| 摘要: |
| 为深入探究不同提取方法对八角茴香油香气特征及品质的影响,提升八角茴香资源的综合利用率,该研究采用电子鼻、红外光谱分析技术及气相色谱质谱联用(GC-MS)技术,结合旋光度、相对密度及折光率的测定,对水蒸气蒸馏(SD-SAO)、超临界CO2流体萃取(SFE-SAO)和微波辅助醇提(MAEE-SAO)3种方法提取的八角茴香油的挥发性成分、香气特征及物理指标进行检测分析。结果表明:(1)SD-SAO和SFE-SAO在旋光度、相对密度及折光率方面无显著性差异,而MAEE-SAO的折光率(1.394)显著低于其他2种样品(SD-SAO为1.557,SFE-SAO为1.555)。(2)电子鼻雷达指纹图谱分析表明,SD-SAO和SFE-SAO的香气轮廓图相似,香气特征差异不显著,而MAEE-SAO的香气轮廓图与SD-SAO和SFE-SAO存在显著性差异。(3)GC-MS挥发性成分分析结果显示,不同提取方法制备的八角茴香油香气成分组成及含量存在明显差异。鉴定的挥发性成分数量及相对含量均有所不同。3种八角茴香油的主要成分均为反式茴香脑,其相对含量具有显著性差异,分别为94.38%(SD-SAO)、85.40%(MAEE-SAO)和82.67%(SFE-SAO)。此外,主成分分析(PCA)能够将3种不同提取方法制备的八角茴香油样品完全区分开来,进一步证实了不同提取工艺对八角茴香油香气特征具有显著影响。综合比较表明水蒸气蒸馏和超临界CO2萃取制备的八角茴香油香气特征较好,而微波辅助醇提制备的八角茴香油挥发性成分较为复杂,需要进一步精制处理。该研究结果为八角茴香油香气特征分析提供了技术参考,并为八角茴香油产品的加工及品质控制奠定了坚实的理论基础。 |
| 关键词: 八角茴香油, 电子鼻, 红外光谱, 香气特征, 提取方法, 挥发性成分 |
| DOI：10.11931/guihaia.gxzw202411039 |
| 分类号:Q946 |
| 文章编号:1000-3142(2025)00-1871-11 |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金面上项目(32072634); 河南省高等学校重点科研项目(24B210015); 河南省科技攻关项目(252102110093)。 |
|
| Characterization and analysis of aroma characteristics of star anise oil obtained by different extraction methods |
|
GUO Xiangyang1,2
|
|
1.College of Tea and Food Science, Xinyang Normal University, Xinyang 464000, Henan,
China;2. Dabie Mountain Laboratory, Xinyang 464000, Henan, China
|
| Abstract: |
| To investigate the effects of different extraction methods on the aroma characteristics and quality of star anise oil(SAO), and with the aim of enhancing the comprehensive utilization of star anise resources, this study employed electronic nose, infrared spectroscopy analysis technology, and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry(GC-MS)techniques, combined with the determination of optical rotation, relative density, and refractive index. The volatile components, aroma characteristics, and physical properties of SAO extracted using steam distillation(SD-SAO), supercritical CO2 fluid extraction(SFE-SAO), and microwave-assisted ethanol extraction(MAEE-SAO)were analyzed. The results were as follows:(1)There were no significant differences in rotation, relative density, and refractive index between SD-SAO and SFE-SAO, while the refractive index of MAEE-SAO(1.394)was significantly lower than that of the other two samples(1.557 for SD-SAO and 1.555 for SFE-SAO).(2)The electronic nose radar fingerprint analysis indicated that the aroma profiles of SD-SAO and SFE-SAO were similar, with insignificant differences in aroma characteristics, whereas, the aroma radar profile of MAEE-SAO differed significantly from those of SD-SAO and SFE-SAO.(3)GC-MS analysis of volatile components showed that the composition and content of aroma components in SAO varied significantly with different extraction methods. The number and relative content of identified volatile components also differed. Although trans-anethole was the major component in all three types of SAO, its relative amount varied significantly, with values of 94.38% in SD-SAO, 85.40% in MAEE-SAO, and 82.67% in SFE-SAO. Additionally, principal component analysis(PCA)enabled successful discrimination of the three SAO samples prepared with different extraction methods, further confirming that different extraction processes significantly impact the aroma characteristics of SAO. A comprehensive comparison revealed that SAO extracted by steam distillation and supercritical CO2 extraction exhibited better aroma characteristics, while SAO extracted by microwave-assisted ethanol extraction had a more complex volatile component profile and required further refinement. The results of this study provide a technical reference for the analysis of aroma characteristics of SAO, and a solid theoretical basis for the processing and quality control of SAO products. |
| Key words: star anise oil(SAO), electronic nose(E-nose), infrared spectroscopy(IR), aroma characteristics, extraction method, volatile compounds |
