Next Article in Journal
Effect of Ultrasound and Salt on Structural and Physical Properties of Sodium Alginate/Soy Protein Isolates Composite Fiber
Previous Article in Journal
Recent Advances in and Applications of Electrochemical Sensors Based on Covalent Organic Frameworks for Food Safety Analysis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Foods
Volume 12
Issue 23
10.3390/foods12234273
foods-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Volatile Fingerprint and Differences in Volatile Compounds of Different Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica Beauv.) Varieties

by
Miao Kang
1,
Yu Guo
1,*,
Zhiyuan Ren
1,
Weiwei Ma
1,
Yuewei Luo
1,
Kai Zhao
2 and
Xiaowen Wang
1
1
College of Food Science and Engineering, Shanxi Agricultural University, Jinzhong 030801, China
2
College of Agriculture, Shanxi Agricultural University, Jinzhong 030801, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Foods 2023, 12(23), 4273; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12234273
Submission received: 7 October 2023 / Revised: 31 October 2023 / Accepted: 17 November 2023 / Published: 27 November 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Grain)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Aroma components in foxtail millet are one of the key factors in origin traceability and quality control, and they are associated with consumer acceptance and the corresponding processing suitability. However, the volatile differences based on the foxtail millet varieties have not been studied further. The present study was undertaken to develop the characteristic volatile fingerprint and analyze the differences in volatile compounds of 20 foxtail millet varieties by electronic nose (E-Nose), headspace-gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry (HS-GC-IMS), and headspace solid-phase microextraction/gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (HS-SPME/GC-MS). A total of 43 volatile compounds were tentatively identified in foxtail millet samples, 34 and 18 by GC-IMS and GC-MS, respectively. Aldehydes, alcohols, and ketones were the major volatile compounds, and the hexanal content was the highest. The characteristic volatile fingerprint of foxtail millet was successfully constructed. A total of 39 common volatile compounds were found in all varieties. The content of hexanal, heptanal, 1-pentanol, acetophenone, 2-heptanone, and nonanal were explored to explain the aroma characteristics among the different varieties, and different varieties can be separated based on these components. The results demonstrate that the combination of E-Nose, GC-IMS, and GC-MS can be a fast and accurate method to identify the general aroma peculiarities of different foxtail millet varieties.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Foxtail millet, which belongs to the gramineous family [1], has been cultivated in China for thousand of years [2]. Foxtail millet is well known for its drought tolerance across the world and is widely planted in arid and semi-arid regions [3]. It is rich in minerals, vitamins, dietary fiber [3], and various biological active compounds, such as catechin, quercetin, and apigenin, with recognized antioxidant, hypoglycemic, antitumor, blood lipid improvement [4], blood pressure reduction, and cancer prevention activities [5], as well as improving the body’s resistance to diseases [6]. With the growing consumer demand for healthy food, the use of foxtail millet as a key ingredient in various millet-based foods, such as porridge, nutrition powders, and steamed bread, has become more prevalent.
Foxtail millet possesses an unique aroma and its major volatile compounds include aldehydes, ketones, alcohols, hydrocarbons, esters, acids, and benzene derivatives [7]. Processing [8,9,10] and storage conditions [11,12,13] greatly affect the aroma of foxtail millet. The concentration of pyrazines and unsaturated aldehydes significantly improves during roasting and boiling, respectively; however, the process of freeze-drying after boiling reduces the contents of volatile compounds and the complexity of foxtail millet porridge [14]. Furthermore, the variety of foxtail millet affects its aroma [7,15]. In China, different varieties of foxtail millet are mainly cultivated in central and northern provinces, such as Shanxi, Inner Mongolia, Shaanxi, Hebei, Henan and Liaoning. To date, the volatile profile and specificity of volatile compounds in different foxtail millet varieties have been sparsely reported, although this information could greatly contribute to a to better understand of processing suitability and origin traceability.
Aroma, as one of the most significant elements impacting the quality and customer acceptability of food, is normally analyzed by electronic nose (E-Nose) [16,17], headspace solid-phase microextraction/gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (HS-SPME/GC-MS) [18,19], and headspace-gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry (HS-GC-IMS) [20,21]. E-Nose, which consists of odour sensors and pattern recognition algorithms, is a common intelligent sensing technology that partially eliminates the subjectivity of human sensory evaluation [22,23]. E-Nose is efficient, sensitive, portable, and fast in aroma analysis [24,25,26]. HS-GC-IMS is widely used to analyze the volatile compounds in samples and has the advantages of being fast, sensitive, and easy to pretreat [27,28]. Moreover, HS-SPME/GC-MS can be used to separate volatile compounds from complex samples for qualitative and quantitative analysis [29]. Combining multiple techniques to analyze volatile compounds in samples can result in more comprehensive volatile profiles.
In this study, the volatile compounds in 20 foxtail millet varieties were comprehensively qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed by combining E-Nose, HS-GC-IMS, and HS-SPME/GC-MS, and the characteristic fingerprint of foxtail millet was constructed. Moreover, the similarities and differences in aroma quality of foxtail millet varieties were elucidated by multivariate statistical analysis. The results provide useful information for the identification of foxtail millet and further offer scientific underpinnings for the deep processing development and utilization of the foxtail millet and its products.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Foxtail Millet Samples

Twenty varieties of foxtail millet (Table 1) were planted in the same field under the same environmental conditions and field management in Taigu District, Jinzhong City, Shanxi Province, and then harvested in 2021. All samples were ground into powder after hulling. The resulting flours were stored at −80 °C for further analysis.

