Can the design of a gas chromatograph (GC) impact the productivity of your laboratory? The answer is yes, especially when it allows you to work more efficiently. In a previous blog post, I described <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.thermofisher.com/blog/analyteguru/how-modularity-delivers-innovation-in-the-gas-chromatography/">how modularity delivers innovation in the gas chromatography world</a>. It highlighted the benefits to laboratories of the modular concept of the Thermo Scientific TRACE 1300 Series GC.With the introduction of the new Thermo Scientific <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/products/483">TRACE 1600 Series GC</a>, the modular architecture continues to deliver <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAvW8SQEQ0M&amp;pp=ygUKVFJBQ0UgMTYwMA%3D%3D">cost- and time-savings opportunities</a> to users, thanks to a comprehensive choice of self-installable iConnect injector and detector modules. Each module is identified by a serial number for easy tracking in the laboratory and can be qualified as a separate item, so it can be safely interchanged on a GC instrument maintaining compliance with internal quality protocols.An enlightening infographic is available for <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://go.labx.com/4-routes-to-gc-lab-efficiency">downloading</a>, illustrating the four ways to increase laboratory efficiency through the modular concept of the TRACE 1600 Series GC. Don’t miss it.<h3>1. Swap downtime for runtime</h3>High-throughput testing laboratories as well as QA/QC labs need to deliver quality results on time.&nbsp; In a situation where a laboratory needs to quickly solve a contamination issue, for example, or needs to quickly recover a correct instrument behavior, the module replacement allows you to <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://assets.thermofisher.com/TFS-Assets/CMD/brochures/sp-74147-gc-modularity-TRACE1600-sp74147-en.pdf">restore running conditions in less than 30 minutes</a>, including cooling and powering down the instrument, disconnecting the column from the original injector module, removing the module, and plugging in the new one, re-connecting the column, and powering up the GC again. The same operation on a conventional GC design would require a service call and a day of instrument downtime. In a situation where the laboratory has a spare module available, no troubleshooting actions are needed and no service call, reducing instrument downtime to half an hour —all with the limited investment of a spare module.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_4_Ways_to_Increase_Your_GC_Lab_s_Efficiency_2_ec40ea6c18.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific: 4 Ways to Increase Your GC Lab’s Efficiency" srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_4_Ways_to_Increase_Your_GC_Lab_s_Efficiency_2_ec40ea6c18.jpg 234w," sizes="100vw" width="719" height="479"><h3>2. Optimize running costs</h3>A way to increase your laboratory’s efficiency is to make better use of the available resources and optimize running costs by reducing underutilized instrumentation in the lab. The modular concept of unlimited GC configurations and the ability to share modules on any Thermo Scientific TRACE 1300 and 1600 Series GC, multiplies the analytical possibilities. With the increased flexibility gained from modular capabilities, an instrument no longer needs to remain idle because it’s not configured to run particular sample types. More efficient use of your GC instruments optimizes costs and accelerates the return on investment.&nbsp;&nbsp;<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_4_Ways_to_Increase_Your_GC_Lab_s_Efficiency_3_9934c72df9.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific: 4 Ways to Increase Your GC Lab’s Efficiency." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_4_Ways_to_Increase_Your_GC_Lab_s_Efficiency_3_9934c72df9.jpg 156w," sizes="100vw" width="617" height="617"><h3>3. Maximize your investment</h3>Start-up, non-routine laboratories may initially face limited budgets, so investments need to be prioritized. Short-terms requirements are clear but future requirements remain uncertain; the same GC may be required for different applications. So which configuration should be considered to balance the initial investment with growing analytical requirements?With conventional GC, saving money today may mean higher costs in the future.&nbsp; Through modularity, you can invest based on current requirements and benefit from additional modules when they are necessary, with no additional fees. &nbsp;Modularity opens up to high flexibility to quickly adapt the GC system to current and future needs and easily address evolving priorities.<h3>4. Free up bench space</h3>With a width of only 44 cm (17.3 inch), the compact size of the TRACE 1600 series GC allows your lab to optimize valuable bench space, allowing you to position more instruments in a limited space. Additionally, having the capability to quickly install and uninstall injectors and detectors and having spare iConnect modules on hand for fast replacement, eliminates the need for maintaining a duplicate GC back-up instrument, removing associated cost of operation and further optimizing valuable bench space.The modular design of your next GC system will revolutionize the way you work in your laboratory.<blockquote><section>Dr. Daniela CavagninoDr. Daniela Cavagnino is global Product Marketing Manager for GC and Autosampler/front-end solutions at Thermo Fisher Scientific. She received her Master's Degree in Chemistry at the University of Milan, Italy. She started her career in gas chromatography spending several years in R&amp;D laboratories working on GC technology innovation. She then conveyed her technical background into product management and marketing management roles with more than 20 years' experience in promoting GC/GC-MS technology and applications in several different market segments. During her career, she has participated as author and co-author in technical publications and actively operated as lecturer at international conferences.</section></blockquote>

