DOCSLIB.ORG

Redacted for Privacy Abstract Approved: Mina R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Redacted for Privacy Abstract Approved: Mina R AN ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION OF I-Mm Tsai for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Food Science and Technology, presented on March 28, 2006. Title: Understanding Aroma Impacts of Four Important Volatile Sulfur Compounds in Oregon Pinot noir Wines. Redacted for privacy Abstract approved: Mina R. McDaniel Sensory properties of four important volatile sulfur compounds, dimethyl disulfide (DMDS), diethyl disulfide (DEDS), methanethiol (MeSH) and ethanethiol (EtSH), were determined in base Oregon Pinot noir wine in order to understand their impacts on wine aroma. Detection thresholds of these four compounds in base wine were determined first. All four compoundswere found to have very low detection thresholds (in ppb) in base wine. Group thresholds of DMDS ranged from 11.18 to 23.57 ppb, those of DEDS ranged from 1.45 to 2.16 ppb, those of MeSH ranged from 1.72 to 1.82 ppb and those of EtSH ranged from 0.19 to 0.23 ppb. Subjects' abilities to detect these compounds in Pinot noir winewere very different. Aroma characteristics of the four compoundsas well as their interactions in base wine were profiled via descriptive analysis. Aroma of DMDS in base wine was mainly described as old cabbage and rotten cabbage. DEDS aroma in wine was perceived as skunky, sweaty, and tire-like. Aroma of MeSH in wine was associated with stale vegetables, animal, rubbery, and slop. EtSHaroma in base wine was mainly described as durian, garlic, staleeggs, and natural gas. Odor suppression was observed when twoor four sulfur compounds were mixed together in base wine. Perceiving off-odors in base winewas driven by MeSH and EtSH when both MeSH and DMDSor both EtSH and DEDS were present. EtSH affected wine aromas more when both MeSH and EtSHwere present in base wine; however, MeSH governed wine off-odorsmore than EtSH under the influence of subthreshold levels of two disulfides. Mercaptanscan significantly affect aroma quality of Oregon Pinot noir wine atvery low concentrations (in ppb level); they have a stronger effect than disulfides. Regarding the impacts ofbase wine aromas caused by the four sulfur compounds, base wine lost its fruity and floralcharacter and increased overall intensity, overall stinky,nose burn and sulfur-related odors while concentrations of the four volatile sulfur compounds inbase wine increased. Aroma changes of fruity, floral andnose burn can be used by winemakers to diagnose the early presence of volatile sulfur compounds in OregonPinot noir wine during winemaking and wine storage. ©Copyright by I-Mm Tsai March 28, 2006 All Rights Reserved Understanding Aroma Impacts of Four Important Volatile Sulfur Compounds in Oregon Pinot noir Wines by I-Mm Tsai A DISSERTATION submitted to Oregon State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Presented March 28, 2006 Commencement June 2006 Doctor of Philosophy dissertation of I-Mm Tsai presented on March 28. 2006. APPROVED: Redacted for privacy Major Professor, representing Food Science & Technology Redacted for privacy Head of the Department of Food Science & Technology Redacted for privacy Dean of the/GadtIate School I understand that my dissertation will become a part of the permanent collection of Oregon State University libraries. My signature below authorizes release of my dissertation to any reader upon request. Redacted for privacy I-Mm Tsai, Author ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my major professor, Dr. Mina McDaniel for supportingand giving me guidance on my research andmy life in the U.S.; thank Barney Watson for financially supportingmy research and making me enthusiastic about table wines; thank my minor professor, Dr. Virginia Lesser for adviceon statistics and the committee members, Dr. Charles Boyer, Dr. Ulrich Orth, andDr. Yanyun Zhao. Many thanks are given to Dr. Anne Plotto and Dr. Kannapon Lopetcharat for helping my thesis. Thank Dr. Jim Kennedy and Jeff Clawson for helpingme make Pinot noir wine and Dr. Michael Qian for lettingme use his lab facilities to prepare wine samples and run chemical analyses. Thank allmy panelists, Fan, Fang, Fiorella, Helen, Ian, James, Ping, Rebecca, Seth, Thao, Ying, andPedro for letting me abuse their noses for an entire year. Thank the Northwest Center for Small Fruit Research for funding this project. I also want to thank my lab mates: Cindy Lederer, Astrid Kurnianta,and Renata De Marchi. Thank