|
Volumn 1085, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 285-292
|
Comparison of shikimic acid determination by capillary zone electrophoresis with direct and indirect detection with liquid chromatography for varietal differentiation of red wines
|
Author keywords
CZE with direct detection; CZE with indirect detection; HPLC; Ion exclusion chromatography; Red wine; Reserved phase chromatography; Shikimic acid
|
Indexed keywords
ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS;
LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY;
OSMOSIS;
WINE;
CAPILLARY ZONE ELECTROPHORESIS (CZE);
SULFONYL-STYRENE-DIVENYLBENZENE (S-DVB);
TRIMETHYL(TETRADECYL)AMMONIUMBROMIDE (TTAB);
ELECTROPHORESIS;
4 AMINOBENZOIC ACID;
AMMONIUM DERIVATIVE;
BROMINE DERIVATIVE;
DIVINYLBENZENE;
METHANE;
SHIKIMIC ACID;
ACCURACY;
ARTICLE;
CAPILLARY ZONE ELECTROPHORESIS;
COMPARATIVE STUDY;
FLOW RATE;
HIGH PERFORMANCE LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY;
HYDRODYNAMICS;
LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY;
PH;
POWER SUPPLY;
PRIORITY JOURNAL;
RED WINE;
STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;
ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION;
CHROMATOGRAPHY, HIGH PRESSURE LIQUID;
ELECTROPHORESIS, CAPILLARY;
REFERENCE STANDARDS;
SHIKIMIC ACID;
WINE;
|
EID: 22244443017
PISSN: 00219673
EISSN: None
Source Type: Journal
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2005.06.022 Document Type: Article |
Times cited : (37)
|
References (27)
|