The Survey of Preservative and Solvent Contents in Wines and Liquors Sold in Taiwan

• Main Authors: Wen-Chyi Hsieh 謝文棋, 謝文棋
• Other Authors: 王苑春
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/88320914347442320722

碩士 === 國立中興大學 === 食品暨應用生物科技學系 === 94 === In this study, the preservative and solvent contents in wines and liquors sold in Taiwan were investigated. One hundred sixty-six wine and liquor samples were collected including 21 red wines, 8 white wines, 14 other fruit wines, 10 rice-fermentation wines, 3 other grain-fermentation wines, 8 beers, 7 rice liquors, 21 kaoliang liquors, 17 other grain liquors, 8 grape liquors, 12 other liquors and 37 lended liquors to be including. Of these 166 wines and liquors, 64 samples were imported, 30 samples were the Taiwan Tobacco and Liquor Corporation product and other 72 samples were the Taiwanese local winery product. In this study, the preservative was examined including sorbic acid and benzoic acid and the solvent using as flavoring dissolved agent was also examined including isopropanol, ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol and propylene glycol. All the analyses were performed by HPLC. As demonstrated by the results shown, benzoic acid was detected in 63 of the 166 samples (38.0 %), with a detection range of 0.109 ± 0.02 µg/mL to 196.418 ± 1.050 µg/mL. The highest amoumt of benzoic acid was found in the imported Vodka-based blended wine, on the other hand, whereas other liquors were at lowly level. No limit is established for benzoic acid in wine by the standard of DOH (Department of Health the Executive Yuan R.O.C.), whereas FAO/WHO and USA set a limit of 1000mg/kg for benzoic acid. All the 166 wines and liquors were conformed to the limits of FAO/WHO and USA. Sorbic acid was detected in 41 of 166 samples (24.7 %), with a detection range of 0.017 ± 0.006 to 435.442 ± 1.533 µg/mL. The grape wines contained the highest amoumt of soric acid, followed in order by the other fruit wines and blended wines, while the rice-fermentation wines and liquor contained lowly or undetectable amounts of sorbic acid. According to the standard of DOH, the maxium using level of sorbic acid in fruit wine is 0.2 g/kg, of the 166 wines and liquors, 3 local red wines and 1 other fruit wine and 2 imported other fruit wines exceeded the limit. No detectable amount of isopropanol was found in all the 166 wines and liquors. According to the standard of DOH, the maxium residual level of isopropanol in hop extract is 2.2 % (w/v). Ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, propylene glycol and ethylene glycol were found in 9 of the 166 samples (with in a concentration range of 0.105 ± 0.015 to 6.24 ± 0.03 µg/mL), whereas these solvents were not found in all the fermentation wines and liquors. The DOH of ROC does not set a limit for ethylene glycol content in wines, while the Organisation Internationale de la Vigne et du Vin (OIV) sets a standard of 10 mg/L for ethylene glycol. All the 166 wines and liquors were conformed to the standard of ethylene glycol set by OIV. Of the 166 wines and liquors, diethylene glycol was only detected in a blended wine purchased from local winery, with 13.43 ± 1.8 µg/mL of content, which exceeded the limit of OIV (below 10 mg/L). Propylene glycol was not detected in any of the 166 wines and liquors. In this study, a HPLC analytical method for in quantification of ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol and propylene glycol in wines and liquors were developed. A reverse-phase HPLC was performed by using mobile phase to compose of acetonitrile and sodium acetate, after derivation between acetonitrile and 3.5-Dinitrobenzoyl chloride peaks of products detection at 254 nm. As the results shown, ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol and propylene glycol, all the three compounds were linearized in the range of 5 to 125 µg/mL, with regression coefficient (r2) in the range of 0.9991 to 0.9997. After spiked 5 to 25 µg/mL of ethylene glycol and diethylene glycol solution to the wine solution, the recovery range of 98.8 ~ 99.7 % was obtained. The coefficient variation for intra-day and inter-day precisions were in a range of 0.66 ~ 1.59 %. Based on the validation results, the analytical method showed specific, accurate and precise to quantify ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol and propylene glycol in wines and liquors.