Thermo trace gc ultra

The GC-MS analysis of the methanol extract of the fresh sample from the overexpression/WT tomato fruit was carried out by using a Thermo Trace GC Ultra coupled with DSQ II mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher), based on the methods described in Yun et al.54 (link). The processed data were used for PCA using the SIMCA- P 11.5 program (Umetrics).

In a typical reaction, a mixture of catalyst (10.0 mg) and KOH (1.0 mmol) was added to a 10 mL Schlenk tube equipped with a rubber stopper. The Schlenk tube was vacuumed with a vacuum pump. The mixture of aniline (1.0 mmol) and DMSO (2 mL) was injected into the Schlenk tube and connected to an oxygen balloon. The reaction mixture was vigorously stirred at 15 °C for 24 h. After the reaction, the products were extracted with ethyl acetate. The catalytic oxidative couplings of other aniline derivatives were the same as the catalytic oxidative coupling of aniline except for the use of 4-chloroaniline (1.0 mmol) or 4-methoxyaniline (1.0 mmol) as reactants. The conversions and selectivities of aniline and its derivatives oxidation coupling were determined by gas chromatography (GC) with a Nexis GC-2030 chromatograph manufactured by Shimadzu Corporation with a barrier discharge ionization detector and an RTX-5 capillary column (J&W, 30 m, 0.25 mm i.d.). The products were identified using gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS) analysis subjected to ISQ GC–MS with an electrical capture detector (ECD, Thermo Trace GC Ultra) using a capillary column (TR-5MS, Thermo Scientific; length 30 m, inner diameter 0.25 mm, film 0.25 µm). The TOF was calculated by dividing the number of converted aniline molecules per hour by the number of cobalt atoms as determined from ICP–OES.

Trapping of headspace volatiles was performed as described (Cankar et al., 2015 (link)) with the following modifications: headspace sampling was performed in a climate room (20±2 °C, 56% relative humidity) with LED lighting (adjusted at 100% white, 10% deep red, 100% far red, and 5% blue light). Volatiles were trapped by sucking air out of the jar at a rate of 100 ml min⁻¹ (inlet flow at 150 ml min⁻¹) for 4 h.
Trapped headspace volatiles were analysed using a Thermo TraceGC Ultra connected to a Thermo TraceDSQ quadrupole mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Settings were as described (Jongedijk et al., 2015 (link)), except that volatiles were injected on the analytical column at a split ratio of 10.

Non-targeted metabolite profiling was carried out by GC-MS using a modified method described by Yun et al. [29 (link)] and Tan et al. [68 ]. In summary, 200 mg flower samples were extracted in 2, 700 μl methanol and ribitol solution (300 μl, 0.2 mg ml^− 1) was added as a quantification internal standard. The mixture was incubated firstly, then agitated, dried and derivatized. GC-MS analysis was performed by using a Thermo Trace GC Ultra, together with a Thermo Fisher TSQ 8000 Evo Triple Quadrupole mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) as suggested by Yun et al. [29 (link)] and Tan et al. [68 ]. Metabolites were identified by searching in the NIST library. Quantification was based on the peak area ratios of the quantitation ions and the internal standard ribitol as described by Tan et al. [68 ].

Thermo Trace GC Ultra gas chromatograph coupled with TSQ Quantum mass spectrometer (triple quadrupole) (Thermo Scientific). The experimental conditions were optimized to set the main parameters of chromatographic separation, identification. GC conditions Temperature program: 50 °C (1 min), 10°/min, 250 °C (10 min), Split/splitless injector: 250 °C, Splitless mode, split flow: 50 mL/min, split time: 1 min, Carrier gas: helium, constant flow-rate: 1 mL/min, Transfer line temperature: 250 °C, Column Thermo Trace TR-5MS, Length: 30 m, i.d.: 0.25 mm, film thickness: 0.25 µm, Software: XCalibr software version 2.1, Mass Spectrometry (MS) conditions: full scan, mass range: 40–400 Da, scan time: 0.132 s, ionization mode: electron impact at 70 eV, emission current: 50 µA, compound identification was based on comparison of their mass spectra to those of reference standards obtained from spectral libraries NIST Mass Spectral Libraries v2.1. (National Institute of Standards and Technology) and Wiley.

The herbal extract was dissolved in methanol (MeOH), then purified by solid-phase extraction using the QuEChERS method. For further analysis, GC (Thermo Trace GC Ultra, USA) and ITQ900 (Thermo, Waltham, MA, USA) were conducted. A TG-SQC capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm × 0.25 μm) was utilized for the GCMS analysis. Helium (99.999%), a carrier gas, was set at a constant flow rate of 1 mL/min. The sample solution (1 μL) was injected in a split ratio of 10:1. The temperature of the injector and the ion source were set at 250 and 230 °C, respectively. The temperature program of the oven was set at 70 °C (isothermal for 2 min) and increased up to 280 °C with an increasing speed of 15 °C/min, ending with a 10 min isothermal at 280 °C. MS data were at 70 eV, a scanning interval time of 0.5 s, and for fragments from 50 to 650 Da. The compounds were identified via comparison with reported compounds using compounds data of the Mass Spectra Library (NIST 17.L and Wiley).

Six independent plants were used as biological replicates, and about five leaves were sampled from each plant in primary metabolic profiling. Non-targeted metabolite profiling was carried out by GC-MS using a modified method described by Yun et al. [37 (link)]. A total of 200 mg ground leaf samples were extracted in 2,700 μl methanol and ribitol solution (300 μl, 0.2 mg ml⁻¹) was added as an internal standard. The samples were centrifuged, dried and derivatized. GC-MS analysis was performed by using a Thermo Trace GC Ultra, coupled with Thermo Fisher a DSQ II mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Metabolites were identified by using an available chromatogram library and PCA analysis was performed by using the software Simca-P (Ver 11, Umetrics, Umea, Sweden).