2.2. Electronic-Nose (E-Nose) Analysis

The volatile compounds in foxtail millet were analyzed using a HERACLES II electronic nose (Alpha MOS, Toulouse, France). For this, 8 g of foxtail millet flour in a 20 mL vial sealed with a magnetic lid was incubated at 40 °C for 30 min. Then, 5 mL headspace was sampled by a syringe and injected into the gas chromatography. Hydrogen was used as the carrier gas and the split flow rate was 10 mL/min at the column heads. Then, the volatile compounds were separated by MXT-5 and MXT-1701 (20 m × 0.18 mm × 0.4 μm, Restek, Co., Bellefonte, PA, USA) column. The initial temperature of the oven was set at 40 °C and held for 10 s, then ramped at 1.5 °C/s until 250 °C and held for 60 s. The temperature of the two flame ionization detectors was set at 250 °C.

2.3. Headspace-Gas Chromatography-Ion Mobility Spectrometry (HS-GC-IMS) Analysis

The volatile compounds were analyzed on a GC-IMS (FlavourSpec®, G. A. S., Dortmund, Germany). A 20 mL headspace vial with 5 g foxtail millet flour was incubated at 80 °C for 15 min with a 500 rpm agitation rate. A syringe was used to inject 500 μL of headspace gas phase into the injector at 85 °C under splitless mode. The volatile compounds were separated by GC with an MXT-5 capillary column (15 m × 0.53 mm × 1 μm) at 60 °C and coupled with IMS at 45 °C. The carried gas was nitrogen at a programmed flow as follows: 2 mL/min for 0–2 min; 100 mL/min for 2–20 min. The drift gas (nitrogen) was set to 150 mL/min. The retention index (RI) of each volatile compound was calculated using the n-ketones C4–C9 (Sinopharm Chemical Reagent Beijing Co., Ltd., Beijing, China) as external references. Volatile compounds were identified by comparing RI and the drift time with the GC-IMS library.

2.4. Headspace Solid-Phase Microextraction/Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (HS-SPME/GC-MS) Analysis

The volatile compounds in different varieties of foxtail millet were determined by 7610 GC-MS (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Waltham, MA, USA) with a DB-5ms Capillary GC Column (30 m × 0.25 mm × 0.25 μm). For this, 1 g foxtail millet flour was placed into a 20 mL headspace vial with 4 mL saturated sodium chloride and 10 µL of 50 mg/L cyclohexanone as the internal standard, and then sealed with a magnetic lid. The vials with samples were thermostatized at 40 °C for 30 min and then the 50/30 µm DVB/CAR/PDMS SPME fiber (Supelco, Bellefonte, PA, USA) was exposed in the sample vial headspace for 30 min. The fiber was instantly inserted into the injector port at 250 °C for 5 min.
The oven program was set as follows: initial temperature was 35 °C for 2 min; then heated to 280 °C at 5 °C/min and held for 3 min. The inlet temperature was set at 280 °C. The flow rate of helium used as carrier gas was 1 mL/min. The injection mode was splitless. The ion source temperature of mass spectrometry was set at 200 °C with a mass range of 35–400 m/z and in the electron ionization (EI) mode at 70 eV. n-alkanes C7–C30 (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) were used as external references to calculate the retention index (RI) of volatile compounds. Comparing the mass spectra and RI of volatile compounds in the NIST 11 library, volatile compounds were tentatively identified. The levels of volatile compounds were determined by the internal standard method.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

All experiments were repeated three times. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on the experimental results by BM SPSS Statistics 26 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). MetaboAnalyst was used to conduct the principal component analysis (PCA) for volatile compounds in 20 foxtail millet varieties. Heml 1.0.1 was used to create the heat maps.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Volatile Profile of Foxtail Millet Analyzed by E-Nose

The volatile profile of foxtail millet was analyzed by E-nose and the results are shown in Figure S1. The peak area of the volatile compound was used to conduct PCA (Figure 1) for understanding the differences in the volatile composition among the foxtail millet varieties. The first two principle components (PCs) accounted for 95% of the total data variability. The 20 varieties of foxtail millet samples were mainly divided into two groups in PC1 (84%): Samples 1 to 8 were placed in the PC1 negative, at the left side of the x-axis, while samples 9 to 20 were placed in the PC1 positive, at the right x-axis side. Samples 18 (Jingu 62), 19 (Changnong 35), and 20 (Changsheng 07) were grouped in the fourth quadrant, suggesting similar aroma profiles; Samples 1 (77–322) and 4 (Jingu 28) were clustered together and distributed in the third quadrant; Sample 6 (Jingu 34②), located in the third quadrant, was separated with other samples; Samples 2 (Jingu 21), 3 (Jingu 26), 7 (Jingu 34③), and 8 (Jingu 41) gathered together in the second quadrant; other samples were clustered together in the first quadrant. These results showed significant differences in the volatile composition of the 20 foxtail millet varieties, revealing each variety’s specificity.