all FST faculties, staffs and students for helpingand teaching me, especially lola Williams and Christina Hull. Thank Chen-YiChen, who always gives me love and support. Specially thank tomy best friend in Corvallis, Yu Fang. She always helps and supportsme in my research and my life.Fianlly, thank my parents, Wei-Gang Tsai and Shu-Chuan Chen, and allmy relatives in Taiwan for supporting my life and education. CONTRIBUTION OF AUTHORS Yu Fang helped analyze sulfide contents of base Pinot noir wine via GC-PFPD. Dr. Kannapon Lopetcharat was involved with the initial ideas and data analyseson determining group thresholds of the four volatile sulfur compounds basedon beta- binomial model. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................. I 2. LITERATURE REVIEW...................................................................................... 4 2.1. VOLATILE SULFUR COMPOUNDS iN WINE......................................... 4 2.1.1. Origin of volatile sulfur compounds in wine........................................... 5 2.1.1.1. Elemental sulfur and sulfur-containing pesticides.........................6 2.1.1.2. Sulfateandsuffite........................................................................... 7 2.1.1.3. Organic sulfur compounds............................................................. 9 2.1.2. Common volatile sulfur compounds found in wine............................... 10 2.1.2.1. Hydrogen sulfide (H25)................................................................ 10 2.1.2.2. Mercaptans................................................................................... 14 2.1.2.3. Polymercaptans............................................................................ 16 2.1.2.4. Thioesters and miscellaneous volatile sulfur compounds............19 2.2. PINOT NOIR WINE AND ITS AROMA AND FLAVOR CHARACTERISTICS................................................................................. 21 2.3. THRESHOLDS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION....................... 25 2.4. DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS....................................................................... 31 2.4.1. Flavor Profile......................................................................................... 36 2.4.2. Texture Profile....................................................................................... 37 2.4.3. Quantitative Descriptive Analysis (QDA®)........................................... 39 2.4.4.SpectrumTMDescriptive Analysis.......................................................... 40 2.4.5. Free-choice Profiling.............................................................................. 41 3. DETECTION THRESHOLD DETERMINATION OFFOUR IMPORTANT VOLATILE SULFUR COMPOUNDS IN OREGON PINOT NO1RWINE.....48 3.1. ABSTRACT................................................................................................. 49 3.2. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................... 50 3.3. MATERIALS AND METHODS................................................................. 55 3.3.1. Winemaking........................................................................................... 55 3.3.2. Spiking volatile sulfur compounds into base Pinot noir wine...............56 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 3.3.3. Threshold determination procedures...................................................... 57 3.3.4. Data analysis.......................................................................................... 60 3.3.4.1. Graphic (irobit) method for individual threshold determination.61 3.3.4.2. Logistic method for individual threshold determination..............61 3.3.4.3. Binomial and beta-binomial models forgroup threshold determination............................................................................... 63 3.4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.................................................................. 64 3.4.1. Aroma descriptions regarding difference between baseand spiked wine during warm-up............................................................................. 64 3.4.2. Individual thresholds.............................................................................. 65 3.4.2.1. Result comparison between graphic (probit) and logistic models......................................................................................... 66 3.4.2.2. Threshold results and sensitivity differenceamong subjects ....... 67 3.4.3. Group thresholds.................................................................................... 71 3.4.3.1. Estimating probability of correctresponses ................................. 71 3.4.3.2. Group threshold determination by the logistic method................73 3.4.4. Implication of threshold results to Oregon Pinot noir wine...................73 3.5. CONCLUSION............................................................................................ 75 3.6. LITERATURE CITED................................................................................ 92 4. PROFILiNG AROMA CHARACTERISTICS OF FOURIMPORTANT VOLATILE SULFUR COMPOUNDS
