## 3 Results and Discussion
### Impact of Fermentation Parameters on Volatile Compound Production
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(Sc/Lt\) Ratio} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Nitrogen} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Oxygenation} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Temperature} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Residuals} \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Ethyl acetate} & Stand. effect & **5.914** & \(-\)6.856 & **6.856** & **21.058** & \\  & _p_-Value & **0.010** & **0.006** & **0.006** & **0.000** & \\  & Var. contrib. & **6.08\%** & **8.17\%** & **8.17\%** & **77.10\%** & 0.52\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{_Propyl acetate_} & _Stand. effect_ & _0.707_ & \(-\)_2.828_ & _0.000_ & _2.828_ & \\  & _p-Value_ & _0.530_ & _0.066_ & _1.000_ & _0.066_ & \\  & _Var. contrib._ & _2.56\%_ & _41.00\%_ & _0.00\%_ & _41.00\%_ & _15.40\%_ \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Isoamyl acetate} & Stand. effect & \(-\)1.874 & 0.687 & 0.687 & \(-\)**5.746** & \\  & _p_-Value & 0.158 & 0.541 & 0.541 & **0.010** & \\  & Var. contrib. & 8.67\% & 1.17\% & 1.17\% & **81.60\%** & 7.41\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Ethyl lactate} & Stand. effect & **-4.883** & \(-\)0.740 & 0.888 & 0.000 & \\  & _p_-Value & **0.016** & 0.513 & 0.440 & 1.000 & \\  & Var. contrib. & **84.60\%** & 2.00\% & 2.80\% & 0.00\% & 10.60\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{_Ethyl butyrate_} & _Stand. effect_ & _3.000_ & _1.000_ & \(-\)_3.000_ & \(-\)_7.000_ & \\  & _p_-Value & _0.058_ & _0.391_ & _0.058_ & _0.006_ & \\  & _Var. contrib._ & _12.70\%_ & 1.41\% & 12.70\% & _69.00\%_ & 4.23\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Ethyl hexanoate} & Stand. effect & **8.486** & 2.092 & \(-\)**4.185** & \(-\)**4.766** & \\  & _p_-Value & **0.003** & 0.127 & 0.025 & **0.018** & \\  & Var. contrib. & **60.20\%** & 3.66\% & **14.60\%** & **19.00\%** & 2.51\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Ethyl octanoate} & Stand. effect & 1.136 & 1.544 & \(-\)0.089 & \(-\)0.396 & \\  & _p_-Value & 0.339 & 0.220 & 0.934 & 0.719 & \\  & Var. contrib. & 18.90\% & 34.90\% & 0.12\% & 2.00\% & 43.90\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{_Ethyl nonanoate_} & _Stand. effect_ & _1.732_ & _1.732_ & _1.732_ & _0.000_ & \\  & _p_-Value & _0.182_ & _0.182_ & _0.182_ & _1.000_ & \\  & _Var. contrib._ & _25.00\%_ & 25.00\% & _25.00\%_ & _0.00\%_ & _25.00\%_ \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Ethyl decanoate} & Stand. effect & 1.121 & 1.537 & 0.374 & \(-\)0.208 & \\  & _p_-Value & 0.344 & 0.222 & 0.733 & 0.849 & \\  & Var. contrib. & 18.50\% & 34.70\% & 2.05\% & 0.63\% & 44.10\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{_Diethyl succinate_} & _Stand. effect_ & _0.000_ & _1.732_ & _0.000_ & \(-\)1.732 & \\  & _p_-Value & _1.000_ & _0.182_ & _1.000_ & _0.182_ & \\  & _Var. contrib._ & _0.00\%_ & _33.00\%_ & _0.00\%_ & _33.00\%_ & _33.30\%_ \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{_Ethyl dec-9-enoate_} & _Stand. effect_ & _0.500_ & _1.000_ & \(-\)_0.500_ & \(-\)_0.500_ & \\  & _p_-Value & _0.651_ & _0.391_ & _0.651_ & _0.651_ & \\  & _Var. contrib._ & 5.26\% & 21.10\% & _5.26\%_ & _5.26\%_ & 63.20\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{_Phenylethyl acetate_} & _Stand. effect_ & _0.728_ & _1.213_ & _0.243_ & \(-\)_0.243_ & \\  & _p_-Value & _0.519_ & _0.312_ & _0.824_ & _0.824_ & \\  & _Var. contrib._ & _10.30\%_ & _28.70\%_ & _1.15\%_ & _1.15\%_ & _58.60\%_ \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{_Ethyl laurate_} & _Stand. effect_ & _5.000_ & _3.000_ & \(-\)_1.000_ & \(-\)_3.000_ & \\  & _p_-Value & _0.015_ & _0.058_ & _0.391_ & _0.058_ & \\  & _Var. contrib._ & 53.20\% & _19.00\%_ & _2.13\%_ & _19.00\%_ & _6.38\%_ \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: Impact of fermentation parameters on the production of different esters. production (stand. effect \(-9.037\)). The \(Sc\) population seemed to be mainly linked to the formation of acids and esters. This was in line with the work of [PERSON] et al. (2019) [23], who showed an increase in ethyl esters, acetals, and acids, as well as a decrease in alcohols, when the proportion of _Saccharomyces cerevisiae_ increased in the inoculum.