oeni could be interesting tools for the early stages of winemaking, especially since the wines produced from them were preferred by the tasting panel, and enzyme treatment could evidently contribute positively to the “typical” Riesling aroma. However, further detailed experiments using different wine varieties and fermentation conditions (e.g., yeasts) will be required in order to confirm this conclusion. Regarding a possible application of see more such glycosidases,

it is necessary to mention that a direct application of bacterial enzymes in winemaking is at present not realistic. A major obstacle is the necessity of recombinant enzyme production. The use of recombinant techniques in the food industry has a rather negative image due to consumer and market preferences. An attractive alternative (although recombinant as well) could be the use of LAB as GRAS/food grade expressions www.selleckchem.com/mTOR.html systems, which is a developing field of intensive research ( Peterbauer, Maischberger, & Haltrich, 2011). This work was supported by a Grant (FWF Project 20246-B11) given to K.D.K. by the Austrian Science Fund. We thank Yiqun Wu for assistance in sample preparation. “
“In chromatographic analysis of complex samples, the

responses attributed to pesticides may undergo changes caused by matrix components. “Matrix effect” is the name given to these changes. This phenomenon is used to explain recovery rates of pesticides that exceed 100% and the low accuracy of results (Hajslová et al., 1998). Usually the matrix effect is observed when a significant difference in response is obtained between chromatographic standards prepared in solvent and those prepared in the matrix extract (Picó, Blasco, & Font, 2004). This effect can be positive, leading to an increase in Farnesyltransferase chromatographic signal or negative, when there is a decrease of this signal. These changes are the result of adsorption of analytes

and matrix components in both the injector and the detector and/or in chromatographic column (Hajslová & Zrostlíková, 2003). When standard solutions are prepared in pure solvent and analysed by gas chromatography, the analytes can bind to the active sites of the inserter and a smaller amount of it is transferred to the chromatographic column and consequently detected. In the analysis of the matrix extract containing these analytes, the co-extractives “compete” with the analytes for the occupation of the sites, causing a larger amount of analyte is transferred to the chromatographic column than when prepared in pure solvent. When the detector response, attributed to the analyte, is compared with the response of standard solutions of the same analyte, there is an overestimation of the results (Pinho, Neves, Queiroz, & Silvério, 2009).