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hydrocarbon Processing Overview
    Hydrocarbon Processing Overview Hydrocarbon Processing – The Solutions Start Here Full Spectrum Product Line Other support comes from Praxair R&D, where teams of Today’s hydrocarbon processing industries (HPI) requires scientists are dedicated to the development of specialty high precision measurement, uniform stability, specialty gas products and services. mixes, and reference standards. Praxair’s Spectrum Reliable Production and Distribution products offer a wide range of certified mixes, industry Praxair possesses multiple ISO 9001:2000 certified plants reference standards, and high purity organics. The pro- with 5 specialty gas plants and North America’s largest gas duction of natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, engine production facility working to provide the highest quality fuels, and ethane are analyzed to meet process feed and products, product availability, and meeting on time delivery salable product specifications. Spectrum gases and liquid requirements. With over 600 US locations, our distribution mixes are formulated to certifiable references and to meet network accompanied by our ability to supply custom standards for your low sulfur fuels and natural gases, vapor delivery solutions for packaged and bulk products allows pressure, LPG standards, and HVOC requirements. Praxair Praxair to offer packaged and bulk options that may help possesses an extensive portfolio of assayed chemicals to you increase your productivity. customize your requirements. A Complete Range of Gas Delivery Equipment Centers of Excellence Praxair’s offers a wide range of essential equipment to meet To effectively service North America, Praxair has three the demands of today’s hydrocarbon processing facility centers of excellence dedicated for hydrocarbons. These laboratories and process feed monitoring instrumentation centers are located in Geismar, Louisiana; Edmonton, gas delivery solutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Notes
    Technical notes New tools to manage common taint problems Wine producers can proactively manage potential taint issues through a new set of tools available from the AWRI Analytical Service. In recent years, several taint problems have occurred in Australia resulting in serious financial consequences for the wine producers involved. The AWRI provides assistance in resolving these issues and we continue to develop services that enable winemakers and suppliers to proactively reduce the risk of wine contamination. The implementation of preventative measures and controls can minimise the development of taints. A broad suite of analytical services tailored for QC testing for the presence of taints in winemaking additives, closures and oak products as well as taint assessment of juices and wines is available through the Analytical Service. Recently, we have also developed a new sensory training tool to help winemakers recognise the most common taints. Minimising risk Early identification of the potential sources of contamination is critical. Testing of additives and juices/wines at critical control points proactively detects and eliminates any taints before they develop into a problem. Just like taking out insurance it comes with a small price tag compared to the risk of losing large volumes of wines due to serious taint problems. Also, in today’s highly competitive market, the purchase of just one slightly tainted bottle of wine can be enough to influence a consumer to seek an alternative brand or label. So, it is crucial to have the ability to monitor and prevent taint and, if necessary, treat wines to prevent further tainting. Analytical services to prevent and control taint problems This article provides detailed information on three examples of commercial taint services developed by the AWRI Analytical Service in collaboration with staff at the AWRI and our stakeholders.
