Volatile Profiling in Wine Using Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry with Thermal Desorption

Significance of the Topic

Profiling volatile compounds in wine is essential for understanding its aroma complexity, ensuring quality control, and differentiating products based on varietal, geographic origin and processing methods. A detailed volatile fingerprint supports sensory evaluation, authentication and targeted process optimization.

Objectives and Study Overview

This study aimed to develop and optimize a robust analytical workflow combining solid phase extraction–thermal desorption (SPE-TD) headspace sampling with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS) for rapid, comprehensive volatile profiling of Indian wines. The method was applied to 15 wine samples, enabling qualitative screening of 225 compounds and classification of wines into distinct groups.

Used Instrumentation

• Thermal Desorption System: Markes UNITY TM 2 series TD with ULTRA TM 2 autosampler
• GC Column: HP-INNOWAX, 60 m × 0.25 mm, 0.25 µm film
• Carrier Gas Flow: 1.3 mL/min; Oven Program: 40 °C (1 min) → 5 °C/min to 250 °C (24 min)
• MS Detection: Electron ionization at –70 eV; scan range m/z 30–300; source 230 °C; quadrupole 150 °C
• Thermal Desorption Parameters: Desorb 20 min at 180 °C; cold trap –20 °C; transfer line 200 °C; trap desorb to 275 °C

Methodology and Instrumentation

Sample preparation involved adding 2 g NaCl and a 3-octanol internal standard to 8 mL wine in a 20 mL headspace vial. A preconditioned SPE-TD cartridge and magnetic stir bar were inserted, and the vial was stirred at 80 °C for 40 min to adsorb volatiles. The cartridge was transferred to a TD tube for automated desorption.
Key optimization parameters included:

• Desorption time: 20 min
• Cold trap temperature: –20 °C
• High trap temperature: 250 °C
• Wine volume: 6 mL
• Soaking time: 40 min
• Salt addition: 2 g NaCl
• Extraction temperature: 80 °C

Main Results and Discussion

The optimized protocol yielded a 67 min GC–MS run detecting 225 volatiles encompassing esters (67), alcohols (61), aldehydes (19), terpenes (19), organic acids (18), ketones (14), ethers (7), phenols (5), lactones (4), pyrazines (3) and others (8). Targeted deconvolution in MassHunter software reduced processing time to ~10 min per sample versus >8 h manual integration, resolving coelutions and lowering false positives. Statistical evaluation differentiated 15 Indian wines into three aroma-based clusters, with Cinsaut and Gewürztraminer forming unique profiles.

Benefits and Practical Applications

• Enhanced compound coverage, including low-abundance markers
• Rapid throughput suitable for batch QC
• Cost-effective compared to conventional SPME or LLE approaches
• Reliable varietal and origin discrimination
• Scalable to routine sensory labs and industrial QC

Future Trends and Opportunities

Advances may include expansion of targeted libraries, integration with multivariate chemometrics and machine learning for predictive authentication, miniaturized on-line TD sampling, and coupling with high-resolution MS for absolute quantification and deeper aroma mapping.

Conclusion

This work demonstrates a thoroughly optimized SPE-TD GC–MS method enabling rapid, high-coverage volatile profiling of wines. The workflow facilitates efficient identification and differentiation of complex aroma signatures in diverse wine samples and offers a practical tool for quality control, product development and authentication.

Reference

• Martiä MP, et al. J Agric Food Chem. 2003;51:7861.
• Esti M, Tamborra P. Anal Chim Acta. 2006;563:173.
• Gonzalez-Viiias MA, et al. Food Chem. 1996;56:399.
• Piñeiro Z, Palma M, Barroso CG. Anal Chim Acta. 2004;513:209.
• Ortega-Heras M, González-SanJosé ML, Beltrán S. Anal Chim Acta. 2002;458:85.
• Zalacain A, et al. Talanta. 2007;71:1610.
• Sánchez-Palomo E, Díaz-Maroto MC, Pérez-Coello MS. Talanta. 2005;66:1152.
• Mamede MEO, Pastore GM. Food Chem. 2006;96:586.