2000Journal of Food ScienceRequires access

Headspace Evaluation of Methanethiol and Dimethyl Trisulfide in Aqueous Solutions of Soy‐protein Isolates

W. L. Boatright, Q. Lei

Open publisher page 30 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Volatile compounds from 2 samples of aqueous soy‐protein isolates (SPI) (7%) were analyzed using both static and dynamic headspace methods. Based on dynamic headspace analyses, the most powerful odorants were (1) dimethyl trisulfide, (2) methanethiol, (3) hexanal, (4) an unidentified charred, sweaty feet‐like odor, (5) 2‐pentyl furan, (6) 2,3‐butadione, and (7) an unknown burnt‐like odor. The most powerful odorants by static headspace analyses were (1) dimethyl trisulfide, (2) hexanal, (3) methanethiol, and (4) 2‐pentyl furan. Using deuterium labeled DMTS as an internal standard, DMTS was quantified at 60.1 and 45.5 ppb in the SPIs. This corresponds to odor values of 6014 and 4554, respectively. Using a cool, on‐column technique, direct injection of concentrated‐headspace volatiles and solvent‐recovered volatiles with an internal standard of d 6 ‐DMTS detected both methanethiol and DMTS at similar levels as with the traditional injection methods.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

ABSTRACT Volatile compounds from 2 samples of aqueous soy‐protein isolates (SPI) (7%) were analyzed using both static and dynamic headspace methods. Based on dynamic headspace analyses, the most powerful odorants were (1) dimethyl trisulfide, (2) methanethiol, (3) hexanal, (4) an unidentified charred, sweaty feet‐like odor, (5) 2‐pentyl furan, (6) 2,3‐butadione, and (7) an unknown burnt‐like odor. The most powerful odorants by static headspace analyses were (1) dimethyl trisulfide, (2) hexanal, (3) methanethiol, and (4) 2‐pentyl furan. Using deuterium labeled DMTS as an internal standard, DMTS was quantified at 60.1 and 45.5 ppb in the SPIs. This corresponds to odor values of 6014 and 4554, respectively. Using a cool, on‐column technique, direct injection of concentrated‐headspace volatiles and solvent‐recovered volatiles with an internal standard of d 6 ‐DMTS detected both methanethiol and DMTS at similar levels as with the traditional injection methods.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 30 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

ABSTRACT Volatile compounds from 2 samples of aqueous soy‐protein isolates (SPI) (7%) were analyzed using both static and dynamic headspace methods. Based on dynamic headspace analyses, the most powerful odorants were (1) dimethyl trisulfide, (2) methanethiol, (3) hexanal, (4) an unidentified charred, sweaty feet‐like odor, (5) 2‐pentyl furan, (6) 2,3‐butadione, and (7) an unknown burnt‐like odor. The most powerful odorants by static headspace analyses were (1) dimethyl trisulfide, (2) hexanal, (3) methanethiol, and (4) 2‐pentyl furan. Using deuterium labeled DMTS as an internal standard, DMTS was quantified at 60.1 and 45.5 ppb in the SPIs. This corresponds to odor values of 6014 and 4554, respectively. Using a cool, on‐column technique, direct injection of concentrated‐headspace volatiles and solvent‐recovered volatiles with an internal standard of d 6 ‐DMTS detected both methanethiol and DMTS at similar levels as with the traditional injection methods.

Key concepts: Methanethiol, Dimethyl trisulfide, Chemistry, Hexanal, Odor, Dimethyl disulfide, Furan, Aqueous solution

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Headspace Evaluation of Methanethiol and Dimethyl Trisulfide in Aqueous Solutions of Soy‐protein Isolates — Research Paper | ScholarLens