A Comparative Study on the Volatile Profile of Virgin Olive Oils (cv. Koroneiki) | ||||
| Egyptian Journal of Chemistry | ||||
| Volume 67, Issue 8, August 2024, Page 501-511 PDF (1.07 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/ejchem.2024.272860.9387 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Muhammad Elsorady1; Hanaa Soliman   2
| ||||
| 1Fays and oils department, food technology research institute. | ||||
| 2Oils & Fats Dept., National Research Centre, Dokki, Giza, Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| The aroma of virgin olive oil (VOO) is derived from volatile compounds. We utilized SPME-GC/MS to examine these compounds and discovered both quantitative and qualitative variations in the volatile profiles of the VOO samples we analyzed. The differences were attributed to enzymatic processes in the olive fruits prior to oil extraction or changes during VOO storage. Odor activity values (OAVs) were used to identify the primary volatiles and their impact on the aroma in each VOO. In the EVOO sample, the highest OAV was E-2-Hexenal, followed by Hexanol, Hexanal, and Z-3-Hexenyl acetate. Conversely, Z-3-hexenyl acetate, E-2-nonenal, E-2-decenal, Nonanoic, propanoic, and Butanoic acids were responsible for the fusty VOO sample. The main contributors to the rancid defect were E-2-decenal, nonanal, hexanal, and E-2-nonenal. E-2-decenal, butanoic acid, acetic acid, and nonanal were the primary volatiles responsible for the vinegary defect. Lastly, the findings indicated that hexanal, 2,4-heptadienal, and nonanoic acids were responsible for the musty defect. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Virgin olive oils; EVOO; Fusty; musty; vinegary; rancid; volatiles | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 42 PDF Download: 29 |
||||
