Page Banner

United States Department of Agriculture

Agricultural Research Service

Title: Comparison of analytical techniques for detection of geosmin and 2-methylisoborneol in aqueous samples.

item Hurlburt, Barry
item Lloyd, Steven
item Grimm, Casey

Submitted to: Journal of Chromatographic Science
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 1/6/2009
Publication Date: 9/4/2009
Citation: Hurlburt, B.K., Lloyd, S.W., Grimm, C.C. 2009. Comparison of analytical techniques for detection of geosmin and 2-methylisoborneol in aqueous samples. Journal of Chromatographic Science. 670-673

Interpretive Summary: This research provides an improved method for analyzing the muddy/musty off-flavors which plague the farm-raised catfish industry and public water systems. Sensitivity and precision are compared for a series of standards for five different analytical techniques. This research will benefit the catfish industry, the potable water industry. Additionally, beneficiaries are scientists working to mitigate the off-flavor problem in the catfish and other susceptible industries.

Technical Abstract: Geosmin and 2-methylisoborneol are secondary metabolites expressed by a variety of organisms that are responsible for off-flavors in public water supplies, aquaculture, and a host of other important products. Hence, there is continuing research into the causes for their expression and methods to mitigate it, which required sensitive and accurate detection methods. In recent years, several new techniques for collecting and concentrating volatile and semi-volatile compounds have been automated and commercialized, making them available for use in most laboratories. In this study, we compared solid-phase microextraction (SPME) and membrane-assisted solvent extraction (MASE), for the detection of 2-methylisoborneol and geosmin in aqueous samples. SPME is the most sensitive of these techniques with a limit of detection (LOD) of 25 parts per trillion for 2-methylisoborneol, and 10 parts per trillion for geosmin, but with a large relative standard deviation. MASE is less sensitive, but provides a greater level of precision, as well as the ability for multiple injections from the same sample.

Last Modified: 10/17/2017
Footer Content Back to Top of Page