3.2. Volatile Compounds in Foxtail Millet Determined by HS-GC-IMS

To analyze the volatile compounds in foxtail millet and discriminate the differences among the 20 varieties, HS-GC-IMS was employed to obtain the global IMS information and identify volatile compounds based on the retention time retention time and ion migration time of gas chromatography [30]. A total of 34 volatile compounds were identified in foxtail millet (Table 2), including 13 aldehydes, 7 alcohols, 6 ketones, 5 esters, 2 furans, and 1 ether. The major volatile compounds in foxtail millet were hexanol, hexanal, 1-pentanol, ethyl acetate and acetone (Figure 2A).
Volatile compounds in foxtail millet were presented in 2D and 3D topographic photographs (Figure 2A,B). Each point on the 2D topographic photographs (Figure 2A) represents a volatile compound, and the color of the point is related to the content of a volatile compound: red for a higher content and white for a lower content [31]. In the 3D topographic photographs (Figure 2B), the transverse, longitudinal and vertical axes represent ion migration time, gas chromatography retention time, and signal peak intensity, respectively. The color and the signal intensity in the vertical axis of the plot are related to the contents of the volatile compounds. As shown in Figure 2A,B, there were many signals dispersed in a region with a GC retention time of 100–200 s and a relative drift time of 1.0–1.5 ms. Based on the fact that non-polar compounds have a longer retention time on non-polar columns than polar compounds [32], it was suggested that volatile compounds in foxtail millet were rich in polar compounds. Although the composition of the volatile compounds resembled those in the various foxtail millet, the content of volatile compounds varied due to variety differentiation (Figure 2A,B). For instance, the ranges of 2-heptanone and hexanol (Area A in Figure 2A,B) in Samples 2 (Jingu 21) and 16 (Jingu 59) were relatively lower than other varieties. The lower contents of hexanal and 1-pentanol (Area B in Figure 2A,B) were observed in Samples 2 (Jingu 21), 6 (Jingu 34②), 7 (Jingu 34③), and 16 (Jingu 59). Also, differences in the components and concentration of volatile compounds were visually found in Area C. To compare the differences in the different foxtail millet more clearly, Sample 1 (77–322) was chosen as the reference, and other varieties were subtracted from the reference on the original basis (Figure 2C). After subtraction, the background color changed to white. A blue plot denotes that the volatile compound’s content is lower than the reference, while a red plot indicates that it is higher than the reference. Differences in the composition and content of volatile compounds were directly observed. These results demonstrate that the volatile compositions of the 20 varieties of foxtail millet were similar, but the volatile contents were significantly different.
To reflect the differences in volatile compounds of different foxtail millet varieties, the characteristic non-targeted volatile fingerprints were conducted and analyzed based on the whole spectral information. All the signals were extracted to form the fingerprints (Figure 3), in which each column and row indicated one volatile compound and the sample, respectively. The total signal intensities in Samples 1–8 were obliviously higher than in Samples 9–20, and there were significant differences in volatile compound content between Samples 1–8 and Samples 9–20, which was consistent with the E-Nose results. Methyl-5-hepten-2-one and butyl acrylate reached the maximum concentration in Sample 1 (77–322) (as shown in region A). The intensities of volatile compounds in Sample 3 (Jingu 26) were higher than those in other samples, especially dihydro-2(3H)-furanone and butyl acrylate (as shown in region B). Samples 3 (Jingu 26), 4 (Jingu 28), and 5 (Jingu 34①) in region C had a high content of volatile compounds, and were dominated by alcohols and aldehydes, such as 1-pentanol, 2-octenal, 2-heptenal, and 2-hexenal. The contents of 2-methylbutanal and 3-methylbutanal were highest in Sample 16 (Jingu 59), as shown in region D. The highest content of 2-butanone was found in Sample 18 (Jingu 62) (as shown in region E). Hexanal with strong signal intensity was one of the main volatile compounds in 20 foxtail millet varieties, which is consistent with Liu’s results [32] (as shown in region F).
To better understand the differences in volatile compounds in the 20 foxtail millet varieties, PCA was carried out based on the signal intensity of the compounds (Figure 4). The accumulative variance contribution rate of the first PC (58%) and the second PC (15%) was 73%, which could well represent the characteristic differences in the original variables. The samples were well dispersed in four different quadrants. Samples 9 to 20 and Sample 7 (Jingu 34③) were clustered on the left side of the x-axis, and other samples were on the right side. Samples 1 (77–322), 3 (Jingu 26), 4 (Jingu 28), 5 (Jingu 34①), and 8 (Jingu 41) were clustered together and distributed in the fourth quadrants; Samples 2 (Jingu 21), 6 (Jingu 34②), and 7 (Jingu 34③) were grouped together. Aside from Sample 16 (Jingu 59), other samples gathered together and distributed in the third quadrant. The results showed that the different varieties of foxtail millet could be clearly discriminated from one another based on the volatile compounds by HS-GC-IMS.
The differences in volatile compounds across different foxtail millet varieties were analyzed, and the volatile profile in foxtail millet is specificity-dependent on variety. As a variety widely cultivated and highly favored by consumers in northern China, Jingu21 (Sample 2) dominated in aldehydes and esters, and the typical volatile compounds were benzaldehyde (bitter almond, cherry, nut), 2-methylbutyrate (fruity, green), ethyl acetate (fruity, sweet), 2-methylbutanal (musty, nutty), and propyl acetate (raspberry-like). These typical volatile compounds combine together to give Jingu 21 a unique aroma.

3.3. Volatile Compounds of Foxtail Millet Analyzed by HS-SPME/GC-MS

To fully understand the variations between volatile compounds in twenty foxtail millet varieties, the volatile compounds were examined using HS-SPME/GC-MS. A total of 18 volatile compounds were tentatively identified in foxtail millet samples (Table 3), including aldehydes (6), ketones (3), alcohols (3), alkanes (4), and heterocyclic compounds (2), with hexanal, heptanal, 1-pentanol, 2-heptanone, nonanal, and 1-hexanol comprising the predominant volatile compounds determined in the 20 foxtail millet varieties under study. Compared with GC-IMS, GC-MS detected fewer volatile compounds, and most of them were macromolecular compounds.
Aldehydes generally possess green, fatty, and other odors, and play a significant role in the distinctive aroma of cereals due to their low thresholds [15,33]. Aldehydes accounted for 35.41–66.36% of the total volatile compounds (Figure 5A), and they were the main volatile components in foxtail millet. These compounds include hexanal, benzaldehyde, heptanal, octanal, nonanal and decanal, and the content of hexanal was the highest compared to other aldehydes (5.49–7.36 µg/g) (Figure 5B, Table S2). Hexanal is one of the main volatile components in grains, such as rice [16], barley [34], and oats [35]. The odor of hexanal is described as being grassy in low concentrations and an unpleasant sour smell at high concentrations [36]. The contents of heptanal and octanal were all higher than 0.22 µg/g (Figure 5B, Table S2), and they were all accompanied with a grassy and fatty odor [37,38]. Nonanal, which is generally expressed as a fragrant and fatty odor [39], accounted for 2.93–9.20% of the total volatile compounds and constitutes a common volatile substance in cereals. An earlier piece of work on the volatile profiles of foxtail millet reported that nonanal was the major volatile compound [15].
Ketones are generally considered to have a fatty and burnt aroma as well as an enhanced floral aroma with an increase in carbon chains [39]. The relative contents of ketones in foxtail millet were 8.09–29.46% (Figure 5A), of which 2-heptanone was the most abundant in Sample 8 (Jingu 41), accounting for 10.7% of the total volatile compounds (Figure 5B, Table S2). In addition, 2-heptanone can be produced by the oxidation of linoleic acid [40] with a banana and slightly medicinal odor [41], and is detected in sorghum [42], black rice [43], and other cereals.
Alcohols accounted for 18.28–23.71% of the total volatile compounds. Unsaturated alcohols have a lower threshold value and make a greater contribution to the characteristic aroma of foxtail millet. 1-octene-3-ol is an unsaturated alcohol with a mushroom and earthy aroma [17], which is considered to make an important contribution to the characteristic aroma of rice (Figure 5B, Table S2). Although a low content of 1-octene-3-ol was detected in foxtail millet (0.76–1.44%) (Figure 5A), it contributes to the characteristic aroma to foxtail millet due to its low threshold value [31].
The relative content of alkane compounds ranged from 2.66% to 3.89% (Figure 5A); however, their effects on the odor quality of the different foxtail millet were insignificant due to the high threshold. Compared with other volatile compounds, heterocyclic compounds accounted for the smallest proportion of total volatile compounds (1.12–2.13%) (Figure 5A).
Although the composition of volatile compounds in different varieties of foxtail millet was similar, the contents of volatile compounds in foxtail millet were different (Figure 5B). The contents of hexanal in Sample 12 to Sample 20 were higher than those in the other samples. Differences in the composition and content of volatile compounds contributed to the distinctive aroma of the different foxtail millet varieties.
The PCA was carried out to understand the differences in volatile compounds among 20 foxtail millet varieties (Figure 6). The cluster and separation of samples on the score plot are related to the distribution of volatile compounds on the load plot in Figure 6B. Different samples can be better resolved by presenting score plots combined with loading plots. In this way, correlations between the 18 volatile compounds and the samples can be easily observed. The score plot and loading plot revealed the volatile compounds responsible for the differences among the foxtail millet.
The accumulative variance contribution rate was 93% of the two principal components. We found that 20 varieties of foxtail millet clustered into four different groups (Figure 6A), indicating the differences in the volatile compounds of the different varieties. It was observed in the load plot that the volatile compounds with significant contributions to PC1 were hexanal and acetophenone. These compounds were characterized by green, grass, and sweet aromas. The volatile compounds with a clear contribution to PC2 were heptanal, 2-heptanone, 1-pentanol, and nonanal, which have aroma profiles of fruity, grassy, fatty, and vanilla (Table 3).

