Dynamic headspace analysis of floral volatiles: a comparison of methods [Clarkia breweri]

Lack of standardization of floral scent analysis using dynamic headspace collection and GC-MS has prevented meaningful biological comparisons of results from different studies. We explored technique-related sources of variation by comparing the relative performances of different trapping sorbents, e...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Oikos 1998-03, Vol.81 (2), p.238-254
Main Authors: Raguso, R.A. (Michigan Univ., Ann Arbor (USA)), Pellmyr, O
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
ANALYTICAL METHODS
Animal, plant and microbial ecology
Biological and medical sciences
Brewing
CHROMATOGRAPHIE EN PHASE GAZEUSE
COMPOSE VOLATIL
COMPUESTO VOLATIL
CROMATOGRAFIA DE GASES
DEBIT
Elution
ENSAYO DE MAQUINAS
EQUIPMENT TESTING
ESSAI DE MATERIEL
EXPERIMENTACION EN LABORATORIO
EXPERIMENTATION EN LABORATOIRE
FLORACION
FLORAISON
Floral fragrances
FLOW RATE
Flow velocity
FLOWERING
Flowers
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY
GASTO
General aspects. Techniques
GERANIOL
Hexanes
LABORATORY EXPERIMENTATION
Methods and techniques (sampling, tagging, trapping, modelling...)
NORMALISATION
NORMALIZACION
ODEUR
OLOR
ONAGRACEAE
Plants
Pollination
SMELL
SOLVANT
SOLVENTES
SOLVENTS
Sorbents
STANDARDIZING
TECHNIQUE ANALYTIQUE
TECNICAS ANALITICAS
VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Lack of standardization of floral scent analysis using dynamic headspace collection and GC-MS has prevented meaningful biological comparisons of results from different studies. We explored technique-related sources of variation by comparing the relative performances of different trapping sorbents, elution solvents and vacuum pump flow rates in the collection of known volatiles from (a) synthetic blends on filter papers and (b) living flowers of Clarkia breweri (Onagraceae). The greatest amounts of volatiles were collected when Porapak Q sorbent and hexane solvent were used, but most analyses were qualitatively similar. Low and high pump flow rates yield a tradeoff, with higher rates trapping low volatility compounds but also raising ambient contamination levels. Significant variation was associated with the use of different sorbents and solvents, but detailed statistical comparisons were precluded by significant interaction effects involving other experimental variables. Given the tightly controlled experimental conditions and use of inbred plant lines, this unexpected result suggests that analyses of small samples carry a high risk of experimental artifact. We recommend that floral scent analyses incorporate experimental and statistical approaches that address as many method-related variables as possible, that samples of 10 or more individuals be used, and that GC-MS parameters be held constant for all comparative analyses.
ISSN:0030-1299
1600-0706
DOI:10.2307/3547045