Evaluates diesel fuel composition with two GC-TOF/MS methods, suggesting enhanced profiling accuracy.
One-dimensional gas chromatography coupled with time-of-flight mass spectrometry (1D GC-TOF/MS) and comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography coupled with TOF/MS (GC×GC-TOF/MS) were evaluated as complementary platforms for diesel-fuel compositional profiling. Across all samples, 1D GC-TOF/MS reported 1,850 library-annotated features (similarity score ≥ 700), whereas GC×GC-TOF/MS reported 27,146 deconvoluted features, comprising 8,108 annotated features and 19,038 unnamed Peak-ID features. Only 595 annotated features were common to both workflows, yet workflow-specific statistical evaluation and PCA of GC×GC feature-occurrence profiles consistently highlighted the same atypical samples. Broad chemical grouping of annotated and predicted GC×GC features showed that paraffinic and olefinic/naphthenic hydrocarbon families dominated most fuels. In contrast, sample 51 × 57, and to a lesser extent K8LZ1 depending on feature inclusion, exhibited redistributed class patterns and a higher proportion of oxygenated or FAME-associated features. Integrating chromatographic profiling with routine physicochemical descriptors indicated that meaningful compositional divergence may occur even within a narrow specification window. Overall, 1D GC-TOF/MS remains effective for robust comparative screening, while GC×GC-TOF/MS provides additional selectivity and peak capacity to interrogate compositionally congested diesel matrices and to support future chemometric modelling.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zieliński et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: