Comparative Analysis of Bioactive Compounds in Pine Resin: Headspace/GC-MS and Direct Injection/GC-MS

Nurten Yılmaz; Mustafa Oğuzhan Kaya; Elif Coşkun Dağgeçen

Article Details

Comparative Analysis of Bioactive Compounds in Pine Resin: Headspace/GC-MS and Direct Injection/GC-MS

Authors:

Nurten Yılmaz | Mustafa Oğuzhan Kaya | Elif Coşkun Dağgeçen

Publisher:

Siirt University

Main Topics:

Enzimler | Tarımsal Biyoteknolojik Tanılama

Journal:

Türkiye Tarımsal Araştırmalar Dergisi Vol.12 Issue 1, pp.63-71

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

3/2025

Document Language:

English

Document ID (Org No.):

2001344459

pISSN:

2148-2306

Keywords:

Abstract:

 This study, the chemical composition of pine resin collected from three different locations Kaburgediği, Karabucak and Mavisilifke of Mersin province in the Mediterranean Region of Türkiye was investigated using headspaceGC-MS and direct injectionGC-MS techniques. A commercial essential oil was used as a control sample in the study. The analysis focused on key volatile compounds, including α-pinene, delta-3-carene, camphene, DL-limonene mixture of D- and L-form, and caryophyllene. The headspaceGC-MS method was more effective for detecting compounds with higher volatility, such as α-pinene, which was more abundant in Karabucak 66.12 in headspace vs. 53.13 in direct injection. On the other hand, direct injectionGC-MS provided higher sensitivity for less volatile compounds, such as caryophyllene 4.82 in direct injection vs. 0.67 in headspace in Kaburgediği. The most significant difference between the methods was observed in the detection of DL-limonene, which showed higher concentrations in direct injectionGC-MS 3.76 in Mavisilifke compared to headspaceGC-MS 1.51. This suggests that direct injectionGC-MS is better for quantifying compounds with lower volatility, while headspaceGC-MS is more effective in capturing the overall aroma profile, especially for volatile compounds. This highlights the difference in efficiency and sensitivity based on the compounds volatility. Therefore, choosing the right method depends on the specific compounds of interest and their volatility characteristics. These findings highlight the unique volatile profiles of each resin, shaped by both the species and the analytical method used, with implications for their aromatic and potential pharmacological properties.

 This study, the chemical composition of pine resin collected from three different locations Kaburgediği, Karabucak and Mavisilifke of Mersin province in the Mediterranean Region of Türkiye was investigated using headspaceGC-MS and direct injectionGC-MS techniques. A commercial essential oil was used as a control sample in the study. The analysis focused on key volatile compounds, including α-pinene, delta-3-carene, camphene, DL-limonene mixture of D- and L-form, and caryophyllene. The headspaceGC-MS method was more effective for detecting compounds with higher volatility, such as α-pinene, which was more abundant in Karabucak 66.12 in headspace vs. 53.13 in direct injection. On the other hand, direct injectionGC-MS provided higher sensitivity for less volatile compounds, such as caryophyllene 4.82 in direct injection vs. 0.67 in headspace in Kaburgediği. The most significant difference between the methods was observed in the detection of DL-limonene, which showed higher concentrations in direct injectionGC-MS 3.76 in Mavisilifke compared to headspaceGC-MS 1.51. This suggests that direct injectionGC-MS is better for quantifying compounds with lower volatility, while headspaceGC-MS is more effective in capturing the overall aroma profile, especially for volatile compounds. This highlights the difference in efficiency and sensitivity based on the compounds volatility. Therefore, choosing the right method depends on the specific compounds of interest and their volatility characteristics. These findings highlight the unique volatile profiles of each resin, shaped by both the species and the analytical method used, with implications for their aromatic and potential pharmacological properties.

 This study, the chemical composition of pine resin collected from three different locations Kaburgediği, Karabucak and Mavisilifke of Mersin province in the Mediterranean Region of Türkiye was investigated using headspaceGC-MS and direct injectionGC-MS techniques. A commercial essential oil was used as a control sample in the study. The analysis focused on key volatile compounds, including α-pinene, delta-3-carene, camphene, DL-limonene mixture of D- and L-form, and caryophyllene. The headspaceGC-MS method was more effective for detecting compounds with higher volatility, such as α-pinene, which was more abundant in Karabucak 66.12 in headspace vs. 53.13 in direct injection. On the other hand, direct injectionGC-MS provided higher sensitivity for less volatile compounds, such as caryophyllene 4.82 in direct injection vs. 0.67 in headspace in Kaburgediği. The most significant difference between the methods was observed in the detection of DL-limonene, which showed higher concentrations in direct injectionGC-MS 3.76 in Mavisilifke compared to headspaceGC-MS 1.51. This suggests that direct injectionGC-MS is better for quantifying compounds with lower volatility, while headspaceGC-MS is more effective in capturing the overall aroma profile, especially for volatile compounds. This highlights the difference in efficiency and sensitivity based on the compounds volatility. Therefore, choosing the right method depends on the specific compounds of interest and their volatility characteristics. These findings highlight the unique volatile profiles of each resin, shaped by both the species and the analytical method used, with implications for their aromatic and potential pharmacological properties.

 This study, the chemical composition of pine resin collected from three different locations Kaburgediği, Karabucak and Mavisilifke of Mersin province in the Mediterranean Region of Türkiye was investigated using headspaceGC-MS and direct injectionGC-MS techniques. A commercial essential oil was used as a control sample in the study. The analysis focused on key volatile compounds, including α-pinene, delta-3-carene, camphene, DL-limonene mixture of D- and L-form, and caryophyllene. The headspaceGC-MS method was more effective for detecting compounds with higher volatility, such as α-pinene, which was more abundant in Karabucak 66.12 in headspace vs. 53.13 in direct injection. On the other hand, direct injectionGC-MS provided higher sensitivity for less volatile compounds, such as caryophyllene 4.82 in direct injection vs. 0.67 in headspace in Kaburgediği. The most significant difference between the methods was observed in the detection of DL-limonene, which showed higher concentrations in direct injectionGC-MS 3.76 in Mavisilifke compared to headspaceGC-MS 1.51. This suggests that direct injectionGC-MS is better for quantifying compounds with lower volatility, while headspaceGC-MS is more effective in capturing the overall aroma profile, especially for volatile compounds. This highlights the difference in efficiency and sensitivity based on the compounds volatility. Therefore, choosing the right method depends on the specific compounds of interest and their volatility characteristics. These findings highlight the unique volatile profiles of each resin, shaped by both the species and the analytical method used, with implications for their aromatic and potential pharmacological properties.

Article Details

Comparative Analysis of Bioactive Compounds in Pine Resin: Headspace/GC-MS and Direct Injection/GC-MS

Authors:

Nurten Yılmaz | Mustafa Oğuzhan Kaya | Elif Coşkun Dağgeçen

Publisher:

Siirt University

Main Topics:

Enzimler | Tarımsal Biyoteknolojik Tanılama

Journal:

Türkiye Tarımsal Araştırmalar Dergisi Vol.12 Issue 1, pp.63-71

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

3/2025

Document Language:

English

Document ID (Org No.):

2001344459

pISSN:

2148-2306

Pine resin

headspace/gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

bioactive compounds

aroma profile

volatile oilPine resin

headspace/gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

bioactive compounds

aroma profile

volatile oil

Issues

Article Details

Authors: Nurten Yılmaz | Mustafa Oğuzhan Kaya | Elif Coşkun Dağgeçen

Publisher: Siirt University

Main Topics: Enzimler | Tarımsal Biyoteknolojik Tanılama

Journal: Türkiye Tarımsal Araştırmalar Dergisi Vol.12 Issue 1, pp.63-71

Document Type: Article

Publication Date: 3/2025

Document Language: English

Document ID (Org No.): 2001344459

pISSN: 2148-2306

Issues

Authors:

Nurten Yılmaz | Mustafa Oğuzhan Kaya | Elif Coşkun Dağgeçen

Publisher:

Siirt University

Main Topics:

Enzimler | Tarımsal Biyoteknolojik Tanılama

Journal:

Türkiye Tarımsal Araştırmalar Dergisi Vol.12 Issue 1, pp.63-71

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

3/2025

Document Language:

English

Document ID (Org No.):

2001344459

pISSN:

2148-2306