OTA or the same content in a bulb, if the OTA was obtained in the form of film after evaporation, in the solvent mixture (3.12) to obtain a solution containing approximately 20 to 30 μg/ml of OTA.
To determine the exact concentration, record the absorption spectrum between 300 and 370 nm in a quartz space with 1 cm of optical path while using the solvent mixture (3.12) as a blank. Identify maximum absorption and calculate the concentration of OTA (c) in µg/ml by using the following equation:
|
In which:
= Absorption determined by the longest maximum wave (about 333 nm)
M = OTA molecular mass = 403,8 g/mole
ε = coefficient d'extinction molaire de l'OTA dans le mélange de solvant (3.12) ( = 544/mole)
δ = optical pathway (cm)
This solution is stable at -18°C for at least 4 years.
3.5. Standard OTA solution (2 µg/ml in toluene: acetic acid, 99:1, v/v)
Dilute the stock solution (3.13) with the solvent mixture (3.12) to obtain a standard solution of OTA with a concentration of 2 μg/ml.
This solution can be stored at + 4 °C in a refrigerator. The stability should be tested regularly.
- Equipment
Usual laboratory equipment and in particular, the following equipment:
4.1. Glass tubes (4 ml)
4.2. Vacuum pump to prepare the immunoaffinity columns.
4.3. Reservoir and flow tube adapted to immunoaffinity columns.
4.4. Fibre glass filters (for example Whatman GF/A).
4.5. Immunoaffinity columns specifically for OTA.
The column should have the total link capacity of at least 100 ng OTA. This will allow for a purification yield of at least 85% when a diluted solution of wine containing 100 ng OTA is passed through.
4.6. Rotating evaporator
4.7. Liquid chromatography, a pump capable of attaining a constant flow of 1 ml/mn isocratic, as with the mobile phase.
4.8. Injection system must be equipped with 100 μl loop.
4.9. Column of analytical HPLC in steel 150 4.6 mm (i.d.) filled with a stationary phase (5 μm) preceded with a pre-column or a pre-filter (0,5 μm) containing an appropriate phase. Different size columns can be used provided that they guarantee a good base line and background noise enabling the detection of of OTA peaks, among others.
4.10. Fluorescence detector is connected to the column and the excitation wavelength is set at 333 nm and the emitting wavelength at 460 nm.
4.11. Information retrieval system
4.12. U.V. spectrometer
- Procedure
5.1. Preparation of samples
Pour 10 ml of wine in a 100 ml conical flask. Add 10 ml of the dilution solution (3.8). Mix vigorously. Filter through fibreglass filter (4.4). Filtration is necessary for cloudy solutions or when there is precipitation after dissolving.
5.2. Purification by immunoaffinity column
Set up the by immunoaffinity column (4.5) to the vacuum pump (4.2), and attach the reservoir (4.3).
Add 10 ml (equivalent to 5 ml of wine) of the diluted solution in the reservoir. Put this solution through the immunoaffinity column at a flow of 1 drop per second. The immunoaffinity column should not become dry. Wash the immunoaffinity column with 5 ml of cleaning solution (3.9) and then with 5 ml of water at a flow of 1 to 2 drops per second.
Blow air through to dry column. Elute OTA in a glass flask (4.1) with 2 ml of methanol (3.4) at the rate of 1 drop per second. Evaporate the eluate to dryness at 50° C with nitrogen. Dissolve again immediately in 250 μl of the HPLC mobile phase (3.10) and keep at 4° C until the HPLC analysis.
5.3. HPLC analysis
Using the injection loop, inject 100 μl of reconstituted extract (equivalent to 2 ml of wine) in the chromatography.
Operating conditions
Flow |
1 ml /min. |
Mobile phase |
acetonitrile: water: glacial acetic acid (99:99:2, v/v/v) |
Fluorescence detector |
Excitation wavelength = 333 nm |
Emitting wavelength = 460 nm |
|
Volume of injection |
100 μl |
- Quantification of ochratoxine A (OTA)
The quantification of OTA should be calculated by measuring the area or the height of the peaks at the OTA retention time and compared to the calibration curve
6.1. Calibration curve
Prepare a calibration curve dayly and every time chromatographical conditions change. Measure out 0.5 ml of the standard OTA solution (3.14) at 2 μlg/ml in a glass flask and evaporate the solvent using nitrogen.
Dissolve again in 10 ml in the HPLC mobile phase (3.10) which was previously filtered using a 0.45 100 μm filter. This produces an OTA of 100 ng/ml solution.
Prepare 5 HPLC calibration solutions in five 5 ml graduated flasks following Table 1.
Complete each 5 ml standard solution with HPLC mobile phase. (3.10).
Inject 100 μl of each solution in the HPLC.
Table 1
Std 1 |
Std 2 |
Std 3 |
Std 4 |
Std 5 |
|
µl of mobile phase filtered HPLC (3.10) |
4970 |
4900 |
4700 |
4000 |
2000 |
µl of OTA solution at 100 ng/ml: |
30 |
100 |
300 |
1000 |
3000 |
OTA concentration (ng/ml) |
0.6 |
2.0 |
6.0 |
20 |
60 |
Injected OTA (ng) |
0.06 |
0.20 |
0.60 |
2.00 |
6.00 |
NOTE:
If the quantity of OTA in the samples is outside the calibration range, an appropriate dilution should occur or smaller volumes should be injected. In these cases, the final (7) should be reviewed on a case by case basis.
Due to the great variations in concentrations, it is recommended to pass the linear calibration by zero in order to obtain an exact quantification for low concentrations of OTA. (less than 0.1 μg/l)
- Calculations
Calculate the quantity of OTA in the aliquot of the solution testes and injected in the HPLC column.
Calculate the concentration of OTA () in ng/ml (equivalent to µg/l) by using the following formula:
|
Where:
is the volume of ochratoxin A (in ng) in the aliquot part of the template injected on the column and evaluated from the calibration curve.
F:is the dilution factor
is the sample volume to be analysed (10 ml)
the volume of the solution tested and injected in the column (100 μl)
is the volume of solution used to dissolve the dry eluate (250 μl)
- Performances using this method in laboratories
Table 2 regroups performances of the method applied to white, rosé and red wines in laboratories
participating in the validation of this method.
Table 2. Recovery of ochratoxin A from wines overweighted with different concentrations of added ochratoxin A |
||||||
Red wine |
Rosé wine |
White wine |
||||
Addition (µg/l) |
Yield ± SD* (%) |
RSD# (%) |
Yield ± SD* (%) |
RSD# (%) |
Yield ± SD* (%) |
RSD# (%) |
0.04 |
96.7 ± 2.2 |
2.3 |
94.1 ± 6.1 |
6.5 |
91.6 ± 8.9 |
9.7 |
0.1 |
90.8 ± 2.6 |
2.9 |
89.9 ± 1.0 |
1.1 |
88.4 ± 0.2 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
91.3 ± 0.6 |
0.7 |
88.9 ± 2.1 |
2.4 |
95.1 ± 2.4 |
2.5 |
0.5 |
92.3 ± 0.4 |
0.5 |
91.6 ± 0.4 |
0.4 |
93.0 ± 0.2 |
0.2 |
1.0 |
97.8 ± 2.6 |
2.6 |
100.6 ± .,5 |
2.5 |
100.7 ± 1.0 |
1.0 |
2.0 |
96.5 ± 1.6 |
1.7 |
98.6 ± 1.8 |
1.8 |
98.0 ± 1.5 |
1.5 |
5.0 |
88.1 ± 1.3 |
1.5 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
10,0 |
88,9 ± 0,6 |
0,7 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Average of averages |
92.8 ± 3.5 |
3.8 |
94.5 ± 5.2 |
5.5 |
94.5 ± 4.1 |
4.3 |
* SD = Spread type (Standard deviation) (n = 3 replicates) ;
# RSD = Relative spread type (Variation percentage).
- Group work
The method was validated by a group study with the participation of 16 laboratories in 8 countries, following the protocol recommendations harmonised for validating the analysis methods. [2]. Each participant analysed 10 white wines, 10 red wines, representing 5 random duplicate wines; naturally contaminated or with OTA added. The performances of the method which resulted from this work are found in appendixes I and II, outlining critical points of the method are found in appendix III.
- Participating laboratories
Unione Italiana Vini, Verona Istituto Sperimentale per l’Enologia, Asti Istituto Tecnico Agraria, S. Michele all’Adige (TN) Università Cattolica, Piacenza Institute for Health and Consumer Protection, JRC – Ispra Neotron s.r.l., S. Maria di Mugnano (MO) Chemical Control s.r.l., Madonna dell’Olmo (CN) Laboratoire Toxicologie Hygiène Appliquée, Université V. Segalen, Bordeaux Laboratoire de la D.G.C.C.R.F. de Bordeaux, Talence National Food Administration, Uppsala Systembolagets Laboratorium, Haninge Chemisches Untersuchungsamt, Trier State General Laboratory, Nicosia Finnish Customs Laboratory, Espoo Central Science Laboratory, York E.T.S. Laboratories, St. Helena, CA |
ITALY ITALY ITALY ITALY ITALY ITALY ITALY FRANCE FRANCE SWEDEN SWEDEN GERMANY CYPRUS FINLAND UNITED KINGDOM UNITED STATES |
- References
[1] A. Visconti, M. Pascale, G. Centonze. Determination of ochratoxin A in wine by means of immunoaffinity column clean-up and high-performance liquid chromatography. Journal of Chromatography A, 864 (1999) 89-101.
[2] AOAC International 1995, AOAC Official Methods Program, p. 23-51.
Appendix I
The following data was obtained in inter-laboratory tests, according to harmonised protocol recommendations for joint studies in view of validating an analysis method.
WHITE WINE |
Added OTA (μg/l) |
||||
Sample |
White |
0.100 |
1.100 |
2.000 |
n.c. |
Inter-laboratory test year |
1999 |
1999 |
1999 |
1999 |
1999 |
Number of laboratories |
16 |
16 |
16 |
16 |
16 |
Number of laboratories retained after eliminating absurd findings |
14* |
13* |
14 |
14 |
15 |
Number of eliminated laboratories |
- |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
Number of accepted results |
28 |
26 |
28 |
28 |
30 |
Average value (μg/l) |
<0,01 |
0,102 |
1,000 |
1,768 |
0,283 |
Spread-type/Repeatabilityr (μg/l) |
- |
0.01 |
0.07 |
0.15 |
0.03 |
Relative spread-type (Variation percentage) /Repeatability RSDr (%) |
- |
10.0 |
6.6 |
8.5 |
10.6 |
Repeatability limit r (μg/l) |
- |
0.028 |
0.196 |
0.420 |
0.084 |
Spread-type/capacity of being reproduced sR (μg/l) |
- |
0.01 |
0.14 |
0.23 |
0.04 |
Relative spread-type (variation percentage) /capacity of being reproduced RSDR (%) |
- |
14.0 |
13.6 |
13.3 |
14.9 |
Capacity of being reproduced limit R (μg/l) |
- |
0.028 |
0.392 |
0.644 |
0.112 |
Extraction yield % |
- |
101.7 |
90.9 |
88.4 |
- |
* 2 laboratories were excluded from the statistical 'evaluation due to high detection limit (= 0,2 μg/l).
n.c. = sample naturally contaminated
Appendix II
The following data was obtained in inter-laboratory tests, according to harmonised protocol recommendations for joint studies in view of validating an analysis method.
RED WINE |
Added OTA (μg/l) |
||||
samples |
White |
0.200 |
0.900 |
3.000 |
n.c. |
Inter-laboratory test year |
1999 |
1999 |
1999 |
1999 |
1999 |
Number of laboratories |
15 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
Number of laboratories retained after eliminating absurd findings |
14* |
12* |
14 |
15 |
14 |
Number of eliminated laboratories |
- |
2 |
1 |
- |
1 |
Number of accepted results |
28 |
24 |
28 |
30 |
28 |
Average value (μg/l) |
<0.01 |
0.187 |
0.814 |
2.537 |
1.693 |
Spread-type/Repeatabilityr (μg/l) |
- |
0.01 |
0.08 |
0.23 |
0.19 |
Relative spread-type (Variation percentage) /Repeatability RSDr (%) |
- |
5.5 |
9.9 |
8.9 |
10.9 |
Repeatability limit r (μg/l |
- |
0.028 |
0.224 |
0.644 |
0.532 |
Spread-type/capacity of being reproduced sR (μg/l ) |
- |
0.02 |
0.10 |
0.34 |
0.23 |
Relative spread-type (variation percentage) /capacity of being reproduced RSDR (%) |
- |
9.9 |
12.5 |
13.4 |
13.4 |
Capacity of being reproduced limit R (μg/l) |
- |
0.056 |
0.280 |
0.952 |
0.644 |
Extraction yield % |
- |
93.4 |
90.4 |
84.6 |
- |
* 1 laboratory was excluded from the statistical evaluation because of high detection limits (= 0,2 µg/l).
n.c. = naturally contaminated sample
Appendix III
Guide to the critical points of the method of measuring ochratoxin A by immunoaffinity column, type II.
The critical points to observe are listed below for information purposes only and are a guide to applying the method. Numbering refers to paragraphs of the resolution.
- Field of application
For information purposes only the method can be applied to grape musts, partially fermented grape musts, and new wines still under fermentation. The validation parameters concern wines only.
- Principle
The method is broken down into two steps. The first step involves purification and concentration of the OTA in the wine or the must by capture on an immunoaffinity column followed by elution. The second step involves quantification of the eluate by HPLC using fluorescence detection.
- Reagents
3.1. OTA stock solution
The use of OTA in solid form in not recommended; it is recommended to use a standard solution of OTA (point 3.5)
3.2. Standard OTA solution
Use of a commercial solution of standard concentration (around 50 µg/ml) with an analysis certificate stating the reference value and uncertainty of the concentration.
In theory the volume of these solutions is not certified, and they must be sampled with certified pipettes to constitute stock solutions from 0.25 to 1 mg/l in pure ethanol or in the mobile phase of the HPLC method (see 3.2.3).
This solution is stable at -18°C for at least 4 years.
- Equipment
4.1. Recommendations for assessment of the performance of immunoaffinity columns (optional)
The step of concentration on an immunoaffinity column is a major source of inaccuracy in the analysis method. Experience shows that the various columns offered on the market could have recovery rates of between 70 and 100%.
It is therefore recommended to check the performance of a batch of columns before use. This step is recommended where there has been a change in supplier or column references.
4.2. Characterisation of the batch of columns (measure of recovery rate):
Select around 10 columns representative of the types of column routinely used in the laboratory, and all from different batch numbers. Prepare the same number of wines representing different matrices, with zero OTA concentrations, with known additions xi of between 0.5 and
2 μg∙kg-1. After the known additions quickly analyse these n samples with the batch of selected columns. Let yi be the values found.
The recovery rate data are calculateed, the rate being the measured quantity in relation to the known added quantity.
|
Recovery rate with column |
|
Average recovery rate |
|
Standard deviation of the recovery rate |
The standard deviation of the recovery rate calculated in this way represents not only the variability of the recovery rate of the columns, but also the standard uncertainty of the measurement system used after use of the columns (HPLC). It is nevertheless possible to establish a reasonable estimate of the standard deviation of the recovery rate of the columns by deducting the standard uncertainty of the HPLC system from the calculated recovery error:
- Estimate the standard uncertainty (expressed as the standard deviation) of the measurement system in the strict sense of the word (without considering the the immunoaffinity column step).
For this it is possible to use a fidelity study on the OTA solutions.
The standard deviation of the recovery rate Sp is estimated as follows:
|
For a fairly wide concentration range, it is preferable to express this value as the coefficient of variation of the standard deviation (RSDR).
|
- Procedure
The procedure outlined in point 5 is an example. The composition of dilution and washing solutions may differ from one column manufacturer to another. Likewise, the concentration of the diluted wine sample may be adjusted as needed.
- Quantification of ochratoxine A (OTA)
6.1. Calibration curve
Prepare a calibration curve daily or each time that the chromatographic conditions change. Prepare the curve using solutions produced by diluting the stock solution in the mobile phase (see 3.2.3). The values chosen must provide the working range taking into account the concentration factor of the wine.
HPLC-Determination of nine major Anthocyanins in red and rosé wines (Type-II)
OIV-MA-AS315-11 HPLC-Determination of nine major anthocyanins in red and rosé wine
Type II method
- Field of application
The analytical method concerns the determination of the relative composition of anthocyanins in red and rosé wine. The separation is performed by HPLC with reverse phase column and UV-VIS detection.
Many authors [3, 6-17] have published data on the anthocyanin composition of red wines using similar analytical methods. For instance Wulf et al. [18] have detected and identified 21 anthocyanins and Heier et al. [13] nearly 40 by liquid chromatography combined with mass spectrometry. The anthocyanin composition may be very complex, so it is necessary to have a simple procedure. Consequently this method only determines the major compounds of the whole anthocyanin fraction.
Member states are encouraged to continue research in this area to avoid any non scientific evaluation of the results.
- Principle
Separation of the five most important non acylated anthocyanins (see Figure 1, peaks 1-5) and four major acylated anthocyanins (see Figure 1, peaks 6-9).
Analysis of red and rosé wine by direct separation by HPLC by using reverse phase column with gradient elution by water/formic acid/acetonitrile with detection at 518 nm [1.2].
- Reagents and material
Formic acid (p.a. 98 %) (CAS 64-18-6);
Water, HPLC grade;
Acetonitrile, HPLC grade (CAS 75-08-8);
HPLC solvents:
Solvent A: Water/Formic acid/Acetonitrile 87 : 10 : 3 (v/v/v)
Solvent B: Water/Formic acid/Acetonitrile 40 : 10 : 50 (v/v/v)
Membrane filter for HPLC solvent degassing and for sample preparation to be analysed.
Reference products for peak identification.
The HPLC analysis of anthocyanins in wine is difficult to perform due to the absence of commercially available pure products. Furthermore, anthocyanins are extremely unstable in solution.
The following anthocyanin pigments are commercially available:
Cyanidol-3-glucoside (also couromanin chloride); M = 484.84 g/mol
Peonidol-3-glucoside; M = 498.84 g/mol
Malvidol-3-glucoside (also Oeninchloride); M = 528.84 g/mol
Malvidol-3,5-diglucoside (also Malvinchloride); M = 691.04 g/mol
- Apparatus
HPLC system with:
binary gradient pump, injection system for sample volumes ranging from 10 to 200 μl,
diode array detector or a UV detector with a visible range,
integrator or a computer with data acquisition software,
furnace for column heating at 40°C,
solvent degassing system,
analytical column, for example:
LiChrospher 100 RP 18 (5 μm) in LiChroCart 250-4 guard column: for example RP 18 (30-40 mm) in a cartridge 2 mm in diameter x 20 mm long
- Procedure
5.1. Preparation of samples
Clear wines are poured directly without any preparation into the sample vials of the automatic sample changer. Cloudy samples are filtered using a 0.45 μm membrane filter for HPLC sample preparation. The first part of the filtrate should be rejected.
Since the range of the linearity of absorption depending on the concentration of anthocyanins is large, it is possible to modulate the injection volumes between 10 and 200 μl depending on the intensity of the wine colour. No significant difference between the results obtained for different injection volumes was observed.
5.2. Analysis
HPLC conditions
The HPLC analysis is carried out in the following conditions:
Injection Volume: |
50 μl (red wine) up to 200 μl (rosé wine) |
Flow: |
0.8 ml/minute |
Temperature: |
40°C |
Run time: |
45 minutes |
Post time: |
5 minutes |
Detection: |
518 nm |
Gradient elution: |
Time (min) |
Solvent A % (v/v) |
Solvent B % (v/v) |
0 |
94 |
6 |
|
15 |
70 |
30 |
|
30 |
50 |
50 |
|
35 |
40 |
60 |
|
41 |
94 |
6 |
To check the column efficiency, the number of theoretical plates (N) calculated according to malvidol-3-glucoside should not be below 20,000, and the resolution (R) between peonidol-3-coumaryl glucoside and malvidolin-3-coumaryl glucoside should not be lower than 1.5. Below these values, the use of a new column is recommended.
A typical chromatogram is given in Figure 1, where the following anthocyanins are separated:
Peak-N° |
||
Group 1: “Nonacylated anthocyanidin-3-glucosides”: |
delphinidol-3-glucoside cyanidol-3-glucoside petunidol-3-glucoside peonidol-3-glucoside malvidol-3-glucoside |
1 2 3 4 5 |
Group 2: “Acetylated anthocyanidin-3-glucosides”: |
peonidol-3-acetylglucoside malvidol-3-acetylglucoside |
6 7 |
Group 3: “Coumarylated anthocyanidin-3-glucosides”: |
peonidol-3-coumarylglucoside malvidol-3-coumarylglucoside |
8 9 |
- Expression of results
Note that the values are expressed as relative amounts of the sum of the nine anthocyanins defined in this method.
- Limit of detection and limit of quantification
The limit of detection (LD) and the limit of quantification (LQ) are estimated following the instructions in the resolution OENO 7-2000 “Estimation of the Detection and Quantification Limits of a Method of Analysis“. Along the line of the ”Logic Diagram for Decision-Making” in N° 3 the graph approach has to be applied following paragraph 4.2.2.
For this purpose a part of the chromatogram is drawn out extendedly enclosing a range of a tenfold mid-height width (w½) from an anthocyan relevant peak.
Furthermore two parallel lines are drawn which just enclose the maximum amplitude of the signal window. The distance of these two lines gives , expressed in milli Absorption Units (mAU).
The limit of detection (LD) and the limit of quantification (LQ) depend on the individual measurement conditions of the chemical analysis and are to be determined by the user of the method. The Annex gives an example of its determination with the following results:
hmax = 0,208 [mAU]; LD = 3 x 0,208 [mAU] = 0,62 [mAU].
LQ = 10 x 0, 208 [mAu] = 2,08 [mAU].
Recommendation:
With combined data out of the whole Anthocyanin composition such as the sum of Acylated Anthocyanins or the ratio of Acetylated to Coumarylated Anthocyanins the calculation should not be carried out in cases where one of the components is below the limit of quantification (LQ).
On the other hand measurements below the limit of quantification (LQ) are not devoid of information content and may well be fit for purpose [1].
Bibliography:
- Thompson, M.; Ellison, S.L.R. ; Wood, R., Harmonized Guidelines for Single-Laboratory Validation of Methods of Analysis, Pure Appl. Chem. (2002) 74: 835- 855
- Fidelity parameters
The repeatability (r) and the reproducibility (R) values for the nine anthocyanins are given in Table 2 and depend on the amount of the peak area. The uncertainty measurement of a particular peak area is determined by the value of r and R which corresponds to the nearest value given in Table 2.
The values made up of validation data can be calculated by following the appropriate statistical rules. To calculate the total error (sr) for example of the sum of acetylated anthocyanins, the variances (sr2) of specific the total error of ratios, for example, that of acetylated to coumarylated anthocyanins the square of relative errors (=sr/ai) are to be added. By using these rules, all the fidelity values can be calculated by using the data in Table 2.
|
Annex A : Bibliography
- Marx, R., B. Holbach, H. Otteneder; Determination of nine characteristic Anthocyanins in Wine by HPLC; OIV, F.V.N° 1104 2713/100200
- Holbach, B., R. Marx, M. Ackermann; Bestimmung der Anthocyanzusammensetzung von Rotwein mittels Hochdruckflüssigkeitschromatographie (HPLC). Lebensmittelchemie (1997) 51: 78 – 80
- Eder, R., S. Wendelin, J. Barna; Auftrennung der monomeren Rotweinanthocyane mittels. Hochdruckflüssigkeitschromatographie (HPLC).Methodenvergleich und Vorstellung einer neuen Methode. Mitt. Klosterneuburg (1990) 40: 68-75
- ISO-5725-2: 1994 “Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results - Part 2: Basic method for the determination of repeatability and reproducibility”
- Otteneder, H., Marx, R., Olschimke, D.; Method-performance study on the determination of nine characteristic anthocyanins in wine by HPLC. O.I.V. F.V.N° 1130 (2001)
- Mattivi F.; Scienza, A.; Failla, O.; Vika, P.; Anzani, R.; Redesco, G.; Gianazza, E.; Righetti; P. Vitis vinifera - a chemotaxonomic approach: Anthocyanins in the skin. Vitis (special issue) 1990, 119-133
- Roggero, I.P.; Larice, I.L.; Rocheville-Divorne, C.; Archier, P.; Coen, V. Composition Antocyanique des cepages. Revue Francaise d’Oenologie 1998, 112, 41-48
- Eder, R.; Wendelin, S; Barna, J. Classification of red wine cultivars by means of anthocyanin analysis. Mitt. Klosterneuburg 1994, 44, 201-212
- Arozarena, I.; Casp, A.; Marin, R.; Navarro, M. Differentiation of some Spanish wines according to variety and region based on their anthocyanin composition. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2000, 212, 108-112
- Garcia-Beneytez, E.; Revilla, E.; Cabello, F. Anthocyanin pattern of several red grape cultivars and wines made from them. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2002, 215, 32-37
- Arozarena, I.; Ayestarán, B.; Cantalejo, M.J.; Navarro, M.; Vera, M.; Abril, K.; Casp, A. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2002, 214, 313-309
- Revilla, E.; Garcia-Beneytez, E.; Cabello, F.; Martin-Ortega, G.; Ryan, J-M. Value of high-performance liquid chromatographic analysis of anthocyanins in the differentiation of red grape cultivars and red wines made from them. J. Chromatogr A 2001, 915, 53-60
- Heier, A.; Blaas, W.; Droß, A.; Wittkowski, R.; Anthocyanin Analysis by HPLC/ESI-MS, Am.J.Enol.Vitic, 2002, 53, 78-86
- Arozarena, I.; Casp, A.; Marin, R.; Navarro, M. Multivariate differentiation of Spanish red wines according to region and variety. J. Sci. Food Agric, 2000, 80, 1909-1917
- Anonymous. Bekanntmachung des Bundesinstituts für gesundheitlichen Verbraucherschutz und Veterinärmedizin. Bundesgesundheitsbl. Gesundheitsforsch. Gesundheitsschutz, 2001, 44, 748
- Burns, I.; Mullen, W.; Landrault, N.; Teissedre, P.-L.; Lean, M.E.I.; Crozier, A. Variations in the Profile and Content of Anthocyanins in Wines made from Cabernet Sauvignon and hybrid grapes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 4096-4102
- Otteneder, H.; Holbach, B.; Marx, R.; Zimmer, M. Rebsortenbestimmung in Rotwein mittels Anthocyanspektrum. Mitt. Klosterneuburg, 2002, 52, 187-194
-
L.W. Wulf and C.W. Nagel; High-Pressure liquid chromatographic separation of Anthocyanins of Vitis vinifera.
Am.J.Enol.Vitic 1978, 29, 42-49
Annex B Statistical results
Method performance study and evaluation
17 laboratories from 5 European Nations participated in the validation study of the method under the coordination of the German Official State Laboratory for Food Chemistry in Trier. The participants are listed in Table 3. An example of a chromatogram is presented in Figure 1 and the detailed results are given in Table 2.
The statistical evaluation followed the Resolution 6/99 and the Standard ISO 5725-1944 [4.5].
The chromatograms sent back with the results sheets fulfilled all requirements concerning the performance of the analytical column. No laboratory had to be completely eliminated, for example, because of a wrong peak identification.
The outlier values were searched using Dixon and Grubbs outlier testing according to the procedure for “Harmonised Protocol – IUPAC 1994” and the OIV Resolution OENO 19/2002. The values of sr, sR, r and R were calculated for 9 major anthocyanins at 5 content levels. For analytical results, the values of the closest levels should be used.
In order to have a global vision of the method performance, all the values RSDr- et RSDR- gathered are grouped by range of areas in the following table:
Table 1: Summary of the results of the method performance study
Range of relative peak areas*[%] |
Range of RSDr |
Range of RSDR |
>0.4 – 1.0 |
6.8 - 22.4 |
20.6 - 50.9 |
>1.1 – 1.5 |
4.2 - 18.1 |
11.8 - 28.1 |
>1.5 – 3.5 |
2.1 – 7.7 |
10.6 - 15.6 |
>3.5 – 5.5 |
2.7 – 5.7 |
18.7 – 7.5 |
>5.5 – 7.5 |
2.4 – 3.9 |
6.5 - 10.0 |
>10 – 14 |
1.1 – 2.9 |
3.7 - 9.2 |
>14 – 17 |
1.0 - 3.9 |
3.2 - 5.4 |
>50 – 76 |
0.3 - 1.0 |
2.1 - 3.1 |
* independent of anthocyanin |
This leads to the conclusion that repeatabilities and reproducibilities depend on the total sum of the relative peak areas. The higher they are, the better are RSDr and RSDR. For anthocyanin contents close to the detection limit (e.g. Cyanidin-3-glucoside) with small relatives areas (less than 1%) the RSDr et RSDR values can rise significantly. For anthocyanin whose relative areas are more than 1%, the RSDr and RSDR values are reasonable.
Figure 1: Separation of 9 anthocyanins in red wine |
|
Table 2: Results of the method performance study
Anthocyanin |
sample 1 |
sample 2 |
sample 3 |
sample 4 |
sample 5 |
|
Delphinidol-3-glucoside |
||||||
n |
14 |
14 |
16 |
15 |
16 |
|
mean |
6.75 |
14.14 |
3.45 |
16.68 |
3.54 |
|
sr |
0.163 |
0.145 |
0.142 |
0.142 |
0.108 |
|
RSDr(%) |
2.4 |
1.0 |
4.1 |
0.8 |
3.1 |
|
r |
0.46 |
0.41 |
0.40 |
0.40 |
0.30 |
|
sR |
0.544 |
0.462 |
0.526 |
0.704 |
0.490 |
|
RSDR(%) |
8.1 |
3.3 |
15.2 |
4.2 |
13.8 |
|
R |
1.52 |
1.29 |
1.47 |
1.97 |
1.37 |
|
Cyanidol-3-glucoside |
||||||
n |
16 |
17 |
16 |
15 |
14 |
|
mean |
2.18 |
1.23 |
0.61 |
1.46 |
0.34 |
|
sr |
0.086 |
0.053 |
0.043 |
0.110 |
0.031 |
|
RSDr(%) |
4.0 |
4.3 |
7.1 |
7.5 |
9.2 |
|
r |
0.24 |
0.15 |
0.12 |
0.31 |
0.09 |
|
sR |
0.460 |
0.211 |
0.213 |
0.180 |
0.158 |
|
RSDR(%) |
21.2 |
17.2 |
34.9 |
12.3 |
46.7 |
|
R |
1.29 |
0.59 |
0.60 |
0.50 |
0.44 |
|
Petunidol-3-glucoside |
||||||
n |
15 |
17 |
16 |
14 |
15 |
|
mean |
10.24 |
14.29 |
5.75 |
12.21 |
6.19 |
|
sr |
0.233 |
0.596 |
0.157 |
0.097 |
0.196 |
|
RSDr(%) |
2.3 |
4.2 |
2.7 |
0.8 |
3.2 |
|
r |
0.65 |
1.67 |
0.44 |
0.27 |
0.55 |
|
sR |
0.431 |
0.996 |
0.495 |
0.469 |
0.404 |
|
RSDR(%) |
4.2 |
7.0 |
8.6 |
3.8 |
6.5 |
|
R |
1.21 |
2.79 |
1.39 |
1.31 |
1.13 |
|
Peonidol-3-glucoside |
||||||
n |
16 |
15 |
17 |
17 |
16 |
|
mean |
11.88 |
6.23 |
13.75 |
7.44 |
4.12 |
|
sr |
0.241 |
0.166 |
0.144 |
0.232 |
0.174 |
|
RSDr(%) |
2.0 |
2.7 |
1.0 |
3.1 |
4.2 |
|
r |
0.68 |
0.47 |
0.40 |
0.65 |
0.49 |
|
sR |
0.981 |
0.560 |
1.227 |
0.602 |
0.532 |
|
RSDR(%) |
8.3 |
9.0 |
8.9 |
8.1 |
12.9 |
|
R |
2.75 |
1.57 |
3.44 |
1.69 |
1.49 |
|
Malvidol-3-glucoside |
||||||
n |
16 |
15 |
17 |
16 |
16 |
|
mean |
55.90 |
55.04 |
76.11 |
52.60 |
61.04 |
|
sr |
0.545 |
0.272 |
0.251 |
0.298 |
0.377 |
|
RSDr(%) |
1.0 |
0.5 |
0.3 |
0.6 |
0.6 |
|
r |
1.53 |
0.76 |
0.70 |
0.83 |
1.06 |
|
sR |
2.026 |
2.649 |
2.291 |
1.606 |
1.986 |
|
RSDR(%) |
3.6 |
4.8 |
3.0 |
3.1 |
3.3 |
|
R |
5.67 |
7.42 |
6.41 |
4.50 |
5.56 |
|
n |
= N° of laboratories retained after eliminating outliers |
|||||
sr |
= standard deviation of repeatability |
|||||
RSDr(%) |
= relative standard deviation of repeatability |
|||||
r |
= repeatability |
|||||
sR |
= standard deviation of reproducibility |
|||||
RSDR(%) |
= relative standard deviation of reproducibility |
|||||
R |
= reproducibility |
|||||
Table 2: Results of the method performance study
Anthocyanin |
sample 1 |
sample 2 |
sample 3 |
sample 4 |
sample 5 |
|
Peonidol-3-acetylglucoside |
||||||
n |
14 |
16 |
14 |
16 |
||
mean |
1.16 |
1.44 |
0.59 |
3.74 |
||
sr |
0.064 |
0.062 |
0.059 |
0.215 |
||
RSDr(%) |
5.5 |
4.3 |
10.1 |
5.8 |
||
0.18 |
0.17 |
0.17 |
0.60 |
|||
sR |
0.511 |
0.392 |
0.272 |
0.374 |
||
RSDR(%) |
43.9 |
27.2 |
46.4 |
10.0 |
||
R |
1.43 |
1.10 |
0.76 |
1.05 |
||
Malvidol-3-acetylglucoside |
||||||
n |
16 |
17 |
17 |
16 |
||
mean |
5.51 |
4.84 |
3.11 |
15.07 |
||
sr |
0.176 |
0.167 |
0.088 |
0.213 |
||
RSDr(%) |
3.2 |
3.4 |
2.8 |
1.4 |
||
r |
0.49 |
0.47 |
0.25 |
0.60 |
||
sR |
0.395 |
0.366 |
0.496 |
0.617 |
||
RSDR(%) |
7.2 |
7.6 |
16.0 |
4.1 |
||
R |
1.11 |
1.02 |
1.39 |
1.73 |
||
Peonidol-3-coumarylglucoside |
||||||
n |
16 |
14 |
17 |
16 |
||
mean |
1.26 |
0.90 |
0.89 |
1.32 |
||
sr |
0.130 |
0.046 |
0.060 |
0.058 |
||
RSDr(%) |
10.3 |
5.1 |
6.8 |
4.4 |
||
r |
0.36 |
0.13 |
0.17 |
0.16 |
||
sR |
0.309 |
0.109 |
0.204 |
0.156 |
||
RSDR(%) |
24.5 |
12.2 |
23.0 |
11.8 |
||
R |
0.86 |
0.31 |
0.57 |
0.44 |
||
Malvidol-3-coumarylglucoside |
||||||
n |
17 |
17 |
17 |
16 |
||
mean |
4.62 |
2.66 |
4.54 |
4.45 |
||
sr |
0.159 |
0.055 |
0.124 |
0.048 |
||
RSDr(%) |
3.4 |
2.1 |
2.7 |
1.1 |
||
r |
0.45 |
0.15 |
0.35 |
0.13 |
||
sR |
0.865 |
0.392 |
0.574 |
0.364 |
||
RSDR(%) |
18.7 |
14.7 |
12.6 |
8.2 |
||
R |
2.42 |
1.10 |
1.61 |
1.02 |
||
n |
= N° of laboratories retained after eliminating outliers |
|||||
sr |
= standard deviation of repeatability |
|||||
RSDr(%) |
= relative standard deviation of repeatability |
|||||
r |
= repeatability |
|||||
sR |
= standard deviation of reproducibility |
|||||
RSDR(%) |
= relative standard deviation of reproducibility |
|||||
R |
= reproducibility |
|||||
Table 3: List of participants
ABC Labor Dahmen, Mülheim/Mosel |
D |
Chemisches Landes- und Staatliches Veterinäruntersuchungsamt Münster |
D |
Institut für Lebensmittelchemie Koblenz |
D |
Institut für Lebensmittelchemie Speyer |
D |
Institut für Lebensmittelchemie Trier |
D |
Institut für Lebensmittelchemie und Arzneimittel Mainz |
D |
Labor Dr. Haase-Aschoff, Bad Kreuznach |
D |
Labor Dr. Klaus Millies, Hofheim-Wildsachsen |
D |
Labor Heidger, Kesten |
D |
Landesveterinär- und Lebensmitteluntersuchungsamt Halle |
D |
Staatliche Lehr- und Forschungsanstalt für Landwirtschaft, Weinbau und Gartenbau, Neustadt/Weinstraße |
D |
Staatliches Institut für Gesundheit und Umwelt, Saarbrücken |
D |
Staatliches Medizinal-, Lebensmittel- und Veterinäruntersuchungsamt, Wiesbaden |
D |
Laboratoire Interrégional de la D.G.C.C.R.F de Bordeaux, Talence/France |
F |
Unidad de Nutricion y Bromotologia, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca/Espana |
E |
University of Glasgow, Div. of Biochem. and Molek. Biology |
UK |
Höhere Bundeslehranstalt und Bundesamt für Wein- und Obstbau, Klosterneuburg |
A |
Laboratories
D (13); A (1); F (1); E (1); UK (1)
Plant proteins (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-12 Determination of plant proteins in wines and musts
Type IV method
The technique developed below enables to determine the quantity of proteins possibly remaining in beverages treated with proteins of plant origin after racking.
- Principle
Wine and must proteins are precipitated with trichloroacetic acid, then they are separated by electrophoresis in polyacrylamide gel in the presence of dodecyl sodium sulphate (DSS). The addition of Coomassie blue colours the proteins. The intensity of the colouration enables to determine the protein content using a calibration curve made beforehand with the known protein concentration solutions. The antigenic capacity of musts and treated wines is determined by immunoblotting testing.
- Protocol
2.1. Concentration of proteins by precipitation with trichloroacetic acid (TCA)
2.1.1. Reagents
2.1.1.1. Pure trichloroacetic acid (TCA)
2.1.1.2. TCA at 0.1% prepared using 2.1.1.1: 0.1 g in
100 ml of water.
2.1.1.3. TCA at 100% prepared using 2.1.1.1: 100 g in
100 ml of water.
2.1.1.4. Sodium hydroxide 0.5 M
2.1.1.5. Buffer Tris/HCl 0.25 M pH=6.8
30.27 g of Tris-(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane (Tris) are dissolved in 300 ml of distilled water. The pH is adjusted to 6.8 with concentrated hydrochloric acid for analysis. The volume is completed to 1 l with distilled water. The buffer is stored at 4°C.
