The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Comparison of glass vessels and plastic bags for enclosing living plant parts for headspace analysis

Comparison of glass vessels and plastic bags for enclosing living plant parts for headspace analysis
Comparison of glass vessels and plastic bags for enclosing living plant parts for headspace analysis
Plants release volatile chemicals into their surrounding air space that can affect the physiology of neighboring plants and influence the behavior of insects. In studying these interactions, it is desirable to collect volatiles from plants that have not been excised and are growing under as natural conditions as possible. We compared a vessel of borosilicate glass and Nylon-6 or polyester [poly(ethyleneterephthalate) or PET] cooking bags for enclosing plants during collection of volatiles. A push–pull airflow system was used, and volatiles were trapped on Tenax TA and analyzed by gas chromatography after thermal desorption. Low levels of impurities were found for the glass vessel and polyester bags. Nylon bags contained higher levels and more impurities. Recoveries of standards of 10 plant volatiles were measured in static and dynamic systems. In a static air system, there was good recovery only from the glass vessel. In a dynamic system, there was generally good recovery from both the glass vessel and polyester bags. Recoveries of ?-pinene and (Z)-jasmone were poor throughout. The former was shown to have a very low breakthrough volume on the Tenax TA adsorbent, and the latter may be strongly adsorbed on glass. All three materials were essentially transparent in the IR and visible (photosynthetic) range but with significantly different absorptions in the UV range. In a simulated dynamic entrainment in full sunlight, internal vessel temperatures were higher than ambient by up to 9.5°C in the glass vessel and 7.5°C in the polyester bag. Lower increases in temperature relative to ambient (<1°C) were recorded when entrainments were conducted in the shade. In a field trial, the profiles of volatiles collected from an apple tree infested with rosy apple aphid using a glass vessel and a polyester bag were similar. Polyester bags are recommended as more convenient than glass vessels for the enclosure of plants during the collection of volatiles.
floral odor, green leaf volatile, headspace collection, nylon, polyester, sampling, plant volatiles, volatile organic compounds
0098-0331
845-864
Stewart-Jones, A.
e3202851-ddbe-4410-9d45-c6e58741dd77
Poppy, G.M.
e18524cf-10ae-4ab4-b50c-e73e7d841389
Stewart-Jones, A.
e3202851-ddbe-4410-9d45-c6e58741dd77
Poppy, G.M.
e18524cf-10ae-4ab4-b50c-e73e7d841389

Stewart-Jones, A. and Poppy, G.M. (2006) Comparison of glass vessels and plastic bags for enclosing living plant parts for headspace analysis. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 32 (4), 845-864. (doi:10.1007/s10886-006-9039-6).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Plants release volatile chemicals into their surrounding air space that can affect the physiology of neighboring plants and influence the behavior of insects. In studying these interactions, it is desirable to collect volatiles from plants that have not been excised and are growing under as natural conditions as possible. We compared a vessel of borosilicate glass and Nylon-6 or polyester [poly(ethyleneterephthalate) or PET] cooking bags for enclosing plants during collection of volatiles. A push–pull airflow system was used, and volatiles were trapped on Tenax TA and analyzed by gas chromatography after thermal desorption. Low levels of impurities were found for the glass vessel and polyester bags. Nylon bags contained higher levels and more impurities. Recoveries of standards of 10 plant volatiles were measured in static and dynamic systems. In a static air system, there was good recovery only from the glass vessel. In a dynamic system, there was generally good recovery from both the glass vessel and polyester bags. Recoveries of ?-pinene and (Z)-jasmone were poor throughout. The former was shown to have a very low breakthrough volume on the Tenax TA adsorbent, and the latter may be strongly adsorbed on glass. All three materials were essentially transparent in the IR and visible (photosynthetic) range but with significantly different absorptions in the UV range. In a simulated dynamic entrainment in full sunlight, internal vessel temperatures were higher than ambient by up to 9.5°C in the glass vessel and 7.5°C in the polyester bag. Lower increases in temperature relative to ambient (<1°C) were recorded when entrainments were conducted in the shade. In a field trial, the profiles of volatiles collected from an apple tree infested with rosy apple aphid using a glass vessel and a polyester bag were similar. Polyester bags are recommended as more convenient than glass vessels for the enclosure of plants during the collection of volatiles.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: April 2006
Keywords: floral odor, green leaf volatile, headspace collection, nylon, polyester, sampling, plant volatiles, volatile organic compounds
Organisations: Biological Sciences

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 41070
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/41070
ISSN: 0098-0331
PURE UUID: 1087d950-0051-48ee-8f98-b8f533db5575

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 14 Jul 2006
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 08:24

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: A. Stewart-Jones
Author: G.M. Poppy

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×