ArticleJournal of chemical ecology2021
Desorption Temperature, Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME), and Natural Product Analyses, how Low Can we Go?
Article in Journal of chemical ecology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sorbent-coated metal discs for time-integrated VOC sampling: A reproducible workflow coupled to SPME-GC/MS.MethodsX · 2026Article
- P-glycoprotein 1 as a shared target for resensitizing drug-resistant tumor cells and preventing fibronectin-driven metastasis.Theranostics · 2026Article
- Solvent Extraction of PDMS Tubing as a New Method for the Capture of Volatile Organic Compounds from Headspace.Journal of chemical ecology · 2024Article
- Sampling of Volatiles in Closed Systems: A Controlled Comparison of Three Solventless Volatile Collection Methods.Journal of chemical ecology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Solid phase microextraction (SPME) has become a common technique for volatile sampling due to its ease of use and limited technical requirements. The solvent-free nature of SPME is also exceptionally attractive for gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis. To ensure efficient transfer of the sample to the GC, the manufacturer recommend injector desorption temperatures in the range of 200 to 320 °C. A high desorption temperature can, however, have unwanted effects on analyses of plant and insect produced semiochemicals. By investigating the quantitative and qualitative chromatographic responses at varying inlet temperatures for a component blend of seven plant produced volatile compounds, we found the thermally labile plant-nematode signaling compound, pregeijerene to degrade to geijerene at all tested temperatures within the recommended range (200, 240, and 280 °C), but that it did not break down with an inlet temperature below 200 °C (100 °C and 150 °C). Degradation was also detected for the sesquiterpene germacrene D, but only at the highest inlet temperature tested (280 °C). Surprisingly, an inlet temperature of 200 °C gave the highest sample recovery, measured as total peak area while an inlet temperature of 100 °C as well as 280 °C gave the lowest total area values. An increase in desorption time from 3 to 5 min. Resulted in a recovery at 100 °C close to that obtained at 200 °C. Peak broadening was minimal, and only observed at the 100 °C inlet temperature. Based on these results, we highly recommend that SPME users include desorption temperature as one variable when developing sampling procedures for novel biological systems to ensure that potentially present thermally labile compounds are not degraded.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33460000What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.