## 2 Results and Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\(n^{\circ}\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Compound**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Formula**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**CAS**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**MS/MS**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Fiber**} \\ \cline{5-8}  & & & & & & **DVB/CAR/**PDMS** & **PA** & **PDMS/DVB** \\ \hline
12 & (-)-caryophyllene-(11) & C\({}_{15}\)H\({}_{24}\) & 87-44-5 & 281, 149, 147 & x & x & - \\ \hline
13 & Cubenol & C\({}_{15}\)H\({}_{26}\)O & 21284-22-0 & 207, 161, 119 & x & - & x \\ \hline
14 &
\begin{tabular}{c} 1,1,4a-Trimethyl-5,6- \\ dimethylenedechaydronaphthalene \\ \end{tabular} & C\({}_{15}\)H\({}_{24}\) & - & 205, 204, 161 & x & - & - \\ \hline
15 & Copaene & C\({}_{15}\)H\({}_{24}\) & 3856-25-5 & 204, 119, 161 & - & - & x \\ \hline
16 & Viridiforene & C\({}_{15}\)H\({}_{24}\) & 21747-46-6 & 204, 161, 133 & - & - & x \\ \hline
17 & Cadina-1(10),4-diene & C\({}_{15}\)H\({}_{24}\) & 16729-01-4 & 205, 204, 161 & - & - & x \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{18} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{(4-isopropyl-1-methyl \\  & 6,7 dimethylenebicyclo \\  & [3.2.1]octo-8 yl) methanol} & C\({}_{15}\)H\({}_{24}\)O & - & 191, 149, 135 & - & - & x \\ \hline
19 & Patchoulene & C\({}_{15}\)H\({}_{24}\) & 560-32-7 & 204, 189, 161 & - & x & - \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: _Cont._  
Figure 2: Effects of parameters: sample weight, extraction time, and extraction temperature on the extraction of volatiles using different fibers for HS-SPME-(**a**) DVB/CAR/PDMS, (**b**) PA, and (**c**) PDMS/DVB. Through [PERSON]'s diagram, generated from the total area, it is possible to observe that for all parameters evaluated, there was no significant difference when using PA fibers (Figure 2b) and PDMS/DVB (Figure 2c). However, a significant difference was observed when using DVB/CAR/PDMS fibers and for the variation in sample weight and extraction time (Figure 2a). The graph shows a positive correlation between the increase in weight and the extraction of analytes, so the greater the sample weight, the greater the extraction efficiency. Despite this, when we evaluated the influence of the extraction time, we observed that increasing time decreased the efficiency of analyte extraction. The total area of the chromatographic peaks corresponding to the grumixama sample for each investigated fiber was used as a response to the presented experimental runs to obtain the response surface graphs, as shown in Figure 3. The graphs show the behavior of the extraction effectiveness of the analytes concerning the parameters evaluated. Figure 3: _Cont_. By evaluating the response surface graphs obtained from the evaluation of the DVB/CAR/PDMS fiber data, confirmation of the influence of sample weight and time on the efficiency of analyte extraction could be observed. In addition to this, it can also be inferred that there was no significant influence on the parameters evaluated for the PA fiber. For the behavior of the graphs when using the PDMS/DVB fiber, no significant difference was observed, despite the response surface graphic showing a tendency to increase the efficiency of the process with an increase in temperature and sample weight.