    [Show full text]
  • High-Temperature Unimolecular Decomposition Pathways for Thiophene Angayle K
    Article pubs.acs.org/JPCA Modeling Oil Shale Pyrolysis: High-Temperature Unimolecular Decomposition Pathways for Thiophene AnGayle K. Vasiliou,*,† Hui Hu,‡ Thomas W. Cowell,† Jared C. Whitman,† Jessica Porterfield,∥,§ and Carol A. Parish‡ † Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Middlebury College, Middlebury, Vermont 05753, United States ‡ Department of Chemistry, Gottwald Center for the Sciences, University of Richmond, Richmond, Virginia 23713, United States § Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, United States ABSTRACT: The thermal decomposition mechanism of thiophene has been investigated both experimentally and theoretically. Thermal decomposition experiments were done using a 1 mm × 3 cm pulsed silicon carbide microtubular Δ → reactor, C4H4S+ Products. Unlike previous studies these experiments were able to identify the initial thiophene decomposition products. Thiophene was entrained in either Ar, Ne, or He carrier gas, passed through a heated (300−1700 K) SiC microtubular reactor (roughly ≤100 μs residence time), and exited into a vacuum chamber. The resultant molecular beam was probed by photoionization mass spec- troscopy and IR spectroscopy. The pyrolysis mechanisms of thiophene were also investigated with the CBS-QB3 method using UB3LYP/6-311++G(2d,p) optimized geometries. In particular, these electronic structure methods were used to explore pathways for the formation of elemental sulfur as well as for fi the formation of H2S and 1,3-butadiyne. Thiophene was found to undergo unimolecular decomposition by ve pathways: C4H4S → − − (1) S C CH2 + HCCH, (2) CS + HCCCH3, (3) HCS + HCCCH2, (4) H2S + HCC CCH, and (5) S + HCC CH fi CH2. The experimental and theoretical ndings are in excellent agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • Dielectric Constant Chart
    Dielectric Constants of Common Materials DIELECTRIC MATERIALS DEG. F CONSTANT ABS RESIN, LUMP 2.4-4.1 ABS RESIN, PELLET 1.5-2.5 ACENAPHTHENE 70 3 ACETAL 70 3.6 ACETAL BROMIDE 16.5 ACETAL DOXIME 68 3.4 ACETALDEHYDE 41 21.8 ACETAMIDE 68 4 ACETAMIDE 180 59 ACETAMIDE 41 ACETANILIDE 71 2.9 ACETIC ACID 68 6.2 ACETIC ACID (36 DEGREES F) 36 4.1 ACETIC ANHYDRIDE 66 21 ACETONE 77 20.7 ACETONE 127 17.7 ACETONE 32 1.0159 ACETONITRILE 70 37.5 ACETOPHENONE 75 17.3 ACETOXIME 24 3 ACETYL ACETONE 68 23.1 ACETYL BROMIDE 68 16.5 ACETYL CHLORIDE 68 15.8 ACETYLE ACETONE 68 25 ACETYLENE 32 1.0217 ACETYLMETHYL HEXYL KETONE 66 27.9 ACRYLIC RESIN 2.7 - 4.5 ACTEAL 21 3.6 ACTETAMIDE 4 AIR 1 AIR (DRY) 68 1.000536 ALCOHOL, INDUSTRIAL 16-31 ALKYD RESIN 3.5-5 ALLYL ALCOHOL 58 22 ALLYL BROMIDE 66 7 ALLYL CHLORIDE 68 8.2 ALLYL IODIDE 66 6.1 ALLYL ISOTHIOCYANATE 64 17.2 ALLYL RESIN (CAST) 3.6 - 4.5 ALUMINA 9.3-11.5 ALUMINA 4.5 ALUMINA CHINA 3.1-3.9 ALUMINUM BROMIDE 212 3.4 ALUMINUM FLUORIDE 2.2 ALUMINUM HYDROXIDE 2.2 ALUMINUM OLEATE 68 2.4 1 Dielectric Constants of Common Materials DIELECTRIC MATERIALS DEG. F CONSTANT ALUMINUM PHOSPHATE 6 ALUMINUM POWDER 1.6-1.8 AMBER 2.8-2.9 AMINOALKYD RESIN 3.9-4.2 AMMONIA -74 25 AMMONIA -30 22 AMMONIA 40 18.9 AMMONIA 69 16.5 AMMONIA (GAS?) 32 1.0072 AMMONIUM BROMIDE 7.2 AMMONIUM CHLORIDE 7 AMYL ACETATE 68 5 AMYL ALCOHOL -180 35.5 AMYL ALCOHOL 68 15.8 AMYL ALCOHOL 140 11.2 AMYL BENZOATE 68 5.1 AMYL BROMIDE 50 6.3 AMYL CHLORIDE 52 6.6 AMYL ETHER 60 3.1 AMYL FORMATE 66 5.7 AMYL IODIDE 62 6.9 AMYL NITRATE 62 9.1 AMYL THIOCYANATE 68 17.4 AMYLAMINE 72 4.6 AMYLENE 70 2 AMYLENE BROMIDE 58 5.6 AMYLENETETRARARBOXYLATE 66 4.4 AMYLMERCAPTAN 68 4.7 ANILINE 32 7.8 ANILINE 68 7.3 ANILINE 212 5.5 ANILINE FORMALDEHYDE RESIN 3.5 - 3.6 ANILINE RESIN 3.4-3.8 ANISALDEHYDE 68 15.8 ANISALDOXINE 145 9.2 ANISOLE 68 4.3 ANITMONY TRICHLORIDE 5.3 ANTIMONY PENTACHLORIDE 68 3.2 ANTIMONY TRIBROMIDE 212 20.9 ANTIMONY TRICHLORIDE 166 33 ANTIMONY TRICHLORIDE 5.3 ANTIMONY TRICODIDE 347 13.9 APATITE 7.4 2 Dielectric Constants of Common Materials DIELECTRIC MATERIALS DEG.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Patent Office Patented Jan