2.1.1.6. Pure glycerol
2.1.1.7. Pure dodecyl sodium sulphate (DSS)
2.1.1.8. Pure 2-mercaptoethanol
2.1.1.9. Buffer solution for samples: it is made up of a buffer Tris/HCl 0.25 M, pH=6.8 (2.1.1.5); 7.5% of pure glycerol (2.1.1.6); 2% of dodecyl sodium sulphate (DSS) (2.1.1.7) and 5% of pure 2-mercaptoethanol (2.1.1.8). The percentages of different reagents correspond to the final concentration in the buffer solution.
2.1.2. Procedure
3 ml of trichloroacetic acid at 100% (2.1.1.3) and 24 ml of wine or must (treated or untreated) are successively put in 50 ml centrifuge tubes. The final concentration in TCA thus obtained is 11%.
After 30 minutes at 4°C, the samples are centrifuged at 10,000 rpm for 30 minutes at 4°C. The pellets are washed in an aqueous solution of TCA at 0.1% (2.1.1.2), re-centrifuged and put again in suspension in 0.24 ml mixture (1:1, v/v) of sodium hydroxide 0.5 M (2.1.1.4) and buffer solution (2.1.1.9). The samples are heated at 100°C in a water bath for 10 minutes.
2.2. Electrophoresis in Polyacrylamide Gel in the presence of DSS
2.2.1. Reagents
2.2.1.1. Buffer Tris/HCl 1.5 M pH=8.8
181.6 g of Tris-(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane are dissolved in 300 ml of distilled water. The pH is adjusted at 8.8 with concentrated hydrochloric acid for analysis. The volume is completed to 1 l with distilled water. The buffer is stored at 4°C.
2.2.1.2. Mixture of acrylamide (30%)–bis-acrylamide (0.8%)–glycerol (75%)
Slowly add 300 g of acrylamide and 8 g of bis-acrylamide to 600 ml of a glycerol solution at 75%. After dissolution, adjust the volume to 1 l with glycerol at 75%. The mixture is stored in the dark at room temperature.
2.2.1.3. DSS at 10%
10 g of DSS are dissolved in 100 ml of distilled water. Store at room temperature.
2.2.1.4. N,N,N’,N’-tetramethylenediamine (TEMED) for electrophoresis
2.2.1.5. Ammonium persulfate at 10%
1 g of ammonium persulfate is dissolved in 10 ml of distilled water. Store at 4°C.
2.2.1.6. Bromophenol blue solution
10 mg of bromophenol blue for electrophoresis are dissolved in 10 ml of distilled water.
2.2.1.7. Solution for the separation gel (15% of acrylamide)
It is prepared just before use:
- 1.5 ml of Tris/HCl 1.5 M, pH=8.8 (2.2.1.1),
- 1.5 ml of distilled water,
- 3 ml of glycerol acrylamide mixture (2.2.1.2),
- 50 μl of DSS 10% (2.2.1.3),
- 10 μl of N,N,N’,N’-tetramethylenediamine (TEMED) for electrophoresis (2.2.1.4),
- 20 μl of ammonium persulfate (2.2.1.5).
-
1 drop of bromophenol blue (2.2.1.6)
- Buffer Tris/HCl 0.5 M pH=6.8
60.4 g of Tris-(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane are dissolved in 400 ml of distilled water. The pH is adjusted to 6.8 with concentrated hydrochloric acid for analysis. The volume is completed to 1 l with distilled water. The buffer is stored at 4°C.
2.2.1.9. Mixture of acrylamide (30%)–bis-acrylamide (0.8%)–water
Slowly add 300 g of acrylamide and 8 g of bis-acrylamide to 300 ml of water. After dissolution, adjust the volume to 1 l with distilled water. The mixture is stored in the dark at room temperature.
2.2.1.10. Concentration gel at 3.5% of acrylamide
It is prepared just before use:
- 0.5 ml of Tris/HCl 0.5 M pH=6.8 (2.2.1.8),
- 1.27 ml of distilled water,
- 0.23 ml of water acrylamide mixture (2.2.1.9),
- 20 μl of DSS 10% (2.2.1.3),
- 5 μl of N,N,N’,N’-tetramethylenediamine (TEMED) for electrophoresis (2.2.1.4),
- 25 μl of ammonium persulfate (2.2.1.5),
-
1 drop of bromophenol blue (2.2.1.6).
- Migration buffer
30.27 g of Tris-(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane, 144 g of glycine and 10 g of DSS are dissolved in 600 ml of distilled water. The pH should be 8.8. If necessary, it is adjusted with concentrated hydrochloric acid for analysis. The volume is completed to 1 l with distilled water. The buffer is stored at 4°C. At the time of use, the solution is diluted to 1/10 in distilled water.
2.2.1.12. Colouring solution
Are successively mixed:
- 16 ml of ultra-pure Coomassie brilliant blue G-250 at 5% (5 g in 100 ml of distilled water),
- 784 ml from a 1 l solution where 100 g of ammonium sulphate and 13.8 ml of orthophosphoric acid at 85% were dissolved for analysis,
-
200 ml of absolute ethanol.
- Discolouring solution
Are successively mixed:
- 100 ml of glacial acetic acid 100% for analysis,
- 200 ml of absolute ethanol for analysis.
-
700 ml of distilled water.
- Procedure
The separation gel solution (2.2.1.7) is poured between two glass plates of 7x10cm. The upper surface of the gel is levelled by the addition of 2 drops of distilled water.
After polymerisation of the separation gel and the elimination of water, 1 ml of concentration gel (2.2.1.10) is deposited on the separation gel using a 1 ml pipette. Then the comb is set up whose imprints will create deposit wells.
The samples necessary for the calibration range are prepared in a mixture (1:1), v/v, 0.5% M sodium hydroxide (2.1.1.4) and the buffer solution (2.1.1.9) in order for the calibration range be between 5 μg/ml and 50 μg/ml.
20 to 30 μl of wine and calibration solution are deposited in the wells.
After migration (at a constant voltage of 90 V) at room temperature for about 3-4 hours, the gels are removed from the mould. They are immediately plunged into 50 ml of an aqueous solution of TCA 20% for 30 minutes then in 50 ml of the colouring solution (2.2.1.12).
The proteins appear in the form of blue coloured bands. The gel is then discoloured with 50 ml of discolouring solution (2.2.1.13). When the bottom of the gel is transparent, it is placed in distilled water for storage.
- Quantitative analysis
The intensity of each spot is evaluated by using a scanner for gel with an image analyser software. The quantity of protein on the gel is determined by the calculation of the average density of the pixels of the band and by integration of the band width. The protein content of each sample is obtained using a calibration curve. The points of this curve are obtained by tracing the known concentration values of plant proteins deposited on the gel depending on the corresponding integration area.
The detection and quantification limit is about 0.030 ppm for peas and at 0.36 ppm for gluten, in an environment concentrated 100 times. The coefficient of variation is always below 5%.
- Search by immunoblotting of the antigenic potential of wines and musts treated
The antigenic capacity of proteins that could remain in the beverages treated after racking is then evaluated.
4.1. Principle
After electrophoresis, the gels are submitted to the immunoblotting technique. The proteins are transferred to a membrane where they are adsorbed. An antigen–antibody complex is formed by the addition of a plant anti-protein antibody (for example anti–gliadin antibodies if the plant protein is gluten). The method is revealed by the addition of an antibody directed against the plant anti-protein antibodies coupled with phosphatase. In the presence of the chromogenic substrate of the enzyme, a colouration whose intensity will be proportional to the quantity of immunocomplexes will develop. This immunoreactivity will be quantified using a calibration curve made with known concentration plant proteins solutions.
4.2. Protocol
4.2.1. Reagents
4.2.1.1. Transfer buffer
3.03 g of Tris, 14.4 g of glycine (R), 200 ml of methanol (R) are mixed and completed to 1 l with distilled water.
4.2.1.2. Gelatine 1%
8.77 g of sodium chloride (R), 18.6 g of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) for analysis, 6.06 g of Tris and 0.5 ml of Triton X are dissolved in 800 ml of distilled water. The pH is adjusted to 7.5 with concentrated hydrochloric acid for analysis. 10 g of gelatine are added and the volume is completed to 1 l.
4.2.1.3. Gelatine 0.25%
8.77 g of sodium chloride (R), 18.6 g of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) for analysis, 6.06 g of Tris and 0.5 ml of Triton X are dissolved in 800 ml
of distilled water. The pH is adjusted to 7.5 with concentrated hydrochloric acid for analysis. 2.5 g of gelatine are added and the volume is completed to 1 l.
4.2.1.4. Polyclonal antibody solution (marketed or described in the annex)
10 μl of polyclonal plant anti-protein antibodies
q.s.f. 10 ml with gelatine at 0.25% (4.2.1.3).
4.2.1.5. TBS buffer
29.22 g of sodium chloride for analysis and 2.42 g of tris are dissolved in 1 l of distilled water.
4.2.1.6. Alkaline phosphatase buffer
5.84 g of sodium chloride (R), 1.02 g of magnesium chloride (R) and 12.11 g of Tris are dissolved in 800 ml of distilled water. The pH is adjusted to 9.5 with concentrated hydrochloric acid and the volume is completed to 1 l.
4.2.1.7. Developer
15 g of bromochloroindol phosphate (BICP) and 30 g of nitro blue tetrazolium (NBT) are dissolved in 100 ml of alkaline phosphatase buffer (4.2.1.6).
4.2.2. Procedure
After electrophoresis, the proteins are transferred from the gel to a membrane of polyvinylidene difluoride by electrophoretic elution: 16 hours at 4°C at 30 V in the transfer buffer (4.2.1.1). The membranes are saturated with gelatine at 1% (4.2.1.2) and washed 3 times with gelatine at 0.25% (4.2.1.3). The gelatine becomes set on free sites and inhibits non specific adsorption of immunological reagents. The membrane is then plunged into 10 ml of the plant anti-protein polyclonal antibody solution (4.2.1.4). For gluten, the anti-gliadin antibodies are purchased. The other antibody types are prepared according to the method provided for in the annex. The IgG-antigen complex is detected by the addition of 10 μl of anti-IgG rabbit antibodies marked with alkaline phosphatase. The membranes are washed twice with gelatine 0.25% (4.2.1.3) and once with the TBS buffer (4.2.1.5). After incubation in the developer (4.2.1.7), a dark purple precipitate is formed in the spot where the enzyme is attached.
4.3. Quantitative analysis
In order to calculate the quantity of residual immunoreactivity of a marketed wine, a calibration curve is traced out: known concentrations of plant proteins deposited on the gel (and transferred to a membrane) depending on the areas obtained by integration of the intensity of the spots corresponding to the formation of immune-complex. The analysis is done with the same equipment as for analysing electrophoresis gels.
Annex Production of polyclonal anti-peas
Anti-peas polyclonal antibodies necessary for the determination of antigenic capacity of pea proteins in wine and musts treated are being carried out on animals.
- Principle
Serums containing polyclonal antibodies are obtained from New Zealand rabbits after an intradermal injection of antigen.
- Protocol
2.1. Reagents
2.1.1. PBS pH=7.4 phosphate buffer: 8 g of NaCl, 200 mg of KCl, 1.73 of Na2HPO4 H2O and 200 mg of KH2PO4 are dissolved in 300 ml of distilled water. pH is adjusted to 7.4 with sodium hydrate 1 M. The volume is brought to 1 l with distilled water.
2.1.2. Antigens:
10 mg of pea protein is dissolved in 5 ml of PBS phosphate buffer (2.1.1). The solution is then filtered under sterile conditions through 0.2 µm and stored at -20°C until the day of immunization.
2.2. Procedure
1 ml of 2.1.2. solution is mixed with 1 ml of Freund complete adjuvant. 1 ml of this mixture is injected intradermically to a New Zealand rabbit weighing approximately 3 kg. This injection is repeated on day 15, day 30 and day 45.
60 days after the first injection, 100µl of blood were withdrawn from the auricular vein which was then tested for its capacity to react to antigens. Immunoblotting was used for this evaluation as described in Chapter 4.2 of the analysis method using a gel with a pea protein which migrated on the gel.
After checking the formation of an antigen-antibody complex, 15 ml of blood were withdrawn from the auricular vein. The blood is placed at 37°C for 30 minutes. The serum containing the anti-pea polyclonal antibodies is withdrawn after centrifuging the blood at 3000 rpm for 5 minutes.
Determination of Lysozyme by HPLC (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-14 Measurement of lysozyme in wine by high performance liquid chromatography
Type IV method
- Introduction
It is preferable to have an analysis method available for lysozyme which is not based on enzyme activity.
- Scope
The method allows the quantification of lysozyme (mg of protein per l) present in red and white wines independently of the enzyme activity (which could be inhibited by partial denaturation or by complex formation or coprecipitation phenomena) found in the test solution.
- Definition
HPLC provides an analytical approach based on steric, polar or adsorptive interactions betwen the stationary phase and the analyte, and is therefore not linked to the actual enzyme activity exhibited by the protein.
- Principle
The analysis is carried out using HPLC with a spectrophotometric detector combined with a spectrofluorimetric detector. The unknown quantity in the wine sample is calculated on the chromatographic peak areas, using the external calibration method.
- Reagents
5.1. Solvents and working solutions
HPLC analysis on Acetonitrile (CN)
Pure trifluoroacetic acid (TFA)
deionised water for HPLC analysis
Standard solution: Tartaric acid 1g/L, Ethyl alcohol 10% v/v, adjusted to pH 3.2 with neutral potassium tartrate.
5.2. Eluents
A: CN 1%, TFA 0.2 %, = 98.8%
B: CN 70%, TFA 0.2 %, = 29.8%
5.3. Reference solutions
Quantities from 1 to 250 mg/L standard lysozyme, dissolved in standard solution by stirring continuously for at least 12 hours.
- Equipment
6.1. HPLC apparatus equipped with a pumping system suitable for gradient elution
6.2. Thermostated column compartment (oven)
6.3. Spectrophotometer combined with spectrofluorimeter
6.4. 20 μL loop injection
6.5. Column: polymer in reverse phase with phenyl functional groups (diameter of pores = 1000 Å, exclusion limit = 1000000 Da) Toso Bioscience TSK-gel Phenyl 5PW RP, 7.5 cm x 4.6 mm ID as an example
6.6. Pre-column in the same material as the column: Toso Bioscience TSK-gel Phenyl 5PW RP Guardgel, 1.5 cm 3.2mm ID as an example
- Preparation of the sample
The wine samples are acidified with HCl (10M) diluted 1/10 and filtered using a polyamide with 0.22 μm diameter pores filter, 5 minutes after the addition. The chromatography analysis is carried out immediately after filtering.
-
Operating conditions
- Eluent flow-rate: 1mL/min
- Temperature of column: 30°C
- Spectrophotometric detection: 280 nm
- Spectrofluorimetric detection:
- λ ex = 276 nm;
- λ em = 345 nm;
-
Gain = 10
- Gradient elution sequence
Time (min) |
A% |
B% |
gradient |
0 |
100 |
0 |
|
isocratic |
|||
3 |
100 |
0 |
|
linear |
|||
10 |
65 |
35 |
|
isocratic |
|||
15 |
65 |
35 |
|
linear |
|||
27 |
40.5 |
59.5 |
|
linear |
|||
29 |
0 |
100 |
|
isocratic |
|||
34 |
0 |
100 |
|
linear |
|||
36 |
100 |
0 |
|
isocratic |
|||
40 |
100 |
0 |
8.6. Average retention time of lysozyme: 25.50 minutes
- Calculation
The reference solutions containing the following concentrations of lysozyme: 1; 5; 10; 50; 100; 200; 250 mg/L are analysed in triplicate. For each chromatogram, the peak areas corresponding to the lysozyme are plotted according to the respective concentrations, in order to obtain the linear regresssion lines expressed by the formula Y= ax+b. The correlation coefficient must be > 0.999
- Characteristics of the method
A validation study was carried out for the purpose of assessing the suitability of the method for the purpose in question, taking into account linearity, limits of detection and quantification and the accuracy of the method. The latter parameter was determined by defining the levels of precision and trueness of the method.
10.1. Linearity of the method
Based on the results obtained from the linear regression analysis, the method proved to be linear within the ranges shown in the table below:
Linearity range (mg/L) |
Line gradient |
Correlation coefficient (r2) |
LD (mg/L) |
LQ (mg/L) |
Repeatability (n=5) RSD% |
Reproducibility (n=5) RSD% |
|||
Std1 |
V.R.2 |
V.B.3 |
Std1 |
||||||
UV |
5-250 |
3 786 |
0,9993 |
1,86 |
6,20 |
4,67 |
5,54 |
0,62 |
1,93 |
FLD |
1-250 |
52 037 |
0,9990 |
0,18 |
0,59 |
2,61 |
2,37 |
0,68 |
2,30 |
Table 1: Data related to characteristics of the method: standard solution (Std 1); red wine (V.R 2); white wine (V.B 3)
10.2. Limit of detection and limit of quantification
The detection limit (LD) and limit of quantification (LQ) were calculated as the signal equivalent to respectively 3 times and 10 times the background chromatography noise under working conditions on an actual test solution (table 1),
10.3. Precision of the method
The parameters taken into account were repeatability and reproducibility. Table 1 shows the values of these parameters (expressed as %age St.dv. of measurements repeated in different concentrations) found for standard solution, red wine and white wine
10.4. Trueness of the method
The percentage recovery was calculated on the standard solutions containing 5 and 50 mg/L of lysozyme, with known quantities of lysozyme added, as shown in the table below.
Nominal initial [C] (mg/L) |
Quantity added (mg/L) |
Theoretical [C] (mg/L) |
[C] found |
Std.Dev. |
%age recovery |
|
UV 280 nm |
50 |
13.1 |
63.1 |
62.3 |
3.86 |
99 |
FD |
50 |
13.1 |
63.1 |
64.5 |
5.36 |
102 |
UV 280 nm |
5 |
14.4 |
19.4 |
17.9 |
1.49 |
92.1 |
FD |
5 |
14.4 |
19.4 |
19.0 |
1.61 |
97.7 |
|
Fig.1 Chromatogram of red wine containing pure lysozyme (standard solution containing 1 000 mg/L of lysozyme was added to wine to obtain a final concentration of 125 mg/L of lysozyme). A: UV detector at 280 nm; B: UV detector at 225 nm; C: FLD detector (λ ex 276 nm; λ em 345 nm). |
- Bibliography
- Claudio Riponi; Nadia Natali; Fabio Chinnici. Quantitation of hen’s egg white lysozyme in wines by an improved HPLC-FLD analytical method. Am. J. Enol. Vit., in press.
Determination of 3-methoxypropane-1,2-diol and cycli diglycerols (by-products of technical glycerol) in wine by GC-MS- Description of the method and collaborative study
OIV-MA-AS315-15 Determination of 3-methoxypropane-1,2-diol and cyclic diglycerols (by products of technical glycerol) in wine by GC-MS- Description of the method and collaborative study
Type II method
- Introduction
This is an internationally validated method for the determination of 3-methoxypropane-1,2-diol (3-MPD) and cyclic diglycerols (CycDs) - both being recognised as impurities of technical glycerol - in different types of wine. It is known that glycerol produced by transesterification of plant and animal triglycerides using methanol contains considerable amounts of 3-MPD. The synthesis of glycerol from petrochemicals leads to impurities of CycDs. One of the published methods [1, 2, 3[i]] was adopted, modified and tested in an collaborative study. Here we present the optimized method and report the results of the collaborative study [2]. Design and assessment of the validation study followed the O.I.V. Resolution 8/2000 “Validation Protocol of Analytical Methods”.
- Scope
The described method is suitable for the determination of 3-MPD and 6 cyclic diglycerols (cis-, trans-2,6-bis(hydroxymethyl) 1,4-dioxane; cis-, trans-2,5-bis(hydroxymethyl) 1,4-dioxane; cis-, trans-2,-hydroxymethyl-6-hydroxy-1,4-dioxepane) in white, red, sweet and dry wines. The study described covers the concentration range of 0.1 to 0.8 mg/L for 3-MPD and 0.5 to 1.5 mg/L for the CycDs.
- Definitions
3-MPD |
3-methoxypropane-1,2-diol |
ANOVA |
Analysis of Variance |
C |
Concentration |
CycDs |
Cyclic diglycerols |
GC-MS |
Gas chromatography – mass spectrometry |
H2 |
Hydrogen |
IS |
Internal standard |
m/z |
mass/charge ratio |
ML |
Matrix calibration level |
S0 |
Standard dilution 1000 ng/ μL |
S1 |
Standard dilution 100 ng/ μL |
S2 |
Standard dilution 10 ng/ μL |
- Principle
The analytes and the internal standard are salted-out by addition of , and extracted using diethyl ether. Extracts are analyzed directly by GC-MS on a polar column. Detection is then carried out in selected ion monitoring mode.
- Reagents and Materials
5.1.2. Diethyl ether Uvasol for spectroscopy
5.1.3. Molecular sieve (2 mm diameter, pore size 0.5 nm)
5.1.4. Ethanol (Absolute)
5.2. Standards
5.2.1. Cyclic diglycerol mixture (6 components) Solvay Alkali GmbH[1], 89.3 %
cis-, trans-2,6-bis(hydroxymethyl) 1,4-dioxane; cis-, trans-2,5-
bis(hydroxymethyl) 1,4-dioxane; cis-, trans-2,-hydroxymethyl-6-hydroxy-1,4-dioxepane
5.2.2. 3-Methoxypropane-1,2-diol (3-MPD) 98% (CAS 623-39-2)
5.2.3. Butane-1,4 -diol-1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4-(2H)8 98% (CAS 74829-49-5)
5.3. Preparation of standard solution
5.3.1. S0 stock solutions
Accurately weigh 10.0 mg 0.05 mg of each standard substance (11.2 mg are weighed for the CycDs, corresponding to 89.3 % purity) and transfer them to a 10 mL volumetric flask (one for each). Add exactly 10 mL of ethanol and mix thoroughly. The concentration of this solution is 1000 ng/ μL.
5.3.2. S1 working solutions
Volumetrically transfer 1000 μL of the S0 stock solution (6.3.1) to a 10 mL volumetric flask, dilute the contents to volume with ethanol, thoroughly stopper the flask and invert to mix. The concentration of this solution is 100 ng/ μL.
5.3.3. S2 working solutions
Volumetrically transfer 100 μL of the S0 stock solution (6.3.1) to a 10 mL volumetric flask, dilute the content to volume with ethanol, thoroughly stopper the flask and invert to mix. The concentration of this solution is 10 ng/ μL.
Overview of required standard solutions:
CycDs mixture (6 components)
Solution |
Concentration |
|
S0 |
1000 |
ng/ μL |
S1 |
100 |
ng/ μL |
3-Methoxypropane-1,2-diol (3-MPD)
Solution |
Concentration |
|
S0 |
1000 |
ng/ μL |
S1 |
100 |
ng/ μL |
S2 |
10 |
ng/ μL |
1,4 Butane-1,4-(2H)8 (internal standard IS)
Concentration |
||
S0 |
1000 |
ng/ μL |
S1 |
100 |
ng/ μL |
5.4. Preparation of the matrix calibration curve
Matrix-matched calibration solutions are prepared in an uncontaminated wine. It is necessary to analyze this wine first to check that it is not contaminated with 3-MPD or CycDs. If the concentrations of the analytes in the sample are outside the range of the calibration curve, additional levels must be prepared. To ensure that the internal standard does not interfere with any wine components, a blank should be included.
Table 1. Pipetting scheme of matrix calibration
Matrix calibration level |
Volume Wine |
C Wine |
C Wine |
|||
Spike μl |
ml |
μg/L |
mg/L |
|||
Blank |
IS |
- |
10 |
0 |
0 |
|
3-MPD |
- |
|||||
CycDs |
- |
|||||
ML0 |
IS |
100 |
S1 |
10 |
1000 |
1.00 |
3-MPD |
- |
|||||
CycDs |
- |
|||||
ML1 |
IS |
100 |
S1 |
10 |
1000 |
1.00 |
3-MPD |
100 |
S2 |
100 |
0.10 |
||
CycDs |
50 |
S1 |
500 |
0.50 |
||
ML2 |
IS |
100 |
S1 |
10 |
1000 |
1.00 |
3-MPD |
25 |
S1 |
250 |
0.25 |
||
CycDs |
100 |
S1 |
1000 |
1.00 |
||
ML3 |
IS |
100 |
S1 |
10 |
1000 |
1.00 |
3-MPD |
50 |
S1 |
500 |
0.50 |
||
CycDs |
20 |
S0 |
2000 |
2.00 |
||
ML4 |
IS |
100 |
S1 |
10 |
1000 |
1.00 |
3-MPD |
100 |
S1 |
1000 |
1.00 |
||
CycDs |
30 |
S0 |
3000 |
3.00 |
||
ML5 |
IS |
100 |
S1 |
10 |
1000 |
1.00 |
3-MPD |
200 |
S1 |
2000 |
2.00 |
||
CycDs |
40 |
S0 |
4000 |
4.00 |
- Apparatus
6.1. Analytical balance.0.0001 g readability.
6.2. Lab centrifuge (at least 4000 rpm/min)
6.3. Gas chromatograph.-With mass spectrometric detector, split-splitless injector,
6.4. Diverse precision pipettes and volumetric flasks
6.5. Pasteur pipettes
6.6. 40 mL centrifugation vials
6.7. GC-vials (1.5 –2.0 mL)
6.8. Thermostat
6.9. Shaking machine
- Sampling
Wine samples for the analysis should be taken in a sufficient size. Volume needed for one test sample is 10 mL. The wine used for the preparation of the matrix-calibration (5.4) shall be free of analyte.
- Procedure
8.1. Extraction
Add 100 μL internal standard solution S1 (6.3.2) to 10 mL wine to a suitable centrifugation vial e.g. 40 mL. (This corresponds to a concentration of 1 mg/L butane-1,4-(2H)8). Carefully add 10 g of K2CO3 and mix. Take care during this addition as heat is produced due to the release of CO2. After cooling the solution to approximately 20 °C in a water bath, add 1 mL diethyl ether. Homogenise the mixture for 5 minutes using a vertical-shaking machine. Centrifuge the vials at 4000 rpm for 5 min. For better removal of the organic phase, the extract can be partially transferred into a vial with a smaller diameter. Using a Pasteur pipette, transfer the upper organic phase, composed of diethyl ether and ethanol, into a GC vial. Add approximately 120 mg of molecular sieve into the vial. Close the vial, leave for at least 2 h and shake well from time to time. The clear supernatant is transferred to a second GC vial for the GC-MS analysis.
8.2. GC-MS Analysis
Specific parameters for the GC-MS analysis are provided below. Alternative systems may be used, if they provide a similar chromatographic performance and adequate sensitivity. The chromatographic system must be able to separate the internal standard from phenylethanol, a potential interference.
Typical GC conditions
Gas chromatograph: HP 5890 or equivalent
DB-Wax (J&W) column 60 m, 0.32 mm internal diameter, 0.25 μm film thickness, 2 m capillary containment same dimensions or equivalent
Carrier gas: H2
Flow: Pressure 60 k Pa column head
Temperature program:
90° C, 2 min., ramp at 10°C/min. up until 165° C, held for 6 min., ramp at 4° C/min to 250°C, held for 5 min.
Injection temperature: 250° C; Injected volume; 2 μL, 90 sec splitless for 90 s.
Specificl MS conditions
Mass spectrometer: Finnigan SSQ 710 or equivalent
Transfer line: 280° C
Source: 150° C
MS detection:
window1.: 0-25 min.:
14.3 min. 3-MPD: m/z 75, m/z 61
16.7 min IS: m/z 78, m/z 61
Acquisition time for each mass is 250 µs (dwell time).
Monitor for m/z 91 the separation of the internal standard (IS) peak from phenylethanol, which also produces a fragment m/z 78.
window 2. 25-40 min.:
32-34.5 min. CycDs: m/z 57, m/z 117
Acquisition time for each mass is 250 µs (dwell time).
It has been observed that the analysis may degrade chromatographiccolumn. In particular, the injection of the high boiling CycDs mixture is suspected to cause irreversible damage. Injections of reference standard solutions should be avoided; analysis should be restricted to salted-out solutions with low analyte concentrations. In addition it is recommended to use a 1-2 m pre column in order to protect the analytical column. Nevertheless, the analytical column has to be considered as a consumable and must be replaced quite regularly.
- Evaluation
9.1. Identification
Record the relative retention time of each analyte to the IS. Calculate the mean relative retention time of the analytes in the calibration standards. The relative retention time of the analyte should be the same as that of the standard within a margin of 0.5 %. As a confirmation criterion, an ion ratio can be calculated for each analyte from the selected ion monitoring. This ratio is 117/57 for CycDs, 75/61 for 3-MPD and 78/61 for the IS. The ratio should be within 20 % of that which is found in the spiked sample. Confirmation of the identity of substances by full scan using ionsn can also be used.
9.2. Quantification
The quantification is done by a matrix calibration curve prepared according to appropriate section. The analyte/IS area ratios of the indicated mass ratios are correlated by linear regression against the concentration of the analyte. Quantification of the CycDs is achieved by summing the peak area of all six peaks and calculating the total content, to allow for other distributions of the six characteristic CycDs than in the standard. The following m/z values are used for quantification:
3-MPD: m/z 75
IS:m/z 78
CycDs: m/z 117
9.3. Expression of results
Results should be expressed in mg/L for 3-MPD and CycDs with two decimals (e.g. 0.85 mg/L).
9.4. Limit of Detection and limit of quantification
The limit of detection (LD) and the limit of quantification (LQ) depend on the individual measurement conditions of the chemical analysis and are to be determined by the user of the method.
The limit of detection (LD) and the limit of quantification (LQ) were estimated using the instrumentation and conditions mentioned exemplarily above (s. 8) following the instructions in the resolution OENO 7-2000 (E-AS1-10-LIMDET) “Estimation of the Detection and Quantification Limits of a Method of Analysis“. Along the line of the „Logic Diagram for Decision-Making“ in N° 3 the graph approach has to be applied following paragraph 4.2.2. For this purpose a part of the ion trace (m/z) chromatogram is drawn extendedly enclosing a range of a tenfold peak width at mid-height (w½) of an analyte peak in a relevant part of the chromatogram. Furthermore two parallel lines are drawn which just enclose the maximum amplitude of the signal window.
The distance of these two lines gives hmax, expressed in abundance units is multiplied by 3 for LD, by 10 for LQ and finally converted into concentration units by implementing the individual response factor.
3-MPD:
LD: 0,02 mg/l
LQ: 0,06 mg/l
CycDs (sum):
LD: 0,08 mg/l
LQ: 0,25 mg/l
(Note: Since the CD are a mixture of six single compounds with the same response factor - due to their chemical equality - and with hmax constant in the relevant part of the chromatogram the LD and LQ for each single compound are one sixth of the figures above)
- Precision (interlaboratory validation)
Eleven laboratories participated in the collaborative study. The participating laboratories have proven experience in the analysis of the by-products. All of them participated in the pre-trial.
Repeatability (r) and reproducibility (R) and the respective standard deviations (Sr and SR) were found to be correlated statistically significantly with the concentration of the analytes (ANNEX: Figures 1 and 2), r with more than 95% probability and R with more than 99% probability for each of the analytes using the linear regression model.
The actual performance parameters can be calculated by:
3-MPD
Sr=0,060x |
x=concentration of 3-MPD [mg/L] |
SR=0,257x |
r = 0,169 x |
x=concentration of 3-MPD [mg/L] |
R = 0,720 x |
CycDs
Sr = 0,082 x |
x=concentration of CycDs [mg/L] |
SR = 0,092 x + 0,070 |
r = 0,230 x |
x=concentration of CycDs [mg/L] |
R = 0,257 x + 0,197 |
Annex (Interlaboratory Study)
Participants
11 international laboratories participated in the collaborative study (5). The participating laboratories have proven experience in the analysis of the by-products. All of them participated in the pre-trial:
- CSL, York, UK
- Unione Italiana Vini, Verona, Italy
- BfR, Berlin, Germany
- BLGL, Würzburg, Germany
- Istituto Sperimentale per l'enologia, Asti, Italy
- LUA, Speyer, Germany
- Labor Dr. Haase-Aschoff, Bad Kreuznach, Germany
- CLUA, Münster, Germany
- Kantonales Laboratorium, Füllinsdorf, Switzerland
- LUA, Koblenz, Germany
- ISMAA, S. Michele all Adige, Italy
Samples
In November 2002, participating laboratories were sent 11 wine samples consisting of five sets of blind duplicates and one further single test material. Dry white wines, dry red wines and a sweet red wine were used for test materials. The samples were subjected to homogeneity testing previously ([ii]).
Data analysis
Statistical analysis was carried out according to the “Protocol for the Design, Conduct and Interpretation of Method Performance Studies” ([iii]) using a blind duplicate model.
Determination of outliers was assessed by Cochran, Grubbs and paired Grubbs tests.
Statistical analysis was performed to obtain repeatability and reproducibility data.
Horrat values were calculated.
Table 2. Results for 3-MPD
Sample A White wine |
Sample B Red wine a |
Sample C White wine |
Sample F Sweet red wine |
Sample G White wine |
|
Mean mg/L |
0.30 |
0.145 |
0.25 |
0.48 |
0.73 |
Spiked mg/L |
0.30 |
0.12 |
- |
- |
0.80 |
Recovery % |
100 |
121 |
- |
- |
91 |
n |
10 |
10 a |
10 |
10 |
10 |
nc |
1 |
1 a |
1 |
1 |
1 |
outliers |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
n1 |
7 |
9 a |
9 |
8 |
8 |
r |
0.03 |
- |
0.05 |
0.08 |
0.13 |
sr |
0.01 |
- |
0.02 |
0.03 |
0.05 |
RSDr % |
3.20 |
- |
7.20 |
5.80 |
6.57 |
Hor |
0.30 |
- |
0.60 |
0.50 |
0.59 |
R |
0.13 |
0.13 |
0.15 |
0.31 |
0.59 |
sR |
0.05 |
0.05 |
0.05 |
0.11 |
0.21 |
RSDr % |
15.50 |
32.67 |
21.20 |
22.70 |
28.91 |
HoR |
0.80 |
1.53 |
1.10 |
1.30 |
1.72 |
a Single test sample; n, nc and n1 are single results
mean: arithmetic mean of the data used in the statistical analysis
n: total number of sets of data submitted
nc: number of results (laboratories) excluded due to non-compliance
outliers: number of results (laboratories) excluded due to determination as outliers by either Cochran’s or Grubbs’ tests
n1: number of results (laboratories) retained in statistical analysis
Sr: the standard deviation of the repeatability
RSDr: the relative standard deviation of the repeatability (Srx100/mean)
r: repeatability (2.8 x Sr)
Hor: the Horrat value for repeatability is the observed RSDr divided by the RSDr value estimated from the Horwitz equation using the assumption r = 0.66R
R: reproducibility (between laboratory variation) (2.8 x SR)
SR: the standard deviation of the reproducibility
RSDR: the relative standard deviation of the reproducibility (SRx100/mean)
HoR: the Horrat value for reproducibility is the observed RSDR value divided by the RSDR value calculated from the Horwitz equation
Figure 1. Correlation between 3-MPD concentration and r and R. |
|
Table 3. Results for cyclic dyglycerols
Sample A White wine |
Sample B Red winea |
Sample D Red wine |
Sample F Sweet red wine |
Sample G White wine |
|
Mean mg/L |
1.55 |
0.593 |
0.80 |
0.96 |
0.56 |
Spiked mg/L |
1.50 |
0.53 |
0.50 |
||
Recovery % |
103 |
113 |
112 |
||
n |
11 |
11a |
11 |
11 |
11 |
nc |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
outliers |
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
n1 |
9 |
11a |
10 |
9 |
10 |
r |
0.37 |
- |
0.19 |
0.18 |
0.15 |
sr |
0.13 |
- |
0.07 |
0.07 |
0.05 |
RSDr % |
8.50 |
- |
8.60 |
6.70 |
9.30 |
Hor |
0.90 |
- |
0.80 |
0.60 |
0.80 |
R |
0.61 |
0.379 |
0.39 |
0.41 |
0.34 |
sR |
0.22 |
0.135 |
0.13 |
0.15 |
0.12 |
RSDR % |
14.00 |
22.827 |
17.30 |
15.20 |
21.50 |
HoR |
0.90 |
1.319 |
1.00 |
0.90 |
1.20 |
a Single test sample; n and nc are single results
Figure 2. Correlation between CycDs concentration and r and R. |
|
[1] Solvay Alkali GmbH no longer provides the standard mixture; solutions of the mixture may be obtained from the BfR. Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Thielallee 88-92, D-14195 Berlin. www.bfr.bund.de; poststelle@bfr.bund.de
(1) Bononi, M., Favale, C., Lubian, E., Tateo F. (2001)
A new method for the identification of cyclic diglycerols in wine
J. Int. Sci. Vigne Vin. 35, 225-229
(2) Thompson, M. and Wood, R. (1993)
International Harmonised Protocol for the Proficiency Testing of (Chemical) Analytical Laboratories - J AOAC Int 76, 926-940
(3) Horwitz ,W. (1995)
Protocol for the design, conduct and interpretation of method-performance studies
Pure and Applied Chemistry 67, 331-343
Determination of releasable 2,4,6-trichloroanisole in wine (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-16 Determination of releasable 2,4,6-trichloroanisole in wine by cork stoppers
Type IV method
- Scope
The method of determination of releasable 2,4,6-trichloroanisole (TCA) by cork stoppers measures the quantity of TCA released by a sample of cork stoppers macerated in a aqueous-alcoholic solution. The aim of this method is to evaluate the risk of releasing by the lot of analyzed cork stoppers and to provide a method for controlling the quality of cork stoppers.
- Principle
The method aims to simulate 2,4,6-trichloroanisole migration phenomena susceptible of being produced between the cork stopper and wine in bottles. Cork stoppers are macerated in a wine or a aqueous-alcoholic solution, until a balance is obtained. The TCA of the head space is sampled from an appropriate part of the macerate by the solid-phase micro-extraction technique (SPME), then analyzed by gas chromatography, with detection by mass spectrometer (or by electron-capture detector).
- Reagents and products
3.1. White wine with an alcoholic strength ranging between 10 and 12 % vol. (It can be replaced by an aqueous-alcoholic solution with an alcoholic strength of 12 % vol). The wine and/or the aqueous-alcoholic solution must be free of TCA.
3.2. Sodium chloride 99.5 %
3.3. Internal standard for GC/MS analysis: 2,4,6-trichloroanisole (TCA)-d5 purity 98% or 2,3,6-trichloroanisole purity 99%.
Internal standard for GC/ECD analysis; 2,6-dibromoanisole purity 99% or 2,3,6-trichloroanisole purity 99%.
3.4. 2,4,6-trichloroanisole (TCA) purity ≥ 99.0%
3.5. Absolute ethanol
3.6. Pure de-ionised water void of TCA (Standard EN ISO 3696)
3.7. Aqueous-alcoholic solution at 12 % vol.
Prepared using absolute ethanol (3.5) and de-ionised water void of TCA (3.6).
3.8. Internal standard stock solution (500 mg/L)
Add either 0.050 g of 2,4,6-trichloroanisole- (or 2,6-dibromoanisole or 2,3,6-trichloroanisole (3.3) to approximately 60 ml of absolute ethanol (3.5). After dissolution, adjust the volume to 100 mL with absolute ethanol (3.5). It can be kept in a glass bottle with a metallic or glasscover.
3.9. Intermediate solution of internal standard (5.0 mg/L)
Add 1 mL of a solution of either 2,4,6-trichloroanisole- (or 2,6-dibromoanisole or 2,3,6-trichloroanisole) at 500 mg/L (3.8) to approximately 60 mL of absolute ethanol (3.5). Adjust the volume to 100 mL with absolute ethanol (3.5). It can be kept in a glass bottle with a metallic or glass cover.
3.10. Internal standard solution (2.0 µg/L)
Add 40 μL of a solution of either 2,4,6-trichloroanisole-d5 (or 2,6-dibromoanisole or 2,3,6 trichloroanisole) at 5.0 mg/L (3.9) to approximately 60 mL of absolute ethanol (3.5). Adjust the volume to 100 ml with absolute ethanol (3.5). It can be kept at an ambient temperature in a glass bottle with a metallic or glass cover.
3.11. Stock solution of TCA standard (40 mg/L)
Add 0.020g of 2,4,6-trichloroanisole to approximately 400 ml of absolute ethanol (3.5). Following dissolution, adjust volume to 500 mL with absolute ethanol (3.5).
3.12. Intermediate solution A of TCA standard (80 μg/L)
Add 1 mL of 2,4,6-trichloroanisole solution at 40 mg/L (3.11) to approximately 400 mL of absolute ethanol (3.5). Following dissolution, adjust volume to 500 mL with absolute ethanol (3.5).
3.13. Intermediate solution B of TCA standard (160 ng/L)
Add 1 mL of solution 2,4,6-trichloroanisole at 80 μg/L (3.12) to approximately 400 mL of pure de-ionised water (3.6). Following dissolution, adjust the volume to 500 mL with pure de-ionised water (3.6)
3.14. Use the standard-addition technique to make up a range of standard solutions of TCA. Standard solutions in the range from 0.5 ng/L to 50 ng/L can be used, by making additions with a solution of 2,4,6-trichloroanisole at 160 ng/L (3.13) to 6 ml of absolute ethanol (3.5). Following dissolution, adjust volume to 50 mL with pure de-ionised water (3.6)
The calibration curve obtained should be evaluated regularly and in any case whenever there is a major change in the GC/MS or GC/ECD systems.
3.15. Carrier gas: Helium, chromatographic purity ( 99.9990 %)
- Apparatus
4.1. Laboratory glassware
4.1.1. Graduated 100-mL flask
4.1.2. 100- μL microsyringe
4.1.3. Wide-neck glass jar of a capacity adapted to the sample size, closed with a glass or metallic stopper or a material which does not bind TCA.
4.1.4. 20-mL glass sample bottle closed with a perforated capsule and a liner with one side Teflon-coated.
4.2. Solid-phase microextraction system (SPME) with a fiber coated with a polydimethylsiloxane film 100 μm thick
4.3. Heating system for sample bottle (4.1.4)
4.4. Stirring system for sample bottle (4.1.4)
4.5. Gas chromatograph equipped with a "split-splitless" injector and a mass spectrometer detector (MS) or an electron-capture detector (ECD)
4.6. Data-acquisition system
4.7. If required, an automatic sampling and injection system operating with an SPME system
4.8. Capillary column coated with an apolar stationary phase, of the phenylmethylpolysiloxane type (e.g.: 5 % phenyl methylpolysiloxane, 30 m x 0,25 mm x 0,25 µm film thickness or equivalent.)
- Sample preparation
The corks are placed whole in a glass closed container. The container capacity (4.1.3), the same as the quantity of wine or aqueous-alcoholic solution (3.1 or 3.7), must be chosen in accordance to the sample size while ensuring that the corks are completely covered and immersed in the maceration container.
Example 1: 20 corks (45x24) mm, in a 1 L container;
Example 2: 50 corks (45x24) mm, in a 2 L container.
Most of the TCA released during maceration of the groups of stoppers is generally derived from a very low percentage of these stoppers. In order to obtain the best representation of a batch of stoppers, a number of appropriate analyses according to sampling rules and risk with regard to wine contamination should be carried out.
- Operating method
6.1. Extraction
After macerating at ambient temperature for (24 2) hours under laboratory ambient temperature conditions, the maceration is homogenized by inversion. A part of the aliquot of the 10ml maceration solution (5) is transferred to a glass sample bottle (4.1.4)
To increase extraction efficiency and subsequent sensitivity of the method, a quantity sodium chloride (3.2) can be added. The amount of sodium chloride can be adjusted / optimized by the users of this method, depending on the desired level of sensitivity and possible matrix effects that may occur. For example, a quantity of about 3 g of sodium chloride is suggested. 50 μL of the internal standard solution at 2.0 μg/L (3.10) are immediately added, then the bottle is closed using a perforated metal capsule fitted with a silicone / Teflon-coated liner. The capsule is crimped. The contents of the bottle are homogenized for 10 minutes by mixing using a stirring system (4.4) or by using an automatic system (4.7).
The bottle containing the sample is placed in the heating system (4.3) set to 35 °C 2 °C, with stirring (4.4). The extraction of the headspace is carried out using the SPME system (4.2) for at least 15 minutes.
6.2. Analysis
The fiber is then desorbed at 260 °C for at least 2 minutes in the injector of a gas chromatograph, in splitless mode (4.5). The separation is carried out using a capillary column with a non-polar stationary phase (4.8). The carrier gas is helium with a constant flow of 1 ml/min. A temperature program from 35 °C (for 3 min) to 265 °C (at 15 °C/min) is given as an example.
6.3. Detection and quantification
Detection and quantification are carried out by mass spectrometry with a selection of specific ions. For example, the following ion ratio is suggested:
Analysis in SIM mode |
Analyte |
Interesting ions for detection (m/z): |
Ion Quantification (m/z) : |
2,4,6-TCA |
195, 210, 212 |
195 |
|
(2,4,6-TCA)-d5 |
199, 215, 217 |
215 |
|
2,3,6-TCA |
195, 210, 212 |
212 |
Analysis in tandem mode (MS/MS) |
Analyte |
Parent ions (m/z): |
Daughter ion (m/z) : |
2,4,6-TCA |
212 |
169, 197 |
|
196 |
167, 169 |
||
(2,4,6-TCA)-d5 |
217 |
171, 199 |
For the determination of ECD, identify the analyte and internal standard (2,6-dibromoanisole or 2,3,6 trichloroanisole) in the chromatogram, by comparing the retention time of the sample peak corresponding to that of the standard solution peak.
- Calculations
The area of the chromatographic peak obtained for the 2,4,6-trichloroanisole is corrected by the area obtained for the chromatographic peak of the internal standard. The content in 2,4,6-trichloroanisole of each sample is obtained using a calibration curve. The points on this curve are obtained by tracing the relative responses of the 2,4,6-trichloroanisole/internal standard, obtained for aqueous-alcoholic solutions (3.7) containing known concentrations of 2,4,6-trichloroanisole, as a function of the concentrations of these solutions (3.14).
The results are given in ng/L of TCA present in the maceration, rounded off to the nearest 0.1 ng/L.
- Characteristics of the method
As an indication, the detection limit of the analysis of the macerations must be lower than 0.5 ng/L, and the quantification limit close to 1 ng/L. The coefficient of variation is lower than 5% for 5 ng/L, when the selected internal standard is the deuterated analogue TCA-.
An interlaboratory trial was carried out in order to validate the method. This interlaboratory trial was not carried out according to the OIV protocol and the validation parameters mentioned in the FV 1224.
- Bibliography
- HERVÉ E., PRICE S., BURNS G., Chemical analysis of TCA as a quality control tool for natural corks. ASEV Annual Meeting. 1999.
- ISO standard 20752:2007 Cork stoppers — Determination of releasable 2, 4, 6-trichloroanisol (TCA).
- FV 1224 - Résultats de l’analyse collaborative Ring test 3-TCA SPME.
Determining the presence and content of polychlorophenols and polychloroanisols in wines, cork stoppers, wood and bentonites used as atmospheric traps (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-17 Determining the presence and content of polychlorophenols and polychloroanisols in wines, cork stoppers, wood and bentonites used as atmospheric traps
Type IV method
- Scope
All wines, cork stoppers, bentonites (absorption traps) and wood.
- Principle
Determination of 2,4,6-trichloroanisol, 2,4,6-trichlorophenol, 2,3,4,6-tetrachloroanisol, 2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol, pentachloroanisol and pentachlorophenol by gas chromatography, by injecting a hexane extract of the wine and an ether/hexane extract of the solid samples to be analyzed and internal calibration.
- Reagents
Preliminary remark: all the reagents and solvents must be free of the compounds to be determined listed in 2 at the detection limit.
3.1. Purity of hexane > 99 %
3.2. Purity of ethylic ether > 99 %
3.3. Ether/hexane mixture (50/50; v/v)
3.4. or 2,5-dibromophenol purity 99 %
3.5. Pure ethanol
3.6. Pure deionized water, TCA free, type II in accordance with ISO standard EN 3696
3.7. 50 % vol. aqueous-alcoholic solution. Place 100 ml of absolute ethanol (3.<5) in a graduated 200-ml flask (4.9.9), add 200 ml of deionized water (3.6), and homogenize.
3.8. Internal standard:
3.8.1. 200 mg/l stock solution. Place 20 mg of internal standard (3.4) in a graduated 100-ml flask (4.9.8), add the 50 % volume aqueous-alcoholic solution (3.7) and homogenize.
3.8.2. Internal standard solution (2 mg/l). Place 1 ml of the stock solution of internal standard (3.8.1) in a graduated 100-ml flask (4.9.8), add the 50% vol aqueous-alcoholic solution (3.7) and homogenize.
3.8.3. Internal standard solution (20 µg/l). Place 1 ml of stock solution of internal standard (3.8.2) in a 100 ml graduated flask (4.9.8), add with 50 % vol aqueous-alcoholic solution
3.9. Pure products
- 2,4,6-trichloroanisole: 99 %, case: 87-40-1
- 2, 4, 6-trichlorophenol: 99.8 %, case: 88-06-2
- 2,3,5,6-tetrachloroanisole: 99 %, case: 6936-40-9 (note: the product sought in the samples is 2,3,4,6-tetrachloroanisole but is does not exist on the market)
- 2, 3, 4, 6-tetrachlorophenol: 99 %, case: 58-90-2
- pentachloroanisole: 99 %, case: 1825-21-1
-
pentachlorophenol: 99 %, case: 87-86-5
-
Reagents for derivatisation - Piridine: acetic anydride (1:0,4) vol.
- Piridine: 99 %
- Acetic anydride: 98 %
- Calibration stock solution at 200 mg/l
-
Reagents for derivatisation - Piridine: acetic anydride (1:0,4) vol.
In a graduated 100-ml flask (4.9.8), place approximately 20 mg of the pure reference products (3.9.1 to 3.9.6) but whose exactly weight is known (4.7), add absolute ethanol (3.5). Homogenize.
3.12. Intermediate calibration solution at 200 μg/l
In a graduated 100-ml flask (4.9.8) filled with absolute ethanol (3.5), add 100 μl of the calibration stock solution at 200 mg/l (3.11) using the 100- μl micro-syringe (4.9.1) and homogenize.
3.13. Calibration surrogate solution at 4 μg/l
In a graduated 50-ml flask (4.9.7) containing 50 % vol aqueous-alcoholic solution (3.7) add 1 ml of the intermediate calibration solution at 200 μg/l (3.11) using a 1-ml pipette (4.9.6). Add to volume 50 ml with pure ethanol (3.5) and homogenize.
3.14. Calibration solutions. It is possible to prepare various standard solutions with various concentrations by adding, using the 100- μl micro-syringe of (4.9.1), for example 50 μl of the surrogate calibration solution at 4 μg/l (3.12) to 50 ml of wine to enrich it with 4 ng/l of the substances to be determined.
The same reasoning can be used to prepare calibration solutions of various concentrations, either using aqueous-alcoholic solutions, or wine, or to enrich an extraction medium with a known quantity of pure products.
3.15. Commercially available Bentonite.
- Apparatus
4.1. Gas phase chromatograph with Split-splitless injector coupled to an electron capture detector. (It is likewise possible to use a mass spectrometer)
4.2. Capillary tube of non-polar steady-state phénylmethylpolysiloxane type: (0.32 mm x 50 m, thickness of film 0.12 μm or the equivalent
4.3. Chromatographic conditions, as an example:
4.3.1. Injection in "split-splitless" mode (valve closing time 30 seconds)
4.3.2. Carrier gas flow rate: 30 ml/min including 1 ml in the column Hydrogen U ®2 (It is likewise possible to use helium)
4.3.3. Auxiliary gas flow rate: 60 ml/min – Nitrogen with chromatographic purity ( 99,9990 %). It is also possible to use argon methane.
4.3.4. Furnace gradient temperature for information purposes:
- from 40 °C to 160 °C at a rate of 2 °C/min
- from 160 °C to 200 °C at a rate of 5 °C/min
-
step at 220 °C for 10 min
- Injector temperature: 250 °C
- Detector temperature: 250 °C
- Acquisition and integration: acquisition is by computer. The peaks of the various compounds identified by comparison with the reference are then integrated.
- Magnetic agitator.
- Vortex with adaptation for 30-ml flask (4.9.3)
- Precision balance to within 0.1 mg
- Manual or electric household grate
-
Laboratory equipment:
- 100- μl micro-syringe
- 10- μl micro-syringe
- 30-ml flask closing with a screwed plug and cover with one side Teflon-coated
- 10-ml stick pipette graduated 1/10 ml
- 5-ml stick pipette graduated 1/10 ml
- 1-ml precision pipette
- Graduated 50-ml flask
- Graduated 100-ml flask
- Graduated 200-ml flask
- 10 100-ml separating funnel
- Pasteur pipettes and suitable propipette pear
- Household aluminum foil, roll-form.
- Centrifuge
- Sample preparation
5.1. The stopper is grated (4.8) or cut into pieces (dimension < 3 mm)
5.2. Wood is cut with a clipper to obtain pieces (dimension < 3 mm)
5.3. The bentonite (3.15) (30 g for example) is spread out over a strip of aluminum foil (4.9.12) of approximately 30 cm x 20 cm and is exposed to the atmosphere to be analyzed for at least 5 days.
- Operating method
6.1. Extraction process for solid samples:
6.1.1. Stopper: in a 30-ml flask (4.9.3), place approximately 1 g of grated stopper (5.1) but of a precisely known weight (4.7)
6.1.2. Wood: in a 30-ml flask (4.9.3), place approximately 2 g of wood chips (5.2) but of a precisely known weight (4.7)
6.1.3. Control Bentonite: in a 30-ml flask (4.9.3), place approximately 5 g of bentonite (3.15) but of a precisely known weight (4.7)
6.1.4. Sample bentonite: in a 30-ml flask (4.9.3), place approximately 5 g of bentonite (5.3) of a precisely known weight (4.7)
6.1.5. Add 10 ml (4.9.4) of ether/hexane mixture (3.3)
6.1.6. Add with the micro-syringe (4.9.1) 50 μl of the internal standard solution (3.8.2)
6.1.7. Agitate with the vortex (4.6) for 3 min
6.1.8. Recover the ether/hexane liquid phase in a 30-ml flask (4.9.3)
6.1.9. Repeat the extraction operation on the sample with 2 times 5 ml of ether/hexane mixture (3.3)
6.1.10. Final extract: mix the 3 phases of ether/hexane.
6.2. Extraction of the wine and calibration solution
6.2.1. Sample 50 ml of wine or calibration solution (using the graduated flask (4.9.7)
6.2.2. Place them in the 100-ml graduated flask (4.9.8)
6.2.3. Add with the microsyringe (4.9.1) 50 μl of internal standard (3.8.3)
6.2.4. Add 4 ml (4.9.5) of hexane (3.1)
6.2.5. Carry out the extraction using the magnetic stirrer (4.5) for 5 min.
6.2.6. Elutriate into the funnel (4.9.10)
6.2.7. Recover the organic phase with the emulsion in a 30-ml flask (4.9.3) and aqueous phase in the 100-ml graduated flask (4.9.8)
6.2.8. Repeat the extraction of the wine or calibration solution using 2 ml of hexane (3.1)
6.2.9. Carry out the extraction using the magnetic stirrer (4.5) for 5 min.
6.2.10. Elutriate into the funnel (4.9.10)
6.2.11. Recover the organic phase with the emulsion in the same 30-ml flask mentioned in 6.2.7 (containing the organic phase obtained upon the first extraction)
6.2.12. Break the emulsion of the organic phase by centrifugation (4.9.13) by eliminating the lower aqueous phase using a Pasteur pipette (4.9.11) fitted with a propipette pear.
6.2.13. Final wine extract and calibration solutions: the residual organic extract
6.3. Analyze:
6.3.1. Add final extract (6.1.11 or 6.2.13) 100 μl (4.9.1) of the pyridine acetic anydride reagent mixture (3.10) for the derivatisation.
6.3.2. Mix using a magnetic stirrer (4.5) for 10 min.
6.3.3. Inject 2 μl of derivatised final extract (6.3.2) into the chromatograph
- Calculation
|
Response factor = concentration of calibration solution (3.13) * (Peak area of the internal standard / *(Peak area of the pure product in the calibration solution).
Check the calibration by ensuring the response factors +/- 10 %.
- Results
The results are expressed in ng/l for the wine and ng/g for the cork stoppers, bentonites and wood.
- Characteristics of the method
9.1. Coverage rate
The coverage rate calculated in relation to the quantities added in terms of wood chips, polychloroanisols and polychlorophenols of 115 ng/g is:
- 2,4,6-trichloroanisol: 96 %
- 2,4,6-trichlorophenol: 96 %
- 2,3,4,6-tetrachloroanisol: 96 %
- 2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol: 97 %
- pentachloroanisol: 96 %
- pentachlorophenol: 97 %
9.2. Measurement repeatability
Calculated for each product, the uncertainties are as follows:
In a stopper ng/g |
Mean |
Standard deviation |
Repeatability |
2,4,6-trichloroanisol |
1.2 |
0.1 |
0.28 |
2,4,6-trichlorophenol |
26 |
3.3 |
9.24 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachloroanisol |
1.77 |
0.44 |
1.23 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol |
2.59 |
0.33 |
0.92 |
pentachloroanisol |
23.3 |
2.9 |
8.12 |
pentachlorophenol |
7.39 |
1.91 |
5.35 |
In wood with 23 ng/g |
Standard deviation |
Repeatability |
2,4,6-trichloroanisol |
1.9 |
5.3 |
2,4,6-trichlorophenol |
1.9 |
5.3 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachloroanisol |
2.6 |
7.4 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol |
3.3 |
9.3 |
pentachloroanisol |
2.7 |
7.5 |
pentachlorophenol |
3.6 |
10.1 |
In wine with 10 ng/l |
Standard deviation |
Repeatability |
2,4,6-trichloroanisol |
0,4 |
1,1 |
2,4,6-trichlorophenol |
2,1 |
5,9 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachloroanisol |
0,6 |
1,7 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol |
4 |
11,2 |
pentachloroanisol |
1,2 |
3,4 |
pentachlorophenol |
6,5 |
18,2 |
In bentonite with15ng/g |
Standard deviation |
Repeatability |
2,4,6-trichloroanisol |
0,9 |
2,5 |
2,4,6-trichlorophenol |
4 |
11,2 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachloroanisol |
1,2 |
3,4 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol |
5,2 |
14,6 |
pentachloroanisol |
4,3 |
12,0 |
pentachlorophenol |
12,1 |
33,9 |
9.3. Detection limits (DL) and quantification limits (QL) calculated according to the OIV method:
9.3.1. Wood
DL in ng/g |
QL in ng/g |
|
2,4,6-trichloroanisol |
0.72 |
2.4 |
2,4,6-trichlorophenol |
0.62 |
2.0 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachloroanisol |
0.59 |
2.0 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol |
1.12 |
3.74 |
pentachloroanisol |
0.41 |
1.4 |
pentachlorophenol |
0.91 |
3.1 |
9.3.2. Bentonite
DL in ng/g |
QL in ng/g |
|
2,4,6-trichloroanisol |
0.5 |
1 |
2,4,6-trichlorophenol |
1 |
3 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachloroanisol |
0.5 |
1 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol |
1 |
3 |
pentachloroanisol |
0.5 |
1 |
pentachlorophenol |
Not det. |
Not det. |
9.3.3. Stopper
DL in ng/g |
QL in ng/g |
|
2,4,6-trichloroanisol |
0.5 |
1.5 |
2,4,6-trichlorophenol |
1 |
2 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachloroanisol |
0.5 |
1.5 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol |
1 |
2 |
pentachloroanisol |
0.5 |
1.5 |
pentachlorophenol |
1 |
2 |
9.3.4. Wine
DL in ng/l |
QL in ng/l |
|
2,4,6-trichloroanisol |
0.3 |
1 |
2,4,6-trichlorophenol |
1 |
3 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachloroanisol |
0.3 |
1 |
2,3,4,6-tetrachlorophenol |
0.3 |
1 |
pentachloroanisol |
0.5 |
3 |
pentachlorophenol |
1 |
3 |
®2 Air Liquide
Analysis of biogenic amines in musts and wines HPLC (Type-II)
OIV-MA-AS315-18 Analysis of biogenic amines in musts and wines using HPLC
Type II method
- Scope
This method can be applied for analysing biogenic amines in musts and wines:
- Ethanolamine: up to 20 mg/l
- Histamine: up to 15 mg/l
- Methylamine: up to 10 mg/l
- Serotonin: up to 20 mg/l
- Ethylamine: up to 20 mg/l
- Tyramine: up to 20 mg/l
- Isopropylamine: up to 20 mg/l
- Propylamine: normally absent
- Isobutylamine: up to 15 mg/l
- Butylamine: up to 10 mg/l
- Tryptamine: up to 20 mg/l
- Phenylethylamine: up to 20 mg/l
- Putrescine or 1,4-diaminobutane: up to 40 mg/l
- 2-Methylbutylamine: up to 20 mg/l
- 3-Methylbutylamine: up to 20 mg/l
- Cadaverine or 1,5-diaminopentane: up to 20 mg/l
- Hexylamine: up to 10 mg/l
- Definition
The biogenic amines measured are:
- Ethanolamine: – CAS [141 – 43 – 5]
- Histamine:- CAS [51 – 45 – 6]
- Methylamine: – CAS [74 – 89 – 5]
- Serotonin: C10H12N2O – CAS [153 – 98 – 0]
- Ethylamine: C2H7N – CAS [557 – 66 – 4]
- Tyramine: C8H11NO - CAS [60 – 19 – 5]
- Isopropylamine: C3H9N - CAS [75 – 31 – 0]
- Propylamine: C3H9N – CAS [107 – 10 – 8]
- Isobutylamine: C4H11N – CAS [78 – 81 – 9]
- Butylamine: C4H11N – CAS [109 – 73 – 9]
- Tryptamine: C10H12N2 – CAS [61 – 54 – 1]
- Phenylethylamine: C8H11N – CAS [64 – 04 – 0]
- Putrescine or 1,4-diaminobutane: C4H12N2 – CAS [333 – 93 – 7]
- 2-Methylbutylamine: C5H13N - CAS [96 – 15 – 1]
- 3-Methylbutylamine: C5H13N - CAS [107 – 85 – 7]
- Cadaverine or 1,5-diaminopentane: C5H14N2 – CAS [1476 – 39 – 7]
- 1,6-Diaminohexane: C6H16N2 – CAS [124 – 09 – 4]
- Hexylamine: C6H15N – CAS [111 – 26 – 2]
- Principle
The biogenic amines are directly determined by HPLC using a C18 column after O-phthalaldehyde (OPA) derivatization and fluorimetric detection.
- Reagents and products
4.1. High purity resistivity water (18MΩ·cm)
4.2. Dihydrate disodium hydrogenophosphate – purity 99 %
4.3. Acetonitrile - Transmission minimum at 200 nm - purity 99 %
4.4. O-phthalaldehyde (OPA) - Application for fluorescence - purity 99 %
4.5. Disodium tetraborate decahydrate - purity 99 %
4.6. Methanol - purity 99 %
4.7. Hydrochloric acid 32 %
4.8. Sodium hydroxide pellets - purity 99 %
4.9. Ethanolamine - Purity 99 %
4.10. Histamine dichlorhydrate - Purity 99 %
4.11. Ethylamine chlorhydrate - Purity 99 %
4.12. Serotonin - Purity 99 %
4.13. Methylamine chlorhydrate – Purity 98 %
4.14. Tyramine chlorhydrate - Purity 99 %
4.15. Isopropylamine purity 99 %
4.16. Butylamine - Purity 99 %
4.17. Tryptamine chlorhydrate - purity 98 %
4.18. Phenylethylamine - Purity 99 %
4.19. Putrescine dichlorhydrate - Purity 99 %
4.20. 2-Methylbutylamine - Purity 98 %
4.21. 3-Methylbutylamine - Purity 98 %
4.22. Cadaverine dichlorhydrate - Purity 99 %
4.23. 1-6-Diaminohexane - Purity 97 %
4.24. Hexylamine - Purity 99 %
4.25. Nitrogen (maximum impurities: H2O 3 mg/l; O2 2 mg/L; CnHms 0.5 mg/l)
4.26. Helium (maximum impurities: H2O 3 mg/l; O2 2 mg/L; CnHm 0.5 mg/l)
Preparation of reagent solutions:
4.27. Preparation of eluents
Phosphate solution A: Weigh 11.12 g 0.01 g of di-basic sodium phosphate (4.2) in a 50-ml beaker (5.5) on a balance (5.27). Transfer to a 2-litre volumetric flask (5.9) and make up to 2 litres with high purity water (4.1). Homogenize using a magnetic stirrer (5.30) and filter over a 0.45 μm membrane (5.17). Put in the 2-litre bottle (5.12).
Solution B: The acetonitrile (4.3) is used directly.
4.28. OPA solution – Daily preparation
Weigh 20 mg 0.1 mg of OPA (4.4) in a 50-ml flask (5.7) on the precision balance (5.27). Make up to 50 ml with methanol (4.6). Homogenize.
4.29. Preparation of the borate buffer (4.29) – Weekly preparation
Weigh 3.81 g 0.01 g of Na2B4O7·10H2O (4.5) in a 25-ml beaker (5.6) on the precision balance (5.27). Transfer to a 100-ml volumetric flask (5.8) and make up to 100 ml with demineralised water (4.1). Homogenize with a magnetic stirrer (5.30), transfer to a 150-ml beaker (5.4) and adjust to pH 10.5 using a pH meter (5.28 and 5.29) with 10 N soda (4.8).
4.30. 0.1 M hydrochloric acid solution: Put a little demineralised water (4.1) into a 2-litre volumetric flask (5.9). Add 20 ml of hydrochloric acid (4.7) using a 10-ml automatic pipette (5.24 and 5.25)
4.31. Calibration solution in 0.1 M hydrochloric acid
Guideline concentration of the calibration solution - weigh at 0.1 mg
Indicative final concentration in the calibration mix in mg/l |
|
Ethanolamine |
5 |
Histamine |
5 |
Methylamine |
1 |
Serotonin |
20 |
Ethylamine |
2 |
Tyramine |
7 |
Isopropylamine |
4 |
Propylamine |
2.5 |
Isobutylamine |
5 |
Butylamine |
5 |
Tryptamine |
10 |
Phenylethylamine |
2 |
Putrescine |
12 |
2- Methylbutylamine |
5 |
3- Methylbutylamine |
6 |
Cadaverine |
13 |
1.6 Diaminohexane |
8 |
Hexylamine |
5 |
The true concentration of the calibration solution is recorded with the batch number of the products used.
Certain biogenic amines being in salt form, the weight of the salt needs to be taken into account when determining the true weight of the biogenic amine.
The stock solution is made in a 100-ml volumetric flask (5.8).
The surrogate solution is made in a 250-ml volumetric flask (5.10).
4.32. 1,6 Diaminohexane internal standard
Weigh exactly 119 mg in a 25-ml Erlenmeyer flask (5.1) on a balance (5.26). Transfer to a 100-ml volumetric flask (5.8) and top up to the filling mark with 0.1 N hydrochloric acid (4.30).
4.33. 2-Mercaptoethanol - Purity 99 %.
- Apparatus
5.1. 25-ml Erlenmeyer flasks
5.2. 250-ml Erlenmeyer flasks
5.3. 100-ml beakers
5.4. 150-ml beakers
5.5. 50-ml beaker
5.6. 25-ml beaker
5.7. 50-ml volumetric flasks
5.8. 100-ml volumetric flasks
5.9. 2,000-ml volumetric flasks
5.10. 250-ml volumetric flask
5.11. 1-litre bottles
5.12. 2-litre bottle
5.13. 2-ml screw cap containers suitable for the sample changer
5.14. 50-ml syringe
5.15. Needle
5.16. Filter holder
5.17. 0.45 μm cellulose membrane
5.18. 0.8 μm cellulose membrane
5.19. 1.2 μm cellulose membrane
5.20. 5 μm cellulose membrane
5.21. Cellulose pre-filter
5.22. 1-ml automatic pipette
5.23. 5-ml automatic pipette
5.24. 10-ml automatic pipette
5.25. Cones for 10-ml, 5-ml and 1-ml automatic pipettes
5.26. Filtering system
5.27. Balances for weighing 0 to 205 g at 0.01 mg
5.28. pH meter
5.29. Electrode
5.30. Magnetic stirrer
5.31. HPLC pump
5.32. Changer-preparer equipped with an oven
Note: An oven is indispensable, if a changer-preparer is used for injecting several samples one after another. This operation may likewise be done manually) the results may be less precise;
5.33. Injection loop
5.34. 5 μm column, 250 mm 4 (which must lead to a similar chromatogram as presented in annex B);
5.35. Fluorimetric detector
5.36. Integrator
5.37. Borosilicic glass tube with a stopper and closure cap covered with PTFE
(ex Sovirel 15).
- Preparation of samples
Samples are previously purged of gas with nitrogen (4.25).
6.1. Filtering
Filter approximately 120 ml of the sample over membrane:
- for a wine: 0.45 μm (5.17),
-
for a must or non-clarified wine: 0.45 (5.17) – 0.8 (5.18) – 1.2 (5.19) - 5 μm (5.20) + pre-filter (5.21), pile filters in the following order, the sample pushed by the top: 0.45 μm (5.17) + 0.8 μm (5.18) + 1.2 μm (5.19) + 5 μm (5.20) + prefiltered (5.21)
- Preparation of the sample
Put 100 ml of the sample (6.1) into a 100-ml volumetric flask (5.8);
Add 0.5 ml of 1-6-diaminohexane (4.32) at 119 mg/100 ml using a 1-ml automatic pipette (5.21 and 25);
Draw off 5 ml of the sample using the pipette (5.23 and 5.25); pour this into a 25-ml Erlenmeyer flask (5.1);
Add 5 ml of methanol to this (4.6) using the pipette (5.23 and 5.25);
Stir to homogenize;
Transfer to containers (5.13);
Start the HPLC pump (5.31), then inject 1 µl (5.32 and 5.33)
6.3. Derivatisation
In a borosilicic glass tune (5.37), pour 2 ml of OPA solution (4.28), 2 ml of borate buffer (4.29), 0,6 ml of 2-mercaptoethanol (4.33). Close, mix (5.30). Open and pour 0,4 ml of sample. Close, mix (5.30). Inject immediately, as the derivitive is not stable. Rinse recipient immediately after injection, due to odour.
Note: Derivatisation can be carried out by an automatic changer-preparer. In this case, the process will be programmed to come close to the proportion of manual derivisation
6.4. Routine cleaning
Syringe (5.13) and needle (5.14) rinsed with demineralised water (4.1) after each sample;
filter holder (5.16) rinsed with hot water, then MeOH (4.6). Leave to drain and dry.
- Procedure
Mobile phase (5.31)
- A: phosphate buffer (4.2)
- B: acetonitrile (4.3)
Elution gradient:
Time ( in mins) |
% A |
% B |
0 |
80 |
20 |
15 |
70 |
30 |
23 |
60 |
40 |
42 |
50 |
50 |
55 |
35 |
65 |
60 |
35 |
65 |
70 |
80 |
20 |
95 |
80 |
20 |
Note: The gradient can be adjusted to obtain a chromatogram close to the one presented in annex B
Flow rate: 1 ml/min;
Column temperature: 35 °C (5.32);
Detector (5.35): Exc = 356 nm, Em = 445 nm (5.30);
Internal calibration
The calibration solution is injected for each series;
Calibration by internal standard;
Calculation of response factors:
|
Cci = concentration of the component in the calibration solution and
Ccis = concentration of the internal standard in the calibration solution (1-6-diaminohexane).
Area i = area of the product peak present in the sample
Area is = area of the internal standard peak in the sample
Calculation of concentrations:
|
Area i = area of the product peak present in the sample
Area is = area of the internal standard peak present in the sample
XF = quantity of internal calibration added to samples for analysis
XF = 119 0.5/100 = 5.95.
- Expression of results
Results are expressed in mg/l with one significant digit after the decimal point.
- Reliability
r (mg/l) |
R (mg/l) |
|
Histamine |
0.07x + 0.23 |
0.50x + 0.36 |
Methylamine |
0.11x + 0.09 |
0.40x + 0.25 |
Ethylamine |
0.34x - 0.08 |
0.33x + 0.18 |
Tyramine |
0.06x + 0.15 |
0.54x + 0.13 |
Phenylethylamine |
0.06x + 0.09 |
0.34x + 0.03 |
Diaminobutane |
0.03x + 0.71 |
0.31x + 0.23 |
2-methylbutylamine et 3-methylbutylamine |
0.38x + 0.03 |
0.38x + 0.03 |
Diaminopentane |
0.14x + 0.09 |
0.36x + 0.12 |
The details of the interlaboratory trial with regard to reliability of the method are summarised in appendix A.
- Other characteristics of the analysis
The influence of certain wine components: amino acids are released at the beginning of the analysis and do not impede in detection of biogenic amines.
The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) according to an intralaboratory study
LOD (in mg/l) |
LOQ (in mg/l) |
|
Histamine |
0,01 |
0,03 |
Methylamine |
0,01 |
0,02 |
Ethylamine |
0,01 |
0,03 |
Tyramine |
0,01 |
0,04 |
Phenylethylamine |
0,02 |
0,06 |
Diaminobutane |
0,02 |
0,06 |
2-methylbutylamine |
0,01 |
0,03 |
3-methylbutylamine |
0,03 |
0,10 |
Diaminopentane |
0,01 |
0,03 |
- Quality control
Quality controls may be carried out with certified reference materials, with wines the characteristics of which result from a consensus or spiked wines regularly inserted into analytical series and by following the corresponding control charts.
Annex A
Statistical data obtained from the results of interlaboratory trials
The following parameters were defined during an interlaboratory trial. This trial was carried out by the Oenology Institute of Bordeaux (France) under the supervision of the National Interprofessional Office of Wine (ONIVINS – France).
Year of interlaboratory trial: 1994
Number of laboratories: 7
Number of samples: 9 double blind samples
(Bulletin de l’O.I.V. November-December 1994, 765-766, p.916 to 962) numbers recalculated in compliance with ISO 5725-2:1994.
Types of samples: white wine (BT), white wine (BT) fortified = B1, white wine (BT) fortified = B2, red wine n°1 (RT), red wine fortified = R1, red wine (RT) fortified = R2, red wine n°2 (CT), red wine (CT) fortified = C1 and red wine (CT) fortified = C2. fortified in mg/l.
HistN |
MetN |
EthN |
TyrN |
PhEtN |
DiNbut |
IsoamN |
DiNpen |
|
wine B1 |
wine BT |
vine BT |
wineBT |
wine BT |
vine BT |
wine BT |
wine BT |
wineBT |
wine B2 |
wine BT |
wine BT |
wine BT |
wine BT |
wine BT |
wine BT |
Wine BT |
wine BT |
wine C1 |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wineC2 |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine CT |
wine R1 |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine R2 |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
wine RT |
HistN : histamine, MetN : methylamine, EthN : ethylamine, TyrN : tyramine, PhEtN : phenylethylamine, DiNbut : diaminobutane, IsoamN : isoamylamine and DiNpen : diaminopentane.
Annex B : Chromatogram model obtained by this method
|
Bibliography
- TRICARD C., CAZABEIL J.-M., SALAGOÏTI M.H. (1991): Dosage des amines biogènes dans les vins par HPLC, Analusis, 19, M53-M55.
- PEREIRA MONTEIRO M.-J. et BERTRAND A. (1994): validation d'une méthode de dosage – Application à l'analyse des amines biogènes du vin. Bull. O.I.V., (765-766), 916-962.
Determination of glutathione (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-19 Determination of glutathione in musts and wines by capillary electrophoresis
Type IV method
- Scope
This method makes it possible to determine the glutathione content of musts and wines in a concentration range of 0 to 40 mg/L. It uses capillary electrophoresis (CE) associated with fluorimetric detection (LIF).
- Principle
The method used, which proceeds by capillary electrophoresis, is an adaptation of the method developed by Noctor and Foyer (1998) to determine non-volatile thiols in poplar leaves using HPLC coupled with fluorimetric detection.
The separation of a mixture’s solutes by capillary electrophoresis is obtained by differential migration in an electrolyte. The capillary tube is filled with this electrolyte.
The sample to be separated is injected into one end of the capillary tube. As a result of electrical field activity generated by the electrodes immersed in the electrolyte, the solutes separate due to differences in migration speed and are detected near the other end of the capillary tube in the form of peaks. In given operating conditions, migration times constitute a criterion for the identification of chemical species and the peak area is proportional to the quantity injected.
- Products and reagents
3.1. List of products
3.1.1. Glutathione (GSH, > 98 %)
3.1.2. Dithiothreitol (DTT, > 99 %)
3.1.3. Anhydrous monobasic sodium phosphate (NaH2PO4, > 99 %)
3.1.4. Anhydrous dibasic sodium phosphate (Na2HPO4, > 99 %)
3.1.5. 2-(N-cyclohexylamino)ethanesulfonic acid (CHES, > 98 %),
3.1.6. Monobromobimane (MBB, 97 %)
3.1.7. Ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid sodium salt (EDTA, > 99 %)
3.1.8. Sodium hydroxide
3.1.9. Hydrochloric acid (35 %)
3.1.10. Acetonitrile (99.5 %)
3.1.11. Ultra-pure water with a resistance of >18 MΩ·cm.
3.2. List of solutions
All solutions are homogenised prior to use
3.2.1. Electrophoretic buffer: phosphate buffer, 50 mM, pH 7
This buffer is prepared using two solutions - A and B
3.2.1.1. Solution A: 3 mg of anhydrous monobasic phosphate (3.1.3) taken up by 250 ml ultra-pure water (3.1.11)
3.2.1.2. Solution B: 3.55 mg of anhydrous dibasic phosphate (3.1.4) taken up by 250 ml ultra-pure water (3.1.11)
The phosphate buffer is obtained by the addition of 40 ml of solution A (3.2.1.1) and 210 ml of solution B (3.2.1.2) and then made up to 500 ml with ultra-pure water (3.1.11). The buffer’s pH is then adjusted to 7 using hydrochloric acid (3.1.9).