4 Ways to Increase Your GC Lab’s Efficiency

The expansion of hop cultivation in Brazil has increased interest in understanding its chemical characteristics. This study compared three Brazilian hop cultivars (Comet, Cascade, and Sorachi Ace) with imported hops using GC×GC–MS and chemometric tools, focusing on essential oils and α- and β-acids.Results showed that Brazilian hops exhibited chemical profiles similar to imported hops of the same cultivar, clustering primarily by cultivar. While imported hops contained higher levels of myrcene and β-pinene, Brazilian hops showed elevated concentrations of several sesquiterpenes, highlighting their promising potential for the brewing industry.<blockquote><h4>The original article</h4><h4><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsfoodscitech.5c00718">Comparative Assessment of the Chemical Composition of Locally Cultivated and Imported Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) in Brazil Using Chemometrics</a></h4>Letícia Fagundes Pereira, Stanislau Bogusz Júnior, Leandro Wang Hantao, Gabriela Aguiar Campolina, Amanda Francine Minetto, Andre Luis Carvalho Souza, Lucas Barboza de Mori, Maria das Graças Cardoso, Cleiton Antônio Nunes, and Marcio Pozzobon Pedroso*ACS Food Sci. Technol. 2025<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acsfoodscitech.5c00718">https://doi.org/10.1021/acsfoodscitech.5c00718</a><h6>licensed under <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC-BY 4.0</a></h6></blockquote>Selected sections from the article follow. Formats and hyperlinks were adapted from the original.Hops, responsible for imparting bitterness, flavor, and characteristic aroma to beer, have gained increased prominence in recent years, driven by changes in consumer preferences and the growing appreciation for beverages with differentiated sensory attributes. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(1)</a> In this context, hops have come to be used in much larger quantities than in traditional brewing methods, aiming to produce beers with more intense flavors and aromas. This increase in usage, along with the adoption of irrigation methods, genetic improvements, and the development of more efficient pesticides and fertilizers, has contributed to the global expansion of hop cultivation. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(2−4)</a>Hops are originally cultivated in temperate regions, with the United States and Germany being the largest producers, accounting for approximately 77% of global production. As cultivation has expanded, hop-growing regions have spread to various parts of the world, including Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and Brazil. In Brazil, the growing number of breweries has driven higher hop consumption. As one of the world’s largest beer producers, the country relies heavily on imports, which reached about 57 million USD in 2020. This high demand, coupled with the need to lower production costs, has fostered the development of domestic hop cultivation. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(5,6)</a>The first hop harvests in Brazil date back to 2017, and the crop has been expanding nationwide. In 2023, hop cultivation areas increased by 113% compared to 2022, totaling approximately 112 ha, with a focus on the southern and southeastern regions, because in some parts of the country, the shorter natural photoperiod requires the use of supplemental lighting. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(7,8)</a> This new scenario demands studies that evaluate everything from the genetic conditions of hop seedlings to the characteristics of hops used in brewing.The quality and characteristics of hops can be influenced by several factors. Among the most relevant are the degree of ripeness at harvest, processing and pelletization methods, moisture control, and storage conditions. Additionally, chemical properties such as the content and composition of essential oils, as well as levels of α-acids and β-acids, are highly relevant to the aroma and bitterness attributes. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(9)</a> These characteristics are directly related to hop quality and the attributes they confer to beer, with an intrinsic relationship between chemical composition and sensory properties. Thus, the use of techniques to determine chemical characteristics is a valuable parameter for evaluating hop quality, highlighting the importance of understanding their chemical composition. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(10−12)</a>Resins make up about 10 to 30% of hop dry matter and contain α- and β-acids that contribute to beer bitterness. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(13,14)</a> On the other hand, essential oil imparts the characteristic hop aroma and flavor to beer and is composed mainly of hydrocarbons (50 to 80%) and oxygenated compounds (up to 30%). <a href="javascript:void(0);">(15−17)</a>Considering the importance of hop chemical composition, hop quality can be comparatively assessed. The quality of Cascade hops grown in Sardinia was evaluated in comparison with hops cultivated in the United States and New Zealand. The levels of α- and β-acids and essential oil composition were assessed, and compatible proportions of these acids and oil compounds were found across the different samples. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(18)</a> Hops from different cultivars cultivated organically and conventionally in Brazil were also compared in terms of essential oil composition and α- and β-acid levels. Minor chemical composition variations were observed among the different cultivars and within the same cultivar across the two cultivation methods. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(19)</a> The essential oil composition of Cascade hops cultivated in Brazil was compared with samples of the same cultivar grown in the United States. The essential oils of the Brazilian samples showed lower levels of myrcene, humulene, and caryophyllene, and higher levels of trans-β-farnesene, β-selinene, and α-selinene than those from the U.S. samples. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(20)</a> In another study, cones of Cascade and Chinook cultivars grown in Brazil were compared with commercial pellets of the same cultivars imported from the United States, considering the content and composition of essential oils. The results showed that 40% of the Brazilian samples presented essential oil content within the expected range, and regarding composition, the hops were mainly differentiated by cultivar type, with no distinction between Brazilian-grown hops and commercial pellets. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(21)</a>Additionally, the adaptation of some hop cultivars to the northeastern region of Brazil has been evaluated. When comparing bitter acids, xanthohumol, and essential oils from hop flowers to commercial hop pellets, a similar profile was observed among samples from different growing locations, despite being in different hop forms. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(22)</a> Comparisons between hops grown in Brazil and imported cultivars have also been conducted using extracts obtained with dichloromethane <a href="javascript:void(0);">(23)</a> and through the volatile profile of the samples. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(24)</a> In both cases, differences were observed between Brazilian and imported samples, with compounds identified as being distinct among hops grown in different regions.These findings demonstrate that hops of the same cultivar may exhibit different chemical characteristics depending on the cultivation region, resulting in site-specific properties and generating a regional identity. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(25)</a> However, considering the expansion of hop cultivation in Brazil, there are still few studies involving Brazilian hops and the evaluation of their chemical characteristics. Furthermore, there is a lack of studies assessing bitter acids and essential oils obtained through official methods, and comparing different hop cultivars cultivated and marketed in Brazil with the same imported cultivars, which are currently the most commonly used in beer production. Therefore, this study investigates the chemical characteristics of three hop cultivars (Cascade, Comet, and Sorachi Ace) produced and marketed in Brazil, comparing them with imported hops of the same cultivars.<h4>2. Material and Methods</h4><h5>2.4. GC × GC–MS and GC × GC–FID Analyses</h5>To perform chromatographic analyses, essential oil samples were diluted to obtain 5% (v/v) solutions in hexane and were analyzed in triplicate. A GC × GC system was a <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/library?mainauthorItems=3&amp;search=TRACE+1300">TRACE 1300 chromatograph</a> equipped with an FID and a transmission quadrupole mass spectrometer (QMS) (Thermo Fisher Scientific-Waltham, MA, USA). Samples were introduced using the <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/products/63">TriPlus RSH autosampler</a>, into which 1 μL of sample was injected. The injector was operated at 250 °C with a split ratio of 1:10. The oven temperature program started at 60 °C, which was maintained for 3 min, and then the temperature was increased at 3 °C min–1 to 210 °C. Helium was used as the carrier gas at a constant flow rate of 0.5 mL min–1. The auxiliary gas was maintained at 20 mL min–1. Flow modulation was performed using an INSIGHT modulator (SepSolve Analytical–Waterloo, Canada). The modulation period was 5 s. The columns used in the first and second dimensions were Rxi-5 ms of 30 m × 0.25 mm (0.25 μm) and Rxi-17 ms of 5 m × 0.25 mm (0.25 μm) columns, respectively. Further analytical details are provided in our previous papers. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(27,28)</a> The FID temperature was 250 °C. For the mass spectrometer, the transfer line and ion source temperatures were 260 and 250 °C, respectively. Electron ionization (EI) was used to acquire the mass spectra in the m/z range of 50–350.For data acquisition, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/1758">Xcalibur software</a> (Thermo Fisher Scientific–Waltham, MA, USA) was used, and the data were processed with GC Image software (GCI, TX, USA), allowing for the integration of the chromatographic peaks to obtain the peak areas. To identify the essential oil compounds, the mass spectra of each compound were compared with those contained in the NIST database, with a minimum similarity of 80% between the spectra required for compound identification. Furthermore, by injecting a homologous series of n-alkanes from C8 to C20, the linear retention indices (LTPRI) of the compounds were calculated using the van den Dool and Kratz equation. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(29)</a> The calculated LTPRI were then compared with those reported in the literature (NIST and Adams), with tolerated deviations of up to ±10 between the theoretical and experimental values. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(30)</a><h4>3. Results and Discussion</h4><h5>3.2. Essential Oils and GC × GC Analysis</h5>In addition to α- and β-acids, essential oils are another parameter of great importance for hop quality, and their composition should be evaluated. Thus, the results of the essential oils of hops are displayed in <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsfoodscitech.5c00718#fig3">Figure 3</a>, as well as the reference values for each cultivar reported by imported brands. The data were also subjected to ANOVA and Tukey’s test and the results are presented in <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/suppl/10.1021/acsfoodscitech.5c00718/suppl_file/fs5c00718_si_001.docx">Table S2</a>.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/ACS_Food_Sci_Technol_2025_Figure_3_Essential_oil_content_of_hop_samples_3895b58b6f.jpg" alt="ACS Food Sci. Technol. 2025: Figure 3. Essential oil content of hop samples." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_ACS_Food_Sci_Technol_2025_Figure_3_Essential_oil_content_of_hop_samples_3895b58b6f.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1365" height="626">When comparing the obtained levels of essential oils with those expected according to the range reported by reference brands, <a href="javascript:void(0);">(33)</a> Brazilian hops Comet cmB1, Sorachi Ace sB2 and sB3 presented values below expectations, while imported hops presented levels compatible. The I1 brand packaging specified that the yields considered the average of the last harvests, and variations may occur. Lower essential oil contents in Brazilian hops could be due harvest variation, but this information was not available to the consumer. These variations may occur, for example, as a consequence of changes in climatic conditions, which have been reported to influence the composition of bitter acids and essential oils in hops cultivated within the same region across different years. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(35)</a> In addition, lower values can be also associated with factors related to the processing steps of Brazilian hops. After harvesting, several factors contribute to the reduction of the amount of essential oil in hops, such as the drying and pelletizing processes and storage conditions, especially when there is no control of temperature, since high temperatures contribute to the volatilization and loss of essential oil. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(11,17)</a> The lower oil content of Brazilian hops may also be associated with plant age, as plants with less than three years of cultivation may not have reached sufficient maturity to produce the expected levels of essential oil. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(21)</a> However, this information was not available for the samples analyzed as they were currently available in the market, and the fact that hop cultivation in the country is recent suggests that some of them may have been obtained from plants younger than three years, resulting in pellets with essential oil content below the expected values.Finally, when comparing the essential oil content for each cultivar, it can be observed that the Brazilian Cascade hops presented levels equivalent to their imported counterparts and to values reported in the literature. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(18,20,36)</a> When applying ANOVA and the Tukey test (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/suppl/10.1021/acsfoodscitech.5c00718/suppl_file/fs5c00718_si_001.docx">Table S2</a>), it is noted that the two Brazilian samples are equivalent to the imported sample cI2, while the imported sample cI1, which presented a lower essential oil content, differs significantly from the samples cI2 and cB1. For the Comet cultivar, only the B2 brand was comparable to the imported samples, resenting essential oil content equivalent to that of the imported sample cmI2. For Sorachi Ace, none of the Brazilian samples matched the essential oil content of the imported ones and all samples presented essential oil contents that differed significantly from each other. Given that Brazilian hops had α-acid levels compatible with the imported cultivars but some exhibited lower essential oil content, it was essential to evaluate the composition of these oils to determine if the chemical profile of Brazilian hops was comparable to that of imported hops. Additionally, it was important to investigate whether there was a trend toward the production of specific compounds that might differentiate Brazilian hops from imported ones.<h5>3.3. Chemometrics</h5>To gain a deeper understanding of these differences, an exploratory data analysis was conducted using unsupervised HCA and heat map construction. This analysis aimed to identify clusters among the samples. The HCA shown in <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsfoodscitech.5c00718#fig4">Figure 4</a> reveals clustering based on hop cultivar, without distinctions related to sample origin. Additionally, it was possible to identify the most prominent variables for each cultivar, with a consistent pattern observed in samples of the same cultivar, regardless of their origin. Another notable finding is the clustering of both imported and Brazilian samples, observed in the I2 and B2 brand samples of the Comet cultivar, as well as in the I1 and B1 brand samples of the Cascade cultivar. For the Sorachi Ace cultivar, it is observed that the sB2 sample is grouped with the imported samples sI1 and sI2, indicating a greater similarity between their characteristics than the sB3 sample. Similarly, for the Comet cultivar, the B2 brand sample also grouped with the imported ones, which may be evidence of the greater proximity of the samples of this brand with the imported hops. It is also possible to observe the clustering between the Sorachi Ace and Cascade samples, suggesting similarities between these two cultivars. Both have an aroma profile in which the sweet fruity and citrus characteristics stand out, which should contribute to this clustering. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(32)</a><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/ACS_Food_Sci_Technol_2025_Figure_4_Heat_map_of_the_triplicate_of_hop_essential_oil_of_cascade_c_comet_cm_and_sorachi_ace_s_samples_and_HCA_of_samples_and_compounds_9f655428c7.jpg" alt="ACS Food Sci. Technol. 2025: Figure 4. Heat map of the triplicate of hop essential oil of cascade (c), comet (cm) and sorachi ace (s) samples, and HCA of samples and compounds." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_ACS_Food_Sci_Technol_2025_Figure_4_Heat_map_of_the_triplicate_of_hop_essential_oil_of_cascade_c_comet_cm_and_sorachi_ace_s_samples_and_HCA_of_samples_and_compounds_9f655428c7.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1741" height="862">In view of the results presented, there are similarities between hops grown in Brazil and their imported counterparts, which demonstrate great potential for Brazilian production. Nevertheless, there is a need for greater attention to the postharvest processing steps to ensure the integrity of essential oils and mitigate losses. Regarding the aromatic characteristics of hops, PLS-DA analysis revealed some differences for those grown in Brazil, with a higher concentration of some essential oil compounds, such as selinene isomers, than in imported hops, which may indicate specific characteristics of hops grown in Brazil. However, this conclusion cannot be definitively drawn due to the limited number of hop samples, batches and cultivars evaluated. Therefore, future analyses require a larger number of samples, including those from different batches and harvests, to confirm the evidence observed in this study. Furthermore, future work would also benefit from a more comprehensive evaluation of the chemical and sensory characteristics of hops, along with a sensory analysis of beers produced with these hops, to determine whether these compounds contribute unique attributes to Brazilian hops. Nevertheless, this study represents an important initial assessment of the quality of Brazilian hops and provides a basis for more comprehensive future investigations.