    3,075,024 United States Patent Office Patented Jan. 22, 1963 2 The thioethers which are effective are the dialkyl sul 3,075,024 fides having alkyl radicals containing from 1 to 5 carbon SELECTIVE HYDROGENATION OF ACETYLENE atoms as well as cyclic thioethers having up to 5 carbon N ETHYLENE atoms in the ring. Illustrative examples of the thioethers Ludo K. Frevel, Midland, and Leonard J. Kressley, Sagi which may be used are dimethyl sulfide, diethyl sulfide, Raw, Mich., assignors to The Dow Chemical Company, ethyl butyl sulfide, dibutyl sulfide and diamyl sulfide. Midland, Mich., a corporation of Delaware Thiophene, tetramethylene sulfide and pentamethylene No Drawing. Filed Aug. 31, 1959, Ser. No. 836,892 sulfide are illustrative examples of the cyclic thioethers 12 Claims. (C. 260-677) which are effective. Under controlled conditions, it is possible to form the This invention relates to selective hydrogenation of 0. thioethers in situ. When a sulfur-containing compound acetylene in the presence of ethylene. It pertains espe such as hydrogen sulfide and carbonyl sulfide in a hydro cially to an improvement in hydrogenation of a mixture carbon mixture is subjected to a palladium catalyst at comprising acetylene using a palladium catalyst whereby temperatures below 110° C., the sulfur-containing com the hydrogenation of the ethylene is inhibited by the pound is converted to a thioether. Thus, using a temper mixture of a thioether prior to contacting the mixture 5 ature below 110° C. and a hydrocarbon stream contain with the catalyst. ing from about 10 to not more than 100 parts per million Ethylene is commonly produced by the pyrolysis of of hydrogen sulfide or carbonyl sulfide, it is possible to hydrocarbonaceous materials.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Ethanol on the Adsorption of Volatile Sulfur Compounds on Solid
    molecules Article Effect of Ethanol on the Adsorption of Volatile Sulfur Compounds on Solid Phase Micro-Extraction Fiber Coatings and the Implication for Analysis in Wine Peter M. Davis 1 and Michael C. Qian 1,2,* 1 Department of Food Science & Technology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA; [email protected] 2 Oregon Wine Research Institute, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +(541)-737-9114; Fax: +(541)-737-1877 Academic Editor: Eugenio Aprea Received: 9 August 2019; Accepted: 17 September 2019; Published: 18 September 2019 Abstract: Complications in the analysis of volatile sulfur compounds (VSC) in wine using solid-phase microextraction (SPME) arise from sample variability. Constituents of the wine matrix, including ethanol, affect the volatility and adsorption of sulfur volatiles on SPME fiber coatings (Carboxen- polydimethylsiloxane(PDMS); DVB-Carboxen-PDMS and DVB-PDMS), which can impact sensitivity and accuracy. Here, several common wine sulfur volatiles, including hydrogen sulfide (H2S), methanethiol (MeSH), dimethyl sulfide (DMS), dimethyl disulfide (DMDS), dimethyl trisulfide (DMTS), diethyl disulfide (DEDS), methyl thioacetate (MeSOAc), and ethyl thioacetate (EtSOAc) are analyzed, using SPME followed by gas chromatography (GC), using a system equipped with a pulsed-flame photometric detection (PFPD) system, at various ethanol concentrations in a synthetic wine matrix. Ethyl methyl sulfide (EMS), diethyl sulfide (DES), methyl isopropyl sulfide (MIS), ethyl isopropyl sulfide (EIS), and diisopropyl disulfide (DIDS) are evaluated as internal standards. The absorption of volatile compounds on the SPME fiber is greatly affected by ethanol. All compounds exhibit a stark decrease in detectability with the addition of ethanol, especially between 0.0 and 0.5% v/v.