3.2.2. Monobromobimane solution (MBB) - 50 mM
25 mg of monobromobimane (MBB) (3.1.6) are taken up by 1,850 μl of acetonitrile (3.1.10).
Stored in the dark at -20 °C, this reagent remains stable for three months.
3.2.3. 0.1 M sodium hydroxide solution
0.4 g of sodium hydroxide (3.1.8) are put into a 100-ml volumetric flask and taken up by 100 ml of ultra-pure water (3.1.11).
3.2.4. 5 M sodium hydroxide solution
20 g of sodium hydroxide (3.1.8) are put into a 100-ml volumetric flask and taken up by 100 ml of ultra-pure water (3.1.11).
3.2.5. CHES buffer: 0.5 M, pH 9.3
2.58 g of 2-(N-cyclohexylamino) ethanesulfonic acid (CHES) (3.1.5) are dissolved in approximately 20ml of ultra pure water (3.1.11). The pH buffer is adjusted to 9.3 by the addition of sodium hydroxide 5 M (3.2.4). The volume is then adjusted to 25 ml with ultra pure water (3.1.11). This buffer is divided between the 1.5-ml test tubes (Eppendorf type) with 1 ml per tube. Stored at –20 °C, the CHES aqueous solution may be kept for several months.
3.2.6. Dithiothreitol solution (DTT) - 10 mM
15.4 mg of dithiothreitol (3.1.2) is dissolved in 10 mL of ultra pure water (3.1.11) then this solution is divided in 1.5-ml test tube (Eppendorf type) with 1 ml per tube
Stored at –20 °C, this DTT aqueous solution may be kept several months.
- Apparatus
4.1. Capillary electrophoresis
Capillary electrophoresis equipped with a hydrostatic-type injector is coupled with a laser-induced fluorescence detector with an excitation wavelength similar to the absorption wavelength of the MBB-GSH adduct: e.g.= 390 nm (e.g. Zetalif detector).
4.2. The capillary tube
The total length of the non-grafted silica capillary tube is 120 cm. Its effective length is 105 cm, and its internal diameter is 30 µm.
- Preparation of samples
The method of determination used consists of the derivatization of the SH functions by the monobromobimane (MBB) (Radkowsky & Kosower, 1986). Samples of musts or non-bottled wines are clarified by centrifugation prior to analysis. Bottled wines are analysed without prior clarification.
Preparation of samples:
In a 1.5-ml test tube (Eppendorf type), put successively:
- 200 μl of the sample
- 10 μl of the DTT solution (3.2.4) - final concentration of 0.25 mM,
- 145 μl of CHES (3.2.3) - final concentration of 179 mM,
- 50 μl of MBB (3.2.2) - final concentration of 6.2 mM.
After stirring the reagent mixture, the derivatization of thiol functions by the MBB requires a 20-minute incubation period in the dark at ambient temperature. In these analytical conditions, the MBB-SR derivatives thus formed are relatively unstable; CE-LIF determination should be carried out immediately after incubation.
- Procedure
6.1. Capillary tube preparation
Before being used for the first time and as soon as migration times increase, the capillary tube (4.2) should be treated in the following way:
6.1.1. Rinse with 0.1 M sodium hydroxide (3.2.5) for 3 minutes,
6.1.2. Rinse with ultra-pure water (3.1.12) for 3 minutes,
6.1.3. Rinse with the electrophoretic phosphate buffer (3.2.1) for 3 minutes.
6.2. Migration conditions
6.2.1. Injection of the sample is of the hydrostatic type; 3 s at 50 kPa.
This is followed by injection of 50 mb electrophoretic buffer (3.2.1) to improve peak resolution (Staking).
6.2.2. Analysis.
A voltage of +30 kV, applied throughout separation, generates a current of 47 μA. These conditions are reached in 20 s. Separation is carried out at a constant temperature of 21 °C.
6.2.3 Rinsing the capillary tube
The capillary tube should be rinsed after each analysis, successively with:
- 0.1M sodium hydroxide (3.2.5) for 3 minutes,
- ultra-pure water (3.1.12) for 3 minutes,
- electrophoretic phosphate buffer (3.2.1) for 3 minutes.
- Results
At the concentration ultimately used in the sample, the presence of DTT during derivatization makes it possible to stabilise the unstable functions of thiols that have an alkaline pH and are very easily oxidized by quinines produced by phenolic compound auto-oxidation, but does not break the disulphide bonds. Thus, under these analytical conditions, the reduced glutathione content (GSH) found in a wine with or without the addition of 10 mg/l of oxidized glutathione (GSSG) is strictly comparable (Figure 1). This method therefore makes it possible to determine glutathione content in its reduced form alone.
|
Figure 1: Demonstration of the stability of disulphide bonds according to the conditions of derivatization described. (DTT, ultimately 0.25 mM). |
Figure 2 shows the electrophoretic profile of a white grape must sample (Sauvignon) in which cysteine, glutathione, N-acetyl-cysteine and sulphur dioxide are identified. The first peak corresponds to excess reagents (DTT, MBB). The separation of non-volatile thiols takes less than 20 minutes. Only certain peaks could be identified (Figure 2, A) (Newton et al., 1981). These thiols, apart from the sulphur dioxide, are generally present in varying quantities in grapes (Cheynier et al., 1989), fruit and vegetables (Mills et al., 2000).
|
Figure 2: Example of the separation of the known non-volatile thiols in an HCl/EDTA solution (A) 1 and in a grape must (B): DTT; 2: homocysteine; 3: cysteine; 4: Cys-Gly; 5: GSH; 6: g Glu-Cys; ,7: NAC; 8: SO2 . |
In these analytical conditions, MBB-RS adduct retention times are as follows: MBB-homocysteine 10.40 mins; MBB-cysteine 10.65 mins, MBB-GSH 14.14 mins; MBB-NAC 15.41mins; MBB-SO2 18.58mins.
- Characteristics of the method
Certain internal elements of validation were determined, but do not constitute formal validation according to the protocol for the design, conducts and interpretation of methods of analysis performance studies (OENO 6/2000).
Wine is used as a matrix to produce calibration curves and repeatability tests for each compound. Each concentration is calculated based on the average of three determinations obtained by using the right of the calibration curb regression. Results are expressed in mg/L
Linear regressions and correlation coefficients are calculated according to the least squares method. The stock solutions of the various thiols are produced from an HCl/EDTA solution, allowing them to be stored at +6 °C for several days with no loss. Successive dilutions of these solutions allow the threshold limits for detection in wine to be estimated, for a signal-to-noise ratio of three of more.
The linearity spectrum varies according to thiols (Table 1).
Table 1: Linearity spectrum, linear regression properties for each thiol in solutions prepared in exactly the same way as that of the glutathione.
Linearity spectrum |
Linear regression |
Correlation coefficient |
|
Homocysteine |
0 - 15 mg/l |
Y= 0.459X – 0.231 |
0.9987 |
Cysteine |
0 - 15 mg/l |
Y = 0.374X – 0.131 |
0.9979 |
Glutathione |
0 - 40 mg/l |
Y = 0.583X – 0.948 |
0.9966 |
N-acetyl-cysteine |
0 - 10 mg/l |
Y = 0.256X – 0.085 |
0.9982 |
These analytical conditions make it possible to eliminate interference caused by MBB hydrolysis products, unlike the reported findings of other works (Ivanov et al., 2000).
The method’s repeatability is calculated on the basis of ten analyses of the same sample of wine. For a thiol concentration of 10 mg/l, the coefficient of variation is 6.0 % for the glutathione; besides this, it is 3.2 % for the homocysteine, 4.8 % for the cysteine and 6.4 % for the N-acetyl-cysteine.
The limit for detecting glutathione is 20 µg/l and the quantification limit is 60 µg/l.
- Bibliography
- Noctor, G. and C. Foyer, 1998. Simultaneous measurement of foliar glutathione, gamma-glutamylcysteine, and amino acids by high-performance liquid chromatography: comparison with two other assay methods for glutathione, Analytical Biochemistry, 264, 98-110.
- Kosower, N.S., Kosower E. M., Newton G. L.,and Ranney H. M., 1979. Bimane fluorescent labels: Labeling of normal human red cells under physiological conditions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 76 (7), 3382-3386.
- Newton, G.L., R. Dorian, and R.C. Fahey, Analysis of biological thiols: derivatisation with monobromobimane and separation by reverse-phase high-performance liquid chromatography. Anal. Biochem., 1981. 114: p. 383-387.
- Cheynier, V., J.M. Souquet, and M. Moutounet, 1989. Glutathione content and glutathione to hydroxycinnamique acid ration in Vitis vinifera grapes and musts. Am. J.Enol.Vitic,. 40 (4), 320-324.
- Mills, B.J., Stinson C. T., Liu M. C. and Lang C. A., 1997. Glutathione and cyst(e)ine profiles of vegetables using high performance liquid chromatography with dual electrochemical detection. Journal of food composition and analysis, 10, 90-101.
- Ivanov, A.R., I.V. Nazimov, and L. Baratova, 2000. Determination of biologically active low molecular mass thiols in human blood. Journal of Chromatogr. A,. 895, 167-171.
Determination of a-dicarbonyl compounds of wine by HPLC after derivatization (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-20 Method for the determination of α-dicarbonyl compounds of wine by HPLC after derivizationation by 1,2-diaminobenzene
Type IV method
- Introduction
The principal α-dicarbonyl compounds found in wine (Fig 1) are: glyoxal, methylglyoxal, diacetyl and pentane-2,3-dione, but only α-diketones are relatively abundant in wine. Carbonyl compounds exist in all types of wines, particularly after malolactic fermentation and in red wines. In addition, sweet white wines produced with botrytized grapes can contain high levels of glyoxal and methylglyoxal.
Glyoxal: OCH−CHO (ethanedial) |
Methylglyoxal: −CO−CHO (2-oxopropanal) |
Diacetyl: −CO−CO−(2,3-butanedione) |
2,3-Pentanedione: −−CO−CO− |
2,3-Hexanedione: −−−CO−CO− |
Figure 1. The principal α-dicarbonyl compounds of wine (2,3-hexanedione is not naturally present in wine but it is used as internal standard). |
Dicarbonyl compounds are important in wine for different reasons: their sensory impact, the reactivity with other components of the wine or possible microbiological effects.
- Applicability
This method applies to all types of wines (white, red, sweetened or fortified), for dicarbonyl compounds with a content that ranges from 0.05 mg/l to 20 mg/l .
- Principle
The method is based on the formation of derivatives of the quinoxaline type based on the α-dicarbonyl compounds of the wine with 1,2-diaminobenzene (Figure 2).
|
||
1,2-diaminobenzene |
dicarbonyl |
quinoxaline |
Figure 2 Formation of derivatives |
The reaction takes place directly in the wine at pH 8 and after a reaction time of 3 h at 60°C. The analysis of the derivatives is then carried out directly by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and detection by UV absorption at 313 nm.
- Reagents and products
4.1. Dicarbonyl compounds
4.1.1. Glyoxal in a solution at 40% (CAS N° 107-22-3)
4.1.2. Methylglyoxal in a solution at 40% (CAS N° 78-98-8)
4.1.3. Diacetyl, purity > 99% (CAS N° 431-03-8)
4.1.4. 2,3-Pentanedione, purity > 97% (CAS N° 600-14-6)
4.1.5. 2,3-Hexanedione, purity > 90% (CAS N° 3848-24-6)
4.2. 1,2-Diaminobenzene in powder form, purity > 97%
4.3. Water for HPLC (for example microfiltered and with a resistivity of 18.2 MΩ) (CAS N° 95-54-5)
4.4. Pure ethanol for HPLC (CAS N° 64-17-5)
4.5. Sodium Hydroxide M (CAS N° 1310-73-2)
4.6. Pure crystallisable acetic acid (CAS N° 64-19-7)
4.7. Solvent A for the analysis by HPLC
To 1 l of water for HPLC (4.3) add 0.5 ml of acetic acid (4.8), mix, degas (for example by sonication)
4.8. Solvent B for HPLC
Pure methanol for HPLC (CAS N° 67-56-1)
4.9. Aqueous-alcoholic solution at 50% vol.
Mix 50 ml of pure ethanol for HPLC (4.4) with 50 ml of water (4.3)
4.10. Solution of internal standard 2,3-hexanedione at 2.0 g/l
Place 40 mg of 2,3-hexanedione (4.2) in a 30-ml flask, dilute in 20 ml of aqueous- alcoholic solution to 50% vol (4.9) and stir until it has completely dissolved.
-
Equipment
-
High-performance liquid chromatograph with detection by UV absorption (313 nm);
- Analytical column filled with 5 µm octadecyl silica whose dimensions are for example 250 mm x 4.6 mm.
- Data acquisition system.
- pH measuring apparatus.
- Magnetic stirrer.
- Balance with a precision of 0.1 mg.
- Solvent degasification system for HPLC (for example an ultrasonic bath).
- Oven which can be set to 60°C.
- Standard laboratory glassware including pipettes, 30-ml screw-cap flasks, and microsyringes.
-
High-performance liquid chromatograph with detection by UV absorption (313 nm);
- Preparation of the sample
No specific preparation is necessary.
- Procedure
- Place 10 ml of wine in a 30-ml flask (5.7)
- Bring to pH 8 while stirring, with sodium hydroxide M (4.5)
- Add 5 mg of 1,2-diaminobenzene (4.2)
- Add 10 μl of 2,3-hexanedione (internal standard) at 2.0 g/L (4.10)
- Close the flask using a screw-cap fitted with a Teflon-faced seal
- Stir until the reagent has completely disappeared (5.3)
- Place in the oven at 60°C for 3 h (5.6)
- Cool.
7.1. Optimisation and analytical conditions
The yield of the reaction of the dicarbonyl compounds with the 1-2-diaminobenzene is optimal at pH 8. Solutions of dicarbonyl compounds have been derivatized at 25, 40 or 60°C and then analysed by HPLC according to the protocol described in point 7.2 at different times (Table 1). Diketones require much more reaction time and a higher reaction temperature. The reaction is slower with molecules with longer chains (2,3-pentanedione and 2,3-hexanedione).
In addition, no interference of SO2 with the formation of quinoxalines was noted during the study of the method.
Table 1. Effect of reaction time and temperature on the formation of derivatives by diaminobenzene from glyoxal, diacetyl and 2,3-hexanedione
Reaction time |
||||
1h |
2h |
3h |
||
Temperature (°C) |
Recovery rate (%) |
|||
Glyoxal |
25 |
92 |
93 |
94 |
40 |
95 |
97 |
98 |
|
60 |
96 |
98 |
100 |
|
Diacetyl |
25 |
23 |
77 |
87 |
40 |
64 |
89 |
94 |
|
60 |
85 |
100 |
100 |
|
2,3-Hexanedione |
25 |
17 |
67 |
79 |
40 |
55 |
79 |
88 |
|
60 |
69 |
93 |
100 |
|
Table 1. Effect of reaction time and temperature on the formation of derivatives by diaminobenzene from glyoxal, diacetyl and 2,3-hexanedione |
7.2. Analysis by HPLC
- Injection. After cooling, 20 µl of the reaction medium containing the quinoxalines is directly injected into the HPLC system.
- Elution programme. For the separation, the elution programme is presented in Table 2
Table 2. Elution programme for the analysis by HPLC
Time in minutes |
Solvent A |
Solvent B |
0 |
80 |
20 |
8 |
50 |
50 |
26 |
25 |
75 |
30 |
0 |
100 |
32 |
0 |
100 |
40 |
100 |
0 |
45 |
80 |
20 |
50 |
80 |
20 |
Table 2. Elution programme for the analysis by HPLC |
The flow rate is 0.6 ml/min
- Separation. The chromatogram obtained by HPLC is shown in Figure 3.
- Detection. The maximum absorbance was studied for all the derivatized dicarbonyl compounds and set at 313 nm as being optimal.
-
Identification of derivatives. The identification of the derivatives was carried out by comparing the retention times with standard reference solutions. The chromatographic conditions permit a good separation of the peaks in all wines.
- Characteristics of the method by HPLC
Some internal validations methods have been determined but do not constitute a formal validation proccess according to the protocol governing the planning, the implementing and the interpreting of performance studies pertaining to analysis methods (OIV 6/2000)
Repeatability. The repeatability of the method was calculated using 10 analyses of the same wine (Table 3).
Average* |
Standard deviation |
CV(%) |
|
White wine |
|||
Glyoxal |
4.379 |
0.101 |
2.31 |
Methylglyoxal |
2.619 |
0.089 |
3.43 |
Diacetyl |
5.014 |
0.181 |
3.62 |
2.3-Pentanedione |
2.307 |
0.0097 |
4.21 |
Red wine |
|||
Glyoxal |
2.211 |
0.227 |
10.30 |
Methylglyoxal |
1.034 |
0.102 |
9.91 |
Diacetyl |
1.854 |
0.046 |
2.49 |
2,3-Pentanedione |
0.698 |
0.091 |
13.09 |
Table 3. Repeatability study and performance of the method |
* Results in mg/l based on 10 analyses of the same wine.
Linearity. The linearity of the method was tested using standard solutions (using an aqueous-alcoholic solution at 12% vol. as a matrix) (Table 4). The quantitative analysis of the additions of dicarbonyl compounds showed that
the method is linear for the four compounds and that its precision is satisfactory.
Glyoxal |
Methylglyoxal |
Diacetyl |
Pentane-2,3-dione |
valuea peak area b |
valuea peak area b |
valuea peak area b |
valuea peak area b |
1 |
|||
R = 0.992 |
R = 0.997 |
R = 0.999 |
R = 0.999 |
Table 4. Study of the linearity and recovery tests with standard solutions (water-ethanol at 12% v/v) Value of the correlation coefficient |
The recovery of additions carried out in red and white wines demonstrated the satisfactory performance of the method . Contained in the 92% - 116% range for extreme values
The quantification limit of the dicarbonyl compounds is very low, the best results being obtained with diacetyl, whose detection limit is 10 times lower than that of the other compounds (Table 5).
Limits |
detectiona |
determinationa |
quantificationa |
Glyoxal |
0.015 |
0.020 |
0.028 |
Methyglyoxal |
0.015 |
0.020 |
0.027 |
Diacetyl |
0.002 |
0.002 |
0.003 |
2.3-Pentanedione |
0.003 |
0.004 |
0.006 |
able 5. Performance of the method by HPLC for the quantification of dicarbonyl compounds |
a: results in mg/l, aqueous-alcoholic solution (10% vol).
|
Figure 3. High-performance liquid phase chromatogram of dicarbonyl compounds derivatized by 1,2-diaminobenzene from a white wine, detected by UV at 313 nm. Spherisorb ODS Column 250 mm x 4.6 mm x 5 μm. |
Bibliography
- Bartowski E.J. and Henschke P.A., The buttery attribute of wine – diacetyl – desirability spoilage and beyond. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 96: 235-252 (2004).
- Bednarski W., Jedrychowski L., Hammond E., and Nikolov L., A method for determination of α-dicarbonyl compounds. J. Dairy Sci. 72:2474-2477 (1989).
- Leppannen O., Ronkainen P., Koivisto T. and Denslow J., A semiautomatic method for the gas chromatographic determination of vicinal diketones in alcoholic beverages. J. Inst. Brew. 85:278- 281 (1979).
- Martineau B., Acree T. and Henick-Kling T., Effect of wine type on the detection threshold for diacetyl. Food Res. Int. 28:139-143 (1995).
- Moree-Testa P. and Saint-Jalm Y., Determination of -dicarbonyl compounds in cigarette smoke. J. Chromatogr. 217:197-208 (1981).
- De Revel G., Pripis-Nicolau L., Barbe J.-C. and Bertrand A., The detection of α-dicarbonyl compounds in wine by the formation of quinoxaline derivatives. J. Sci. Food Agric. 80:102-108 (2000).
- De Revel G. and Bertrand A., Dicarbonyl compounds and their reduction products in wine. Identification of wine aldehydes. Proc. 7th Weurman Flavour Research Symp, Zeist, June, pp 353-361 (1994).
- De Revel G. and Bertrand A., A method for the detection of carbonyl compounds in wine: glyoxal and methylglyoxal. J. Sci. Food Agric. 61:267-272 (1993).
- Voulgaropoulos A., Soilis T. and Andricopoulos N., Fluorimetric determination of diacetyl in wines after condensation with 3,4-diaminoanisole. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 42:73-75 (1991).
- Gilles de Revel et Alain Bertrand Analyse des composés α-dicarbonyles du vin après dérivation par le 2,3-diaminobenzène OIV FV 1275
Determination of a-dicarbonyl compounds of wine by GC after derivatization (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-21 Method for the determination of α-dicarbonyl compounds of wine by GC after derivitatization by 1,2-diaminobenzene
Type IV method
- Introduction
The principal α-dicarbonyl compounds found in wine (Fig 1) are: glyoxal, methylglyoxal, diacetyl and 2,3-pentanedione, but only α-diketones are relatively abundant in wine. Carbonyl compounds exist in all types of wines, particularly after malolactic fermentation and in red wines. In addition, sweet white wines produced with botrytized grapes can contain high levels of glyoxal and methylglyoxal.
Glyoxal: OCH−CHO (ethanedial) |
Methylglyoxal: −CO−CHO (2-oxopropanal) |
Diacetyl: -CO−CO− (2,3-butanedione) |
2,3-pentanedione: −−CO−CO− |
2,3-hexanedione: −−CO−CO− |
Figure 1. The principal α-dicarbonyl compounds of wine (2,3-hexanedione is not naturally present in wine but it is used as internal standard). |
Dicarbonyl compounds are important in wine for different reasons: their sensory impact, the reactivity with other components of the wine or possible microbiological effects.
- Applicability
This method applies to all types of wines (white, red, sweetened or fortified), for carbonyl derivatives content ranging from 0.05 mg/L and 20 mg/L.
- Principle
The method is based on the formation of derivatives of the quinoxaline type based on the α-dicarbonyl compounds of the wine with 1,2-diaminobenzene (Figure 2).
|
||
1,2-diaminobenzene |
di-carbonyl |
quinoxaline |
Figure 2 Formation of derivatives. |
The reaction takes place directly in the wine at pH 8 and after a reaction time of 3 h at 60°C. The analysis of the derivatives is then carried out after extraction of the derivatives by dichloromethane and analysis by gas chromatography with detection by mass spectrometry (GC-MS) or using a nitrogen-specific detector.
- Reagents and products
4.1. Dicarbonyl compounds
4.1.1. Glyoxal in a solution at 40% (CAS n° 107-22-3)
4.1.2. Methylglyoxal in a solution at 40% (CAS n° 78-98-8)
4.1.3. Diacetyl, purity > 99% (CAS n° 431-03-8)
4.1.4. 2,3-Pentanedione, purity > 97% (CAS n° 600-14-6)
4.1.5. 2,3-Hexanedione, purity > 90% (CAS n° 3848-24-6)
4.2. 1,2-Diaminobenzene in powder form, purity > 97% (CAS n° 95-54-5)
4.3. Water for HPLC (for example microfiltered and with a resistivity of 18.2 MΩ)
4.4. Pure ethanol for HPLC (CAS n° 64-17-5)
4.5. Sodium hydroxide M. (CAS n° 1310-73-2)
4.6. Sulphuric acid 2M (CAS n° 7664-93-9)
4.7. Dichchloromethane (CAS n° 75-09-2)
4.8. Anhydrous sodium sulphate (CAS n° 7757-82-6)
4.9. Aqueous-alcoholic solution at 50% vol .
Mix 50 ml of pure ethanol for HPLC (4.4) with 50 ml of water (4.3)
4.10. Solution of internal standard 2,3-hexanedione at 2.0 g/L
Place 40 mg of 2,3-hexanedione (4.2) in a 30-ml flask, dilute in 20 ml of aqueous-alcoholic solution to 50% vol (4.9) and stir until it has completely dissolved.
4.11. Anhydrous sodium sulphate (CAS n° 7757-82-6)
-
Equipment
-
Gas chromatograph with detection by mass spectrometry (GC-MS) or a nitrogen-specific detector.
- Relatively polar, polyethylene glycol capillary column (CW 20M,BP21 etc.) with the following characteristics (as an example): 50 m x 0.32 mm x 0.25 μm.
- Data acquisition system.
- pH measuring apparatu
- Magnetic stirrer
- Balance with a precision of 0.1 mg.
- Oven which can be set to 60°C
- Standard laboratory glassware including pipettes, screw-cap flasks, and microsyringes.
-
Gas chromatograph with detection by mass spectrometry (GC-MS) or a nitrogen-specific detector.
- Preparation of the sample
No specific preparation is necessary
- Procedure
Place 50 ml of wine in a flask (5.6)
Bring to pH 8 while stirring, with sodium hydroxide M (4.5)
Add 25 mg of 1,2-diaminobenzene (4.2)
Add 50 μl of 2,3-hexanedione (internal standard) at 2.0 g/L (4.10)
Close the flask using a screw-cap fitted with a Teflon-faced seal
Stir until the reagent has completely disappeared (5.3)
Place in the oven at 60°C for 3 h (5.5)
Cool.
7.1. Optimisation and analytical conditions (this study was carried out by HPLC analysis, see this method)
The yield of the formation of derivatives of the dicarbonyl compounds with the 1-2-diaminobenzene is optimal at pH 8 at 60°C after three hours of reaction time
In addition, no interference of SO2 with the formation of quinoxalines was noted during the study of the method.
7.2. Analysis by GC
7.2.1. Extraction of quinoxalines
- The reaction medium prepared in 7 is brought to pH 2 using 2M (4.6);
- Extract 2 times using 5 ml of dichloromethane (4.7) by magnetic stirring for 5 minutes;
- Decant the lower phase each time;
- Mix the two solvent phases;
- Dry on approximately 1 g of anhydrous sodium sulphate (4.11);
-
Decant.
- Chromatographic analysis (given as an example)
- Detection. For the analysis by GC-MS, a Hewlett Packard HP 5890 gas-phase chromatograph was coupled with Chemstation software and an HP 5970 mass spectrometer (electronic impact 70eV, 2.7 kV),
Note: It is also possible to use a nitrogen-specific detector
- Column. The column is a BP21 (SGE, 50 m x 0.32 mm x 0.25 μm).
- Temperatures. The temperature of the injector and the detector are respectively 250°C and 280C; that of the oven is held at 60°C for 1min, then programmed to increase at a rate of 2C/min to 220C and the final isothermal period lasts 20 min.
-
Injection. The volume injected is 2 µl and the splitless time of the injector valves is 30s.
- Analysis of quinoxalines formed
- Separation. The chromatogram of the derivatives from a wine obtained with 1,2-diaminobenzene, using selected-ion monitoring (SIM), is shown in Figure 3. Good separations were obtained with all types of wines (white, red, sweetened or fortified), and even with fermenting musts.
- Identification of the peaks. GC-MS was used to identify the dicarbonyl compounds derivatized from the wine based on the total ion current method (scan) which is used to obtain the mass spectra of derivatized quinoxalines and to compare them with those recorded in the library; in addition, the retention times were compared with those for pure compounds treated in the same way. Table 1 shows the principal ions of the mass spectra for the derivatized dicarbonyl compounds obtained.
-
Determination. The quantitative determination of the dicarbonyl compounds is performed with the SIM method, by selecting ions m/z = 76, 77, 103, 117, 130, 144, 158 and 171. The ions m/z = 76 and 77 are used for the quantification and the others as qualifiers, i.e. glyoxal: ions m/z = 103 and 130, methylglyoxal: ions m/z = 117 and 144, diacetyl: ions m/z = 117 and 158, 2,3-pentandione: ions m/z = 171 and 2,3-hexanedione: ions m/z = 158 and 171.
- Characteristics of the method
Some elements of internal validation were determined, but this is not a formal validation according to the protocol governing the planning, the implementing and the interpreting of the performance studies pertaining to the analysis methods (OIV 6/2000)
- Repeatability. The repeatability of the GC-MS-SIM method shows coefficients of variation ranging between 2 and 5% for the four dicarbonyl compounds;
- Recovery rate. The quantities added to a wine were recovered with a recovery rate ranging between 92 and 117%;
- Linearity. Linear correlations were obtained in concentrations ranging from 0.05 to 20 mg/l.
- Limit of detection. The limit of detection of most of the derivatized dicarbonyl compounds using wine as a matrix is 0.05 mg/l
Table 1. Mass spectra (ion m/z and abundance of the ion in relation to that of the base peak) of derivatives of dicarbonyl compounds using 1,2-diaminobenzene
Dicarbonyl compound |
Derivative |
Mass spectrum (principal ions and abundance) |
Glyoxal |
Quinoxaline |
130 (100), 103 (56.2), 76 (46.8), 50 (20.2),75 (10.4), 131 (9.4) |
Methylglyoxal |
2-Methylquinoxaline |
144 (100), 117 (77.8), 76 (40.5), 77 (23.3), 50 (21.9), 75(11.3), 145 (10.3) |
Diacetyl |
2,3-Dimethylquinoxaline |
117 (100), 158 (75.6), 76 (32.3), 77 (23.1), 50 (18.3), 75 (10.4) |
2,3-Pentanedione |
2-Ethyl-3-methylquinoxaline |
171 (100), 172 (98), 130 (34.1), 75 (33.3), 77 (21), 50 (19.4), 144 (19), 143 (14.1),103 (14) |
2,3-Hexanedione |
2,3-Diethylquinoxaline |
158 (100), 171 (20.1), 76 (13.7), 77 (12.8), 159 (11.4), 157 (10.8), 50 (8.1) |
Table 1. Mass spectra (ion m/z and abundance of the ion in relation to that of the base peak) of derivatives of dicarbonyl compounds using 1,2-diaminobenzene |
|
Figure 3. Gas chromatogram of the extract from the dicarbonyl compounds derivatized by 1,2-diaminobenzene from a white wine, detected by mass spectrometry by selecting the ions m/z = 76, 77, 103, 117, 130, 131, 144, 158, 160 and 171. BP21 Column, 50m x 0.32mm x 0.25 μm oven temperature 60°C for 1min, then programmed increase of 2°C/min up to 220°C. Injector temperature: 250°C. 1. glyoxal; 2. methylglyoxal; 3. diacetyl; 4. 2,3-pentanedione; 5. 2,3-hexanedione (internal standard); 6. phenylglyoxal (not studied with this method). |
Bibliography
- Bartowski E.J. and Henschke P.A. The buttery attribute of wine – diacetyl – desirability spoilage and beyond. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 96: 235-252 (2004).
- Bednarski W., Jedrychowski L., Hammond E., and Nikolov L., A method for determination of α-dicarbonyl compounds. J. Dairy Sci. 72:2474-2477 (1989).
- Leppannen O., Ronkainen P., Koivisto T. and Denslow J. A semiautomatic method for the gas chromatographic determination of vicinal diketones in alcoholic beverages. J. Inst. Brew. 85:278- 281 (1979).
- Martineau B., Acree T. and Henick-Kling T., Effect of wine type on the detection threshold for diacetyl. Food Res. Int. 28:139-143 (1995).
- Moree-Testa P. and Saint-Jalm Y., Determination of α-dicarbonyl compounds in cigarette smoke. J. Chromatogr. 217:197-208 (1981).
- De Revel G., Pripis-Nicolau L., Barbe J.-C. and Bertrand A., The detection of α-dicarbonyl compounds in wine by the formation of quinoxaline derivatives. J. Sci. Food Agric. 80:102-108 (2000).
- De Revel G. and Bertrand A. Dicarbonyl compounds and their reduction products in wine. Identification of wine aldehydes. Proc 7th Weurman Flavour Research Symp., Zeist, June, pp 353-361 (1994).
- De Revel G. and Bertrand A., A method for the detection of carbonyl compounds in wine: glyoxal and methylglyoxal. J. Sci. Food Agric. 61:267-272 (1993).
- Voulgaropoulos A., Soilis T. and Andricopoulos N., Fluorimetric determination of diacetyl in wines after condensation with 3,4-diaminoanisole. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 42:73-75 (1991).
- Gilles de Revel et Alain Bertrand, Analyse des composés α-dicarbonyles du vin après dérivation par le 1-2-diaminobenzène OIV FV 1275
Determination of carboxymethyl cellulose in white wines (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-22 Determination of carboxymethyl cellulose (cellulose gum, CMC) in white wines
Type IV method
- Introduction
Carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) is a polymer derived from natural cellulose that has been routinely used for many years now as a food additive (INS 466) in products such as ice creams and pre-cooked meals [1], to give them smoothness. The use of CMC in white wines and sparkling wines to contribute to their tartaric stabilisation [2] was recently accepted by the OIV in resolution OENO 2/2008 provided that the dose added to the wine is less than 100 mg/l. A specific method for determination of CMC in white wine has therefore been developed based on the method of H.D Graham published in 1971 [3].
- Field of application
The method applies to white wines (still and sparkling).
- Principle
Once the CMC has been isolated from the wine by dialysis, it is hydrolysed in an acid medium to form glycolic acid which is then degraded to form formaldehyde. 2,7-Dihydroxynaphthalene (DHN) is added to form 2,2,7,7-tetrahydroxydinaphthylmethane in the presence of formaldehyde. The complex formed develops a purple-blue colour under the action of concentrated sulphuric acid, at 100 °C, allowing colorimetric measurement at 540nm (Figure 1).
|
Figure 1: Mechanism of reaction of CMC with DHN in hot concentrated sulphuric acid (Feigl, 1966) |
- Reagents
- Sodium carboxymethylcellulose [N° CAS 9004-32-4] (21902 - average viscosity 400-1000 mPa·s, substitution degree 0.60-0.95)
- 2,7-Dihydroxynaphthalene [N° CAS 582-17-2] (purity > 98,0 % - HPLC
- 95 % concentrated sulphuric acid
- Purified water for laboratory use (example of quality: EN ISO 3696)
- Equipment
- Laboratory glasswar
- Dialysis membrane (6000 to 8000 Da)
- Temperature-controlled bath
- Double-beam UV-visible spectrophotometer
- Operating procedure
6.1. Preparation of the reagent
- Place 50 mg of DHN weighed to within 1 mg in a calibrated 100 mL phial.
- Add concentrated sulphuric acid up to the gauge line.
- Place the calibrated phial in a temperature-controlled bath at 28 °C for 4h (without stirring).
- After heating, decant the reagent into a brown flask and store it in a refrigerator at 4 °C.
6.2. Preparation of wine test specimens
- Insert 20 mL of wine, after degassing, into the dialysis membrane.
- Place the dialysis membrane containing the wine in a 6-litre flask filled with distilled water.
- Leave to dialyse for 24h, changing the dialysis water twice.
6.3. Colour reaction
- Place 1 mL of dialysed wine into a test tube.
- Add 9 mL of reagent.
- Place the test tube in a temperature-controlled bath at 100 °C for 2h.
- Analyse the coloured solution by UV-visible spectrophotometer at 540nm and read the absorbance value.
6.4. Calculation of the wine’s CMC content
- Recording the absorbance value read in point 6.3 on the calibration curve obtained for a wine (see figure 2)
- Characteristics of the method
Certain elements of the internal validation were determined but these do not constitute a formal validation according to the protocol governing the planning, the implementing and the interpretation of performance studies pertaining to analysis methods (OENO 6/2000)
7.1. Linearity of the response
A white wine has been added with incremental quantities of CMC ranging between 0 and 100 mg/L, then submitted to dialysis and treated in the conditions defined in the procedure described above. The response is linear for the concentrations under consideration (figure 2).
|
Figure 2: Linearity of CMC determination in white wine |
7.2. Repeatability
The repeatability of the determination of CMC in white wines was defined on the basis of the results achieved on 22 samples of wine that underwent 2 successive analyses, so as to be analysed in identical conditions. The results are given in table 1.
calculated values |
||
Repeatability: |
||
standard deviation |
0,075 |
|
CV in % |
7,2 % |
|
r-limit |
0,21 |
|
r-limit in % |
20 % |
|
Table 1: Repeatability of CMC determination in white wine |
7.3. Reproducibility
The reproducibility of the determination of CMC in white wines was defined through the analysis of a white wine by CMC, on 12 occasions at different dates. The results are given in table 2.
calculated values |
||
reproducibility |
||
standard deviation |
0,082 |
|
CV in % |
9,6 % |
|
R-limit |
0,23 |
|
R-limit in % |
27 % |
|
Table 2: Reproducibility of CMC determination in white wine |
7.4. Specificity
The specificity of CMC determination was verified by adding known quantities of CMC into white wines. The recovery rates thus measure are given in table 3.
Sample |
Added concentration (mg/l) |
Resulting concentration (mg/l) |
Recovery rate |
Wine 1 |
50 |
33 |
66 % |
Wine 1 |
50 |
51 |
102 % |
Wine 1 |
50 |
24 |
77 % |
Wine 2 |
75 |
78 |
104 % |
Wine 2 |
75 |
90 |
121 % |
Wine 2 |
75 |
69 |
92 % |
Wine 3 |
100 |
109 |
109 % |
Wine 3 |
100 |
97 |
97 % |
Wine 3 |
100 |
103 |
103 % |
Wine 4 |
150 |
163 |
109 % |
Wine 4 |
150 |
149 |
100 % |
Wine 4 |
150 |
159 |
106 % |
Table 3: Specificity of CMC determination in white wine
|
7.5. Detection and quantification limits
The detection limits (LD) and quantification limits (LQ) were calculated for an untreated wine that underwent 10 analyses. The detection limit thus determined is of 14 mg/l and the quantification limit is of 61 mg/l.
The method therefore enables to detect the adding of CMC into white wine in quantities exceeding 20 mg/l and to quantify the addition when it exceeds 60 mg/l; this is not highly satisfactory but remains compatible with the maximum authorised dose of 100 mg/l.
7.6. Uncertainty
The uncertainty was calculated at 3 different concentration levels (25, 75 and 150 mg/l) based on the analysis results for wines that have undergone CMC treatment,
using the standard deviation reproducibility. The uncertainty thus obtained is of 40 mg/l, regardless of the CMC determination.
Bibliography
- [1] Regulation (CE) N° 1333/2008 of the 16th of December, 2008 concerning food additives
- [2] Stabilisation tartrique des vins par la carboxyméthylcellulose - Bulletin de l’OIV 2001, vol 74, n°841-842, p151-159.
- [3] Determination of carboxymethycellulose in food products - H.D Graham, Journal of food science 1971, p 1052-1055
Quantification of potentially allergenic residues of fining agent proteins in wine (Type-I)
OIV-MA-AS315-23 Criteria for the methods of quantification of potentially allergenic residues of fining agent proteins in wine
Type of method: criteria
- Method Criteria Definitions
Trueness:
- the closeness of agreement between the average value obtained from a large series of test results and an accepted reference value
r =
- Repeatability limit, the value below which the absolute difference between 2 single test results obtained under repeatability conditions (i.e., same sample, same operator, same apparatus, same laboratory, and short interval of time) may be expected to lie within a specific probability (typically 95%) and hence r = 2.8 x sr.