4. Conclusions

In this study, the characteristic volatile fingerprint of 20 foxtail millet varieties were successfully constructed by using E-nose, HS-GC-IMS, and HS-SPME/GC-MS. A total of 43 volatile compounds were identified in 20 foxtail millet samples: 34 and 18 by HS-GC-IMS and HS-SPME/GC-MS. From these, 39 volatile compounds were found in all varieties and the main volatile compounds in the foxtail millet were hexanol, hexanal, 1-pentanol, ethyl acetate, acetone, heptanal, 2-heptanone, and nonanal. Different varieties of foxtail millet usually exhibited different volatile compounds concentrations, although at similar compositions. Six volatile compounds, hexanal, heptanal, 1-pentanol, acetophenone,2-heptanone, and nonanal, contributed significantly to the volatile differences observed among the different varieties of foxtail millet. The results of this study indicate that the combination of E-nose, HS-GC-IMS, and HS-SPME/GC-MS could better retain the overall information of the volatile compounds of 20 different foxtail millets, and the application of multivariate statistical analysis made it able to distinguish foxtail millets in different varieties.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/foods12234273/s1, Figure S1: Chromatograms of the 20 foxtail millet varieties by E-Nose analysis, Table S1: The signal intensities of volatile compounds in 20 varieties of foxtail millet analyzed by HS-GC-IMS, Table S2: Contents (mean ± standard deviation) of the volatile compounds tentatively identified in 20 varieties of foxtail millet by HS-SPME/GC-MS.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.G. and X.W.; methodology, Y.G.; software, Z.R.; validation, Z.R., W.M. and Y.L.; formal analysis, M.K.; investigation, Z.R.; resources, X.W.; data curation, M.K.; writing—original draft preparation, M.K.; writing—review and editing, M.K. and Y.G.; visualization, K.Z.; supervision, Y.G. and X.W.; project administration, Y.G. and X.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The study was supported by PhD Research Startup Foundation of Shanxi Agricultural University, China (Grant No. 2021BQ30) and Fundamental Research Program of Shanxi Province (Grant No. 20210302123402).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article or Supplementary Material.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Ling Zhang from Shanxi Institute for Functional Food, Shanxi Agricultural University for providing E-nose and all those who contributed directly or indirectly to the project.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interest or personal relationship that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

