本平台为互联网非涉密平台,严禁处理、传输国家秘密或工作秘密

朱砂烟叶和普通烟叶香气成分的HS-SPME-GC/MS对比分析和感官差异

Comparative analysis of aroma components of cinnabar and common tobacco leaves by HS-SPME-GC/MS and their sensory differences

  • 摘要: 为考察朱砂烟叶和普通烟叶香气成分的差异及其对卷烟烟气感官质量的影响,通过优化前处理和仪器条件,采用顶空-固相微萃取-气相色谱-质谱联用(HS-SPME-GC/MS)法分析了朱砂烟叶和普通烟叶样品,并对两种烟叶进行了感官评价。结果表明:①优化确定的实验条件为0.5 g烟叶样品,70℃下用灰色萃取头萃取20 min,解吸2 min后进行GC/MS分析。②2种烟叶样品中共检出82种香气成分,包括醇类15种、酯类11种、酚类3种、醛类9种、酮类20种、酸类7种、烃类8种、其他9种。朱砂烟叶和普通烟叶香气成分中相对质量分数最高的分别为植物醇和烟碱。普通烟叶香气成分中烟碱的相对质量分数远远高于朱砂烟叶。③2种烟叶共有成分71种,香茅醇、异戊酸叶醇酯、马索亚内酯、甲基环戊烯醇酮、R-柠檬烯等11种成分仅在朱砂烟叶中检出。④除烟碱外,朱砂烟叶中醇类、酯类、酚类、醛类、酮类、酸类、烃类等香气成分GC/MS分析的相对质量分数加和高于普通烟叶。⑤朱砂烟叶的加香效果好于普通烟叶,与该烟叶除烟碱外的香气成分相对质量分数加和高于普通烟叶的结果具有较好的一致性。

     

    Abstract: In order to study the differences of aroma components between cinnabar and common tobacco leaves and their effects on sensory quality of cigarette smoke, leaf samples from the 2 types of tobacco were analyzed by headspace-solid phase microextraction-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (HS-SPME-GC/MS) after optimizing pretreatment conditions and instrument parameters. The results showed that:1) The optimized experimental conditions were tobacco sample 0.5 g, extracting for 20 min at 70℃ using gray extraction head, headspace sampling for GC/MS analysis after desorbing for 2 min. 2) A total of 82 aroma components were detected in the 2 types of tobacco samples, including 15 alcohols, 11 esters, 3 phenols, 9 aldehydes, 20 ketones, 7 organic acids, 8 hydrocarbons and 9 other compounds. The highest relative component contents in cinnabar tobacco and common tobacco were phytol and nicotine, respectively. The relative content of nicotine in aroma components of common tobacco was much higher than in cinnabar tobacco. 3) In the 2 types of tobacco samples, 71 common components were found, and the other 11 components, including citronellol, cis-3-hexenyl isovalerate, 5, 6-dihydro-6-pentyl-2H-pyran-2-one, 2-hydroxy-3-methyl-2-cyclopenten-1-one, R-limonene, etc., were only found in cinnabar tobacco. 4) Except nicotine, the total relative content of the other aroma components in cinnabar tobacco were higher than those in the common tobacco. 5) The flavoring effect of cinnabar tobacco was better than that of the common tobacco, which agreed with the results that the total relative content of aroma components (except nicotine) in cinnabar tobacco was higher than that in the common leaf.

     

/

返回文章
返回