Sr=
- Standard deviation, calculated from results generated under repeatability conditions.
RSDr= Relative standard deviation, calculated from results generated under repeatability conditions [(/) x 100], where is the average of results over all laboratories and samples.
R =
- Reproducibility limit, the value below which the absolute difference between single test results obtained under reproducibility conditions (i.e., on identical material obtained by operators in different laboratories, using the standardised test method), may be expected to lie within a certain probability (typically 95%); R = 2.8 x .
=
- Standard deviation, calculated from results under reproducibility conditions.
=
- Relative standard deviation calculated from results generated under reproducibility conditions [(/ x 100]
=
- HORRAT value: the observed RSDR value divided by the RSDR value calculated from the Horwitz equation.
= Mean blank
LOD = Limit of detection, calculated as LOD = + 3*Sr()
LOQ = Limit of quantification, calculated as LOD = + 10*Sr()
- General Aspects
Requirement
The method of analysis must be associated with specific oenological practices
Additives or processing aids containing allergenic proteins
Each product must be characterized from the chemical point of view and quality control is strictly necessary
Class of analytical methods
Generally speaking, immunoenzymatic approaches are considered the most suitable and easy methods for routine control of allergens.
The determination of allergenic fining agent proteins residues in wines could use Sandwich, Competitive, Direct or Indirect ELISA methods.
If no enzyme labeled antibody is available a biotinylated antibody and avidine- HRP conjugate can be used for detection
Antibody
Antibody characterization (evaluation of detection of allergens with higher or lower affinity)
High specificity for the commercial processing aids (characterized as described above)
Cross-reactivity characterization taking in account the proteins usually included in enological practices
Capability to detect allergen derivatives that could be formed by enological treatments (proteolysis or modified molecules)
Method
Antibody must have optimal binding properties in wine samples
Methods must have optimal performances in wine samples having different chemical characteristics (pH and dry extract, red and white wine, etc..)
Results in wines coming from different geographical area (even when different enological practices are applied) must be comparable
The binding properties of the antibodies must be optimal with different condition of maturation of wine (time, temperatures, color changes ...)
- Type of methods
Specific methods for the determination of fining agent proteins in wine are not prescribed yet. Several ELISA methods are already available and can be applied.
Laboratories shall use a method validated to OIV requirements that fulfils the performance criteria indicated in Table 1. Wherever possible, the validation shall include a certified reference material in the collaborative
trial test materials. If not available, an alternative estimation of trueness should be used.
The General Protocol for the Direct and Indirect ELISA Method
The direct, one-step method uses only one labeled antibody. This labeled antibody is incubated with the antigen contained in the sample/standard and bound to the well.
The indirect, two-step method uses a labeled secondary antibody for detection. First, a primary antibody is incubated with the antigen contained in the sample/standard and bound to the well. This is followed by incubation with a labeled secondary antibody that recognizes the primary antibody.
Direct
Prepare a surface to which antigen in sample is bound.
Block any non-specific binding sites on the surface.
Apply enzyme-linked antibodies that bind specifically to the antigen.
Wash the plate, so that the antibody-enzyme conjugates in excess (unbound) are removed.
Apply a chemical which is converted by the enzyme into a color or fluorescent or electrochemical signal.
Measure the absorbance or fluorescence or electrochemical signal (e.g., current) of the plate wells to determine the presence and quantity of antigen.
Before the assay, the antibody preparations must be purified and conjugated.
Indirect
Prepare a surface to which antigen in sample is bound.
Block any non-specific binding sites on the surface.
Apply primary antibodies that bind specifically to the antigen
Wash the plate, so that primary antibodies in excess (unbound) are removed.
Apply enzyme-linked secondary antibodies which are specific to the primary antibodies.
Wash the plate, so that the antibody-enzyme conjugates in excess (unbound) are removed.
Apply a chemical which is converted by the enzyme into a color or fluorescent or electrochemical signal.
Measure the absorbance or fluorescence or electrochemical signal (e.g., current) of the plate wells to determine the presence and quantity of antigen.
Before the assay, both antibody preparations must be purified and one must be conjugated.
|
Figure 1: Direct and indirect ELISA |
For most applications, a high-binding polystyrene microtiter plate is best; however, consult manufacturer guidelines to determine the most appropriate type of plate for binding the given antigen.
The major advantage of direct and indirect ELISA is the high sensitivity, achieved via a comparably easy set-up with reduced chances of unspecific binding. However, it is only applicable in samples containing low amounts of non-antigen protein.
General Protocol for the competitive ELISA Method
The term "competitive" describes assays in which measurement involves the quantification of a substance by its ability to interfere with an established system. The detection can be done directly, one-step method, or indirectly, two-step method.
Direct
Prepare a surface to which a known quantity of wanted antigen is bound.
Block any non-specific binding sites on the surface.
Apply the sample or standard (antigen) and the enzyme-linked antibodies that bind specifically to the antigen on the coated microplate. The antigens immobilized on the surface and the antigens in solution “compete” for the antibodies. Hence, the more antigen in the sample, the less antibody will be bound to the immobilized antigens.
Wash the plate so that the antibodies in excess (unbound) and unbound antigen-antibody-complexes are removed.
Apply a chemical which is converted by the enzyme into a color or fluorescent or electrochemical signal.
Measure the absorbance or fluorescence or electrochemical signal (e.g., current) of the plate wells to determine the presence and quantity of antigen.
Before the assay, the antibody preparations must be purified and must be conjugated.
Indirect
Prepare a surface to which a known quantity of antigen is bound.
Block any non-specific binding sites on the surface.
Apply the sample or standard (antigen) and the specific primary antibody to the coated microplate. The antigens immobilized on the surface and the antigens in solution “compete” for the antibodies. Hence, the more antigen in the sample, the less antibody will be bound to the immobilized antigens.
Wash the plate so that the antibodies in excess (unbound) and unbound antigen-antibody-complexes are removed.
Add a secondary antibody, specific to the primary antibody, conjugated with an enzyme.
Wash the plate so that the conjugated antibodies in excess (unbound) are removed
Apply a chemical which is converted by the enzyme into a color or fluorescent or electrochemical signal.
Measure the absorbance or fluorescence or electrochemical signal (e.g., current) of the plate wells to determine the presence and quantity of antigen.
Before the assay, both antibody preparations must be purified and one must be conjugated.
|
Figure 2: Direct and indirect competitive ELISA |
For competitive ELISA, the higher the original antigen concentration, the weaker is the signal.
For most applications, a high-binding polystyrene microtiter plate is best; however, consult manufacturer guidelines to determine the most appropriate type of plate for binding the given antigen.
General Protocol for the Sandwich ELISA Method
The Sandwich ELISA measures the amount of antigen between two layers of antibodies (i.e. capture and detection antibody). The antigen to be measured must contain at least two different antigenic sites (epitopes) for binding two different antibodies. Either monoclonal or polyclonal antibodies can be used.
Direct
Prepare a surface to which capture antibody is bound.
Block any non-specific binding sites on the surface.
Apply the antigen-containing sample or standard to the plate.
Wash the plate, so that unbound antigen is removed.
Apply enzyme-linked antibodies (detection antibodies) that bind specifically to the antigen.
Wash the plate, so that the enzyme-linked antibodies in excess (unbound) are removed.
Apply a chemical which is converted by the enzyme into a color or fluorescent or electrochemical signal.
Measure the absorbance or fluorescence or electrochemical signal (e.g., current) of the plate wells to determine the presence and quantity of antigen.
Before the assay, both antibody preparations must be purified and one must be conjugated.
Indirect
Prepare a surface to which capture antibody is bound.
Block any non specific binding sites on the surface.
Apply the antigen-containing sample or standard to the plate.
Wash the plate, so that unbound antigen is removed.
Apply primary antibodies that bind specifically to the antigen.
Wash the plate, so that primary antibody in excess (unbound) is removed.
Apply enzyme-linked antibodies (secondary antibodies) that bind specifically to the primary antibody.
Wash the plate, so that the enzyme-linked antibodies in excess (unbound) are removed.
Apply a chemical which is converted by the enzyme into a color or fluorescent or electrochemical signal.
Measure the absorbance or fluorescence or electrochemical signal (e.g., current) of the plate wells to determine the presence and quantity of antigen.
Before the assay, all the antibody preparations must be purified and one of them must be conjugated.
|
Figure 3: Direct and indirect Sandwich-ELISA |
For indirect Sandwich-ELISA, it is necessary for the capture antibodies and the detection antibodies to be raised in different species (e.g. mouse and rabbit), so that the enzyme-linked secondary antibodies specific for the detection antibodies do not bind to the capture antibodies, as well.
For most applications, a high-binding polystyrene microtiter plate is best; however, consult manufacturer guidelines to determine the most appropriate type of plate for binding the given antigen.
For sandwich ELISA, the measure is proportional to the amount of antigen in samples.
The advantage of Sandwich ELISA is that even crude samples do not have to be purified before analysis, and the assay can be very sensitive.
Table 1: Performance criteria for methods of analyses for potentially allergenic fining agent proteins in wine
|
|
Parameter |
Value/Comment |
Applicability |
Suitable for determining fining agents in wine for official purposes. |
Detection limit |
(expressed in mg/L) 0,25 |
Limit of quantification |
(expressed in mg/L) 0,5 |
Precision |
HORRAT values of less or equal to 2 in the validation collaborative trial |
Recovery |
80% - 105% (as indicated in the collaborative trial) |
Specificity |
Free from matrix interferences |
Trueness |
where m is the certified value of the wine reference material and is the average of n measurements of compound content in this wine, within the same laboratory. Sr(lab) are standard deviations, calculated from results within the same laboratory under repeatability conditions. SR(lab) are standard deviations, calculated from results within different laboratories under reproducibility conditions. |
Determination of lysozyme in wine using high-performance capillary electrophoresis (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-24 Determination of lysozyme in wine using high-performance capillary electrophoresis
Type IV method
- Introduction
This method is used to detect the addition of lysozyme in wine but is not suitable for the assay or determination of lysozyme as an allergenic compound.
Determination of residual lysozyme in treated wines is performed using high-performance capillary electrophoresis (HPCE).
- Scope
This method applies to lysozyme determination in white wines at concentrations ranging from 9 mg/L to 100 mg / L, and by dilution above this level.
- Principle
The wine samples are directly injected into the capillary-electrophoresis instrument after filtration and dilution, as needed. The quantification of lysozyme is performed against an external standard.
- Reagents
Lysozyme extract of chicken egg white [CAS No. 12650-88-3]
85% Phosphoric acid [CAS No. 7664-38-2]
Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC) [CAS No 9004-65-3]
Purified water for laboratory use, for example to EN ISO 3696 grade (water for analytical laboratory use - specification and test methods [ISO 3696:1987]).
- Apparatus
Standard laboratory apparatus
Capillary electrophoresis instrument with a UV spectrophotometric detector
- Sample preparation
The wine to be analysed is diluted four-fold in distilled water for analysis by capillary electrophoresis, in order to fit within the linear dynamic range of the method (lysozyme content lower than 100 mg/l).
- Analytical conditions
Capillary: fused silica (37 cm length, 75 µm diameter)
Buffer: phosphoric acid (75 mm) HPMC (0.1 %), pH 1.68
Injection time: 15 sec
Injection mode: hydrostatic procedure (3447.38 Pa)
Temperature: 25°C
Applied voltage: 7 kV
Detection: UV 214 nm
- Calculation
A calibration curve is produced based on lysozyme solutions in water at 10, 20, 50, and 100 mg/l. Depending on the external calibration method, lysozyme quantification is performed by measuring the lysozyme peak area in the wine and comparing it with the corresponding concentration on the calibration curve.
- Method characteristics
9.1. Linearity of response
As the maximum authorized dose of lysozyme which may be added to wines is 500 mg/l, a standard range containing 5 to 500 mg/l of lysozyme in aqueous solution was prepared. Each solution was analysed five times.
Above 100 mg/l, the response is no longer linear. The linear dynamic range of the method is from 5 to 100 mg/l, as shown on the calibration curve in Figure 1.
|
Figure 1: Linearity of lysozyme determination using HPCE |
9.2. Repeatability
The repeatability of lysozyme determination in white wines has been determined from the results obtained across 20 wines with added lysozyme, analysed twice in succession, in order to be tested under identical conditions. The results are given in table 1:
Table 1: Repeatability of lysozyme determination using HPCE
Table 1: Repeatability of lysozyme determination using HPCE |
||
Calculated values |
||
Repeatability |
||
standard deviation in mg/L |
2.63 |
|
CV % |
1.4% |
|
r limit in mg/L |
7.35 |
|
r limit % |
4% |
9.3. Reproducibility
The reproducibility of lysozyme determination in white wines has been determined by analysing the same white wine, with 200 mg/L of lysozyme added, 8 times on different dates. The results are given in Table 2.
Table 2 - Reproducibility of lysozyme determination using HPCE |
||
Reproducibility |
Calculated value |
|
standard deviation in mg/L |
11.75 |
|
CV % |
5.8% |
|
R limit in mg/L |
32.90 |
|
R limit % |
16% |
9.4. Limits of detection and quantification
Limits of detection (LoD) and quantification (LoQ) are determined based on the background noise measured near the lysozyme peak corresponding to the first calibration point, i.e. 5 mg/L. The results obtained are as follows:
- LoD = 3 X background noise (mg/L) = 3 mg/L
- LoQ = 10 X background noise (mg/L) = 9 mg/L
9.5. Uncertainty
Uncertainty was determined using the intralaboratory reproducibility standard deviation, this is 12 %.
Bibliography
- S. Chauvet, C. Lagrèze, A. Domec, M-H Salagoïty, B. Médina: Dosage du lysozyme dans le vin par électrophorèse capillaire haute performance OIV FV 1274
- ME. Barbeito, C. Coria, C. Chiconofri : Influencia del filtrado de vinos para la determinación de lisozima según oeno 8/2007 OIV FV1306
Determination of lysozyme in wine using high-performance liquid chromatography (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-25 Determination of lysozyme in wine using high-performance liquid chromatography
Type IV method
- Introduction
This method describes the analytical procedure used to determine lysozyme in red and white wines. The determination can be carried out on the sample directly for white wines, but for red wines a dissociation of the enzyme from the polyphenolic macromolecules by means of rapid alkalinisation must be undertaken, using the principle of the amphoteric nature of the protein.
- Field of application
This method allows the lysozyme (mg of protein∙L-1) content in red and white wines to be quantified independently from enzyme activity. It should be made clear that this method makes it possible to detect lysozyme added to wine, but the limit of detection of the method does not exclude any allergenicity associated with the presence of low levels of lysozyme.
- Principle
The analysis is carried out using high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with a spectrofluorimetric detector. The unknown quantity in the wine sample is calculated according to the chromatographic peak area using the external standard method.
- Materials and reagents
4.1. Solvents and working solutions
4.1.1. Acetonitrile (CN), HPLC grade (CAS no. 75-05-8)
4.1.2. Trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) (CAS no. 76-05-1)
4.1.3. Deionised water, HPLC grade (CAS no. 7732-18-5)
4.1.4. Tartaric acid (CAS no. 87-69-4)
4.1.5. Ethanol (CAS no. 64-17-5)
4.1.6. Neutral potassium tartrate (CAS no. 921-53-9)
4.1.7. 28% Ammonium hydroxide (w/w) (CAS no. 1336-21-6)
4.1.8. 0.65 μm cellulose acetate filters
4.2. Stock solution: 1 g∙L-1 of tartaric acid in 10% ethanol (v/v) adjusted to a pH of 3.2 with neutral potassium tartrate.
4.3. Eluents
A: 1% CN, 0.2% TFA, 98.8%
B: 70% CN, 0.2% TFA, 29.8%
4.4. Reference solution
Solution containing 250 mg∙L-1 lysozyme standard dissolved in the stock solution by stirring continuously for 1 hour. It is stored in a refrigerator for a maximum of 4 weeks.
4.5. Preparation of working solutions
For the working solutions, the reference solution is diluted with the stock solution until the desired concentrations have been reached. These solutions are prepared daily.
- Equipment
5.1. HPLC apparatus equipped with a pumping system suitable for gradient elution
5.2. Thermostatted column compartment (oven)
5.3. Spectrofluorimetric detector
5.4. 20 μL loop injection
5.5. Reverse phase polymeric column with phenyl functional groups (porosity = 1,000 Å, exclusion limit = 1,000,000 Da), Tosoh Bioscience TSK-gel Phenyl 5PW RP, 4.6 mm ID x 7.5 cm, for example.
5.6. Pre-column in the same material as the column: Tosoh Bioscience TSK-gel Phenyl 5PW RP Guardgel, 3.2 mm ID x 1.5 cm, for example.
- Operating conditions (by way of example)
6.1. Eluent flow rate: 1 mL.min-1
6.2. Elution temperature: 40°C
6.3. Spectrofluorimetric detector: λ ex = 276 nm; λ em = 345 nm; Gain = 4
6.4. Average lysozyme retention time: 7.9 minutes
Time (min) |
Mobile phase A (%) |
Mobile phase B (%) |
0 |
60 |
40 |
10.00 |
0 |
100 |
10.20 |
60 |
40 |
12.00 |
Controller |
Stop |
- Sample preparation
7.1. White wines
White wine samples are filtered using cellulose acetate filters with 0.65 μm porosity and then undergo chromatographic analysis. (There is a lower recovery rate if using nylon filters with 0.45 μm porosity.)
7.2. Red wines
Red wine samples (50 mL) are adjusted to a pH of 11.5. The samples are alkalinised using NH4OH (taking into account the volume of the latter for the final calculation) and are then immediately filtered (after 5 min) using cellulose acetate filters with 0.65 μm porosity and injected into the liquid chromatograph. (There is a lower recovery rate if using nylon filters with 0.45 μm porosity.)
- Control sample preparation
The reference standard solution (4.4) is added to the sample and it is prepared as described in point 7. The percentage recovery is determined.
- Expression of results
Adequate resolution was observed for the chromatographic profile of lysozyme standard for the analyte tested, with the below chromatographic conditions (Fig. 1 and Fig.4). Analysis of the lysozyme-free sample enabled the wine profile to be observed without finding any interferences in the enzyme detection (Fig. 2 and Fig. 5).
In white wines, more than 95% of the enzyme was recovered (Fig. 3), while in red wines an enzyme recovery of between 70 and 95% was observed using this method, depending on the polyphenol concentration present in the wine sample (Fig. 6). The result is expressed in milligrams per litre (mg∙L-1).
|
Fig. 1 Chromatogram of the 10 mg∙L-1 lysozyme standard |
|
Fig. 2 Chromatogram of a white wine sample without lysozyme |
|
Fig. 3 Chromatogram of a white wine sample with 10 mg∙L-1 lysozyme |
|
Fig. 4 Chromatogram of the 50 mg∙L-1 lysozyme standard |
|
Fig. 5 Chromatogram of a red wine sample without lysozyme |
|
Fig. 6 Chromatogram of a red wine sample with 50 mg∙L-1 lysozyme |
- Analytical procedure for white wines
10.1. Internal validation parameters
10.1.1. Repeatability
The repeatability of the method was studied for the interval between 2 mg∙L-1 and 25 mg∙L-1 in white wine. 17 samples of white wine enriched with various lysozyme concentrations were analysed in duplicate.
The repeatability results obtained at a probability level of 95% were as follows:
Concentration measured in mg∙L-1 |
Sr mg∙L-1 |
r (2.8xSr) mg∙L-1 |
2 |
0.25 |
0.7 |
5 |
0.30 |
0.82 |
10 |
0.42 |
1.1 |
15 |
0.61 |
1.7 |
25 |
0.40 |
1.12 |
The average repeatability limit (r) is 1.2 mg∙L-1
10.1.2. Linearity
For the calculation of linearity, 30 peak area measurements of 6 different concentrations of lysozyme in white wine were conducted, these being: an analytical blank without lysozyme, and concentrations of 2 mg∙L-1, 5 m∙gL-1, 10 mg∙L-1, 15 mg∙L-1, and 25 mg∙L-1. From these measurements, the y-intercept, the gradient and the coefficient of correlation were calculated.
|
Fig. 7 Dynamic range of lysozyme in white wines up to 25 mg∙L-1 |
10.1.3. Limit of detection and limit of quantification
The limit of detection obtained for this method was calculated using the graphic procedure derived from the background noise of the recording.
The values obtained were as follows:
LOD: 0.49 mg∙L-1
LOQ: 1.62 mg∙L-1
10.1.4. Intralaboratory reproducibility
The method intralaboratory reproducibility was studied for the interval between 2 mg∙L-1 and 25 mg∙L-1 in a white wine sample for a 30-day period. It should be pointed out that, due to the instability of the analyte, the wine sample was spiked with the lysozyme reference solution (4.4) on the same day as its analysis. 16 measurements were conducted at regular intervals.
The results obtained were as follows:
Concentration measured in mg∙L-1 |
SR mg∙L-1 |
R (2.8xSR) mg∙L-1 |
2 |
0.19 |
0.53 |
5 |
0.36 |
1.0 |
10 |
0.48 |
1.3 |
15 |
0.64 |
1.8 |
25 |
0.93 |
2.6 |
The average reproducibility limit (R) is 1.45 mgL∙-1
-
Analytical procedure for red wines
-
Internal validation parameters
- Repeatability
-
Internal validation parameters
The repeatability of the method was studied for the interval between 5 mg∙L-1 and 25 mg∙L-1 in red wine. 21 samples of red wine enriched with various lysozyme concentrations were analysed in duplicate.
The repeatability results obtained at a probability level of 95% were as follows:
Concentration measured in mg∙L-1 |
Sr mg∙L-1 |
r (2.8xSr) mg∙L-1 |
5 |
0.38 |
1.06 |
10 |
0.64 |
1.79 |
15 |
0.59 |
1.65 |
25 |
0.30 |
0.8 |
The average repeatability limit (r) is 1.4 mg∙L-1
11.1.2. Linearity
For the calculation of linearity, 25 peak area measurements of 5 different concentrations of lysozyme in red wine were conducted, these being: an analytical blank without lysozyme, and concentrations of 5 mg∙L-1, 10 mg∙L-1, 15 mg∙L-1, and 25 mg∙L-1. From these measurements, the y-intercept, the gradient and the coefficient of correlation were calculated.
|
Fig. 8 Dynamic range of lysozyme in red wines up to 25 mg∙L -1 |
11.1.3. Limit of detection and limit of quantification
The limit of detection was calculated using the graphic procedure derived from the background noise of the recording.
The values obtained were as follows:
LOD: 0.88 mg∙L-1
LOQ: 2.90 mg∙L-1
11.1.4. Intralaboratory reproducibility
The method intralaboratory reproducibility was studied for the interval between 5 mg∙L-1 and 25 mg∙L-1 in a red wine sample for a 30-day period. It should be pointed out that, due to the instability of the analyte, the wine sample was spiked with the lysozyme reference solution (4.4) on the same day as its analysis. 16 measurements were conducted at regular intervals.
The results obtained were as follows:
Concentration measured in mg∙L-1 |
SR mg∙L-1 |
R (2.8xSR) mg∙L-1 |
5 |
0.4 |
1.12 |
10 |
0.91 |
2.54 |
15 |
0.54 |
1.5 |
25 |
0.53 |
1.5 |
The average reproducibility limit (R) is 1.7 mg∙L-1
- Bibliography
- Resolution OENO 8/2007 "Measurement of lysozyme in wine by high performance liquid chromatography" (2007).
- Resolution OENO 10/2005 “A practical guide for the validation, quality control, and uncertainty assessment of an alternative oenological analysis method”.
Method of determination of biogenic amines in wine by high-performance liquid chromatography with photodiode array detection (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-26 Method of determination of biogenic amines in wine by high-performance liquid chromatography with photodiode array detection
Type IV method
- Scope
This method is applicable to the analysis of biogenic amines in wines:
Amines |
Scope |
Histamine |
0.500 to 20 mg/L |
Methylamine |
0.250 to 20 mg/L |
Ethylamine |
0.450 to 20 mg/L |
Tyramine |
0.235 to 20 mg/L |
Putrescine |
0.098 to 20 mg/L |
Cadaverine |
0.480 to 20 mg/L |
Phenethylamine (or Phenylethylamine) |
0.096 to 20 mg/L |
Isoamylamine |
0.020 to 20 mg/L |
- Définition
The word biogenic means "created by life". The term "biogenic amines" is therefore given to all the amines produced by the metabolism of living, animal, plant, or microbial cells. Biogenic amines in wine are mainly of microbial origin. The main ones are histamine, putrescine, cadaverine, and tyramine.
- Principle
The biogenic amines studied here are primary, secondary, tertiary, aliphatic, or aromatic amines. However, only aromatic amines absorb UV. This is because the detection of molecules by UV requires the presence of a chromophore in the molecule, usually a sequence of conjugated double bonds.
In order to use the HPLC/DAD, it is necessary to couple a chromophore to the biogenic amines. To do so, diethyl 2-(ethoxymethylene)malonate (DEEMM) is used which, by alkylation, also known as derivatisation, enables biogenic amines to be obtained that are visible by diode array detector [1].
|
Derivatisation reaction |
NB: The yield of the derivatisation is calculated by adding an internal standard (2,4,6-Trimethylphenethylamine hydrochloride or 2,4,6 TPA). Each of the biogenic amines is quantified against a standard range.
- Reagents and Products
4.1. List of reagents
Product references:
|
Product |
CAS |
Purity |
4.1.1. |
Histamine |
51–45–6 |
≥99% |
4.1.2. |
Methylamine |
74–89–5 |
>99.5% |
4.1.3. |
Ethylamine |
557–66–4 |
97% |
4.1.4. |
Tyramine |
60–19–5 |
≥98% |
4.1.5. |
Putrescine (diaminobutane) |
333–93–7 |
≥98% |
4.1.6. |
Cadaverine (diaminopentane) |
1476–39–7 |
≥99% |
4.1.7. |
Phenethylamine |
64–04–0 |
≥99% |
4.1.8. |
Isoamylamine |
107-85-7 |
99% |
4.1.9. |
Boric acid |
10043-35-3 |
≥98.5% |
4.1.10. |
Sodium hydroxide |
1310-73-2 |
≥98% |
4.1.11. |
Sodium azide |
26628-22-8 |
≥99.5% |
4.1.12. |
2,4,6-Trimethylphenethylamine hydrochloride |
3167-10-0 |
97% |
4.1.13. |
DEEMM (Diethyl 2-(ethoxymethylene)malonate) |
87-13-8 |
97% |
4.1.14. |
Glacial acetic acid |
64-19-7 |
≥99.7% |
4.1.15. |
Methanol HPLC |
67-56-1 |
≥99.9% |
4.1.16. |
Acetonitrile HPLC |
75-05-8 |
≥99.93% |
4.1.17. |
Hydrochloric acid |
7646-01-0 |
≥37% |
4.1.18. |
Ultrapure water (18 MΩ) |
- Internal standard solution
Preparation of a 2 g/L solution:
Weigh 20 mg of 2, 4, 6-Trimethylphenethylamine hydrochloride (4.1.12)
Dissolve in 10 mL of 0.1 M HCl (5.1)
Storage
The solution is kept at room temperature.
5.1. 0.1 M HCL solution
Preparation of a 0.1 M HCl solution:
Take a sample of approximately 900 ml of ultrapure water (4.1.18) using a graduated cylinder (6.13)
Pour approximately 500 mL of ultrapure water (4.1.18) into a 1 L volumetric flask (6.9)
Take a 100 mL sample of 1M HCl (prepared from the commercial product 4.1.17) using a graduated cylinder (6.11)
Pour the 100 mL of 1 M HCl (4.1.17) into the volumetric flask (6.9)
Top up to 1 L with the remaining ultrapure water
Storage
The solution is kept at room temperature.
5.2. 1M borate buffer
For 100 mL of solution:
Weigh 6.183 g of boric acid (4.1.9)
Dissolve in a beaker (6.2) by adding 80 mL of ultrapure water (measured using the graduated cylinder) (6.11)
Adjust the pH to 9 with a 4N NaOH solution (prepared from the commercial product 4.1.10)
Adjust to 100 mL in a volumetric flask (6.7)
Note: To obtain good dissolution, the crystals of boric acid should dissolve at a pH as low as possible. To do so, NaOH should be added in small doses (by 10 drops from a Pasteur pipette) (6.30) over a period of 3 hours.
Storage
The solution is kept at room temperature.
5.3. HPLC mobile phase
Mobile phase A: 25 mM acetate buffer + 0.02% of sodium azide pH 5.8:
Take a 1.8 L sample of ultrapure water in a 2 L beaker (6.3)
Add 2.86 mL of glacial acetic acid (4.1.14) (thoroughly rinse the tip in the beaker)
Then 0.4 g of sodium azide (4.1.11)
Stir with a magnetic stirrer (6.24)
Adjust the pH to 5.80 with the 4M NaOH using a Pasteur pipette (6.30) (about 6.5 mL)
Adjust to 2000 mL in a 2000 mL volumetric flask (6.10)
Mobile phase B: Acetonitrile/Methanol (80/20):
For 2 L of mobile phase
Take a 400 mL sample of methanol (4.1.15) using a graduated cylinder (6.12) and pour it into a 2 L cap bottles (6.20) and add in the same cap bottles 1600 mL sample of acetonitrile (4.1.16) measured using a graduated cylinder (6.14).
Storage
The solutions are kept at room temperature.
5.4. Biogenic amine standard range
Preparation of solutions A :
Stock solution A at 500 mg/L
Weigh about 50 mg (accurately known weight) of histamine (4.1.1), methylamine (4.1.2), ethylamine (4.1.3), tyramine (4.1.4) and putrescine (4.1.5) and dissolve them in the same 100 mL flask (6.7) with 0.1 M HCl (5.1)
Surrogate solution A at 50 mg/L
Take a 25 mL sample of solution A at 500 mg/L and pour into a 250 mL flask (6.8)
Top up to 250 mL with 0.1 M HCl (5.1)
Surrogate solution A at 40 mg/L
Take a 50 mL sample of 0.1 M HCl (5.1) and pour into a 250 mL flask (6.8)
Top up to 250 mL with the surrogate solution A at 50 mg/L
Preparation of solutions B
Stock solution B at 500 mg/L
Weigh about 50 mg (accurately known weight) of cadaverine (4.1.6), phenethylamine (4.1.7) and isoamylamine (4.1.8) and dissolve them in the same 100 mL flask (6.7) with 0.1 M HCl (5.1)
Surrogate solution B at 50 mg/L
Take a 25 mL sample of solution B to 500 mg/L and pour into a 250 mL flask (6.8)
Top up to 250 mL with 0.1 M HCl (5.1)
Surrogate solution B at 10 mg/L
Take a 50 mL sample of surrogate solution B at 50 mg/L and pour into a 250 mL flask (6.8)
Top up to 250 mL with 0.1 M HCl (5.1)
Combination of solutions A and B - Standard range
In a 100 mL flask (6.7) add 50 mL of solution A at 40 mg/L using a 50 mL volumetric flask (6.6)
Top up to 100 mL with the solution B at 10 mg/L: you obtain the solution at 20 (A) / 5 (B) mg/L
The next table explains how to prepare concentration points for the calibration curve:
Concentration of the initial solution (mg/L) |
Volume of initial solution sampled (mL) |
Adjusted to 100 mL with a 0.1 M HCl solution (mL) |
Concentration of the final solution (mg/L) |
20(A) / 5 (B) |
50 |
50 |
10 (A) / 2.5 (B) |
10(A) / 2.5 (B) |
50 |
50 |
5 (A) / 1.25 (B) |
5(A) / 1.25 (B) |
20 |
80 |
1 (A) / 0.25 (B) |
In this way, four concentrations of biogenic amines are contained in solution A (20, 10, 5 and 1 mg/L), and four concentrations of biogenic amines are contained in solution B (5, 2.5, 1.25 and 0.25 mg/L).
Storage The solutions are kept at –20°C.
- Equipment and apparatus
6.1. 25 mL Beakers
6.2. 250 mL Beakers
6.3. 2000 mL Beakers
6.4. 10 mL volumetric flasks
6.5. 25 mL volumetric flasks
6.6. 50 mL volumetric flasks
6.7. 100 mL volumetric flasks
6.8. 250 mL volumetric flasks
6.9. 1000 mL volumetric flasks
6.10. 2000 mL volumetric flasks
6.11. 100 mL graduated cylinder
6.12. 500 mL graduated cylinder
6.13. 1000 mL graduated cylinder
6.14. 2000 mL graduated cylinder
6.15. 200 μL automatic pipette
6.16. 1 mL automatic pipette
6.17. 5 mL automatic pipette
6.18. 10 mL automatic pipette
6.19. Tips for 1 mL, 5 mL and 10 mL automatic pipette
6.20. 2-litre cap bottles
6.21. Pyrex 10 mL hydrolysis tubes with screw top
6.22. 2 mL screw cap bottles adapted to the auto-sampler
6.23. Scales for weighing from 0 to 205 g
6.24. Magnetic stirrer
6.25. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)
6.26. Data acquisition software
6.27. DAD detector (diode array)
6.28. Octadecyl-type column (for example HP® C18 - HL, 250 mm x 4.6 mm, 5 μm).
6.29. Dry bath at 70 ° C
6.30. Pasteur pipette
6.31. Ultrasonic bath
- Sampling (sample preparation)
This method does not require special sampling in that 1 mL of wine to be analysed is collected and deposited directly into a Pyrex 10 mL hydrolysis tube with a screw cap (6.21) (see procedure).
However, it is recommended to carry out the derivatisation reaction with DEEMM on receipt of the sample because the histamine concentration in wine may reduce over time.
- Procedure
8.1. Test sample
The manipulation must be done under a fume hood because of the toxicity of certain of the reagents.
If the buffer contains borate crystals, heat it to 50°C while stirring (lower initially, until the solution has heated up).
To avoid any risk of adsorption on the tips of the automatic pipettes, it is advisable to use the micropipette as follows:
Pre-wet the cone once with the solution to be sampled
Add the solution to the recipient without rinsing the tip with the contents of the recipient unless otherwise specified
Shake the solutions well before use (especially the frozen wine)
In a Pyrex 10 mL hydrolysis tube with a screw cap (6.21), introduce using suitable micropipettes:
- 1.75 mL of borate buffer (5.2)
- 750 μL of methanol (4.1.15)
- 1 mL of the sample to be derivatised (1 mL automatic pipette) (6.16)
- 40 μL of the internal standard (2,4,6 TPA to 2 g/L) (5.1)
- 30 μL of DEEMM (4.1.13)
Close the tube (fully tighten to avoid any evaporation) and shake manually.
Turn on the dry bath (6.29) to 70°C.
Place the tube in the ultrasonic bath (6.31) for 30 minutes (2 times 15 minutes, stirring every 5 minutes). Always use a plastic rack suitable for the water bath because the derivatisation is unsatisfactory when a metal rack is used.
Heat the reaction mixture to 70°C for 1h in the dry bath (6.29) to degrade the surplus DEEMM.
Turn off the dry bath
After the reaction mixture has returned to room temperature, fill the 2 mL bottles using Pasteur pipettes (6.30) (change Pasteur pipette with each tube). Shake the tubes manually before sampling.
8.2. Operating conditions
The operating conditions below are given as an example.
Mobile phase:
A: 25 mM acetate buffer + 0.02% of sodium azide pH 5.8 :
B: Acetonitrile/Methanol (80/20):
Gradient elution as follows, with a flow rate of 0.9 mL/min:
Time (min) |
% A |
% B |
0 |
90 |
10 |
5 |
90 |
10 |
10 |
83 |
17 |
35 |
60 |
40 |
43 |
28 |
72 |
48 |
18 |
82 |
52 |
0 |
100 |
57 |
0 |
100 |
Column temperature: 15°C
Detection wavelength: 280 nm
Flow rate: 0.9 ml/min
Volume injected: 50 μL
Analysis time: 57 minutes
Identification of biogenic amines:
The biogenic amines are identified by their retention time. To do so, each biogenic amine was analysed individually in order to determine its retention time (Tr).
Amines |
Average Tr (min) |
|
Histamine |
HI |
25.46 |
Methylamine |
ME |
33.11 |
Ethylamine |
ET |
39.00 |
Tyramine |
TY |
41.50 |
Putrescine |
PU |
46.00 |
Cadaverine |
CA |
48.00 |
Phenethylamine |
PH |
48.75 |
Isoamylamine |
IS |
50.25 |
Internal standard |
2,4,6-TPA |
54.75 |
- Calculations (Results)
Bias caused by the uncertainty on the derivatisation yield and the injection volume can be corrected using the internal standard.
Once the value of the peak has been corrected, the concentration of biogenic amine is calculated based on the slope value of the standard range of the corresponding biogenic amine. To do so, for each series of analyses a standard range is also derivatised and injected.
The results are expressed in mg/L to one figure after the decimal point.
- Quality Control
Quality controls can be carried out with certified reference materials, wines whose characteristics are derived from consensus or wines to which standard additions have been regularly made during the analytical series and in accordance with the accompanying control charts.
- Characteristics of the method: intralaboratory validation parameters
The validation parameters were determined according to [4].
11.1. Linearity
The approach chosen for the study of linearity is that of comparing the residual standard deviations from a linear regression model and a second-order polynomial regression model.
This study was conducted on two different wines spiked with biogenic amines at concentrations of 0, 1, 5, 10, and 20 mg / L (solution A) and 0, 0.25, 1.25, 2.5, and 5 mg/L (solution B).
Summary of the results for biogenic amines:
biogenic Amine |
S res Linear |
S’res Order 2 |
DS 2 |
PG |
F (5%) |
Conclusion |
|
Methylamine |
0.766 |
0.606 |
3.218 |
8.757 |
4.75 |
Linear |
|
Ethylamine |
0.371 |
0.371 |
0.140 |
1.014 |
Linear |
||
Tyramine |
1.065 |
1.065 |
1.135 |
1.000 |
Linear |
||
Putrescine |
0.524 |
0.523 |
0.286 |
1.043 |
Linear |
||
Cadaverine |
0.276 |
0.267 |
0.134 |
1.881 |
Linear |
||
Phenethylamine |
0.251 |
0.248 |
0.082 |
1.328 |
Linear |
||
Isoamylamine |
0.216 |
0.215 |
0.055 |
1.199 |
Linear |
||
Histamine |
0.591 |
0.589 |
0.316 |
1.084 |
Linear |
||
11.2. Specificity
The principle of specificity measurement consists in examining the regression line r = a + bv and verifying that slope b is equal to 1 ( <) and that intercept point a is equal to 0 ( <). The hypotheses are tested using a t-test associated with the 1% risk of error.
The value of , bilateral [p−2, 1%] associated with the 1% risk of error for 3 degrees of freedom is 4.541.
Summary of the results for biogenic amines
biogenic Amine |
Wine A |
Wine B |
Wine C |
Wine D |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Methylamine |
4.482 |
2.321 |
2.933 |
0.013 |
1.563 |
0.007 |
5.199 |
2.864 |
Ethylamine |
0.411 |
0.002 |
0.081 |
0.010 |
0.546 |
10.556 |
0.169 |
2.537 |
Tyramine |
1.834 |
0.005 |
0.636 |
0.005 |
2.151 |
4.485 |
3.420 |
37.419 |
Putrescine |
7.605 |
0.041 |
0.604 |
0.000 |
3.257 |
0.064 |
2.135 |
0.011 |
Cadaverine |
5.499 |
0.033 |
1.719 |
1.314 |
10.929 |
0.049 |
8.466 |
0.026 |
Phenethylamine |
3.348 |
0.016 |
1.265 |
0.001 |
10.238 |
0.034 |
5.925 |
0.009 |
Isoamylamine |
12.980 |
0.016 |
2.297 |
0.004 |
12.996 |
0.020 |
11.121 |
0.000 |
Histamine |
4.978 |
0.250 |
1.222 |
0.006 |
3.128 |
0.014 |
1.229 |
0.004 |
11.3. Repeatability
For this repeatability study, seven different red wines were selected, and three different repetitions were performed on each. Concentrations were from 0.5 mg/L to 15 mg/L depending on the biogenic amine and the wine.
biogenic Amine |
Sr (mg/L) |
r (mg/L) |
Validation range (mg/L) |
Methylamine |
0.335 |
0.937 |
3 - 16 |
Ethylamine |
0.173 |
0.486 |
2 - 7 |
Tyramine |
0.276 |
0.773 |
2 - 20 |
Putrescine |
0.500 |
1.400 |
7 - 26 |
Cadaverine |
0.025 |
0.069 |
0.2 - 0.8 |
Phenethylamine |
0.028 |
0.079 |
0.3 - 1.1 |
Isoamylamine |
0.017 |
0.048 |
0.1 - 0.8 |
Histamine |
0.108 |
0.303 |
5 - 16 |
11.4. Reproducibility
For this reproductibility study, three different red wines were selected, and two repetitions were performed with each.
biogenic Amine |
Sr (mg/L) |
R (mg/L) |
Validation range (mg/L) |
Methylamine |
0.533 |
1.492 |
3 - 16 |
Ethylamine |
0.884 |
2.475 |
2 - 7 |
Tyramine |
0.341 |
0.955 |
2 - 20 |
Putrescine |
0.419 |
1.172 |
7 - 26 |
Cadaverine |
0.172 |
0.482 |
0.2 - 0.8 |
Phenethylamine |
0.053 |
0.150 |
0.3 - 1.1 |
Isoamylamine |
0.056 |
0.157 |
0.1 - 0.8 |
Histamine |
1.333 |
3.732 |
5 - 16 |
11.5. Limits of detection (LOD) and limits of quantification (LOQ)
According to an intralaboratory study using the method of successive dilutions from a solution to 0.5 mg/L serially diluted to 0.01 mg/L :
Amines |
LD (mg/L) |
LQ (mg/L) |
|
Histamine |
HI |
0.167 |
0.500 |
Methylamine |
ME |
0.083 |
0.250 |
Ethylamine |
ET |
0.150 |
0.450 |
Tyramine |
TY |
0.078 |
0.235 |
Putrescine |
PU |
0.033 |
0.098 |
Cadaverine |
CA |
0.160 |
0.480 |
Phenethylamine |
PH |
0.032 |
0.096 |
Isoamylamine |
IS |
0.007 |
0.020 |
- Bibliography
- Gomez-Alonzo S., Hermosin-Gutierrez I., Garcia-Romero E., 2007. Simultaneous HPLC analysis of biogenic amines, amino acids, and ammonium Ion as Aminoenone derivatives in wine and beer samples. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 55, 608-613.
- Tricard C., Cazabeil J.-M., Salagoïti M.H. (1991): dosage des amines biogènes dans les vins par HPLC, Analusis, 19, M53-M55.
- RECUEIL DES METHODES INTERNATIONALES D'ANALYSES - OIV, Amines biogènes par HPLC, Méthode OIV-MA-AS315-18 , Analyse des amines biogènes des moûts et des vins par HPLC (Résolution OIV-Oeno 346-2009).
- "Guide pratique pour la validation, le contrôle qualité et l’estimation de l’incertitude d’une méthode d’analyse œnologique alternative". Oeno Resolution 10/2005. OIV. October 2005. www.oiv.int.
Analysis of volatile compounds in wines by gas chromatography (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-27 Analysis of volatile compounds in wines by gas chromatography
Type IV method
- Object
This method is applicable to the analysis of volatile compounds in wines containing less than 20 g/L sugar.
For wines with a sugar content higher than 20 g/L and for mistelles, prior distillation (identical to that practised to obtain the ABV) is necessary; however distillation sometimes removes a significant part of the compounds.
- Scope of application
The present method may be used for the quantification of the following compounds (non-exhaustive list):
ethanal,
ethyl acetate,
methanol,
butan-2-ol,
propan-1-ol,
2-methylpropan-1-ol,
isoamyl acetate,
butan-1-ol,
2-methylbutan-1-ol,
3-methylbutan-1-ol,
pentan-1-ol,
acetoin,
ethyl lactate,
hexan-1-ol,
3-ethoxypropanol,
ethyl octanoate,
furfuraldehyde,
(2R,3R)-butane-2,3-diol,
(2R,3S)-butane-2,3-diol,
propane-1,2-diol,
butyrolactone,
diethyl succinate,
hexanoic acid (semi-quantitative),
2-phenylethanol,
diethyl malate,
octanoic acid (semi-quantitative),
decanoic acid (semi-quantitative).
Note: diacetyl and acetic acid cannot be quantified by this method yet they appear in the chromatograms.
- Principle
Volatile compounds are quantified by gas chromatography after direct injection of the sample, added with an internal standard, into a capillary column coated with a bonded polar phase and detection using flame ionisation.
- Reagents and products
The quantities and method of preparation are given by way of example and may be adapted as necessary to the types of wine.
4.1. Demineralised water (e.g. ISO 3696 type II or resistivity ≥ 18 MΩ.cm);
4.2. ethanol [CAS no. 64-17-5], purity ≥ 96%;
4.3. high-purity hydrogen for GC (e.g. H2O ≤ 4 ppm; O2 ≤ 2 ppm; CnHm ≤ 0.5 ppm; N2 ≤ 4 ppm);
4.4. high-purity helium for GC (H2O ≤ 3 ppm; O2 ≤ 2 ppm; CnHm ≤ 1 ppm; N2 ≤ 5 ppm);
4.5. high-purity compressed air for GC;
4.6. ethanal [CAS no. 75-07-0], purity ≥ 99%;
4.7. ethyl acetate [CAS no. 141-78-6], purity ≥ 99.5%;
4.8. methanol [CAS no. 67-56-1], purity ≥ 99.8%;
4.9. diacetyl [CAS no. 431-03-08], purity ≥ 99%;
4.10. butan-2-ol [CAS no. 15892-23-6], purity ≥ 99.5%;
4.11. propan-1-ol [CAS no. 71-23-8], purity ≥ 99.5%;
4.12. 2-methylpropan-1-ol [CAS no. 78-83-1], purity ≥ 99.5%;
4.13. isoamyl acetate [CAS no. 123-92-2], purity ≥ 97%;
4.14. butan-1-ol [CAS no. 71-36-3], purity ≥ 99.5%;
4.15. 4-methylpentan-2-ol (internal standard) [CAS no. 108-11-2], purity ≥ 99%;
4.16. 2-methylbutan-1-ol [CAS no. 137-32-6], purity ≥ 99%;
4.17. 3-methylbutan-1-ol [CAS no. 125-51-3], purity ≥ 99.5%;
4.18. pentan-1-ol [CAS no. 71-41-0], purity ≥ 99%;
4.19. acetoin [CAS no. 513-86-0], purity ≥ 96%;
4.20. ethyl lactate [CAS no. 687-47-8], purity ≥ 98%;
4.21. hexan-1-ol [CAS no. 111-27-3], purity ≥ 99.0%;
4.22. 3-ethoxypropanol [CAS no. 111-35-3], purity ≥ 97%;
4.23. ethyl octanoate [CAS no. 106-32-1], purity ≥ 99%;
4.24. furfuraldehyde [CAS no. 98-01-1], purity ≥ 99.0%;
4.25. acetic acid [CAS no. 64-19-7], purity ≥ 99%;
4.26. (2R,3R)- and (2R,3S)-butane-2,3-diol [CAS no. 513-85-9], purity ≥ 98%;
4.27. propane-1,2-diol [CAS no. 57-556], purity ≥ 99.5%;
4.28. butyrolactone [CAS no. 96-48-0], purity ≥ 99%;
4.29. diethyl succinate [CAS no. 123-25-1], purity ≥ 99%;
4.30. hexanoic acid [CAS no. 142-62-1], purity ≥ 99.5%;
4.31. 2-phenylethanol [CAS no. 60-12-8], purity ≥ 99%;
4.32. diethyl malate [CAS no. 7554-12-3], purity ≥ 97%;
4.33. octanoic acid [CAS no. 124-07-2], purity ≥ 99.5%;
4.34. decanoic acid [CAS no. 334-48-5], purity ≥ 99.5%.
Note: diacetyl and acetic acid cannot be quantified by this method yet they appear in the chromatograms.
Preparation of reagent solutions (the quantities are given by way of example and may be adapted as necessary to the types of matrix to be analysed)
4.35. 10% Aqueous-alcoholic mixture to be made up with ethanol (4.2) and water (4.1).
4.36. Internal standard solution
Transfer 1 mL 4-methylpentan-2-ol (4.15) into a 100-mL flask (5.2). Fill up to the calibration mark with ethanol (4.2). Divide into flasks on which the date of preparation is noted. Keep refrigerated.
4.37. Internal or external reference wine (a CRM (Certified Reference Material) wine or a wine used as a reference material from a proficiency-testing programme between laboratoriesfor example).
4.38. Stock calibration solution
The compounds are individually weighed at 1 mg (nominal weights given in the table below) using a precision balance (5.4). In order to avoid losses through evaporation, quickly add a small amount of ethanol (4.2). Mix and pour into a 1-L flask (5.3). Rinse with ethanol. Add 2.5 mL 4-methylpentan-2-ol (4.15). Make up to 1 L with ethanol (4.2) and mix. Divide into flasks and store in the freezer. Record the exact weights.
Compound |
Nominal weight |
Final concentration in the working calibration solution 4.39 |
Compound |
Nominal weight |
Final concentration in the working calibration solution 4.39 |
Ethanal (4.6) |
500 |
50 |
Hexan-1-ol (4.21) |
300 |
30 |
Ethyl acetate (4.7) |
1500 |
150 |
3-Ethoxypropanol (4.22) |
160 |
16 |
Methanol (4.8) |
650 |
65 |
Furfuraldehyde (4.24) |
50 |
5 |
Diacetyl (4.9) |
50 |
5 |
Ethyl octanoate (4.23) |
120 |
12 |
Butan-2-ol (4.10) |
160 |
16 |
Acetic acid (5.25) |
5000 |
500 |
Propan-1-ol (4.11) |
350 |
35 |
Butane-2,3-diol (4.26) |
4000 |
400 |
2-Methylpropan-1-ol (4.12) |
240 |
24 |
Propane-1,2-diol (4.27) |
1000 |
100 |
Isoamyl acetate (4.13) |
250 |
25 |
Butyrolactone (4.28) |
50 |
5 |
Butan-1-ol (4.14) |
160 |
16 |
Diethyl succinate (4.29) |
500 |
50 |
2-Methylbutan-1-ol (4.16) |
160 |
16 |
Hexanoic acid (4.30) |
250 |
25 |
3-Methylbutan-1-ol (4.17) |
1000 |
100 |
2-Phenylethanol (4.31) |
500 |
50 |
Pentan-1-ol (4.18) |
160 |
16 |
Diethyl malate (4.32) |
1000 |
100 |
Acetoin (4.19) |
250 |
25 |
Octanoic acid (4.33) |
500 |
50 |
Ethyl lactate (4.20) |
1500 |
150 |
Decanoic acid (4.34) |
750 |
75 |
4.39. Working calibration solution
Just before use, dilute the stock calibration solution (4.38) ten times.
- Apparatus
5.1. 20-mL volumetric flasks (class A);
5.2. 100-mL volumetric flasks (class A);
5.3. 1-L volumetric flasks (class A);
5.4. precision balance with an accuracy of ± 1 mg;
5.5. gas chromatograph equipped with:
"split-splitless" injector,
autosampler (optional),
detector: flame ionisation (FID);
5.6. fused-silica capillary column:
Carbowax 20 M type with a bonded polar phase,
50 m in length,
internal diameter of 0.32 mm,
film thickness of 0.45 µm.
Note: other systems may be used on condition that they are capable of satisfactorily separating the different compounds.
- Preparation of the samples
Conduct a preliminary degassing of sparkling wine samples (for example, by first taking a sample using an automatic pipette and collecting it in a tube).
Distil the wines containing more than 20 g/L of sugar and the mistelles prior to preparation.
Introduce the sample into a 20-mL flask (5.1). Add 0.5 mL internal standard solution (4.36) and fill up to the calibration mark with wine.
- Procedure
Analyse using the gas chromatograph (5.5) equipped with a capillary column (5.6).
Analytical conditions (given by way of example):
Carrier gas (4.4): Phelium = 90 kPa
Note: another carrier gas such as hydrogen may be used, but nitrogen is best avoided.
Septum flow rate: 2.5 mL/min
Split flow rate: 40 mL/min
Split mode of injection
Volume injected: 1 µL
Temperature of the injector: 200 °C
Detector: FID (flame ionisation)
- Detector temperature at 250 °C
- Flame: = 50 kPa and = 130 kPa
Temperature programming:
- temp. 1 = 32 °C at 2.5 °C/min, up to 80 °C - = 0 min
- temp. 2 = 80 °C at 4 °C/min, up to 170 °C - = 20 min
- temp. 3 = 170 °C at 10 °C/min, up to 220°C - = 20 min
Calibration
Inject the working calibration solution (4.39) before each analysis series.
Calculation of response factors:
= (areai x ) / ( x )
= concentration of the constituent of the calibration solution
= area of the constituent of the calibration solution
= concentration of the internal standard in the calibration solution
= area of the internal standard in the calibration solution
It is also possible to use a calibration curve.
By way of example, chromatograms of a standard solution and a wine sample are given in the Annexes.
- Calculations
In the case of use of a response factor, calculation of the concentrations is as follows:
= ( x )/ ( x ).
- Precision
See Annex C.
- Quality assurance and control
Traceable to the international references through mass, volume and temperature.
Synthetic mixtures or samples coming, for instance, from proficiency ring test are used as internal quality control. A control chart may be used.
- Results
Express concentrations in mg/L to the number of decimal places indicated below.
Analytical parameters |
No. of decimal places |
Analytical parameters |
No. of decimal places |
Ethanal |
0 |
Ethyl lactate |
0 |
Ethyl acetate |
0 |
Hexan-1-ol |
1 |
Methanol |
0 |
3-Ethoxypropanol |
0 |
Butan-2-ol |
1 |
Ethyl octanoate |
0 |
Propan-1-ol |
0 |
Furfuraldehyde |
1 |
2-Methylpropan-1-ol |
0 |
(2R,3R)-Butane-2,3-diol |
0 |
Isoamyl acetate |
1 |
(Meso)-butane-2,3-diol |
0 |
Butan-1-ol |
1 |
Propane-1,2-diol |
0 |
2-Methylbutan-1-ol |
0 |
Butyrolactone |
0 |
3-Methylbutan-1-ol |
0 |
Diethyl succinate |
0 |
Pentan-1-ol |
1 |
2-Phenylethanol |
0 |
Acetoin |
0 |
Diethyl malate |
0 |
Annex A Bibliography
- BERTRAND A., GUEDES DE PINHO P. and ANOCIBAR BELOQUI A. (1994). Les constituants majoritaires du vin, FV 971, OIV, 15 pages.
Annex B Example chromatograms
|
Figure 1: chromatogram of a standard solution of volatile compounds |
|
Figure 2 : chromatogram of volatile compounds in a white wine (sugar < 15 g/L) |
Annexe C
C1 – Organisation of the study - Samples
This study was carried out by the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne in Epernay. A prevalidation occurred during October/December 2015 and actual interlaboratory during March/April 2016.
The trial involved 11 samples: two white wines identified B and E, two red wines identified C and F and one rosé wine identified A (blindly replicated) + one of the samples spiked with butan-2-ol, butan-1-ol, acetoin, hexan-1-ol and diethyl malate (identified D).
C2 - Fidelity
13 laboratories participated in the interlaboratory study:
Autoridade de Segurança Alimentar e Económica, Lisbon, Portugal;
Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung, Berlin, Germany;
Bureau National Interprofessionnel du Cognac, Cognac, France;
Comité Interprofessionnel du vin de Champagne, Epernay, France;
Czech Agriculture and Food Inspection Authority, Brno, Czech Republic;
Instituto dos Vinhos do Douro e do Porto, Porto, Portugal;
Laboratoire DUBERNET, Montredon Corbières, France;
Laboratorio Arbitral Agroalimentario, Madrid, Spain;
Landesuntersuchungsamt, Mainz, Germany;
Miguel Torres S.A.- Finca, Barcelona, Spain;
Service Commun des Laboratoires Bordeaux-Pessac (SCL MINEFI), Pessac, France;
Service Commun des Laboratoires Montpellier (SCL MINEFI), Montpellier, France;
Union Nationale de Groupements des Distillateurs d'alcool (UNGDA), Malakoff, France.
The results were evaluated according to the OIV protocol (Collaborative study OIV‑MA-AS1-07:R2000).
ISO 5725-2 §7.5 recommends to look for any functional relationship between the fidelity values and the content, which is expressed by the graphs below the data tables for each product.
C3 - Results tables
compound |
r |
R |
ethyl acetate |
0.18x – 1.8 |
0.33x – 1.7 |
methanol |
0.22x – 4.3 |
0.28x – 3.2 |
propan-1-ol |
4 mg/l |
7 mg/L |
2-methylpropan-1-ol |
0.20x – 1.4 |
0.36x – 0.7 |
butan-1-ol |
0.07x + 0.2 |
0.14x + 0.3 |
2-methylbutan-1-ol |
0.23x – 2.7 |
0.40x – 5.0 |
3-methylbutan-1-ol |
0.35x – 35.7 |
0.45x – 41.8 |
acetoïn |
0.14x + 1.2 |
0.33x + 2.1 |
ethyl lactate |
0.23x – 1.6 |
0.29x + 4.2 |
hexanol |
0.07x + 0.3 |
0.10x + 0.8 |
3-ethoxypropanol |
0.59x – 0.4 |
0.46x + 0.4 |
ethyl octanoate |
0.5 mg/l |
0.7 mg/l |
butyrolactone |
0.25x + 0.8 |
0.20x + 4.1 |
diethyl succinate |
0.31x + 0.8 |
0.55x + 0.4 |
2-phenylethanol |
0.24x + 0.3 |
0.50x – 2.6 |
where x is the measured concentration
Ethyl acetate - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
12 |
12 |
12 |
13 |
12 |
13 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
42 |
42 |
42 |
23 |
42 |
46 |
Mean (mg/L) |
26.4 |
60.5 |
55.5 |
60.6 |
25.5 |
68.4 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
1.6 |
2.6 |
2.4 |
1.4 |
1.1 |
6.0 |
RSDr % |
5.9 |
4.2 |
4.3 |
2.4 |
4.3 |
8.8 |
Limit of repeatability r |
4.5 |
7.4 |
6.9 |
4.5 |
3.2 |
17.3 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
16.9% |
12.2% |
12.3% |
7.4% |
12.5% |
25.3% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
2.8 |
4.7 |
4.4 |
8.8 |
2.2 |
7.3 |
RSDR % |
10.7 |
7.7 |
8.0 |
14.5 |
8.5 |
10.6 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
8.1 |
13.4 |
12.6 |
25.8 |
6.2 |
20.7 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
30.5% |
22.1% |
22.7% |
42.6% |
24.2% |
30.3% |
HORRAT R |
1.1 |
0.9 |
0.9 |
1.7 |
0.9 |
1.2 |
|
Methanol - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
46 |
46 |
46 |
23 |
46 |
46 |
Mean (mg/L) |
66.8 |
57.2 |
129.8 |
57.8 |
59.4 |
165.6 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
3.8 |
2.6 |
7.4 |
3.0 |
3.3 |
11.9 |
RSDr % |
5.6 |
4.5 |
5.7 |
5.2 |
5.5 |
7.2 |
Limit of repeatability r |
10.8 |
7.4 |
21.2 |
9.5 |
9.4 |
34.1 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
16.2% |
12.9% |
16.3% |
16.3% |
15.8% |
20.6% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
5.1 |
4.6 |
11.4 |
4.2 |
5.4 |
15.4 |
RSDR % |
7.6 |
8.1 |
8.8 |
7.3 |
9.0 |
9.3 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
14.5 |
13.2 |
32.5 |
12.3 |
15.3 |
43.9 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
21.7% |
23.1% |
25.0% |
21.3% |
25.7% |
26.5% |
HORRAT R |
0.9 |
0.9 |
1.1 |
0.8 |
1.0 |
1.3 |
|
Propan-1-ol - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
46 |
46 |
46 |
23 |
46 |
46 |
Mean (mg/L) |
31.1 |
36.1 |
39.5 |
36.7 |
32.9 |
22.7 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
1.5 |
1.4 |
1.8 |
0.8 |
1.4 |
1.5 |
RSDr % |
4.7 |
3.8 |
4.6 |
2.4 |
4.1 |
6.8 |
Limit of repeatability r |
4.2 |
4.0 |
5.3 |
2.7 |
3.9 |
4.4 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
13.4% |
11.0% |
13.4% |
7.4% |
11.8% |
19.4% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
2.0 |
2.1 |
3.0 |
1.5 |
2.1 |
1.9 |
RSDR % |
6.3 |
5.9 |
7.5 |
4.1 |
6.4 |
8.3 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
6.7 |
7.3 |
10.2 |
4.4 |
7.2 |
6.4 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
21.6% |
20.1% |
25.7% |
11.9% |
22.0% |
28.3% |
HORRAT R |
0.7 |
0.6 |
0.8 |
0.4 |
0.7 |
0.8 |
|
2-methylpropan-1-ol - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
13 |
13 |
13 |
12 |
13 |
13 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
46 |
46 |
46 |
21 |
46 |
46 |
Mean (mg/L) |
21.2 |
22.2 |
40.0 |
30.8 |
17.7 |
49.9 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
0.9 |
1.4 |
1.6 |
3.0 |
0.7 |
3.3 |
RSDr % |
4.0 |
6.4 |
4.1 |
9.6 |
3.7 |
6.5 |
Limit of repeatability r |
2.5 |
4.1 |
4.7 |
9.5 |
1.9 |
9.4 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
11.6% |
18.3% |
11.8% |
30.8% |
10.8% |
18.9% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
2.4 |
2.7 |
4.6 |
7.5 |
1.9 |
6.1 |
RSDR % |
11.5 |
12.2 |
11.5 |
24.2 |
10.8 |
12.3 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
6.9 |
7.7 |
13.2 |
22.0 |
5.5 |
17.5 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
32.8% |
34.7% |
33.0% |
71.5% |
30.8% |
35.1% |
HORRAT R |
1.1 |
1.2 |
1.3 |
2.5* |
1.0 |
1.4 |
*presumed outlier, not considered for computation of fidelity.
|
Butan-1-ol – Fidelity repeatability et reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
9 |
8 |
10 |
13 |
9 |
10 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
9 |
8 |
10 |
13 |
9 |
10 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
28 |
26 |
34 |
23 |
28 |
32 |
Mean (mg/L) |
0.87 |
0.87 |
1.77 |
11.36 |
0.81 |
1.36 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
0.05 |
0.07 |
0.14 |
0.29 |
0.07 |
0.15 |
RSDr % |
5.5 |
7.8 |
8.2 |
2.6 |
8.4 |
11.0 |
Limit of repeatability r |
0.14 |
0.20 |
0.42 |
0.92 |
0.20 |
0.44 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
16.2% |
23.1% |
23.9% |
8.1% |
24.8% |
32.1% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
0.14 |
0.13 |
0.20 |
0.67 |
0.14 |
0.26 |
RSDR % |
15.6 |
15.0 |
11.3 |
5.9 |
17.5 |
19.3 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
0.39 |
0.38 |
0.58 |
1.96 |
0.41 |
0.76 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
45.2% |
43.9% |
32.5% |
17.3% |
50.9% |
55.7% |
HORRAT R |
1.0 |
0.9 |
0.8 |
0.5 |
1.1 |
1.3 |
|
2-methylbutan-1-ol - Fidelity
repeatability and reproducibility
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
32 |
32 |
32 |
16 |
32 |
32 |
Mean (mg/L) |
24.3 |
22.4 |
47.6 |
22.6 |
20.4 |
52.0 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
1.4 |
1.1 |
2.2 |
0.3 |
0.7 |
3.8 |
RSDr % |
5.7 |
4.7 |
4.6 |
1.3 |
3.6 |
7.3 |
Limit of repeatability r |
4.0 |
3.1 |
6.4 |
1.0 |
2.2 |
11.0 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
16.6% |
13.7% |
13.3% |
4.3% |
10.6% |
21.2% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
1.7 |
1.5 |
4.7 |
0.8 |
1.5 |
5.7 |
RSDR % |
6.9 |
6.8 |
9.9 |
3.5 |
7.3 |
10.9 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
4.8 |
4.4 |
13.7 |
2.4 |
4.3 |
16.3 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
19.9% |
19.6% |
28.6% |
10.6% |
21.2% |
31.4% |
HORRAT R |
0.7 |
0.7 |
1.1 |
0.4 |
0.7 |
1.2 |
The laboratories that summed the peaks of 2-methylbutan-1-ol and 3-methylbutan-1-ol are excluded.
|
3-methylbutan-1-ol - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
32 |
32 |
32 |
16 |
32 |
32 |
Mean (mg/L) |
142.2 |
147.8 |
200.5 |
150.2 |
134.4 |
201.7 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
7.1 |
6.1 |
9.4 |
0.9 |
5.1 |
15.0 |
RSDr % |
5.0 |
4.1 |
4.7 |
0.6 |
3.8 |
7.5 |
Limit of repeatability r |
20.8 |
17.8 |
27.5 |
2.9 |
14.9 |
44.0 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
14.6% |
12.1% |
13.7% |
1.9% |
11.1% |
21.8% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
8.2 |
9.3 |
15.7 |
3.6 |
8.5 |
18.2 |
RSDR % |
5.8 |
6.3 |
7.8 |
2.4 |
6.3 |
9.0 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
23.7 |
26.9 |
45.2 |
10.9 |
24.6 |
52.6 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
16.6% |
18.2% |
22.5% |
7.3% |
18.3% |
26.1% |
HORRAT R |
0.8 |
0.8 |
1.1 |
0.3 |
0.8 |
1.3 |
The laboratories that summed the peaks of 2-methylbutan-1-ol and 3-methylbutan-1-ol are excluded.
|
Acetoin - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
12 |
13 |
13 |
12 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
12 |
9 |
13 |
13 |
10 |
13 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
11 |
7 |
13 |
13 |
9 |
13 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
38 |
24 |
46 |
23 |
30 |
46 |
Mean (mg/L) |
5.6 |
2.1 |
19.8 |
53.4 |
2.4 |
21.4 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
0.7 |
0.2 |
1.7 |
2.6 |
0.5 |
1.8 |
RSDr % |
11.5 |
8.3 |
8.8 |
4.9 |
19.7 |
8.5 |
Limit of repeatability r |
1.9 |
0.5 |
5.0 |
8.3 |
1.4 |
5.2 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
33.4% |
24.7% |
25.2% |
15.5% |
58.0% |
24.3% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
1.3 |
0.6 |
3.4 |
6.5 |
0.7 |
3.5 |
RSDR % |
23.1 |
28.3 |
17.2 |
12.2 |
30.2 |
16.6 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
3.7 |
1.7 |
9.7 |
19.2 |
2.1 |
10.1 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
66.2% |
82.8% |
48.9% |
36.0% |
87.3% |
47.3% |
HORRAT R |
1.9 |
2.0 |
1.7 |
1.4 |
2.2* |
1.6 |
*presumed outlier, not considered for computation of fidelity
|
Ethyl lactate - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
46 |
46 |
46 |
23 |
46 |
46 |
Mean (mg/L) |
81.5 |
21.4 |
149.2 |
21.8 |
34.3 |
118.2 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
5.4 |
1.3 |
11.9 |
1.0 |
2.7 |
9.1 |
RSDr % |
6.6 |
6.3 |
8.0 |
4.6 |
7.7 |
7.7 |
Limit of repeatability r |
15.5 |
3.9 |
34.2 |
3.1 |
7.6 |
26.1 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
19.0% |
18.0% |
22.9% |
14.2% |
22.2% |
22.1% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
8.9 |
4.0 |
17.7 |
3.8 |
5.0 |
13.0 |
RSDR % |
11.0 |
18.9 |
11.8 |
17.4 |
14.7 |
11.0 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
25.5 |
11.5 |
50.3 |
11.1 |
14.3 |
37.0 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
31.3% |
53.8% |
33.7% |
51.0% |
41.7% |
31.3% |
HORRAT R |
1.3 |
1.9 |
1.6 |
1.7 |
1.5 |
1.4 |
|
Hexan-1-ol - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
11 |
12 |
11 |
13 |
11 |
10 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
11 |
12 |
11 |
13 |
10 |
10 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
36 |
38 |
38 |
23 |
34 |
34 |
Mean (mg/L) |
1.81 |
1.53 |
1.99 |
13.68 |
1.60 |
1.22 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
0.12 |
0.16 |
0.20 |
0.39 |
0.10 |
0.32 |
RSDr % |
6.6 |
10.6 |
10.2 |
2.9 |
6.6 |
26.1 |
Limit of repeatability r |
0.35 |
0.47 |
0.59 |
1.23 |
0.31 |
0.93 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
19.2% |
30.7% |
29.7% |
9.0% |
19.2% |
76.2% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
0.29 |
0.30 |
0.50 |
0.70 |
0.21 |
0.65 |
RSDR % |
15.8 |
19.8 |
25.1 |
5.1 |
13.1 |
53.2 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
0.82 |
0.87 |
1.43 |
2.05 |
0.60 |
1.87 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
45.4% |
56.7% |
71.9% |
15.0% |
37.7% |
152.9% |
HORRAT R |
1.1 |
1.3 |
1.7 |
0.5 |
0.9 |
3.4* |
*presumed outlier, not considered for computation of fidelity.
|
3-ethoxypropanol - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
11 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
7 |
11 |
8 |
11 |
11 |
6 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
7 |
11 |
8 |
10 |
11 |
6 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
21 |
37 |
23 |
17 |
30 |
17 |
Mean (mg/L) |
1.7 |
3.6 |
1.4 |
3.7 |
3.0 |
1.1 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
1.0 |
0.4 |
0.1 |
0.4 |
0.4 |
0.1 |
RSDr % |
62.4 |
10.9 |
7.5 |
11.3 |
14.4 |
6.5 |
Limit of repeatability r |
3.2 |
1.4 |
0.3 |
2.1 |
1.3 |
0.2 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
189.2% |
39.3% |
22.7% |
55.9% |
42.7% |
20.2% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
1.4 |
0.6 |
0.5 |
0.7 |
0.8 |
0.2 |
RSDR % |
81.3 |
16.5 |
33.3 |
17.6 |
27.7 |
22.6 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
4.0 |
1.7 |
1.4 |
1.9 |
2.4 |
0.7 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
239.8% |
47.5% |
97.7% |
52.6% |
80.1% |
67.7% |
HORRAT R |
5.5* |
1.3 |
2.2* |
1.3 |
2.0 |
1.4 |
*presumed outlier, not considered for computation of fidelity.
|
Ethyl octanoate - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
7 |
9 |
5 |
9 |
9 |
4 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
7 |
9 |
5 |
8 |
9 |
4 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
19 |
30 |
10 |
13 |
30 |
10 |
Mean (mg/L) |
0.8 |
1.1 |
0.7 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
0.8 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
0.03 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0.4 |
RSDr % |
4.1 |
20.6 |
47.0 |
10.3 |
24.0 |
49.5 |
Limit of repeatability r |
0.1 |
0.7 |
1.2 |
0.3 |
0.7 |
1.4 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
12.5% |
60.7% |
171.1% |
34.4% |
70.6% |
171.3% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.6 |
0.1 |
0.3 |
0.8 |
RSDR % |
29.9 |
23.5 |
91.4 |
8.2 |
31.8 |
90.3 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
0.7 |
0.8 |
2.0 |
0.3 |
0.9 |
2.4 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
88.8% |
67.9% |
292.8% |
25.3% |
92.0% |
288.8% |
HORRAT R |
1.8 |
1.5 |
5.4* |
0.5 |
2.0 |
5.5* |
*presumed outlier, not considered for computation of fidelity.
|
Butyrolactone - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
10 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
10 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
8 |
8 |
7 |
10 |
9 |
8 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
26 |
28 |
24 |
17 |
30 |
28 |
Mean (mg/L) |
12.8 |
10.9 |
18.8 |
11.3 |
8.2 |
19.1 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
1.4 |
1.2 |
1.6 |
1.2 |
2.9 |
2.1 |
RSDr % |
11.1 |
10.6 |
8.6 |
10.3 |
34.9 |
11.1 |
Limit of repeatability r |
4.2 |
3.4 |
4.8 |
3.9 |
8.5 |
6.3 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
33.1% |
31.2% |
25.5% |
34.3% |
102.7% |
32.8% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
2.6 |
2.0 |
2.6 |
3.9 |
2.9 |
2.8 |
RSDR % |
19.9 |
18.2 |
13.9 |
34.4 |
35.6 |
14.5 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
7.4 |
5.7 |
7.6 |
11.6 |
8.5 |
8.0 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
57.9% |
52.7% |
40.7% |
103.1% |
102.9% |
42.1% |
HORRAT R |
1.8 |
1.6 |
1.4 |
3.1* |
3.1* |
1.4 |
*presumed outlier, not considered for computation of fidelity.
|
Diethyl succinate - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
13 |
10 |
13 |
10 |
12 |
13 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
11 |
10 |
13 |
10 |
12 |
12 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
40 |
34 |
46 |
17 |
35 |
42 |
Mean (mg/L) |
6.5 |
3.3 |
15. 9 |
4.0 |
3.7 |
10.7 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
0.7 |
0.4 |
1.8 |
1.5 |
0.6 |
1.9 |
RSDr % |
11.0 |
11.2 |
11.2 |
37.8 |
16.1 |
17.4 |
Limit of repeatability r |
2.1 |
1.1 |
5.1 |
5.0 |
1.7 |
5.4 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
31.7% |
32.6% |
32.1% |
126.4% |
47.1% |
50.2% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
1.3 |
1.5 |
3.2 |
1.9 |
1.3 |
2.4 |
RSDR % |
20.5 |
44.9 |
20.0 |
48.6 |
35.4 |
22.0 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
3.8 |
4.3 |
9.0 |
5.8 |
3.7 |
6.7 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
58.6% |
129.2% |
56.9% |
145.6% |
101.7% |
63.0% |
HORRAT R |
1.7 |
3.4* |
1.9 |
3.7* |
2.7* |
2.0 |
*presumed outlier, not considered for computation of fidelity.
|
2-phenylethanol - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
13 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
42 |
42 |
42 |
21 |
42 |
46 |
Mean (mg/L) |
19.4 |
18.8 |
47.0 |
18.7 |
15.6 |
53.1 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
1.4 |
2.4 |
4.5 |
1.0 |
1.4 |
4.2 |
RSDr % |
7.4 |
13.0 |
9.6 |
5.3 |
9.1 |
7.8 |
Limit of repeatability r |
4.2 |
7.0 |
13.0 |
3.2 |
4.1 |
11.9 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
21.5% |
37.4% |
27.7% |
17.1% |
26.3% |
22.5% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
2.9 |
3.0 |
6.8 |
1.4 |
1.7 |
8.8 |
RSDR % |
15.1 |
16.2 |
14.5 |
7.6 |
11.0 |
16.6 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
8.4 |
8.7 |
19.5 |
4.2 |
4.9 |
25.2 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
43.1% |
46.2% |
41.4% |
22.4% |
31.5% |
47.4% |
HORRAT R |
1.5 |
1.6 |
1.6 |
0.7 |
1.0 |
1.9 |
|
Ethyl acetate - Fidelity |
|
|||||
repeatability and reproducibility |
|
|||||
wine A |
wine B |
wine C |
wine D |
wine E |
wine F |
|
Method |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
ISO 5725-2 |
No. of laboratories that submitted results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories that submitted compliant results |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
No. of laboratories after elimination of outliners |
12 |
12 |
12 |
13 |
12 |
13 |
Number of measurement values without outliners |
42 |
42 |
42 |
23 |
42 |
46 |
Mean (mg/L) |
26.4 |
60.5 |
55.5 |
60.6 |
25.5 |
68.4 |
Repeatability s.d. Sr |
1.6 |
2.6 |
2.4 |
1.4 |
1.1 |
6.0 |
RSDr % |
5.9 |
4.2 |
4.3 |
2.4 |
4.3 |
8.8 |
Limit of repeatability r |
4.5 |
7.4 |
6.9 |
4.5 |
3.2 |
17.3 |
Relative limit of repeatability r% |
16.9% |
12.2% |
12.3% |
7.4% |
12.5% |
25.3% |
Reproducibility s.d. SR |
2.8 |
4.7 |
4.4 |
8.8 |
2.2 |
7.3 |
RSDR % |
10.7 |
7.7 |
8.0 |
14.5 |
8.5 |
10.6 |
Limit of reproducibility R |
8.1 |
13.4 |
12.6 |
25.8 |
6.2 |
20.7 |
Relative limit of reproducibility R% |
30.5% |
22.1% |
22.7% |
42.6% |
24.2% |
30.3% |
HORRAT R |
1.1 |
0.9 |
0.9 |
1.7 |
0.9 |
1.2 |
Method of determination of 1,2-propanediol and 2,3-butanediol (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-28 Method of determination of 1,2-propanediol and 2,3-butanediol
Type IV method
- Introduction
Measurable quantities of 1,2-propanediol and 2,3-butanediol are formed following fermentation processes. These compounds are practically absent in unfermented musts, yet found within certain limits in wines.
- Principle
The analytes and the internal standard are extracted through the use of ethyl ether. Their transfer into the organic phase is facilitated by the increase in the ionic strength of the initial wine or must matrix. A large quantity of is added to the samples (‘salting out’) for this purpose. The extracts are analysed directly via GC-MS on a polar column. The detection is conducted according to the retention time and the mass spectrometer.
- Scope of application
The method is suitable for determining 1,2-propanediol and 2,3-butanediol in musts and wines whose sugar content is greater than 20 g/L and whose analyte concentrations are between 1 mg/L and 500 mg/L.