  1. Saleh, A.S.M.; Zhang, Q.; Chen, J.; Shen, Q. Millet Grains: Nutritional Quality, Processing, and Potential Health Benefits. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2013, 12, 281–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Zhang, Y.; Yang, N.; Fray, R.G.; Fisk, I.; Liu, C.; Li, H.; Han, Y. Characterization of volatile aroma compounds after in-vial cooking of foxtail millet porridge with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. J. Dairy Res. 2018, 82, 8–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Liang, K.; Liu, Y.; Liang, S. Analysis of the characteristics of foxtail millet during storage under different light environments. J. Dairy Res. 2021, 101, 103302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bhat, S.; Nandini, C.; Tippeswamy, V. Significance of small millets in nutrition and health-A review. Asian J. Dairy Food Res. 2018, 37, 35–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ren, X.; Chen, J.; Molla, M.M.; Wang, C.; Diao, X.M.; Shen, Q. In vitro starch digestibility and in vivo glycemic response of foxtail millet and its products. Food Funct. 2016, 7, 372–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Zhang, L.Z.; Liu, R.H. Phenolic and carotenoid profiles and antiproliferative activity of foxtail millet. Food Chem. 2015, 174, 495–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Liu, J.; Li, S.; Zhang, A.; Zhao, W.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, Y. Volatile profiles of 13 foxtail millet commercial cultivars (Setaria italica Beauv.) from China. Cereal Chem. 2017, 94, 170–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Xingchen, L.; Indrawati, O.; Biniam, K. Effect of industrial processing on the volatiles, enzymes and lipids of wholegrain and rolled oats. Food Res. Int. 2022, 157, 111243. [Google Scholar]
  9. Sun, H.; Wang, H.; Zhang, P.; Ajlouni, S.; Fang, Z. Changes in phenolic content, antioxidant activity, and volatile compounds during processing of fermented sorghum grain tea. Cereal Chem. 2020, 97, 612–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sun, Z.; Lyu, Q.; Chen, L.; Zhuang, K.; Wang, G.; Ding, W.; Wang, Y.; Chen, X. An HS-GC-IMS analysis of volatile flavor compounds in brown rice flour and brown rice noodles produced using different methods. LWT 2022, 161, 113358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Liu, J.; Liu, Y.; Wang, A.; Dai, Z.; Wang, R.; Sun, H.; Strappe, P.; Zhou, Z. Characteristics of moisture migration and volatile compounds of rice stored under various storage conditions. J. Dairy Res. 2021, 102, 103323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Li, X.; Oey, I.; Leong, S.Y.; Kebede, B. Understanding the volatile flavour changes during accelerated shelf-life testing of oats using chemometrics and kinetic modelling. Food Chem. 2023, 405, 134864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Ludwig, V.; Berghetti, M.R.P.; Ribeiro, S.R.; Rossato, F.P.; Wendt, L.M.; Thewes, F.R.; Thewes, F.R.; Brackmann, A.; Both, V.; Wagner, R. The effects of soybean storage under controlled atmosphere at different temperatures on lipid oxidation and volatile compounds profile. Food Res. Int. 2021, 147, 110483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Bi, S.; Wang, A.; Wang, Y.; Xu, X.; Luo, D.; Shen, Q.; Wu, J. Effect of cooking on aroma profiles of Chinese foxtail millet (Setaria italica) and correlation with sensory quality. Food Chem. 2019, 289, 680–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Li, S.H.; Zhao, W.; Liu, S.Y.; Li, P.L.; Zhang, A.X.; Zhang, J.L.; Wang, Y.T.; Liu, Y.Y.; Liu, J.K. Characterization of nutritional properties and aroma compounds in different colored kernel varieties of foxtail millet (Setaria italica). J. Dairy Res. 2021, 100, 103248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Xu, J.; Liu, K.; Zhang, C. Electronic nose for volatile organic compounds analysis in rice aging. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 109, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zheng, X.Z.; Lan, Y.B.; Zhu, J.M.; Westbrook, J.; Hoffmann, W.C.; Lacey, R.E. Rapid Identification of Rice Samples Using an Electronic Nose. J. Bionic Eng. 2009, 6, 290–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bryant, R.J.; McClung, A.M. Volatile profiles of aromatic and non-aromatic rice cultivars using SPME/GC–MS. Food Chem. 2011, 124, 501–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wang, L.; Yang, K.; Liu, L. Comparative flavor analysis of four kinds of sweet fermented grains by sensory analysis combined with GC-MS. Int. J. Food Sci. 2022, 18, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Yang, Y.; Qian, M.C.; Deng, Y.; Yuan, H.; Jiang, Y. Insight into aroma dynamic changes during the whole manufacturing process of chestnut-like aroma green tea by combining GC-E-Nose, GC-IMS, and GC × GC-TOFMS. Food Chem. 2022, 387, 132813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Liu, H.; Wen, J.; Xu, Y.; Wu, J.; Yu, Y.; Yang, J.; Liu, H.; Fu, M. Evaluation of dynamic changes and formation regularity in volatile flavor compounds in Citrus reticulata ‘chachi’ peel at different collection periods using gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry. LWT 2022, 171, 114126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Xu, M.; Wang, J.; Zhu, L. Tea quality evaluation by applying E-nose combined with chemometrics methods. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 58, 1549–1561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Yu, H.; Wang, J.; Zhang, H.; Yu, Y.; Yao, C. Identification of green tea grade using different feature of response signal from E-nose sensors. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2008, 128, 455–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. He, X.; Yangming, H.; Górska-Horczyczak, E.; Wierzbicka, A.; Jeleń, H.H. Rapid analysis of Baijiu volatile compounds fingerprint for their aroma and regional origin authenticity assessment. Food Chem. 2021, 337, 128002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Li, Y.; Fei, C.; Mao, C.; Ji, D.; Gong, J.; Qin, Y.; Qu, L.; Zhang, W.; Bian, Z.; Su, L. Physicochemical parameters combined flash GC e-nose and artificial neural network for quality and volatile characterization of vinegar with different brewing techniques. Food Chem. 2022, 374, 131658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Yang, Y.; Chen, J.; Jiang, Y.; Qian, M.C.; Deng, Y.; Xie, J.; Li, J.; Wang, J.; Dong, C.; Yuan, H. Aroma dynamic characteristics during the drying process of green tea by gas phase electronic nose and gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry. LWT 2022, 154, 112691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Gerhardt, N.; Birkenmeier, M.; Sanders, D.; Rohn, S.; Weller, P. Resolution-optimized headspace gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry (HS-GC-IMS) for non-targeted olive oil profiling. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2017, 409, 3933–3942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Rodríguez-Maecker, R.; Vyhmeister, E.; Meisen, S.; Rosales Martinez, A.; Kuklya, A.; Telgheder, U. Identification of terpenes and essential oils by means of static headspace gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2017, 409, 6595–6603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Chen, Q.; Song, J.; Bi, J.; Meng, X.; Wu, X. Characterization of volatile profile from ten different varieties of Chinese jujubes by HS-SPME/GC–MS coupled with E-nose. Food Res. Int. 2018, 105, 605–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lu, W.; Chen, J.; Li, X.; Qi, Y.; Jiang, R. Flavor components detection and discrimination of isomers in Huaguo tea using headspace-gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry and multivariate statistical analysis. Anal. Chim. Acta 2023, 1243, 340842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Li, S.; Yang, H.; Tian, H.; Zou, J.; Li, J. Correlation analysis of the age of brandy and volatiles in brandy by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and gas chromatography-ion mobility spectrometry. Microchem. J. 2020, 157, 104948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Liu, J.K.; Tang, X.; Zhang, Y.Z.; Zhao, W. Determination of the Volatile Composition in Brown Millet, Milled Millet and Millet Bran by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry. Molecules 2012, 17, 2271–2282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Wang, J.; Huang, X.-H.; Zhang, Y.-Y.; Nie, C.; Zhou, D.; Qin, L. Mechanism of salt effect on flavor formation in lightly-salted large yellow croaker by integrated multiple intelligent sensory and untargeted lipidomics analyses. Food Chem. 2023, 435, 137542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Cramer, A.-C.J.; Mattinson, D.S.; Fellman, J.K.; Baik, B.-K. Analysis of Volatile Compounds from Various Types of Barley Cultivars. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 7526–7531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Sides, A.; Robards, K.; Helliwell, S.; An, M. Changes in the Volatile Profile of Oats Induced by Processing. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2001, 49, 2125–2130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Koc, G.C.; Tekgul, Y.; Erten, E.S.; Akdogan, A. Mineral content, fatty acid composition, and volatile compounds of gluten-free tarhana formulated with different cereal and pulse flours. J. Food Sci. 2021, 86, 4376–4392. [Google Scholar]
  37. Yang, D.S.; Shewfelt, R.L.; Lee, K.S.; Kays, S.J. Comparison of odor-active compounds from six distinctly different rice flavor types. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2008, 56, 2780–2787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Jezussek, M.; Juliano, B.O.; Schieberle, P. Comparison of Key Aroma Compounds in Cooked Brown Rice Varieties Based on Aroma Extract Dilution Analyses. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 1101–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Kangyi, Z.; Can, Z.; Lingling, G.; Haining, Z.; Tao, F.; Guozhen, X. Analysis of volatile flavor compounds of green wheat under different treatments by GC-MS and GC-IMS. J. Food Biochem. 2021, 46, e13875. [Google Scholar]
  40. Mahattanatawee, K.; Rouseff, R.L. Comparison of aroma active and sulfur volatiles in three fragrant rice cultivars using GC–Olfactometry and GC–PFPD-ScienceDirect. Food Chem. 2014, 154, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Han, G.; Zhang, L.; Li, Q.X.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Q.; Kong, B.H. Impacts of different altitudes and natural drying times on lipolysis, lipid oxidation and flavour profile of traditional Tibetan yak jerky. Meat Sci. 2020, 162, 108030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Fan, X.; Jiao, X.; Liu, J.; Jia, M.; Blanchard, C.; Zhou, Z. Characterizing the volatile compounds of different sorghum cultivars by both GC-MS and HS-GC-IMS. Food Res. Int. 2021, 140, 109975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Choi, S.; Seo, H.-S.; Lee, K.R.; Lee, S.; Lee, J.; Lee, J. Effect of milling and long-term storage on volatiles of black rice (Oryza sativa L.) determined by headspace solid-phase microextraction with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Food Chem. 2019, 276, 572–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Foods 12 04273 g001
Figure 1. Principal component analysis (PCA) of 20 foxtail millet varieties based on E-Nose.
Figure 1. Principal component analysis (PCA) of 20 foxtail millet varieties based on E-Nose.
Foods 12 04273 g001
Foods 12 04273 g002aFoods 12 04273 g002bFoods 12 04273 g002c
Figure 2. 2D topographic photographs (A), 3D topographic photographs (B), and contrast difference spectra (C) of volatile compounds in 20 varieties of foxtail millet.
Figure 2. 2D topographic photographs (A), 3D topographic photographs (B), and contrast difference spectra (C) of volatile compounds in 20 varieties of foxtail millet.
Foods 12 04273 g002aFoods 12 04273 g002bFoods 12 04273 g002c
Foods 12 04273 g003
Figure 3. The volatile compounds fingerprints of the 20 foxtail millet varieties.
Figure 3. The volatile compounds fingerprints of the 20 foxtail millet varieties.
Foods 12 04273 g003
Foods 12 04273 g004
Figure 4. PCA plots of different varieties of foxtail millet.
Figure 4. PCA plots of different varieties of foxtail millet.
Foods 12 04273 g004
Foods 12 04273 g005aFoods 12 04273 g005b
