## 3 Results and Discussion
### Gc-Ms
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**No.** & **Volatile Compounds** & **lg** & **ID** & **LRUng** & **LRUng** & **F-Ratio** & & & & & **Variety** & & & \\  & **(minas)** & & & & & & & & & **MI** & **PO** & **MA** & **KR** & **SK** \\ \hline
30 & Actinoid ethyl ether II & 41:49 & MS, LRI & 1723 & 1723 & 2.76 & 0.15 \(\pm\) 0.07\({}^{\rm th}\) & 0.25 \(\pm\) 0.16\({}^{\rm s}\) & 0.20 \(\pm\) 0.15\({}^{\rm s}\) & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.01\({}^{\rm h}\) & 0.15 \(\pm\) 0.04\({}^{\rm th}\) \\  & _Rozemols_ & & & & & & & & & & \\
31 & Ethyl cinnamate & 57:33 & S, MS, LRI & 2111 & 2112 & 6.96 & 0.41 \(\pm\) 0.19\({}^{\rm h}\) & 1.16 \(\pm\) 0.78\({}^{\rm s}\) & 0.39 \(\pm\) 0.08\({}^{\rm h}\) & 0.21 \(\pm\) 0.10\({}^{\rm h}\) & 0.16 \(\pm\) 0.10\({}^{\rm h}\) \\
32 & Benzaldehyde & 3126 & S, MS, LRI & 1508 & 1508 & 1508 & 0.84 & 1.66 \(\pm\) 1.25 & 34.8 \(\pm\) 5.40 & 1.17 \(\pm\) 0.54 & 2.56 \(\pm\) 0.81 & 3.11 \(\pm\) 1.57 \\  & _Alcohis_ & & & & & & & & & & \\
33 & 1-Headamid & 2335 & S, MS, LRI & 1356 & 1357 & 25.56 & 792.14 \(\pm\) 0.14\({}^{\rm h}\) & 949.09 \(\pm\) 197.96\({}^{\rm h}\) & 899.15 \(\pm\) 171.18\({}^{\rm h}\) & 321.98 \(\pm\) 32.09\({}^{\rm s}\) & 1540.49 \(\pm\) 146.31\({}^{\rm s}\) \\
34 & _cis_-3-Heynen-1-01 & 2503 & S, MS, LRI & 1379 & 1379 & 127.73 & 47.98 \(\pm\) 0.04\({}^{\rm d}\) & 299.33 \(\pm\) 1132.3\({}^{\rm h}\) & 193.20 \(\pm\) 1223.2\({}^{\rm h}\) & 261.66 \(\pm\) 463\({}^{\rm s}\) & 54.67 \(\pm\) 2.37\({}^{\rm s}\) \\
35 & 2-Phenylethanol & 4852 & S, MS, LRI & 1891 & 1693 & 17.6 & 20(0.07) \(\pm\) 0.671 & 33.17 \(\pm\) 4673.3\({}^{\rm s}\) & 321.12 \(\pm\) 1072.0\({}^{\rm s}\) & 207.15 \(\pm\) 0.138 & 7.65 \(\pm\) 106.10\({}^{\rm h}\) \\
36 & _trans_-3-Heynen-1-04 & 2403 & S, MS, LRI & 1361 & 1361 & 1.73 & 61.38 \(\pm\) 24.09 & 45.64 \(\pm\) 17.99 & 46.57 \(\pm\) 10.28 & 4.09 \(\pm\) 10.26 & 63.87 \(\pm\) 22.80 \\ \hline \end{tabular} 
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{_Acids_} & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
37 & Decanoic acid & 62:49 & S, MS, LRI & 2257 & 2288 & 5.05 & 646.02 \(\pm\) 179.70\({}^{\rm h}\) & 1627.60 \(\pm\) 699.33\({}^{\rm h}\) & 1062.71 \(\pm\) 505.33\({}^{\rm h}\) & 994.33 \(\pm\) 67.19\({}^{\rm h}\) & 1090. Although the content and composition of terpenes in grapes and wines is principally pre-determined by variety, they are susceptible to modulation in response to many factors, such as vicultural parameters including soil characteristics, exposure to sunlight, water status, defoliation, crop thinning, etc. [34; 50], as well as pre-fermentation and fermentation practices and conditions [35; 36]. Except the effect of variety, the differences between the investigated monovarietal wines were probably partly caused by different geographical origin (Istria, Dalmatia, continental Croatia), so the effects of variety and location probably acted in synergy. It is indeed known that low temperatures favor the production of aroma compounds in grapes [51], so it is possible that the highest concentration of monoterpenes in Skrlet wines from continental Croatia characterized by lower temperatures was at least partly due to the effect of climate. The same could be deduced for Malvazija wines coming from the northern, somewhat colder part of the Adriatic coast. Conversely, elevated temperatures have potential to reduce the aromatic potential of grapes [52], which is possibly a reason for somewhat lower concentrations of monoterpenes in Dalmatian Posip and Marastina wines. Kraljevina wines, which had the lowest concentrations of terpenes despite originating from the continental part, could be an exception that confirms the rule. C\({}_{13}\)-Norisoprenoids are also secondary metabolites in grapes, present in both aromatic and neutral varieties. They are formed as biodegradation products of carotenoid molecules, such as lutein, \(\beta\)-carotene, violaxanthin, and neoxanthin, via numerous formation mechanisms and intermediates during pre-fermentative steps, fermentation, and aging [53; 54].