Comparative Assessment of the Chemical Composition of Locally Cultivated and Imported Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) in Brazil Using Chemometrics

Volatile Organic Compound Profiling of Commercial Poi Products in Fresh and Aged States Using Comprehensive Two-Dimensional Gas Chromatography

Hexane is one of the most widely used extraction solvents in the global food system. Derived from petroleum, it plays a central role in efficiently extracting vegetable oils from crops such as soy, sunflower, rapeseed, and corn. The same process produces protein-rich oilseed meals that are widely used in animal feed. From a technological perspective, hexane is effective, inexpensive, and well understood. From a toxicological and regulatory perspective, however, it is increasingly under scrutiny.In the European Union, “technical hexane” is authorized as a food extraction solvent under Directive 2009/32/EC. Its last full safety assessment by the EU’s Scientific Committee on Food dates back to 1996. In 2024, the <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/sp.efsa.2024.EN-9001">European Food Safety Authority</a> (EFSA) concluded that this assessment is no longer sufficient and formally called for a re-evaluation. The reasons are scientific rather than sensational: technical hexane is not a single pure compound, its impurities are poorly specified, human absorption of n-hexane is well documented, and exposure—particularly for infants and young children—may have been underestimated under current regulatory assumptions.At the same time, public attention has intensified. Investigations commissioned by <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.greenpeace.fr/scandale-sanitaire-lhexane-un-solvant-toxique-dans-vos-assiettes/">Greenpeace</a> reported detectable hexane residues in a wide range of everyday foods, including vegetable oils, butter, milk, infant formula, and poultry. While the measured levels generally fall within current legal limits, these <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.theexamination.org/articles/processing-agent-hexane-found-in-everyday-foods-renewing-concerns-about-toxic-chemical">findings</a> highlight a critical gap between regulatory compliance and public expectations of food safety and transparency. Processing aids like hexane are not listed on labels, even though trace residues may remain in final products.From a scientific standpoint, the debate raises several important questions. How robust are existing toxicological datasets for chronic, low-level exposure? Do current analytical methods sufficiently characterize impurities and residues across complex food matrices? And should efficiency-driven processing choices be reconsidered when safer—though potentially less economical—alternatives exist?EFSA’s conclusion is cautious but clear: there is no immediate acute health concern, but the available evidence is insufficient to confidently assess long-term risks. As new toxicological data emerge and analytical capabilities improve, hexane has become a case study in how legacy food technologies can outpace the science and regulation designed to govern them. The outcome of the ongoing re-evaluation may shape not only future solvent use, but also broader expectations around transparency, precaution, and trust in the food system.<h3>Global inconsistencies in safety standards</h3>Hexane regulation varies widely across jurisdictions. European limits are among the most conservative, yet they rely heavily on industry-generated data. In other regions, allowable residue levels are significantly higher, and in some cases, hexane use in food and feed is largely unrestricted. This variability complicates global risk assessment and raises questions about harmonization and scientific consistency in food safety governance.<h3>Beyond compliance: Rethinking food processing choices</h3>The ongoing re-evaluation of hexane illustrates a broader challenge in food science: technologies adopted for efficiency and cost-effectiveness may persist long after their safety assumptions become outdated. The issue is not whether hexane poses an immediate public health crisis—EFSA has explicitly stated that it does not—but whether current scientific evidence is sufficient to justify its continued widespread use without further scrutiny.Advances in analytical chemistry now allow more sensitive detection of residues and impurities, while modern toxicology places greater emphasis on long-term, low-dose effects. At the same time, alternative extraction technologies, though less efficient, are becoming more viable as sustainability and safety considerations gain weight.<h3>What are the best methods for detection?</h3>Detection options<ul><li>HS-GC-FID: robust, sensitive for hydrocarbons, widely used for routine control (often aligned with “official” oil methods such as AOCS workflows referenced in the literature).</li><li>HS-GC-MS: adds spectral ID confirmation (useful when there are interferences or you want stronger identity evidence).</li></ul>Quantification<ul><li>Prefer internal standard calibration (often a similar volatile hydrocarbon not expected in the sample) and matrix-matched calibration where feasible.</li></ul><h3>Conclusions</h3>EFSA concluded that there is a need to re-evaluate the safety of technical hexane used as an extraction solvent in the production of foodstuffs and food ingredients. A key aspect of this re-evaluation concerns the accurate characterization and quantification of hexane residues and related hydrocarbons, where <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/products?category=1&amp;manufacturerItems=3">gas chromatography (GC)</a> plays a central role. Robust GC-based analytical methods are essential to reliably determine residual solvent levels, distinguish between different hexane isomers and impurities, and ensure compliance with regulatory limits.Advances in GC methodology, including improved separation, sensitivity, and detection capabilities, can significantly reduce analytical uncertainty and support more precise exposure assessments. High-quality GC data are therefore critical for refining dietary exposure estimates, identifying potential sources of variability, and supporting a science-based risk assessment. Strengthening analytical controls through validated GC methods will be an important component of addressing EFSA’s safety concerns and ensuring continued consumer protection.Visit us on&nbsp;<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/72003132/admin/dashboard/">LinkedIn:</a>&nbsp;#hexaneSafety, #GC-FID #GC-MS<section><blockquote><h5>Petra Gerhards</h5>Petra Gerhards, Dipl-Ing, is Regional Marketing Manager of GC and GC-MS for EMEA at Thermo Fisher Scientific. She has more than 29 years of experience in the fields of GC-MS, SPE and LC-MS. Since joining the regional team she has contributed to workflow solutions combining vials and closures with SPE solutions, GC-MS and LC-MS. She works with KOL's on data for regional specific marketing campaigns, organizes in-house seminars and works on customer specific solutions. Her main expertise is in the field of doping and drugs-of-abuse analysis.</blockquote></section>