- Abreviations
C |
Concentration |
|
PG |
1,2-Propanediol |
|
GC-MS |
Gas Chromatograph-Mass Spectrometer |
|
H2 |
Hydrogen |
|
IS |
Internal standard 1,3-butanediol |
|
m/z |
Mass/charge ratio |
|
RF |
Response factor |
|
ML |
Matrix calibration level |
|
SS CS |
Stock solution Calibration solution |
|
SS CS |
Stock solution Calibration solution |
|
RT |
Retention time |
|
CS |
Calibration solutions for gas chromatography |
|
BG |
2,3-Butanediol |
|
S |
Wine with a sugar content > 20 g/L |
|
M |
Must |
|
- Reagents
5.1. K2CO3 (CAS no. 584-08-7)
5.2. Ethyl ether (CAS no. 60-29-7)
5.3. Absolute ethanol (CAS no. 64-17-5)
5.4. Fructose (CAS no. 57-48-7)
5.5. Glucose (CAS no. 50-99-7)
5.6. Glycerol (CAS no. 56-81-5)
5.7. 1,2-Propanediol, purity > 99% (CAS no. 57-55-6)
5.8. 2,3-Butanediol, purity > 99%, mix of (R,R)- and (R,S)-isomers (CAS no. 513-85-9). Estimate the relative quantity of the (R,R) and (R,S) forms as follows:
5.8.1. prepare a 100 mg/L solution following the instructions in points 7.2.1 and 7.3, diluting the mix of 2,3-butanediol isomers (5.8) in water (5.10) instead of in the matrix model solution;
5.8.2. inject into the GC, under the conditions described in point 7.6, and calculate the percentage of (R,R) and (R,S) forms from the percentage of the areas of the two peaks;
5.8.3. take into consideration the relative quantity of the two forms to calculate the concentration of the calibration solutions, CCS,i,, used in paragraph 8.2.1 for the calculation of the RFi relating to the (R,R) and (R,S) forms.
5.9. 1,3-Butanediol, purity > 99%, anhydrous (or dehydrated with sodium sulphate for 24 hours) (CAS no. 107-88-0)
5.10. Purified water for laboratory use, certified to the EN ISO 3696 standardNitrogen
- Apparatus
6.1. Everyday laboratory apparatus such as class-A 1000-mL, 200-mL and 100-mL flasks
6.2. Analytical scale with an accuracy of 0,0001 g
6.3. Laboratory centrifuge (at least 4000 rpm or 2000 xg)
Note 1. The unit ‘xg’ refers to the acceleration experienced by particles in a centrifuge, while ‘rpm’ represents the number of revolutions the rotor of the centrifuge makes per minute. There is a relationship between these units of measurement:
xg = 1.1178 · 10-3 · n² · r. In the laboratory that developed this method, r = 0.115 m.
6.4. Chromatograph coupled to a mass spectrometer and split-splitless injector
6.5. Precision micropipettes and Pasteur pipettes
6.6. 30-mL centrifuge tubes resistant to ether and provided with stoppers
6.7. Thermostatically-controlled water bath
6.8. Vertical vortex mixer
- Procedure
7.1. Preparation of the model solutions that simulate the matrix
To obtain a better response to the GC-MS during quantification, different solutions should be prepared that simulate the matrix of the sample in question as much as possible, given that the response to the analysis of glycols varies according to the matrix in which they were diluted.
Table 1: Preparation of the model solutions in 1000-mL calibrated flasks.
Model solution |
||
M |
S |
|
Fructose |
100 g/L |
50 g/L |
Glucose |
100 g/L |
50 g/L |
Glycerol |
1 g/L |
4 g/L |
Absolute ethanol |
1% v/v |
5% v/v |
7.2. Preparation of reference solutions
7.2.1. SS: PG and BG stock solutions
With an accuracy of 0.1 mg, weigh about 0.10 g of 1,2-propanediol (PG) and about 0.10 g of 2,3-butanediol (BG) into a 10-mL calibrated flask and fill up to the calibration mark with water (5.10). Make a note of the weights. Hermetically seal the flask and mix. The concentration is approximatively 10 mg/mL in the PG solution and 10 mg/mL in the BG solution.
If the quantities of PG and BG differ by 0.1 g, calculate the exact concentrations based on the weights noted.
7.2.2. IS: IS stock solution
With an accuracy of 0.1 mg, weigh about 0.10 g of 1,3-Butanediol (IS) into a 10-mL calibrated flask and fill up to the calibration mark with water (5.10). Make a note of the weight. Hermetically seal the flask and mix. The concentration of this solution is 10 mg/mL.
If the quantity of IS differs by 0.1 g, calculate the exact concentration based on the weights noted.
7.3. Preparation of the calibration matrix solution
The calibration solutions are prepared as follows, by diluting the SS solution into a model solution whose composition is as close as possible to that of the sample for analysis (for sweet wine, S model solution; for must, M model solution):
Table.2: Preparation of calibration solutions (CS) in 100-mL calibrated flasks:
CS-M |
CS-S |
|
SS Solution |
1 mL |
1 mL |
To reach a final volume of 100 mL, make up to volume with: |
M model solution |
S model solution |
Every CS calibration solution contains the selected matrix and the concentration of PG and BG is 100 mg/L. The internal standard is added before the extraction as described in paragraph 7.5.
7.4. Preparation of samples
If the analyte concentration in the sample is greater than the maximum concentration provided within the scope of application, dilute the sample with the model solution (7.1).
Stir the sample before taking the 10 mL to be extracted.
In the case of musts or cloudy wines, sample the clear wine after filtration.
In the case of sparkling or semi-sparkling wines, carry out degassing as described in the OIV method ‘Total Acidity’ (OIV-MA-AS313-01, point 5.1). Proceed with all of the preparation and carry out the tests in duplicate.
7.5. Extraction
7.5.1. Adding the internal standard (IS) to the sample
Prepare a solution containing 5 mL of IS solution (7.2.2) in a 100-mL flask and fill up to the calibration mark with the sample to be analysed, then shake well.
This solution contains 500 mg/L of IS.
7.5.2. Musts and wines with a sugar content > 20 g/L
7.5.2.1. Addition of K2CO3
Pour 10 mL of the solution just prepared, composed of the sample to be analysed and the IS solution, into the centrifuge test tube (6.6), then add 10 g of K2CO3 (5.1) and wait for it to cool. To speed up cooling you may use a thermostatically-controlled water bath at 20 °C (6.7).
7.5.2.2. Extraction with ether
Once cooled, add 10 mL of ethyl ether (5.2) and shake the whole mixture with a vertical vortex agitator, then put it in the centrifuge (6.3) at about 3500 rpm (or 1500 xg) for 10 minutes.
7.5.3. Purification for GC/MS analysis
The supernatant liquid is collected with a Pasteur pipette, transferred into a suitable flask and the solvent evaporated under a flow of nitrogen. The residue is recovered with about 1 mL of ethyl ether and placed in a tightly sealed GC vial ready for GC/MS analysis.
7.5.4. Extraction of the CS calibration solutions
This procedure must also be carried out for the chosen CS calibration solution (7.3). The CS solutions must be considered as samples to all intents and purposes, and must thus be treated in the same way as the sample starting from the moment the IS is added (7.5.1).
7.6. GC-MS analysis
By way of example, the specific parameters of the GC-MS analysis are given below. Alternative systems may be used, if they give adequate chromatographic performances and make it possible to separate the chromatographic peaks with a precision of greater than 2.
7.6.1. GC typical conditions
Column: 60 m x 0.25 mm x 0.25 μm DB-WAX
Carrier gas: He
Carrier gas flow: 1.0 mL/min
Injector temperature: 250 °C
Injection volume: 1 μL
Ionising current: 70 eV
Temperature settings:
Increase (°C/min) |
Temperature (°C) |
Time (min) |
|
Start |
50 |
8.00 |
|
Ramp 1 |
4.0 |
220 |
|
Ramp 2 |
220 |
40 |
Specific MS conditions
Source: 230 °C
MS detector: 150 °C scan, 35.00 – 350.00 amu.
Start time: 10 min
Acquisition time for each mass is 250 μs
Acquisition mode: Full Scan
- Evaluation
8.1. Identification
Identification is performed by comparing the retention time of the calibration solutions provided for this purpose and the mass spectrum found in the library associated with the GC-MS.
8.2. Calculations
For quantification, m/z = 45 is used for the IS, and also the PG and two forms of BG.
8.2.1. Determination of response factors
Quantification is carried out based on the response factor RF obtained by analysing the reference solution:
|
where:
is the peak area of the internal standard and CIS is its concentration;
is the peak area of the PG or each of the isomeric forms of BG in the calibration solution and is its concentration.
8.2.2. Calculation of the concentrations in the samples
Once the response factor RF has been calculated the calculation of the concentration of PG and each of the isomeric forms of BG in the samples can be performed, according to the following formula:
|
where:
is the peak area of the PG or the BG in the sample and Ci is its concentration.
8.3. Expression of the results
The results are expressed in mg/L to the nearest whole number.
Express 2,3-butanediol as the sum of (R,R)-2,3-butanediol and (R,S)-2,3-butanediol.
- Bibliography
- Carsten Fauhl, Reiner Wittkowski, Janice Lofthouse, Simon Hird, Paul Brereton, Giuseppe Versini, Michele Lees and Claude Guillou, ‘Gas Chromatographic/Mass Spectrometric Determination of 3-Methoxy-1,2-Propanediol and Cyclic Diglycerols, By-Products of Technical Glycerol, in Wine: Interlaboratory Study’, JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL, VOL. 87, NO. 5, 2004.
- Di Stefano, R., García Moruno, E. and Borsa, D., ‘Proposta di un metodo di preparazione del campione per la determinazione dei glicoli dei vini’, VINI D'ITALIA, 4, 1992, pp. 61-64.
- García Moruno, E. and Di Stefano, R., ‘La determinazione del glicerolo, del 2,3-butandiolo e dei glicoli nei vini’, VINI D'ITALIA, 5, 1989, pp. 41-46.
- Di Stefano, R., Borsa, D. and García Moruno, E., ‘Glicoli naturalmente presenti nei vini’, VINI D'ITALIA, 5, 1988, pp. 39-44.
Annex 1 :Method performance
- Linearity
Verification of the linearity of the response for a 200 g/L sugar solution (100 g/L of glucose and 100 g/L of fructose). Each analyte was added at concentrations of 10, 100 and 500 mg/L, while the IS was added at a concentration of around 100 mg/L. The measurements were repeated three times.
|
The mean response factors are
1,2-Propanediol RF = = 1/0.2173 = 4.60
(R,R)-2,3-Butanediol RF = = 1/1.7863 = 0.56
(R,S)-2,3-Butanediol RF = = 1/0.9145 = 1.09
- Repeatability
The repeatability was evaluated for two must samples.
One was analysed as such (Must N°1) and the other was obtained by adding 100 mg/L of SS stock solution to it (Must N°2).
The following table makes reference to 10 repeated analyses, and the repeatability (r) is calculated according to the formula r = 2.8*Sr. (Sr = repeatability standard deviation, RSDr = relative standard deviation of repeatability).
Compound |
Must N°1 |
Must N°2 |
||||||||||||
Mean (mg/L) |
Sr (mg/L) |
RSDr (%) |
r (mg/L) |
Mean (mg/L) |
Sr (mg/L) |
RSDr (%) |
r (mg/L) |
|||||||
1,2-Propanediol |
1.5 |
0.5 |
36 |
1.5 |
107 |
9 |
9 |
30 |
||||||
(R,R)-2,3-Butanediol |
3.2 |
1.6 |
52 |
4.6 |
30 |
3 |
9 |
9.0 |
||||||
(R,S)-2,3-Butanediol |
5.4 |
1.7 |
33 |
4.9 |
104 |
11 |
10 |
34 |
||||||
Evaluation of the precision of the limit of repeatability according to the Horwitz equation and Horrat parameter (r):
Must no. 1
Mean (mg/L) |
C106 (m/m) |
PRSD (R) |
R Horwitz |
Horrat (r) |
r min H |
r max H |
|
1,2-Propanediol |
1.5 |
1.5 |
15 |
0.6 |
2.40 |
0.2 |
0.8 |
(R,R)-2,3-Butanediol |
3.2 |
3.2 |
13 |
1.2 |
3.87 |
0.3 |
1.6 |
(R,S)-2,3-Butanediol |
5.4 |
5.4 |
12 |
1.9 |
2.64 |
0.5 |
2.5 |
The limit of repeatability ‘r’ is not contained within the validation range specified by the Horwitz equation (r min H < r < r max H) due to the greater volatility of low-concentration measurements, close to the limit of quantification established in paragraph 5 of Annex 1.
Must no.2
Mean (mg/L) |
C105 (m/m) |
PRSD (R) |
R Horwitz |
Horrat (r) |
r min H |
r max H |
|
1,2-Propanediol |
107 |
11 |
7.9 |
24 |
1.09 |
5.9 |
31.8 |
(R,R)-2,3-Butanediol |
30 |
3 |
9.5 |
8 |
0.98 |
2.0 |
10.7 |
(R,S)-2,3-Butanediol |
104 |
10 |
7.9 |
23 |
1.29 |
5.7 |
30.8 |
The limit of repeatability ‘r’ is not contained within the validation range specified by the Horwitz equation (r min H < r < r max H).
- Recovery rate
The recovery rate was evaluated for must N°2 before and after addition of the SS stock solution, as described in paragraph 7.3 of the method.
Compound |
C. in the must (mg/L) |
C. added (mg/L) |
Theoretical C. (mg/L) |
Measured C. (mg/L) |
Recovery rate (%) |
1,2-Propanediol |
0.7 |
99.5 |
100.2 |
107.5 |
107 |
(R,R)-2,3-Butanediol |
12.6 |
21.7 |
34.3 |
29.9 |
87 |
(R,S)-2,3-Butanediol |
11.4 |
86.8 |
98.2 |
103.7 |
106 |
(R,R)- + (R,S)-2,3-Butanediol |
24.0 |
108.5 |
132.5 |
133.6 |
101 |
The recovery rate is satisfactory for 1,2-propanediol and for 2,3-butanediol evaluated overall as the sum of both forms.
- Effect of the sugar matrix on the response factors
The RFs obtained for the equimolar glucose and fructose solutions with total sugar concentrations of 200 g/L and 2 g/L were compared.
1,2-Propanediol |
(R,R)-2,3-Butanediol |
(R,S)-2,3-Butanediol |
||||
Sugars |
200 g/L |
2 g/L |
200 g/L |
2 g/L |
200 g/L |
2 g/L |
RF |
4.60 |
5.90 |
0.55 |
0.56 |
1.08 |
1.09 |
|
22.0 % |
1.8 % |
0.9 % |
The effect of the matrix on 1,2-Propanediol is highly marked, while it is negligible for both forms of 2,3-Butanediol.
- Limit of detection and limit of quantification
The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) depend on specific analytical-chemical measurement conditions and should be determined by all those who use the method.
The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) were evaluated using the above-mentioned equipment and conditions (point 8) and by following the instructions of Resolution OENO 7-2000 (OIV-MA-AS1-10) ‘Estimation of the detection and quantification limits of a method of analysis’ as described in paragraph 4.2 concerning the “Graph” Approach.
1,2-Propanediol |
(R,R)-2,3-Butanediol |
(R,S)-2,3-Butanediol |
|
LOD (mg/L) |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
LOQ (mg/L) |
0.6 |
0.7 |
0.8 |
Annex 2
|
FIG. 1 Chromatogram of a wine |
Detection of chitinase and thaumatin-like proteins in white wines (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-29 Detection of chitinase and thaumatin-like proteins in white wines
Type IV method
- Introduction
For the detection of unstable proteins and risks of protein casse in white wines, many tests are heat- or precipitation-based, the latter using a chemical agent. These tests give very different, unreliable and even contradictory results. This immunological method of semi-quantitative immunoprinting makes it possible to determine the presence or absence of unstable proteins in wines. Therefore, chitinase and thaumatin-like proteins can be detected from a total concentration of as low as 1 mg/L in wines. This value is taken from the comparison of results with the SDS electrophoresis method described in the Compendium of Methods of Analysis (OIV-MAA-AS315-12), for which the limit of detection is 1 mg/L.
- Scope of application
This immunological method of immunoprinting applies to white wines.
- Principle
The immunological method of immunoprinting is conducted in 3 steps:
3.1. Application of the wine sample to a nitrocellulose membrane
3.2. Detection of unstable proteins
3.3. Revelation of the presence of unstable proteins
The intensity of the coloured spots observed on the membrane is proportional to the quantity of unstable proteins and to the risk of protein casse in wine.
- Reagents and products
4.1. List of reagents and products
Unless otherwise indicated, use the products as marketed.
4.1.1. Ultra-pure water: resistivity ≥ 18 MΩ.cm at 25°C
4.1.2. A wine very rich in proteins and a wine containing no proteins following treatment with bentonite. These wines are used for the positive and negative controls respectively: verification and quantification of proteins present in these wines may be conducted using SDS-PAGE electrophoresis (Method OIV-MA-AS315-12)
4.1.3. Rabbit polyclonal antibodies directed against unstable proteins in wine: see the protocol in the Annex
4.1.4. Goat anti-rabbit IgA polyclonal antibodies conjugated to horseradish peroxidase (hereinafter referred to as: goat anti-rabbit-HRP antibodies)
4.1.5. Anhydrous sodium chloride (NaCl): CAS No. 7647-14-5
4.1.6. Anhydrous Tris-HCl: CAS No. 1185-53-1
4.1.7. Concentrated HCl in solution; purity ≥ 36.5%: CAS No. 7647-01-0
4.1.8. Tween 20: CAS No. 9005-64-5
4.1.9. Lyophilised Bovine Serum Albumin (BSA) powder; purity ≥ 96%: CAS No. 9048-46-8
4.1.10. 4-Chloro-1-naphthol; purity ≥ 99%: CAS No. 604-44-4
4.1.11. Methanol; purity ≥ 99.8%: CAS No. 67-56-1
4.1.12. Hydrogen peroxide in solution (H2O2); purity ≥ 30% : CAS No. 7722-84-1
4.2. Preparation of working solutions
All of the solutions may be stored for 1 year at 4 °C.
4.2.1. TBS buffer (tris-buffered saline)
Dissolve 29.22 g of sodium chloride (4.1.5) and 2.42 g of anhydrous Tris-HCl (4.1.6) in 1 litre of ultra-pure water (4.1.1). Adjust the pH to 7.5 using a concentrated HCl solution (4.1.7).
4.2.2. TBS-Tween 20 buffer
Add 0.05% of Tween 20 (4.1.8) to the TBS buffer (4.2.1).
4.2.3. Blocking solution
Add 4% of BSA (4.1.9) to the TBS buffer (4.2.1).
4.2.4. Polyclonal antibody solution (available on the market or according to the protocol described in the Annex)
4.2.4.1. Dilute the unstable anti-protein polyclonal antibodies (primaries) according to commercial recommendations or to their concentrations in the TBS buffer (4.2.1).
4.2.4.2. Dilute the goat anti-rabbit-HRP polyclonal antibodies (secondaries) according to commercial recommendations or to their concentrations in the TBS buffer (4.2.1).
4.2.5. Solutions for revelation of unstable proteins
4.2.5.1. Dissolve 30 mg of 4-chloro-1-naphthol (4.1.10) in 10 mL of methanol (4.1.11). Place this solution in the dark at -20 °C until needed.
4.2.5.2. Add 30 μL of 30% H2O2 (4.1.12) to 50 mL of TBS (4.2.1) just before use.
- Materials
5.1. List of materials for the immunoprinting reaction:
- nitrocellulose membrane with 0.2 µm pores for conducting immunoprinting;
- 0.5-10 μL and 100-1000 μL automatic pipettes, corresponding cone filters;
- tubes, tube rack for dilutions of antibodies;
- class-A graduated cylinders;
- absorbent paper;
- tweezers;
- laboratory glassware to carry out the reaction: small crystalliser, Petri dish, tubes, stoppers, etc.;
- platform shaker (for a reaction in a dish) or vortex mixer (for a reaction in a tube) with a maximum speed of 20 RPM.
Equipment required to prepare the solutions:
- class-A calibrated flasks;
- pH meter;
- precision weighing balance with an accuracy of 0.1 mg;
- 3000-g centrifuge and centrifuge tubes.
- Sampling
The samples should be taken and stored at 4 °C so as not to modify the proteins naturally present in the wine.
6.1. Sample preparation
The samples (or laboratory samples) of wines are applied directly to the nitrocellulose membrane (5.1.1) using the pipette (5.1.2), without prior preparation.
- Procedure
Analysis may be conducted on unfiltered wines on the sole condition that these wines do not contain bentonite in suspension. If this is the case, carry out centrifugation at 3000 g (5.2.4) for 10 min at room temperature.
As indicated in point 3, the immunological method of immunoprinting takes place in 3 steps, and the reactions are conducted at a room temperature of between 18 °C and 25°C.
7.1. Application of the wine sample
Apply 5 μL (5.1.2) of test portion from the samples and standard colorimetric solutions to the nitrocellulose membrane (5.1.1).
Leave to dry for 15-20 min at room temperature.
7.2. Addition of monoclonal antibodies
7.2.1. Place the membrane in the dish or tube (5.1.7). The volume of the solutions will be dependent on the container and the size of the membrane. This membrane should be covered.
The volumes specified below are for a small Petri dish-type container (5.1.7).
Add the blocking solution (4.2.3). Mix for at least 30 minutes (5.1.8).
7.2.2. Wash by draining off the solution, holding down the membrane if necessary with tweezers, before adding 20 mL of TBS (4.2.1) and mixing for several minutes (5.1.8).
Wash a second time as described above and drain off the solution.
7.2.3. Add 20 mL of primary antibody solution (4.2.4.1).
Mix for one hour (5.1.8).
Wash 3 times with the TBS-Tween 20 solution (4.2.2).
7.2.4. Add 20 mL of goat anti-rabbit-HRP secondary antibody solution (4.2.4.2).
Mix for one hour.
7.2.5. Wash with the TBS-Tween 20 solution (4.2.2) as described above for 5 min.
Wash 2 times with the TBS solution (4.2.1) as described above for 15 min.
Drain off the solution.
7.3. Revelation of the presence of unstable proteins
7.3.1. Mix the two solutions to reveal the unstable proteins (4.2.5.1 and 4.2.5.2) and place in contact with the membrane (5.1.1) prepared according to protocols 7.1 and 7.2, to which the wine has been applied, and stir.
A black-dark purple to mauve precipitate appears on the membrane where the unstable proteins are present.
The colour intensity is dependent upon the concentration of unstable proteins and therefore the risk of protein casse.
After 20-30 min, when the spot corresponding with the application of the positive standard colorimetric solution (4.1.2) is very intense, stop the colouration by washing the nitrocellulose membrane (5.1.1) in water.
Place the membrane to be dried between 2 sheets of absorbent paper (5.1.5).
The results can be interpreted when the membrane is dry.
- Results
For the results to be interpretable:
- the place of application of the positive standard colorimetric solution should show a spot of high colour intensity (dark purple-black),
- the place of application of the negative standard colorimetric solution should show no spots,
- the background "noise" (place on the membrane where no sample has been applied) should be very light, even white.
A semi-quantitative result may be obtained by making a calibration curve based on a wine naturally rich in proteins, for which a dilution range will be used. This calibration curve will be dependent on the surface areas obtained through integration of the colour intensity of the spots corresponding to the formation of immunocomplexes. Analysis may be carried out with the same equipment as that used to analyse the electrophoresis gels described in the Method OIV-MA-AS315-12.
Interpretation of the results may also be carried out visually.
8.1. For direct control over the presence or absence of unstable proteins in wine
Proteins are present in the laboratory sample if the colour intensity of the spot obtained is higher than that of the spot for the negative standard colorimetric solution.
The colour intensity of the spot obtained after the reaction is proportional to the quantity of unstable proteins and, consequently, proportional to the risk of protein casse in this wine.
8.2. To verify the absence of proteins after treatment (in particular, with bentonite)
Proteins are present in the sample if the colour intensity of the spot obtained for the test portion without bentonite treatment is higher than that of the spot for the negative standard colorimetric solution.
In the case of application of a "range of treatment products (bentonite)" in a laboratory test, the colour intensity of the spots in each test portion should decrease as the treatment product concentration increases. Where this intensity is null or minimal for one spot but consistent in relation to the other samples in the range, the dose of the treatment product corresponding to the spot in question is applied to achieve protein stability in the tested wine.
- Annexes
Production of polyclonal antibodies directed against unstable proteins
The antibodies directed against unstable proteins in white and rosé wines may be prepared in rabbits. It is their specificity which makes the method reliable and precise.
9.1. Purification of Chitinase and Thaumatin-like proteins
9.1.1. List of products and equipment
9.1.1.1. Ultra-pure water: resistivity ≥ 18 MΩ.cm
9.1.1.2. Wine grape harvested at technological maturity (Chardonnay or Sauvignon blanc vine variety, for example
9.1.1.3. Anhydrous sodium acetate: CAS No. 127-09-3
9.1.1.4. Triton X-100: CAS No. 9002-93-1
9.1.1.5. Anhydrous ammonium sulphate: CAS No. 127-09-3
9.1.1.6. Anhydrous sodium chloride (NaCl): CAS No. 7647-14-5
9.1.1.7. Anhydrous Tris-HCl: CAS No. 1185-53-1
9.1.1.8. 37% Pure hydrochloric acid: CAS No. 7647-01-0
9.1.1.9. 1M NaoH sodium hydroxide solution: CAS No. 1310-73-2
9.1.1.10. Laboratory glassware, including Class-A calibrated flasks and pipettes
9.1.1.11. Tweezers
9.1.1.12. 10,000-g Centrifuge
9.1.1.13. Laboratory weighing balance with an accuracy of 0.1 mg
9.1.1.14. pH meter
9.1.1.15. Strong anionic resin
9.1.1.16. Anionic resin
9.1.1.17. Membrane with cut off of 10 kDa
9.1.1.18. Low-pressure liquid chromatography apparatus with concentration-gradient pump
9.1.1.19. Detector measuring the absorbance at à 280 nm
9.1.1.20. Conductivity detector
9.1.2. Preparation of sodium acetate buffer (9.1.1.3) diluted to 50 mM, 0.25% Triton X-100 (9.1.1.4) at pH 5
Place the following successively in a 1-L calibrated flask (9.1.1.10):
- 4.1 g sodium acetate (9.1.1.3),
- 2.5 g Triton X-100 (9.1.1.4),
-
make up to 1 L with ultra-pure water (9.1.1.1) and stir; adjust the pH to 5 using 37% HCl (9.1.1.8) in order to avoid having a basic environment that could have a harmful effect on the proteins to be extracted or impede their extraction.
- Preparation of the 50-mM Tris-HCl buffer, pH 8.0
Place the following successively in a 1-L calibrated flask (9.1.1.10):
- 7.9 g anhydrous Tris-HCl (9.1.1.7)
Make up to 1 L with ultra-pure water (9.1.1.1); adjust the pH to 8 using a 1M NaOH solution (9.1.1.9).
9.1.4. Preparation of the 50 mM Tris-HCl buffer, 100 mM NaCl
Place the following successively in a 1-L calibrated flask (9.1.1.10):
- 7.9 g anhydrous Tris-HCl (9.1.1.7),
- 5.8 g anhydrous sodium chloride (9.1.1.6),
-
make up to 1 L with ultra-pure water (9.1.1.1) and mix.
- Preparation of 100 mM sodium chloride solution
- Place the following successively in 1-L calibrated flask (9.1.1.10)
- 5.8 g anhydrous sodium chloride (9.1.1.6),
-
make up to 1 L with ultra-pure water (9.1.1.1) and mix.
- Procedure
Grapes from the Pinot noir or Chardonnay vine varieties are harvested at maturity and frozen at -20 °C. The seeds are removed from the frozen grapes before crushing. 3 g of seeded grapes are crushed into 10 mL of sodium acetate buffer (9.1.2), diluted to 50 mM, pH 5, containing 0.25% Triton X-100 (9.1.1.4). The insoluble material is removed by centrifugation (5 min at 3000 g) (9.1.1.12). The supernatant (2 mL) is then frozen overnight at -20 °C for clarification purposes. The extract is then centrifuged at 10,000 g for 15 min to remove the insoluble material.
Ammonium sulphate (9.1.1.5) is added to the supernatant up to a concentration of 30%. The mixture is mixed for 1 hour at 4 °C then centrifuged once more as described above.
Ammonium sulphate (9.1.1.5) is again added to the supernatant up to a final concentration of 60%. The mixture is mixed for 2 hours at 4 °C then centrifuged once more as described above.
The protein precipitate is collected then re-dissolved in 1 mL of 50 mM Tris-HCl buffer, pH 8.0 (9.1.3). The proteins are bound to a column containing a strong anionic resin (5 x 30 cm) (9.1.1.15). The column is washed with the Tris-HCl buffer described above. Chitinase and Thaumatin-like proteins are then extracted using a Tris-HCl buffer containing 100 mM NaCl. All the fractions are collected then desalinated on a membrane with a MWCO of 10 kDa (9.1.1.17) using the 50 mM Tris-HCl buffer, pH 8.0 (9.1.4.3). The desalinated protein fractions are then loaded onto a low-pressure chromatography column (9.1.1.18) containing an anionic resin (9.1.1.16). Elution is carried out with 120 mL of a NaCl (9.1.5) gradient ranging from 0 to 100 mM by means of a concentration-gradient pump using a solution A of ultra-pure water (9.1.1.1) and a solution B of sodium chloride, 100 mM (9.1.5). The protein and salt concentrations are estimated respectively by measuring the absorbance at 280 nm and the conductivity of the fluids exiting the column using detectors (9.1.1.19 and 9.1.1.20). The Chitinase and Thaumatin-like protein fractions thus purified and separated are used for the production of antibodies.
9.3. Production of anti-Chitinase and Thaumatin-like polyclonal antibodies in rabbits
The protocol used is identical to that described in the Method OIV-MA-AS315-12.
- Bibliography
- Anonymous. 2004. "Determination of Plant Proteins in Wines and Musts," OIV, Resolution Oeno 24/2004. 1-7. (Method OIV-MA-AS315-12).
- Derckel, J. P.; Audran, J. C.; Haye, B.; Lambert, B. and Legendre, L. 1998. "Characterization, Induction by Wounding and Salicylic Acid, and Activity against Botrytis cinerea of Chitinases and Beta-1,3-Glucanases of Ripening Grape Berries." Physiologia Plantarum, 104 (1), 56-64.
- Manteau, S.; Lambert, B.; Jeandet, P. and Legendre, L. 2003. "Changes in Chitinase and Thaumatin-Like Pathogenesis-Related Proteins of Grape Berries During the Champagne Winemaking Process." American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 54 (4), 267-72.
- Manteau, S. and Poinsaut, P. 2010. "Instabilité Protéique Des Vins Blancs Et Rosés. Partie 2/2: Comparaison Des Tests De Stabilité Protéique Dans Les Vins Blancs Et Rosés Et Mise Au Point D'un Nouveau Test: L'immunoTest π." Revue des Œnologues, 135, 23-27.
- Manteau, S.; Sauvage, F.-X.; Poinsaut, P.; Scotti, B.; Sieczkowski, N. and Moutounet, M. 2006. "Haze in White Wine: Involvement of Proteins Other Than Pathogenesis-Related Proteins in Spontaneous Haze," Eds. P. Jeandet, C. Clement and A. Conreux, Macrowine: Macromolecules and Secondary Metabolites of Grape and Wine. Reims: Intercept Publishers - Lavoisier, 165-68.
- Ribéreau-Gayon, J. and Peynaud, E. 1961. "Précipitation Des Protéines," Traité d'Oenologie. Tome II - Composition, Transformations Et Traitements Des Vins. Librairie Polytechnique Ch. Béranger, 346-356.
- Waters, E.; Hayasaka, Y.; Tattersall, D.; Adams, K. and Williams, P. 1998. "Sequence Analysis of Grape (Vitis Vinifera) Berry Chitinases That Cause Haze Formation in Wines." Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 46 (12), 4950-57.
Determination of alkylphenols in wines by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS or GC-MS/MS) (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-30 Determination of alkylphenols in wines by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS or GC-MS/MS)
Type IV method
- Scope of application
The following method allows for the determination of the following molecules:
Range studied |
|
2-tert-butylphenol |
1-100 μg/L |
4-tert-butylphenol |
1-100 μg/L |
6-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
1-100 μg/L |
4-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
1-100 μg/L |
5-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
1-100 μg/L |
4,6-di-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
1-100 μg/L |
2,6-di-tert-butylphenol |
1-100 μg/L |
2,4-di-tert-butylphenol |
1-100 μg/L |
- Standard references
- ISO 78-2: Chemistry – Layouts for standards,
- ISO 3696: Water for analytical laboratory use,
- Resolution OIV-OENO 418-2013.
- Principle of the method
The method describes the analysis, on the one hand, by gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC-MS), and on the other, by gas chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (GC-MS/MS). The sample is extracted in the headspace using the solid-phase microextraction (SPME) technique.
- Reagents and working solutions
During analysis – unless otherwise indicated –only quality, recognised analytical reagents and distilled or demineralised water, or water of equivalent purity, are to be used.
4.1. Reagents
4.1.1. Quality I or II water for analytical usage (ISO 3696 standard)
4.1.2. Absolute ethanol (CAS No. 64-17-5)
4.1.3. Sodium chloride (CAS No. 7647-14-5)
4.1.4. 4-tert-butylphenol-d13 (CAS 225386-58-3)
4.1.5. 4-tert-butylphenol (CAS No. 98-54-4)
4.1.6. 2-tert-butylphenol (CAS No. 88-18-6)
4.1.7. 4-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol (CAS No. 2409-55-4)
4.1.8. 5-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol (CAS No. 88-60-8)
4.1.9. 6-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol (CAS No. 2219-82-1)
4.1.10. 4,6-di-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol (CAS No. 1879-09-0)
4.1.11. 2,4-di-tert-butylphenol (CAS No. 96-76-4)
4.1.12. 2,6-di-tert-butylphenol (CAS No. 128-39-2)
4.2. Stock solutions
Individual stock solutions at 1 g/L are prepared in ethanol for each alkylphenol as well as for the internal standard (e.g. 4-tert-butylphenol-d13).
Based on the individual stock solutions, working solutions are prepared in ethanol to the desired concentrations so as to cover the whole measurement range.
4.3. Calibration solutions
In order to ensure the best possible traceability to the International System of Units (SI), the calibration range should be made up of solutions and powders with (a high grade of) purity of different alkylphenols, prepared by weight or volumetrically according to the SI.
The calibration range is carried out with 12% (v/v) ethanol (4.1.2), with the range of measurement (1-100 μg·L-1) covering 5 points, for example. These solutions are prepared at the time of analysis for immediate use after preparation (within a few hours).
The calibration equation obtained is generally a quadratic function.
- Apparatus
5.1. GC-MS equipped with a “split-splitless” injector and mass-spectrometer detector or tandem mass spectrometer
5.2. Capillary column with apolar stationary phase, 5% phenylmethylpolysiloxane (e.g. 5MS, 30 m x 0.25 mm x 0.25 μm film) or equivalent
5.3. Calibrated 100- μL, 1-mL and 10-mL micropipettes
5.4. 20-mL SMPE vial, sealable by a perforated cap and Teflon seal
5.5. Solid-phase microextraction system (SPME) with polydimethylsiloxane-film-coated fibre of 100 μm in thickness, or equivalent
5.6. Balance
With traceability to the SI and 0.1 mg precision.
5.7. Measuring glassware
The measuring glassware for the preparation of reagents and calibration solutions is class A.
- Preparation of samples
The internal standard 4-tert-butylphenol-d13 is used here by way of example; it is possible to use other internal standards.
A sample of 10 mL wine is placed in a 20-mL SPME glass vial (5.4) with roughly 2 g NaCl (4.1.3) and 50 μL 4-tert-butylphenol-d13 (internal standard) solution at 5 mg/L (4.1.4).
The vial is closed with a perforated cap and Teflon seal (5.4).
- GC-MS Procedure
The procedure is given by way of example. The GC-MS technique used allows for the necessary variations or optimisations to be made according to the equipment configuration.
7.1. Extraction
The headspace SPME extraction is carried out for 20 minutes at 40 °C.
7.2. Injection
Desorption from the fibre is carried out for 10 minutes in the injector.
Injector at 260 °C in splitless mode
Helium flow rate: 1 mL/min
7.3. Gas chromatography parameters
Column: 5MS UI 30 m x 0.25 mm x 0.25 μm
Transfer line temperature: 300°C
Oven: 50°C
Then 10 °C/min up to 300 °C
Then 300 °C for 3 minutes
Run time: 28.0 minutes
Acquisition
Source temperature: 250 °C
Quad temperature: 150 °C
Acquisition: SIM
Run time (min) |
Ions (quantified) |
Ions (qualified) |
|
2-tert-butylphenol |
8.9 |
135 |
107-150 |
4-tert-butylphenol-d13 (IS) |
9.1 |
145 |
113-163 |
4-tert-butylphenol |
9.2 |
135 |
107-150 |
6-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
9.4 |
149 |
164-121 |
4-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
10.0 |
149 |
164-121 |
5-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
10.2 |
149 |
164-121 |
4,6-dimethyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
10.5 |
163 |
135-178 |
2,6-di-tert-butylphenol |
11.2 |
191 |
206-192 |
2,4-di-tert-butylphenol |
12.0 |
191 |
206-192 |
Table 1: Ions used in mass spectrometry.
- GC-MS/MS procedure
The procedure is given by way of example. The GC-MS/MS technique used allows for the necessary variations or optimisations to be made according to the equipment configuration.
8.1. Extraction
The headspace SPME extraction is carried out for 5 minutes at 40 °C.
8.2. Injection
Desorption from the fibre is carried out for 8 minutes in the injector.
Injector at 250 °C in pulsed-split mode with a split ratio of 2:1
Helium flow rate: 2 mL/min
8.3. Gas chromatography parameters
Column: 5MS UI 30 mx0.25 mm x 0.25 μm or equivalent
Transfer line: 300 °C
Oven: 50 °C
Then 25 °C/min up to 130 °C
Then 10 °C/min up to 170 °C
Then 25 °C/min up to 300 °C
Then 300 °C for 3 minutes
Run time: 15.4 minutes
8.4. Acquisition
Source temperature: 250 °C
Quad temperature: 150 °C
Acquisition: MRM
Run time (min) |
Quantification transitions |
Qualification transitions |
|
2-tert-butylphenol |
5.0 |
135>107 |
150>107 & 150>135 |
4-tert-butylphenol-d13 (IS) |
5.1 |
145>113 |
163>113 & 163>145 |
4-tert-butylphenol |
5.2 |
135>107 |
150>107 & 150>135 |
6-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
5.3 |
149>121 |
164>121 & 164>149 |
4-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
5.7 |
149>121 |
164>121 & 164>149 |
5-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
5.8 |
149>121 |
164>121 & 164>149 |
4,6-dimethyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
6.1 |
163>135 |
178>135 & 178>163 |
2,6-di-tert-butylphenol |
6.6 |
206>191 |
191>163 & 191>57 |
2,4-di-tert-butylphenol |
7.2 |
191>57 |
191>163 & 206>191 |
Table 2: Ions used in tandem mass spectrometry.