    [Show full text]
  • Reference Table Chemical Names February 10, 2006 10:27:50
    Reference Table Chemical Names February 10, 2006 10:27:50 Name Alias Type Alias Name (3-bromopropyl)-benzene CAS NUMBER 637-59-2 EPA REFERENCE ID (EPA ONLY) 65862 EPA SYSTEMATIC NAME Benzene, (3-bromopropyl)- STORET PARM CODE 81514 -- BROMPROP BENZENE TOT UG/L (Dichloromethyl)benzene CAS NUMBER 98-87-3 EPA REFERENCE ID (EPA ONLY) 18341 EPA SYSTEMATIC NAME Benzene, (dichloromethyl)- STORET PARM CODE 77982 -- DICLPHYL METHANE UG/L STORET PARM CODE 78560 -- DI(CLPH) METHANE UG/KG STORET PARM CODE 78567 -- DICLMETH BENZENE UG/KG (E,E)-farnesol CAS NUMBER 106-28-5 1,1'-oxybis[3-chloropropane] CAS NUMBER 629-36-7 EPA REFERENCE ID (EPA ONLY) 64733 EPA SYSTEMATIC NAME Propane, 1,1'-oxybis[3-chloro- STORET PARM CODE 77584 -- 3CLP ETR TOTAL UG/L 1,1,1-Tris(chloromethyl) ethane CAS NUMBER 3922-27-8 1,1-Dichloroethylene CAS NUMBER 75-35-4 EPA REFERENCE ID (EPA ONLY) 5538 EPA SYSTEMATIC NAME Ethene, 1,1-dichloro- STORET PARM CODE 30082 -- 11DICLRE SOIL,REC MG/KG STORET PARM CODE 34501 -- 11DICHLO ROETHYLE TOTWUG/L STORET PARM CODE 34502 -- 11DICHLO ROETHYLE DISSUG/L STORET PARM CODE 34504 -- 11DCETEN SEDUG/KG DRY WGT STORET PARM CODE 34505 -- 11DCETEN TISMG/KG WET WGT STORET PARM CODE 78375 -- 11DICLEE SEDIMENT WETMG/KG STORET PARM CODE 79125 -- 11DICLEE FISH TIS DRYMG/KG Page 1 of 511 Reference Table Chemical Names February 10, 2006 10:27:50 Name Alias Type Alias Name STORET PARM CODE 79505 -- 1,1DICL ETHYLENE WASMG/KG 1,1-Difluoroethane CAS NUMBER 75-37-6 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzodioxin (1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HCDD) CAS NUMBER 35822-46-9 EPA REFERENCE
    [Show full text]
  • Low-Level Analysis of Sulfur Compounds in Beer by Purge and Trap
    Low-Level Analysis of Sulfur Compounds in Beer by Purge and Trap Technical Overview Introduction Experimental Low levels of sulfur compounds in beer are known Each beer sample was poured into an amber to have drastic effects on flavor and aroma. Levels 40-mL vial. To reduce foaming of the beer, 0.1 to as low as 0.1 ng/mL for compounds such as thiols 1 mL of Dow Chemical Defoamer 1520 (diluted can affect flavor and are indicators of variations in 1:5 with water) was added to the beer samples the brewing process. This makes it essential for the and blanks. To bind metals present in the beer, modern brewing industry to detect and monitor 0.15 grams of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, sulfur compounds in beer. In the past, the detection disodium salt dihydrate, 99+% (EDTA) was added of such low levels of sulfur compounds was limited to each vial. The EDTA showed no measurable by the reactivity of the sulfur compounds with improvement in the response of the analytes; nickel tubing and stainless steel fittings within the however, it was used to prolong the useful life of analytical equipment. This made it difficult to the ceramic tubes inside the detector. The recover analytes at low levels. samples were placed in the 70-position vial tray of the Tekmar AQUATek 70. The samples were The quantitative analysis of low-level volatile sulfur spiked automatically by the AQUATek 70 with compounds in beer is fully automated with the 2 µL of the internal standard, isopropyl sulfide Tekmar AQUATek 70 and 3100 Sample Concentra- (200,000 ng/mL) and were transferred to the 3100 tor.
    [Show full text]
  • Gypsum Drywall Impact on Odor Production at Landfills: Science and Control Strategies
    EPA Region 5 Records Ctr. 222393 GYPSUM DRYWALL IMPACT ON ODOR PRODUCTION AT LANDFILLS: SCIENCE AND CONTROL STRATEGIES December 2000 (Updated January 2002) Timothy G. Townsend, Principal Investigator Paul Chadik, Co-Principal Investigator Gabriel Bitton, Co-Principal Investigator Matthew Booth, Co-Principal Investigator Sue Lee, Graduate Research Assistant Kenton Yang, Graduate Research Assistant State University System of Florida FLORIDA CENTER FOR SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT 2207 NW 13 Street, Suite D Gainesville, FL 32609 Report #00-09 Gypsum Drywall Impact on Odor Production at Landfills: Science and Control Strategies Timothy G. Townsend, Principal Investigator Paul Chadik, Co-Principal Investigator Gabriel Bitton, Co-Principal Investigator Matthew Booth, Co-Principal Investigator Sue Lee, Graduate Research Assistant Kenton Yang, Graduate Research Assistant Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611-6450 (352) 392-0846 December 2000 (Updated January 2002) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The investigators would like to thank the following students for assisting with the research: Jinkun Song, Thabet Tolyamat, Cristine Plaza, and Brad Allen. Special thanks are extended to the Technical Advisory Group members for all their assistance and support throughout the research. A special thanks goes to James Bradner, Robert Butera and William Krumbholz of FDEP for their assistance. We would also like to thank all the C&D facilities for their cooperation during the field sampling. The authors acknowledge
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Quantification of Flavor-Active Sulfur Compounds in Beer
    Rapid Quantification of Flavor-Active Sulfur Compounds in Beer A. W. Dercksen, I. Meijering, and B. Axcell, The South African Breweries, P.O. Box 782178, Sandton 2146, Republic of South Africa ABSTRACT active sulfur compounds in beer, on beer quality has been widely studied and documented (1,2,4,6,8). However, non-DMS sulfury Sulfury notes that did not correlate with measured dimethyl sulfide flavors often are present in some beers (12,17). The development concentrations were identified during organoleptic panel assessments of of a rapid and accurate method to measure flavor-active sulfur beer. This initiated the development of a method by which these com- pounds could be detected, identified, and quantified. An in-bottle purge- compounds beyond DMS would contribute to the understanding and-trap sampling technique was successfully coupled to a capillary gas of the role that these compounds play in beer taste and flavor. chromatograph with a sulfur chemiluminescence detector. Analyses of Leppanen et al (7) reported an adsorption method for the beer then generated sulfur compound profiles that correlated with the concentration of volatile sulfur compounds from beer on Chromo- sulfury notes detected by the panelists. This method should be a valuable sorb 101 or 105 (Manville, Denver, CO). After thermal desorption, quality control tool for flavor-active sulfur compound profile measurement the compounds were separated directly on a chromatographic and for subsequent control of unwanted high concentrations of these column using a dual flame photometric detector. A similar purge- compounds. and-trap desorb technique was used by Peppard (13), who used Porapak Q (Waters Associates, Milford, MA) as the adsorbent The advancement of gas chromatographic equipment has with a rapid heating and thermal focusing technique.