Hexane in Food: When Processing Chemistry Meets Public Health

<h3>Introduction</h3>MOSH and MOAH analysis remains one of the most challenging and closely scrutinized areas in food and packaging safety testing. With evolving regulations, updated standards such as ISO 20122:2024, and increasing expectations for data quality and throughput, laboratories are under constant pressure to deliver accurate, reproducible, and compliant results.To help laboratories navigate this complexity, Thermo Fisher Scientific and SampleQ hosted an <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/webinar/5817">Ask the Experts</a> session focused entirely on MOSH/MOAH analysis using LC-GC-FID and GC×GC-FID/MS workflows. Analytical specialists addressed real-world questions from scientists and lab managers—covering sample preparation, quality control, internal standards, data processing, and system selection.This blog brings together the most important expert insights and practical guidance from that session, providing a valuable reference for anyone responsible for MOSH/MOAH testing.<h3>Why MOSH/MOAH analysis is so challenging</h3>Mineral Oil Saturated Hydrocarbons (MOSH) and Mineral Oil Aromatic Hydrocarbons (MOAH) are complex mixtures rather than single compounds. Their broad carbon number distribution, co-elution with natural matrix components, and sensitivity to sample preparation steps make analysis technically demanding.At the same time, regulatory scrutiny continues to increase, particularly for MOAH due to potential carcinogenicity. Laboratories must therefore balance:<ul><li>Regulatory compliance</li><li>Robust quantification</li><li>Reliable identification of markers</li><li>High sample throughput</li></ul>The Ask the Experts session focused on how modern, integrated workflows can help labs meet all these demands.<h3>Are MOSH/MOAH sample preparation steps matrix dependent?</h3>One of the most common questions from laboratories is whether MOSH/MOAH sample preparation can be standardized across all matrices.The expert answer: it depends on the matrix—and validation is essential.For fats and oils, certain steps are always required:<ul><li>Saponification</li><li>Epoxidation</li></ul>However, alumina (Alox) clean-up is matrix dependent. Practical comparisons show that:<ul><li>Some matrices benefit from Alox clean-up</li><li>Others may suffer from analyte loss if Alox is applied unnecessarily</li></ul>For non-fat matrices, sample preparation must be carefully selected, and method validation is critical to ensure accuracy and recovery.Key takeaway: There is no universal sample prep recipe for MOSH/MOAH. Laboratories must adapt workflows to their matrices while staying aligned with ISO 20122 guidance.<h3>Managing multiple sample prep options in a busy lab</h3>Many labs analyze a wide variety of matrices daily. Running different sample prep workflows manually can be time-consuming and error-prone.Experts highlighted how software-driven workflows help solve this challenge:<ul><li>Multiple sample prep methods can run in the same sequence</li><li>Optional steps (such as Alox clean-up) can be toggled per sample</li><li>Overlapping methods maximize instrument utilization</li><li>Analysts only need to weigh samples and load reagents—automation handles the rest</li></ul>E-workflows simplify method selection and ensure the correct prep is applied every time, reducing training requirements and minimizing human error.For lab managers, this translates into:<ul><li>Higher throughput</li><li>More consistent results</li><li>Less hands-on time for skilled analysts</li></ul><h3>Which internal standard is best for MOAH quantification?</h3>Internal standard selection is critical for reliable MOAH quantification. The experts addressed this directly, referencing extensive comparative studies.Three candidates were evaluated:<ul><li>1-Methylnaphthalene (1-MN)</li><li>2-Methylnaphthalene (2-MN)</li><li>Tert-butylbenzene (TBB)</li></ul>Based on repeatability, reproducibility, recovery, and accuracy, TBB emerged as the clear winner and is now specified in ISO 20122.<h3>Why TBB?</h3><ul><li>More stable behavior across sample prep steps</li><li>Better overall performance in routine analysis</li><li>Improved consistency between laboratories</li></ul>For labs updating or validating MOSH/MOAH methods, aligning internal standards with ISO recommendations is strongly advised.<h3>How should ISO criteria for internal standard recovery be interpreted?</h3>A frequent point of confusion is how to interpret internal standard recovery limits defined in ISO methods.The experts clarified an important distinction:<ul><li>Recovery criteria apply to direct injections of internal standards</li><li>All components should fall within 90–110% of the quantification standard</li><li>Perylene is allowed a slightly broader range (80–100%)</li></ul>In real samples, internal standard recoveries can vary due to legitimate chemical effects:<ul><li>Epoxidation may reduce perylene</li><li>Alox clean-up can reduce cholestane</li><li>Saponification may affect methylnaphthalenes</li><li>Some hydrocarbons may be naturally present in the matrix</li></ul>Bottom line: Deviations in sample recoveries do not automatically indicate method failure. Understanding the chemistry behind each step is key to correct interpretation.<h3>Do you still need LC-GC-FID if you have GC×GC-MS?</h3>As GC×GC-MS becomes more accessible, many labs ask whether it can replace LC-GC-FID entirely.According to current EURL guidance:<ul><li>GC×GC is primarily intended for identification, not quantification</li><li>Quantification using GC×GC-FID is technically possible but not yet recommended</li><li>LC-GC-FID remains the reference technique for MOSH/MOAH quantification</li></ul>GC×GC-MS plays a complementary role by:<ul><li>Confirming the presence of aromatic markers and MOSH markers like hopanes, steranes and particular naphthenes</li><li>Differentiating mineral oil components from biogenic interferences</li><li>Supporting risk assessment and regulatory discussions</li></ul>For now, the most robust approach is a combined workflow:<ul><li>LC-GC-FID for quantification</li><li>GC×GC-FID/MS for confirmation and identification</li></ul><h3>Using specific ion masses for marker identification in GC×GC</h3>GC×GC-MS offers powerful identification capabilities when used correctly.Experts highlighted that:<ul><li>The EURL provides recommended ion masses for key MOAH subgroups</li><li>Selective ion chromatograms (SICs) can be generated for markers such as:<ul><li>Naphthalenes</li><li>Hopanes</li><li>Steranes</li><li>DIPNs</li></ul></li></ul>Using multiple SIC views alongside total ion chromatograms (TICs) allows:<ul><li>Faster confirmation of markers</li><li>Clear differentiation from interferences</li><li>More confident reporting of MOAH presence</li></ul>This approach significantly improves interpretability compared to relying on TICs alone.<h3>How is GC×GC-MS data processed efficiently?</h3>One concern with GC×GC-MS is the perceived complexity of data handling.The experts demonstrated a streamlined workflow:<ul><li>Instrument control and acquisition remain in <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/products/76">Chromeleon S/W</a></li><li>Raw data are automatically exported for GC×GC processing</li><li>Templates are applied to identify known marker regions</li><li>Results are organized by vial, run, and detector channel</li></ul>This structured approach ensures:<ul><li>Consistent marker identification</li><li>Reduced manual data handling</li><li>Faster reporting despite large data volumes</li></ul>For labs new to GC×GC, standardized templates and automated processing significantly reduce the learning curve.<h3>Comparing FID and MS chromatograms: why it matters</h3>Accurate comparison between FID and MS data is critical when combining quantification and identification.Thanks to synchronized acquisition:<ul><li>FID and MS chromatograms are recorded simultaneously</li><li>First-dimension retention times are identical</li><li>Second-dimension alignment is highly accurate</li></ul>This enables:<ul><li>Direct correlation of quantified FID regions with identified MS markers</li><li>Greater confidence in results</li><li>Stronger defensibility during audits and regulatory review</li></ul><h3>Why use a single quadrupole MS instead of TOF-MS?</h3>Time-of-flight MS is often associated with GC×GC due to its high scan speed. However, experts explained why <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/products?category=19&amp;manufacturerItems=3">single quadrupole MS </a>can be a practical alternative.By optimizing scan speed:<ul><li>Single quadrupole MS can capture sufficient data points</li><li>Complexity and cost are reduced</li><li>Compliance with EURL guidance is maintained</li></ul>For many routine MOSH/MOAH applications, this offers an excellent balance between performance and operational efficiency.<h3>Is offline sample preparation better for GC×GC?</h3>There is no universal answer—workflow design depends on laboratory needs.Integrated systems offer:<ul><li>Minimal user intervention</li><li>Reduced risk of contamination</li><li>Streamlined operation</li></ul>Separate systems allow:<ul><li>Parallel operation</li><li>Higher overall throughput in some labs</li></ul>The best choice depends on sample volume, staffing, and analytical priorities.<h3>Final thoughts: Building a future-proof MOSH/MOAH workflow</h3>MOSH/MOAH analysis is evolving rapidly, but some principles remain constant:<ul><li>Robust quantification still relies on LC-GC-FID</li><li>GC×GC-FID/MS adds critical confirmation power</li><li>Automation and software workflows reduce complexity</li><li>Alignment with ISO and EURL guidance ensures defensibility</li></ul>By combining expert knowledge with integrated technology, laboratories can confidently meet today’s regulatory requirements—while preparing for what comes next.If you’re looking to optimize or future-proof your MOSH/MOAH analysis, the insights from this Ask the Experts session provide a strong foundation for success.<ul><li>Watch the free webinar on demand: <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/webinar/5817">Talk to an expert about our barrier-free analysis of MOSH/MOAH</a></li><li>Visit us on&nbsp;<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/72003132/admin/dashboard/">LinkedIn:</a>&nbsp;#automation #MOSH/MOAH</li></ul><blockquote><h4>Petra Gerhards</h4>Petra Gerhards, Dipl-Ing, is Regional Marketing Manager of GC and GC-MS for EMEA at Thermo Fisher Scientific. She has more than 29 years of experience in the fields of GC-MS, SPE and LC-MS. Since joining the regional team she has contributed to workflow solutions combining vials and closures with SPE solutions, GC-MS and LC-MS. She works with KOL's on data for regional specific marketing campaigns, organizes in-house seminars and works on customer specific solutions. Her main expertise is in the field of doping and drugs-of-abuse analysis.</blockquote>

Ask the Experts: Practical Answers to Today’s Biggest MOSH/MOAH Analysis Questions

Article

Product

Events

Webinars

Application

Academy

Video

Poster

Scientists

Plastics

Environment

Food

Water

Health

Presentation

Scientific article

Interview

Toxicology

Popularization

Science and research

Software

Covid-19

Career

Laboratories

Various

Zaměření

Type of News

Focus

A unique company dedicated to serving science helping our customers drive productivity and accelerate results. Through our premier brands – Thermo Scientific, Applied Biosystems, Invitrogen, Fisher Scientific and Unity Lab Services.

Thermo Fisher Scientific

Everything from the world of analytical chemistry in one place. We connect people in solving their problems. At Labrulez you will find all the necessary information easily, quickly and clearly. Stop searching and start finding.

Ask the Experts: Practical Answers to Today’s Biggest MOSH/MOAH Analysis Questions

Hexane in Food: When Processing Chemistry Meets Public Health

Volatile Organic Compound Profiling of Commercial Poi Products in Fresh and Aged States Using Comprehensive Two-Dimensional Gas Chromatography

Comparative Assessment of the Chemical Composition of Locally Cultivated and Imported Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) in Brazil Using Chemometrics

4 Ways to Increase Your GC Lab’s Efficiency

Upcoming events

LECO Training Course Pegasus HRT+ / HRT+ 4D

Thermal Analysis Online Trainings 2026 - TGA-GC/MS

Thermal Analysis Online Trainings 2026 - TGA-FTIR

Webinars

Measure smarter, spend less – NIR spectroscopy for polymer analysis

Precision Lab Solutions for High-End Optics and Coatings

Agilent Solutions for Natural Gas Analysis in Coal-to-Gas Acceleration