- Expression of results
The results are expressed in μg/L.
- Annex 1: Results of internal validation
The performance was measured using an intra-laboratory experimental approach: 5 materials covering the scope of application of the method (1; 5; 25; 50; 100 μg/L) were formulated, within a synthetic wine matrix (hydroalcoholic solution at 12% (v/v), 6 g/L tartaric acid, pH adjustment to 3.5 with 1M NaOH).
Each material was analysed 5 times under conditions of intermediate precision with 2 repetitions of each analysis. The analyses were performed in September and October 2018.
The calculations were made according to Resolution OIV-OENO 418-2013, “Practical Guide for the assessment, quality control, and uncertainty analysis of an oenological analysis method”.
GC-MS |
% CV (k=2) Intermediate precision |
CVr (%) Repeatability |
Validated LOQ |
2-tert-butylphenol |
6.7% |
4.3% |
1 μg/L |
4-tert-butylphenol |
7.3% |
5.1% |
1 μg/L |
6-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
12.1% |
10.2% |
1 μg/L |
4-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
6.0% |
4.6% |
1 μg/L |
5-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
6.4% |
4.9% |
1 μg/L |
4,6-dimethyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
12.7% |
10.5% |
1 μg/L |
2,6-di-tert-butylphenol |
19.5% |
14.6% |
1 μg/L |
2,4-di-tert-butylphenol |
11.9% |
9.9% |
1 μg/L |
Table 3: Performance obtained with mass spectrometry.
GC-MS/MS |
% CV (k=2) Intermediate precision |
CVr (%) Repeatability |
LOQ |
2-tert-butylphenol |
11.3% |
10.1% |
1 μg/L |
4-tert-butylphenol |
10.4% |
11.0% |
1 μg/L |
6-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
13.9% |
13.5% |
1 μg/L |
4-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
11.1% |
9.6% |
1 μg/L |
5-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
12.3% |
10.3% |
1 μg/L |
4,6-dimethyl-2-tert-butylphenol |
13.4% |
12.6% |
1 μg/L |
2,6-di-tert-butylphenol |
16.6% |
16.8% |
1 μg/L |
2,4-di-tert-butylphenol |
14.5% |
12.4% |
1 μg/L |
Table 4: Performance obtained with tandem mass spectrometry.
-
Annex 2: Example chromatograms and calibration curves
- 2-tert-butylphenol
|
11.2. 4-tert-butylphenol
|
11.3. 6-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol
|
11.4. 4-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol
|
11.5. 5-methyl-2-tert-butylphenol
|
11.6. 4,6-dimethyl-2-tert-butylphenol
|
11.7. 2,6-di-tert-butylphenol
|
11.8. 2,4-di-tert-butylphenol
|
Qualitative determination of sweeteners in wine by liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (LC-MS) (Type-IV)
OIV-MA-AS315-31 Qualitative determination of sweeteners in wine by liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (LC-MS)
Type IV method
- Scope
This method is suitable for the determination of presence of five artificial sweeteners (aspartame, potassium acesulfame, sodium cyclamate, saccharin and sucralose) as well as the natural sweetener stevioside in white, rosé and red wine.
- Definitions
ESI – Electrospray Ionisation
LC – Liquid chromatography
LC-MS – Liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry
m/z – Mass to charge ratio
MS – Mass spectrometry
MS/MS – Mass spectrometry acquisition mode measuring product ions
QTOF – Quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry
RP – Reverse phase
RT – Retention time
UHPLC – Ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography
- Principle
Wine is analysed directly using a liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry system (LC-MS). In liquid chromatography (LC), separation is performed using a reverse phase (RP) column and detection is accomplished by mass spectrometry (MS) according to the compounds’ mass to charge ratio (m/z). The MS data combined with the retention time (RT) are used for the identification and quantitation of sweeteners.
- Reagents and materials
4.1. Reagents:
4.1.1. Acetonitrile, purity 99.95 % (CAS Number 75-05-8)
4.1.2. Purified water: 18 MΩ.cm, TOC 5 μg/L
4.1.3. Formic Acid, purity 98 % (CAS Number 64-18-6)
4.1.4. Aspartame, purity 99.0 % (CAS Number 22839-47-0)
4.1.5. Acesulfame K, purity 99.9 % (CAS Number 55589-62-3)
4.1.6. Cyclamate, Sodium, purity 99.8 % (CAS Number 139-05-9)
4.1.7. Saccharin, purity 99 % (CAS Number 81-07-2)
4.1.8. Sucralose, purity 98.0 % (CAS Number 56038-13-2)
4.1.9. Stevioside, purity 95.0 % (CAS Number 57817-89-7)
4.1.10. Wines representative of the working matrices and previously verified to be absent of any sweeteners in order to be used for the preparation of calibration solutions and standards.
4.2. Solution preparation (as an example)
Standards and calibration solutions are kept in the fridge at approximately 6 °C. Aspartame solutions are unstable in acid media. Therefore, they must be prepared fresh each time the standard is analysed.
4.2.1. Standard solutions
Individual standard solutions at 1 g/L are prepared, e.g., by dissolving 10.0 mg of each sweetener in 10 mL volumetric flasks and filling up to the mark with water (4.1.2) or with ethanol solution at 12% V/V.
4.2.2. Calibration standards
Calibration standards are prepared and analysed by LC-MS as any other sample (see 6).
The calibration standards are prepared in wine (4.1.10) by diluting the appropriate amount of standard solution (4.2.1) to obtain the concentrations 50 μg/L, 100 μg/L, 500 μg/L and 1000 μg/L of each sweetener.
If better method performance is needed it is recommended to perform calibration with the same matrix being evaluated.
-
Apparatus
- Syringe filters: 0.2 μm polypropylene membrane, 25 mm diameter.
- Laboratory glassware, namely class A volumetric flasks.
- Analytical balance with a resolution of 0.0001 g
- Micropipettes for volumes from 5 μL to 1000 μL.
-
High Performance Liquid Chromatography instrument coupled with mass spectrometer.
- Standard HPLC and UPLC systems are possible given that the chromatographic separation is adjusted accordingly.
- Several MS system configurations are possible such as quadrupole, ion trap, time-of-flight and also hybrid systems.
Each wine sample is prepared by filtration with a syringe filter (5.1) prior to injection.
If necessary, samples are degassed beforehand using, for example, an ultrasound bath or nitrogen bubbling. If concentrations fall outside the calibration range, samples should be diluted.
Better performance may also be achieved with additional sample preparation steps such as dilution (relying on the instrument sensitivity), sample cleanup and extraction.
- Procedure
The following description, given as an example, refers to a UHPLC-QTOF instrument equipped with an ESI source. Modifications may occur according to the type of equipment or manufacturer’s instructions.
7.1. LC analysis:
- Mobile phase A: purified water (4.1.2) with 0.1 % formic acid (4.1.3
- Mobile phase B: acetonitrile (4.1.1) with 0.1 % formic acid (4.1.3)
- Injection volume: 2 μL
- Sampler temperature: 10 °C Column: RP C8 2.1 mm x 100 mm, 1.9 μm
- Column Oven: 30 °C
Gradient:
Time Min |
Flow mL/min |
% A |
% B |
0 |
0.4 |
90 |
10 |
3 |
0.4 |
60 |
40 |
3 |
0.4 |
1 |
99 |
4 |
0.4 |
1 |
99 |
4 |
0.8 |
1 |
99 |
5.5 |
0.8 |
1 |
99 |
5.5 |
0.5 |
90 |
10 |
9.5 |
0.5 |
90 |
10 |
9.5 |
0.4 |
90 |
10 |
7.2. Mass Spectrometer parameters:
- ESI: negative ionisation
- Source Temp: 200 °C
- Capillary Voltage: 3000 V
- Acquisition Mode: broadband collision-induced dissociation (bbCID)
- Consists of alternating acquisition of spectra of Full Scan and MS/MS modes (acquisition of precursor and product ions respectively)
- Collision Energy: 30 eV
- Acquisition spectra rate: 2.0 Hz
- Dry Gas Flow: 8 L/min;
- Nebuliser pressure: 2.0x Pa (2.0 bar)
- Identification
Sweetener identification is confirmed using a standard for each compound (4.1.4, 4.1.5, 4.1.6, 4.1.7, 4.1.8 and 4.1.9). The data gathered for peak confirmation is the RT for guidance (these may vary depending on the chromatographic parameters) and m/z of the precursor and product ions (Table 1).
Table 1 – Sweeteners identification data: RT, precursor m/z and product m/z
Sweetener |
RT min |
Ion |
Precursor m/z |
Product m/z |
Acesulfame K |
1.24 |
[M]- |
161.9867 |
77.9655 |
Aspartame |
2.30 |
[M-H]- |
293.1143 |
261.0881 |
Cyclamate Na |
1.66 |
[M]- |
178.0543 |
79.9574 |
Saccharin |
1.55 |
[M-H]- |
181.9917 |
41.9985 |
Sucralose |
2.14 |
[M-H]- |
395.0073 |
359.0306 |
Stevioside |
3.63 |
[M-H]- |
803.3707 |
641.3026 |
Note: The ions used for quantitation are underlined in Table 1.
Ion signals are monitored with extracted ion chromatograms with 3 mDa tolerance (Figure 1).
Aspartame [M-H]- |
Acesulfame K [M]- |
Cyclamate Na [M]- |
|||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
Note: An example of low standard sensitivity and additional transitions are given in appendix
- Calculus
Results are calculated from the calibration curve which is obtained with the amount (μg/L) vs the peak area of each sweetener:
|
Where is the sweetener concentration (μg/L), is the sample peak area, is the calibration curve Y-axis interception point and is the calibration curve slope.
- Results
Concentrations are expressed in μg/L without decimals.
-
Internal validation
- Matrices
Validation was performed using a total of 43 different wines: 20 red wines, 10 rosé wines and 13 white wines. These wines were selected from several regions with the aim of obtaining great variability of characteristics in order to make a comprehensive approach. Bellow there is a table summarizing the major characteristics of the wines.
Table 2 – Matrices main characteristics
Red wine (R) |
Rosé wine (Ro) |
White wine (W) |
||||
Regions |
Alentejo |
4 |
Douro |
3 |
Açores |
1 |
Bairrada |
1 |
Vinho Verde |
1 |
Alentejo |
2 |
|
Dão |
3 |
Other(1) |
6 |
Dão |
1 |
|
Douro |
4 |
Douro |
1 |
|||
Lisboa |
1 |
Lisboa |
1 |
|||
Valladolid |
1 |
Vinho Verde |
4 |
|||
Other(1) |
6 |
Other(1) |
3 |
Alcoholic Strength by Volume % v/v |
12.1 – 17.2 |
9.8 – 12.6 |
8.7 – 13.6 |
Sugar content g/L (glucose + fructose) |
0.5 – 108.0 |
0.7 – 28.8 |
0.2 – 17.1 |
Total Acidity g/L (tartaric acid) |
4.6 – 6.4 |
4.7 – 6.0 |
5.2 – 7.1 |
pH |
3.5 – 3.8 |
3.2 – 3.5 |
3.2 – 3.4 |
Intensity |
2.4 – 16.2 |
0.1 – 0.5 |
0.03 – 0.29(2) |
(1) Without geographical indication
(2) Absorbance at 420 nm instead of intensity
11.2. Linearity
The method proved to be linear within a range of concentrations between 50 μg/L and 1000 μg/L
11.3. Calibration
A total of 14 independent calibrations were made counting 6 red wines, 4 rosé wines and 4 white wines. Then, for each compound, calibrations were made considering 3 different approaches:
- One unified calibration for all the matrices
- 2 groups of matrices consisting in one group for white wines and another group with the remaining wines (red wines and rosé wines)
- 3 groups of matrices consisting of white wines, rosé wines and red wines
Herein presented are the optimized results of the validation study. According to the selected calibration conditions, for acesulfame, saccharin and sucralose calibration functions and subsequent calculations were preformed considering one group for white wines and a second group with the remaining matrices, red wines
and rosé wines. For aspartame, cyclamate and stevioside three groups of matrices were considered: red wines, rosé wines and white wines.
Table 3 – Calibration scheme for each compound
Calibrations |
Individual |
Combined |
||
Matrices |
White wine |
Rosé wine |
Red wine |
Red wines + Rosé wines |
Acesulfame |
X |
X |
||
Aspartame |
X |
X |
X |
|
Cyclamate |
X |
X |
X |
|
Saccharin |
X |
X |
||
Stevioside |
X |
X |
X |
|
Sucralose |
X |
X |
Given the heteroskedasticity and normal distribution of the residuals, the regression model employed was the weighted least square regression.
As an example, sucralose for the group of red and rosé wines at a concentration range 50 μg/L to 1000 μg/L is presented below.
Figure 2 – Calibration curve, standardized residuals and Q-Q plot for the combined red and rosé wines calibration for sucralose |
|
|
|
|
|
Yellow |
2x standard deviation |
red |
3x standard deviation |
|
11.4. Limits of detection and limits of quantitation
The limits of quantitation were obtained through calculation from the calibration curves
Table 4 – LOD and LOQ values obtained for each compound
LOD (mg/L) |
LOQ (mg/L) |
|||||
White wine |
Rosé wine |
Red wine |
White wine |
Rosé wine |
Red wine |
|
Acesulfame K |
0.003 |
0.003 |
0.011 |
0.011 |
||
Aspartame |
0.004 |
0.006 |
0.004 |
0.014 |
0.019 |
0.014 |
Cyclamate Na |
0.002 |
0.005 |
0.004 |
0.006 |
0.015 |
0.014 |
Saccharin |
0.002 |
0.005 |
0.006 |
0.016 |
||
Stevioside |
0.002 |
0.002 |
0.005 |
0.005 |
0.005 |
0.016 |
Sucralose |
0.014 |
0.007 |
0.048 |
0.022 |
11.5. Repeatability
Repeatability was assessed at three spiking levels: 50 µg/L corresponding to the reporting limit, 250 μg/L and 1000 μg/L. This evaluation is based on 8 replicate injections at each spiking level and for each matrix.
In the following tables the repeatability values obtained for each sweetener are presented including the mean concentration measured in each sample, the standard deviation (Std. Dev.), the percentual relative standard deviation for repeatability (RSDr %) and the Horwitz Ratio for repeatability (HorRat (r)).
Table 5 – Repeatability values for potassium acesulfame at 3 spiking levels
Acesulfame |
White wine (W) |
||||||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
W4 |
W5 |
W6 |
W7 |
W8 |
W9 |
||
Mean μg/L |
45 |
42 |
49 |
233 |
207 |
240 |
1036 |
926 |
1060 |
||
Std. Dev. |
1.4 |
2.1 |
0.8 |
3.3 |
5.2 |
2.6 |
13.2 |
13.7 |
15.8 |
||
Recovery % |
89 % |
84 % |
98 % |
93 % |
83 % |
96 % |
104 % |
93 % |
106 % |
||
RSDr % |
3.2 % |
5.0 % |
1.6 % |
1.4 % |
2.5 % |
1.1 % |
1.3 % |
1.5 % |
1.5 % |
||
HorRat (r) |
0.13 |
0.20 |
0.06 |
0.07 |
0.13 |
0.05 |
0.08 |
0.09 |
0.09 |
||
Acesulfame |
Rosé wine (Ro) |
||||||||||
Sample |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
Ro4 |
Ro5 |
Ro6 |
Ro7 |
Ro8 |
Ro9 |
||
Mean μg/L |
49 |
52 |
53 |
248 |
248 |
247 |
1063 |
1091 |
1097 |
||
Std. Dev. |
2.0 |
1.2 |
1.4 |
2.9 |
3.5 |
3.9 |
14.1 |
13.2 |
15.5 |
||
Recovery % |
98 % |
104 % |
107 % |
99 % |
99 % |
99 % |
106 % |
109 % |
110 % |
||
RSDr % |
4.1 % |
2.3 % |
2.6 % |
1.2 % |
1.4 % |
1.6 % |
1.3 % |
1.2 % |
1.4 % |
||
HorRat (r) |
0.17 |
0.09 |
0.10 |
0.06 |
0.07 |
0.08 |
0.08 |
0.08 |
0.09 |
||
Acesulfame |
Red wine (R) |
||||||||
Sample |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
R4 |
R5 |
R6 |
R7 |
R8 |
R9 |
Mean μg/L |
56 |
50 |
57 |
275 |
241 |
260 |
1195 |
1064 |
1160 |
Std. Dev. |
1.2 |
2.0 |
1.4 |
3.2 |
5.1 |
4.3 |
13.8 |
14.5 |
10.0 |
Recovery % |
112 % |
101 % |
115 % |
110 % |
96 % |
104 % |
120 % |
106 % |
116 % |
RSDr % |
2.1 % |
3.9 % |
2.4 % |
1.2 % |
2.1 % |
1.6 % |
1.2 % |
1.4 % |
0.9 % |
HorRat (r) |
0.08 |
0.16 |
0.10 |
0.06 |
0.11 |
0.08 |
0.07 |
0.09 |
0.05 |
Table 6 - Repeatability values for aspartame at 3 spiking levels
Aspartame |
White wine (W) |
||||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
W4 |
W5 |
W6 |
W7 |
W8 |
W9 |
Mean μg/L |
34 |
51 |
45 |
237 |
231 |
235 |
981 |
973 |
982 |
Std. Dev. |
7.3 |
4.2 |
6.7 |
27.5 |
7.6 |
10.9 |
29.0 |
18.0 |
23.2 |
Recovery % |
68 % |
101 % |
91 % |
95 % |
92 % |
94 % |
98 % |
97 % |
98 % |
RSDr % |
21.6 % |
8.3 % |
14.7 % |
11.6 % |
3.3 % |
4.6 % |
3.0 % |
1.8 % |
2.4 % |
HorRat (r) |
0.87 |
0.33 |
0.59 |
0.59 |
0.17 |
0.24 |
0.19 |
0.12 |
0.15 |
Aspartame |
Rosé wine (Ro) |
||||||||
Sample |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
Ro4 |
Ro5 |
Ro6 |
Ro7 |
Ro8 |
Ro9 |
Mean μg/L |
38 |
42 |
41 |
200 |
211 |
210 |
833 |
905 |
916 |
Std. Dev. |
3.0 |
2.9 |
4.3 |
6.8 |
5.2 |
5.9 |
20.9 |
34.0 |
22.5 |
Recovery % |
75 % |
85 % |
82 % |
80 % |
84 % |
84 % |
83 % |
90 % |
92 % |
RSDr % |
8.0 % |
6.9 % |
10.6 % |
3.4 % |
2.5 % |
2.8 % |
2.5 % |
3.8 % |
2.5 % |
HorRat (r) |
0.32 |
0.28 |
0.43 |
0.17 |
0.13 |
0.14 |
0.16 |
0.24 |
0.15 |
Aspartame |
Red wine (R) |
||||||||
Sample |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
R4 |
R5 |
R6 |
R7 |
R8 |
R9 |
Mean μg/L |
46 |
51 |
50 |
227 |
254 |
230 |
956 |
1099 |
1013 |
Std. Dev. |
8.6 |
3.2 |
8.1 |
16.9 |
10.4 |
7.3 |
21.8 |
39.0 |
20.2 |
Recovery % |
92 % |
103 % |
100 % |
91 % |
102 % |
92 % |
96 % |
110 % |
101 % |
RSDr % |
18.5 % |
6.3 % |
16.2 % |
7.4 % |
4.1 % |
3.2 % |
2.3 % |
3.5 % |
2.0 % |
HorRat (r) |
0.74 |
0.25 |
0.65 |
0.38 |
0.21 |
0.16 |
0.14 |
0.22 |
0.13 |
Table 7 - Repeatability values for sodium cyclamate at 3 spiking levels
Cyclamate |
White wine (W) |
||||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
W4 |
W5 |
W6 |
W7 |
W8 |
W9 |
Mean μ g/L |
51 |
50 |
50 |
261 |
247 |
246 |
1092 |
1040 |
1045 |
Std. Dev. |
1.0 |
1.4 |
1.4 |
2.8 |
4.2 |
3.5 |
12.2 |
17.7 |
14.4 |
Recovery % |
103 % |
100 % |
101 % |
104 % |
99 % |
99 % |
109 % |
104 % |
105 % |
RSDr % |
1.9 % |
2.9 % |
2.9 % |
1.1 % |
1.7 % |
1.4 % |
1.1 % |
1.7 % |
1.4 % |
HorRat (r) |
0.08 |
0.12 |
0.11 |
0.05 |
0.09 |
0.07 |
0.07 |
0.11 |
0.09 |
Cyclamate |
Rosé wine (Ro) |
||||||||
Sample |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
Ro4 |
Ro5 |
Ro6 |
Ro7 |
Ro8 |
Ro9 |
Mean μg/L |
42 |
42 |
44 |
232 |
228 |
233 |
982 |
992 |
1002 |
Std. Dev. |
1.6 |
1.3 |
0.8 |
2.8 |
4.4 |
4.5 |
14.9 |
6.0 |
12.9 |
Recovery % |
84 % |
85 % |
88 % |
93 % |
91 % |
93 % |
98 % |
99 % |
100 % |
RSDr % |
3.9 % |
3.0 % |
1.7 % |
1.2 % |
2.0 % |
1.9 % |
1.5 % |
0.6 % |
1.3 % |
HorRat (r) |
0.16 |
0.12 |
0.07 |
0.06 |
0.10 |
0.10 |
0.10 |
0.04 |
0.08 |
Cyclamate |
Red wine (R) |
|||||||||||||||||
Sample |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
R4 |
R5 |
R6 |
R7 |
R8 |
R9 |
|||||||||
Mean µg/L |
51 |
55 |
54 |
250 |
265 |
243 |
1069 |
1160 |
1086 |
|||||||||
Std. Dev. |
1.2 |
1.3 |
1.4 |
5.5 |
5.2 |
4.2 |
27.4 |
13.9 |
18.4 |
|||||||||
Recovery % |
103 % |
110 % |
108 % |
100 % |
106 % |
97 % |
107 % |
116 % |
109 % |
|||||||||
RSDr % |
2.4 % |
2.4 % |
2.6 % |
2.2 % |
2.0 % |
1.7 % |
2.6 % |
1.2 % |
1.7 % |
|||||||||
HorRat (r) |
0.10 |
0.10 |
0.10 |
0.11 |
0.10 |
0.09 |
0.16 |
0.08 |
0.11 |
|||||||||
Table 8 - Repeatability values for saccharin at 3 spiking levels
Saccharin |
White wine (W) |
||||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
W4 |
W5 |
W6 |
W7 |
W8 |
W9 |
Mean μg/L |
45 |
45 |
59 |
216 |
214 |
252 |
920 |
909 |
1055 |
Std. Dev. |
1.5 |
1.4 |
1.4 |
5.1 |
5.1 |
3.7 |
21.3 |
23.7 |
21.5 |
Recovery % |
89 % |
91 % |
119 % |
86 % |
86 % |
101 % |
92 % |
91 % |
105 % |
RSDr % |
3.3 % |
3.0 % |
2.4 % |
2.4 % |
2.4 % |
1.5 % |
2.3 % |
2.6 % |
2.0 % |
HorRat (r) |
0.13 |
0.12 |
0.10 |
0.12 |
0.12 |
0.08 |
0.15 |
0.16 |
0.13 |
Saccharin |
Rosé wine (Ro) |
|||||||||||
Sample |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
Ro4 |
Ro5 |
Ro6 |
Ro7 |
Ro8 |
Ro9 |
|||
Mean µg/L |
58 |
56 |
56 |
303 |
276 |
278 |
1263 |
1190 |
1204 |
|||
Std. Dev. |
1.4 |
2.0 |
0.6 |
5.5 |
3.5 |
4.8 |
28.8 |
24.8 |
25.2 |
|||
Recovery % |
116 % |
112 % |
112 % |
121 % |
110 % |
111 % |
126 % |
119 % |
120 % |
|||
RSDr % |
2.4 % |
3.5 % |
1.1 % |
1.8 % |
1.3 % |
1.7 % |
2.3 % |
2.1 % |
2.1 % |
|||
HorRat (r) |
0.10 |
0.14 |
0.04 |
0.09 |
0.07 |
0.09 |
0.14 |
0.13 |
0.13 |
|||
Saccharin |
Red wine (R) |
|||||||||||
Sample |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
R4 |
R5 |
R6 |
R7 |
R8 |
R9 |
|||
Mean μg/L |
47 |
44 |
46 |
224 |
203 |
199 |
955 |
906 |
885 |
|||
Std. Dev. |
1.4 |
0.5 |
1.5 |
4.4 |
2.2 |
2.9 |
20.6 |
20.1 |
25.8 |
|||
Recovery % |
94 % |
88 % |
92 % |
89 % |
81 % |
80 % |
95 % |
91 % |
88 % |
|||
RSDr % |
3.0 % |
1.1 % |
3.2 % |
2.0 % |
1.1 % |
1.5 % |
2.2 % |
2.2 % |
2.9 % |
|||
HorRat (r) |
0.12 |
0.04 |
0.13 |
0.10 |
0.06 |
0.07 |
0.14 |
0.14 |
0.18 |
|||
Table 9 - Repeatability values for stevioside at 3 spiking levels
Stevioside |
White wine (W) |
||||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
W4 |
W5 |
W6 |
W7 |
W8 |
W9 |
Mean μg/L |
41 |
43 |
30 |
262 |
265 |
204 |
1094 |
1116 |
860 |
Std. Dev. |
0.4 |
0.4 |
0.7 |
2.0 |
31.2 |
1.9 |
13.6 |
12.9 |
6.6 |
Recovery % |
83 % |
86 % |
60 % |
105 % |
106 % |
81 % |
109 % |
112 % |
86 % |
RSDr % |
1.0 % |
1.0 % |
2.2 % |
0.8 % |
11.8 % |
0.9 % |
1.2 % |
1.2 % |
0.8 % |
HorRat (r) |
0.04 |
0.04 |
0.09 |
0.04 |
0.60 |
0.05 |
0.08 |
0.07 |
0.05 |
Stevioside |
Rosé wine (Ro) |
||||||||
Sample |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
Ro4 |
Ro5 |
Ro6 |
Ro7 |
Ro8 |
Ro9 |
Mean μg/L |
50 |
39 |
41 |
237 |
254 |
286 |
935 |
1104 |
1109 |
Std. Dev. |
0.8 |
1.3 |
0.9 |
2.6 |
5.3 |
7.1 |
10.5 |
10.2 |
18.3 |
Recovery % |
99 % |
77 % |
81 % |
95 % |
102 % |
114 % |
93 % |
110 % |
111 % |
RSDr % |
1.7 % |
3.4 % |
2.2 % |
1.1 % |
2.1 % |
2.5 % |
1.1 % |
0.9 % |
1.6 % |
HorRat (r) |
0.07 |
0.14 |
0.09 |
0.06 |
0.11 |
0.13 |
0.07 |
0.06 |
0.10 |
Stevioside |
Red wine (R) |
||||||||
Sample |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
R4 |
R5 |
R6 |
R7 |
R8 |
R9 |
Mean μg/L |
60 |
40 |
43 |
262 |
211 |
210 |
1048 |
904 |
921 |
Std. Dev. |
0.9 |
0.7 |
0.4 |
4.0 |
4.0 |
2.6 |
18.0 |
18.4 |
11.9 |
Recovery % |
120 % |
80 % |
86 % |
105 % |
85 % |
84 % |
105 % |
90 % |
92 % |
RSDr % |
1.5 % |
1.8 % |
1.0 % |
1.5 % |
1.9 % |
1.3 % |
1.7 % |
2.0 % |
1.3 % |
HorRat (r) |
0.06 |
0.07 |
0.04 |
0.08 |
0.10 |
0.06 |
0.11 |
0.13 |
0.08 |
Table 10 - Repeatability values for sucralose at 3 spiking levels
Sucralose |
White wine (W) |
|||||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
W4 |
W5 |
W6 |
W7 |
W8 |
W9 |
|
Mean μg/L |
53 |
52 |
53 |
221 |
225 |
223 |
986 |
973 |
1021 |
|
Std. Dev. |
5.3 |
7.8 |
8.1 |
10.8 |
27.5 |
6.5 |
29.8 |
43.9 |
31.5 |
|
Recovery % |
106 % |
103 % |
105 % |
88 % |
90 % |
89 % |
99 % |
97 % |
102 % |
|
RSDr % |
10.0 % |
15.1 % |
15.4 % |
4.9 % |
12.2 % |
2.9 % |
3.0 % |
4.5 % |
3.1 % |
|
HorRat (r) |
0.40 |
0.61 |
0.62 |
0.25 |
0.63 |
0.15 |
0.19 |
0.28 |
0.19 |
|
Sucralose |
Rosé wine (Ro) |
|||||||||
Sample |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
Ro4 |
Ro5 |
Ro6 |
Ro7 |
Ro8 |
Ro9 |
|
Mean µg/L |
35 |
43 |
36 |
215 |
236 |
194 |
944 |
1075 |
905 |
|
Std. Dev. |
4.1 |
2.1 |
2.2 |
7.2 |
7.4 |
7.7 |
21.3 |
27.5 |
19.3 |
|
Recovery % |
70 % |
86 % |
71 % |
86 % |
94 % |
78 % |
94 % |
108 % |
91 % |
|
RSDr % |
11.7 % |
5.0 % |
6.2 % |
3.3 % |
3.1 % |
4.0 % |
2.3 % |
2.6 % |
2.1 % |
|
HorRat (r) |
0.47 |
0.20 |
0.25 |
0.17 |
0.16 |
0.20 |
0.14 |
0.16 |
0.13 |
|
Sucralose |
Red wine (R) |
||||||||
Sample |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
R4 |
R5 |
R6 |
R7 |
R8 |
R9 |
Mean μg/L |
50 |
46 |
48 |
236 |
255 |
228 |
1017 |
1194 |
1041 |
Std. Dev. |
7.7 |
3.1 |
6.8 |
11.5 |
9.2 |
8.4 |
16.9 |
27.5 |
23.0 |
Recovery % |
100 % |
92 % |
96 % |
94 % |
102 % |
91 % |
102 % |
119 % |
104 % |
RSDr % |
15.3 % |
6.9 % |
14.1 % |
4.9 % |
3.6 % |
3.7 % |
1.7 % |
2.3 % |
2.2 % |
HorRat (r) |
0.61 |
0.28 |
0.57 |
0.25 |
0.18 |
0.19 |
0.10 |
0.15 |
0.14 |
Table 11 – Repeatability summary table
Compound |
Recovery |
RSDr % |
HorRat (r) |
Acesulfame |
83 % – 120 % |
0.9 % – 5.0 % |
0.05 – 0.20 |
Aspartame |
68 % – 110 % |
1.8 % – 21.6 % |
0.12 – 0.87 |
Cyclamate |
84 % – 116 % |
0.6 % – 3.9 % |
0.04 – 0.16 |
Saccharin |
80 % – 126 % |
1.1 % – 3.5 % |
0.04 – 0.18 |
Stevioside |
60 % – 112 % |
0.8 % – 11.8 % |
0.04 – 0.60 |
Sucralose |
70 % – 119 % |
1.7 % – 15.4 % |
0.10 – 0.63 |
11.6. Intermediate Precision
Intermediate precision was evaluated by analyzing samples spiked with 50 μg/L, 250 μg/L and 1000 μg/L in different moments spanning throughout several days. The results are presented in the following tables. Count represents the number of points considered for the determination of the mean values and respective standard deviation (Std. Dev.). The recovery percentage, the relative standard deviation (RSD%) and the Horwitz ratio (HorRat) are also displayed for each case.
Table 12 – Intermediate precision values for potassium acesulfame at 3 spiking levels
Acesulfame |
White wine (W) |
Red (R) and Rosé wines (Ro) |
|||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
Count |
12 |
12 |
11 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
Mean µg/L |
46 |
223 |
928 |
54 |
252 |
1089 |
53 |
252 |
1113 |
Std. Dev. |
6.1 |
31.4 |
76.6 |
6.1 |
23.6 |
66.3 |
2.4 |
9.1 |
41.3 |
Recovery % |
91 % |
89 % |
93 % |
108 % |
101 % |
109 % |
106 % |
101 % |
111 % |
RSD% IP |
13.2 % |
14.1 % |
8.2 % |
11.3 % |
9.4 % |
6.1 % |
4.5 % |
3.6 % |
3.7 % |
HorRat |
0.53 |
0.72 |
0.52 |
0.46 |
0.48 |
0.38 |
0.18 |
0.18 |
0.23 |
Table 13 - Intermediate precision values for aspartame at 3 spiking levels
Aspartame |
White wine (W) |
Rosé wine (Ro) |
Red (R) |
||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
Count |
11 |
10 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
12 |
11 |
12 |
12 |
Mean μg/L |
57 |
281 |
1190 |
41 |
202 |
841 |
41 |
222 |
998 |
Std. Dev. |
5.5 |
21.8 |
91.9 |
4.1 |
12.9 |
73.9 |
7.5 |
15.4 |
43.5 |
Recovery % |
114 % |
113 % |
119 % |
82 % |
81 % |
84 % |
83 % |
89 % |
100 % |
RSD % IP |
9.6 % |
7.7 % |
7.7 % |
10.0 % |
6.4 % |
8.8 % |
18.1 % |
6.9 % |
4.4 % |
HorRat |
0.38 |
0.40 |
0.49 |
0.40 |
0.32 |
0.55 |
0.73 |
0.36 |
0.27 |
Table 14 - Intermediate precision values for sodium cyclamate at 3 spiking levels
Cyclamate |
White wine (W) |
Rosé wine (Ro) |
Red (R) |
||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
Count |
10 |
10 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
Mean μg/L |
48 |
237 |
1011 |
40 |
210 |
918 |
49 |
226 |
999 |
Std. Dev. |
5.5 |
27.3 |
134.3 |
2.5 |
20.1 |
70.7 |
1.3 |
7.4 |
26.6 |
Recovery % |
97% |
95% |
101% |
80% |
84% |
92% |
98% |
91% |
100% |
RSD% IP |
11.3% |
11.5% |
13.3% |
6.3% |
9.6% |
7.7% |
2.7% |
3.3% |
2.7% |
HorRat |
0.45 |
0.59 |
0.84 |
0.25 |
0.49 |
0.48 |
0.11 |
0.17 |
0.17 |
Table 15 - Intermediate precision values for saccharin at 3 spiking levels
Saccharin |
White wine (W) |
Red (R) and Rosé wine (Ro) |
|||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
Count |
11 |
10 |
10 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
Mean μg/L |
51 |
241 |
1010 |
56 |
270 |
1166 |
44 |
195 |
857 |
Std. Dev. |
2.6 |
8.4 |
36.8 |
2.8 |
10.7 |
47.6 |
3.0 |
8.3 |
31.7 |
Recovery % |
103% |
96% |
101% |
112% |
108% |
117% |
88% |
78% |
86% |
RSD % IP |
5.0% |
3.5% |
3.6% |
5.1% |
4.0% |
4.1% |
6.9% |
4.3% |
3.7% |
HorRat |
0.20 |
0.18 |
0.23 |
0.20 |
0.20 |
0.26 |
0.28 |
0.22 |
0.23 |
Table 16 - Intermediate precision values for stevioside at 3 spiking levels
Stevioside |
White wine (W) |
Rosé wine (Ro) |
Red (R) |
||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
Count |
11 |
10 |
10 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
Mean μg/L |
35 |
232 |
977 |
31 |
210 |
921 |
41 |
208 |
905 |
Std. Dev. |
6.5 |
45.8 |
184.1 |
8.1 |
45.4 |
184.4 |
3.1 |
22.2 |
84.5 |
Recovery % |
70% |
93% |
98% |
61% |
84% |
92% |
81% |
83% |
91% |
RSD% IP |
18.5% |
19.7% |
18.8% |
26.4% |
21.6% |
20.0% |
7.6% |
10.7% |
9.3% |
HorRat |
0.74 |
1.01 |
1.19 |
1.06 |
1.10 |
1.26 |
0.31 |
0.55 |
0.59 |
Table 17 - Intermediate precision values for sucralose at 3 spiking levels
Sucralose |
White wine (W) |
Red (R) and Rosé wine (Ro) |
|||||||
Sample |
W1 |
W2 |
W3 |
Ro1 |
Ro2 |
Ro3 |
R1 |
R2 |
R3 |
Count |
10 |
11 |
11 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
Mean μg/L |
51 |
197 |
776 |
51 |
295 |
1196 |
42 |
228 |
1069 |
Std. Dev. |
10.4 |
41.6 |
137.5 |
11.9 |
48.7 |
184.5 |
5.3 |
18.0 |
51.3 |
Recovery % |
101% |
79% |
78% |
101% |
118% |
120% |
85% |
91% |
107% |
RSD % IP |
20.5% |
21.1% |
17.7% |
23.5% |
16.5% |
15.4% |
12.5% |
7.9% |
4.8% |
HorRat |
0.82 |
1.08 |
1.12 |
0.94 |
0.84 |
0.97 |
0.50 |
0.40 |
0.30 |
Table 18 - Intermediate precision summary table
Compound |
Recovery |
RSD% |
HorRat |
Acesulfame |
89 % – 111 % |
3.6 % – 14.1 % |
0.18 – 0.72 |
Aspartame |
81 % – 119 % |
4.4 % – 18.1 % |
0.27 – 0.73 |
Cyclamate |
80 % – 101 % |
2.7 % – 13.3 % |
0.11 – 0.84 |
Saccharin |
78 % – 117 % |
3.5 % – 6.9 % |
0.18 – 0.28 |
Stevioside |
61 % – 98 % |
7.6 % – 26.4 % |
0.31 – 1.26 |
Sucralose |
78 % – 120 % |
4.8 % – 23.5 % |
0.30 – 1.12 |
- Bibliography
- EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY, SANTE/11813/2017, “Analytical quality control and method validation procedures for pesticide residues and analysis in food and feed”. Implemented by 01/01/2018
- Horwitz W., Albert R., 2006. The Horwitz Ratio (HorRat): A Useful Index of Method Performance with Respect to Precision. J AOAC Int, 89, 1095-1109
- OIV, 2021. International Code of Oenological Practices. Issue 2021, OIV, Paris.
Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on food additives (Text with EEA relevance), 2008. OJ, L354, 16–33.
Appendix
A1. Quantitation performance for a wine sample spiked with 50 μg/L of each sweetener
Sweetener |
S/N |
Acesulfame K |
789.4 |
Aspartame |
586.5 |
Cyclamate Na |
282.5 |
Saccharin |
24.3 |
Sucralose |
80.5 |
Stevioside |
224.1 |
A2 . Sweeteners identification data - additional transitions given as guidance
Sweetener |
Additional transition in ESI negative. |
Ace sulfame K |
162 > 82 |
Aspartame |
293 > 200 |
Cyclamate Na |
178 > 96 |
Saccharin |
182 > 106 |
Sucralose |
397 > 361 |
Stevioside |
641 > 479 641 > 317 |