    [Show full text]
  • Gases Measured by the BGA244
    SRS Tech Note ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Gases measured by the BGA244 The BGA244 Binary Gas Analyzer can measure the ratio of gases in a two gas (binary) mixture. It does this by measuring the speed of sound in the gas and then calculating the ratio that would give that speed of sound. These calculations require over 40 different parameters to accurately characterize the behavior of each gas. The BGA244 Factory Gas Table contains this data for about 500 different gases. These include nearly all of the industrial gases, plus most hydrocarbons, refrigerants, specialty gases and semiconductor processing gases. In addition, there are hundreds of less commonly used gases. This large list of gases allows the BGA244 to make measurements on tens of thousands of different mixtures. Unlike most other measurement solutions, no customization or local span calibration is required for any gas combination. The Factory Gas Table is contained within the BGA244’s internal memory. Gases can be easily selected or changed at any time. This can be done directly with the BGA244’s touch screen LCD, with the provided BGAMon software or over any of the three computer interfaces. In the rare case that a gas isn’t contained in the Factory Gas Table, the BGA244 supports user entered gases. This allows for a nearly unlimited number of gases that can be measured. See the BGA244 Manual for details on selecting gases from the Factory Gas Table or entering user gases. The complete BGA244 Factory Gas Table is listed starting on the following page. Gases are listed by order of increasing molecular weight.
    [Show full text]
  • VOC Ionization Potentials
    Appendix : Ionization Potentials Appendix : Ionization Potentials Chemical Name IP (eV) Chemical Name Bromochloromethane 10.77 IP (eV) Bromoform 10.48 A Butane 10.63 2-Amino pyridine 8 Butyl mercaptan 9.15 Acetaldehyde 10.21 cis-2-Butene 9.13 Acetamide 9.77 m-Bromotoluene 8.81 Acetic acid 10.69 n-Butyl acetate 10.01 Acetic anhydride 10 n-Butyl alcohol 10.04 Acetone 9.69 n-Butyl amine 8.71 Acetonitrile 12.2 n-Butyl benzene 8.69 Acetophenone 9.27 n-Butyl formate 10.5 Acetyl bromide 10.55 n-Butyraldehyde 9.86 Acetyl chloride 11.02 n-Butyric acid 10.16 Acetylene 11.41 n-Butyronitrile 11.67 Acrolein 10.1 o-Bromotoluene 8.79 Acrylamide 9.5 p-Bromotoluene 8.67 Acrylonitrile 10.91 p-tert-Butyltoluene 8.28 Allyl alcohol 9.67 s-Butyl amine 8.7 Allyl chloride 9.9 s-Butyl benzene 8.68 *Ammonia 10.2 sec-Butyl acetate 9.91 Aniline 7.7 t-Butyl amine 8.64 Anisidine 7.44 t-Butyl benzene 8.68 Anisole 8.22 trans-2-Butene 9.13 Arsine 9.89 C B 1-Chloro-2-methylpropane 10.66 1,3-Butadiene (butadiene) 9.07 1-Chloro-3-fluorobenzene 9.21 1-Bromo-2-chloroethane 10.63 1-Chlorobutane 10.67 1-Bromo-2-methylpropane 10.09 1-Chloropropane 10.82 1-Bromo-4-fluorobenzene 8.99 2-Chloro-2-methylpropane 10.61 1-Bromobutane 10.13 2-Chlorobutane 10.65 1-Bromopentane 10.1 2-Chloropropane 10.78 1-Bromopropane 10.18 2-Chlorothiophene 8.68 1-Bromopropene 9.3 3-Chloropropene 10.04 1-Butanethiol 9.14 Camphor 8.76 1-Butene 9.58 Carbon dioxide 13.79 1-Butyne 10.18 Carbon disulfide 10.07 2,3-Butadione 9.23 Carbon monoxide 14.01 2-Bromo-2-methylpropane 9.89 Carbon tetrachloride 11.47
    [Show full text]