Figure 5. Composition (A) and relative content (B) of volatile compounds in foxtail millet.
Figure 5. Composition (A) and relative content (B) of volatile compounds in foxtail millet.
Foods 12 04273 g005aFoods 12 04273 g005b
Foods 12 04273 g006
Figure 6. PCA analysis: score plot (A) and load plot (B).
Figure 6. PCA analysis: score plot (A) and load plot (B).
Foods 12 04273 g006
Table 1. Foxtail millet samples.
Table 1. Foxtail millet samples.
No.VarietiesNo.VarietiesNo.VarietiesNo.Varieties
177–3226Jingu 34②11Jingu 4816Jingu 59
2Jingu 217Jingu 34③12Jingu 5317Jingu 60
3Jingu 268Jingu 4113Jingu 5418Jingu 62
4Jingu 289Jingu 4214Jingu 5519Changnong35
5Jingu 34①10Jingu 4615Jingu 5820Changsheng07
Table 2. Volatile compounds tentatively identified in the 20 foxtail millet varieties determined by HS-GC-IMS.
Table 2. Volatile compounds tentatively identified in the 20 foxtail millet varieties determined by HS-GC-IMS.
NO.CompoundAroma DescriptionCASFormulaMWRIRtDt
1Nonanalcucumber124-19-6C9H18O142.21109.2508.0101.48202
22-octenalcucumber-like2548-87-0C8H14O126.21054.8429.8101.33276
3Octanalorange peel, green124-13-0C8H16O128.21003.8356.3781.40870
4Hept-2-enalsweet, marzipan18829-55-5C7H12O112.2952.9308.6961.25421
5Benzaldehydebitter almond, cherry, nut100-52-7C7H6O106.1956.2311.5571.14947
6Hex-2-enalfruity, vegetable505-57-7C6H10O98.1849.3233.9171.18241
7Hexanalgreen, grassy66-25-1C6H12O100.2796.4205.6151.55543
8Butanalmalty123-72-8C4H8O72.1551.7123.3581.27561
9Furfuralfragrant, sweet, almond98-01-1C5H4O296.1826.0221.4811.08335
102-pentenalgrassy, fruity1576-87-0C5H8O84.1747.6184.2181.10518
11Pentanalfermented bread-like110-62-3C5H10O86.1693.0162.0841.42118
122-methylbutanalmusty, nutty96-17-3C5H10O86.1662.8153.3221.16667
133-methylbutanalsour, fatty, rancid590-86-3C5H10O86.1626.5143.5421.17384
14Oct-1-en-3-olmushroom-like, rubbery3191-86-4C8H16O128.2980.2332.0601.15994
15Hexanolgreen, fruity111-27-3C6H14O102.2873.3246.7811.64594
16Pentan-1-oloil, vanilla, sweet71-41-0C5H12O88.1769.7193.1801.51874
172-methylbutan-1-olfermented137-32-6C5H12O88.1741.3181.6771.46495
183-methylbutan-1-oloil, alcoholic, fruity30899-19-5C5H12O88.1729.3176.7791.48937
191-Propanethiolonion107-03-9C3H8S76.2623.9142.8541.36308
20Ethanolstrong alcoholic64-17-5C2H6O46.1450.596.0801.13082
21Methyl-5-hepten-2-onebanana-like, floral110-93-0C8H14O126.2988.6339.2131.17434
22Dihydro-2(3h)-furanone 96-48-0C4H6O286.1917.7278.6551.08270
232-heptanonefruity, spicy sweety110-43-0C7H14O114.2895.4259.6451.62881
242-Butanonefragrant, fruit, pleasant78-93-3C4H8O72.1572.1128.8841.24438
25Acetonesweet67-64-1C3H6O58.1483.6104.9971.12275
262-Pentanonesweety, fruity, woody107-87-9C5H10O86.1681.7158.4391.37005
27Butyl acrylategrassy, fruity141-32-2C7H12O2128.2899.9263.5041.68385
282-methylbutanoatefruity, green868-57-5C6H12O2116.2782.4198.3261.18853
29Butyl acetatesweet, ripe banana123-86-4C6H12O2116.2802.6208.9241.61840
30Ethyl Acetatefruity, sweet141-78-6C4H8O288.1598.4135.9601.33699
31Propyl acetateraspberry-like109-60-4C5H10O2102.1704.6166.7711.16583
322-pentyl furanfruity, grassy3777-69-3C9H14O138.2990.3340.6431.24897
332-Butylfuranmild, sweet, spicy4466-24-4C8H12O124.2890.9256.2141.17752
342-Butoxyethanolfragrance111-76-2C6H14O2118.2899.4263.0751.20076
Note: MW: molecular mass; RI: retention index; RT: retention time; DT: drift time. The aroma description of compounds were referred from The Good Scents Company. The aroma descriptors, reported in the literature, for each volatile compound were also present.
Table 3. Volatile compounds tentatively identified in the 20 foxtail millet varieties determined by HS-SPME/GC-MS.
Table 3. Volatile compounds tentatively identified in the 20 foxtail millet varieties determined by HS-SPME/GC-MS.
NO.CompoundAroma DescriptionRICASMolecule FormulaCharacteristicionIdentification Method
refcal
Aldehydes1Hexanalgreen, grassy80079666-25-1C6H12O56,72MS,RI
2Benzaldehydebitter almond, cherry, nut962959100-52-7C7H6O77,106MS,RI
3Heptanalrancid, pungent901900111-71-7C7H14O70,41MS,RI
4Octanalorange peel, green10031000124-13-0C8H16O43,84MS,RI
5Nonanalcucumber11041103124-19-6C9H18O57,70MS,RI
6Decanalwaxy, floral, citrus12061203112-31-2C10H20O43,70MS,RI
Ketones72-Heptanonefruity, spicy sweety891886110-43-0C7H14O43,71MS,RI
83-Octen-2-onefruity, lemon104010391669-44-9C8H14O55,111MS,RI
9Acetophenonesweet1065105398-86-2C8H8O105,77MS,RI
Alcohols101-Pentanoloil, vanilla, sweet76575571-41-0C5H12O42,70MS,RI
111-Hexanolgreen, fruity868867111-27-3 C6H14O56,69MS,RI
121-Octen-3-olmushroom-like, rubbery9809793391-86-4 C8H16O57,72MS,RI
Alkanes13Tetradecanegasoline-like, mild waxy14001398629-59-4 C14H3057,71MS,RI
14Pentadecane 15001496629-62-9C15H3257,71MS,RI
15Hexadecane 16001592544-76-3C16H3457,71MS,RI
16Nonadecane 19001885629-92-5C19H4057,71MS,RI
Heterocyclic compounds17Benzothiazolerose, vegetable1229122495-16-9C7H5NS135,108MS,RI
18Benzene, 1,3-dimethyl- 866855108-38-3C8H1091,106MS,RI
Note: ref: RI literature value; cal: RI calculated value. Identification method: MS, mass spectrum comparison using NIST14 library; RI: RI calculation in agreement with literature value. The aroma description of compounds were referred from The Good Scents Company Information System.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kang, M.; Guo, Y.; Ren, Z.; Ma, W.; Luo, Y.; Zhao, K.; Wang, X. Volatile Fingerprint and Differences in Volatile Compounds of Different Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica Beauv.) Varieties. Foods 2023, 12, 4273. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12234273

AMA Style

Kang M, Guo Y, Ren Z, Ma W, Luo Y, Zhao K, Wang X. Volatile Fingerprint and Differences in Volatile Compounds of Different Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica Beauv.) Varieties. Foods. 2023; 12(23):4273. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12234273

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kang, Miao, Yu Guo, Zhiyuan Ren, Weiwei Ma, Yuewei Luo, Kai Zhao, and Xiaowen Wang. 2023. "Volatile Fingerprint and Differences in Volatile Compounds of Different Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica Beauv.) Varieties" Foods 12, no. 23: 4273. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12234273

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop