## 1 Introduction  
Considerable variation can be found in the aroma of commercial wines, even when produced from the same grape variety [1; 2; 3]. This variation in wine aroma (and thus wine chemistry) can arise from differences in winemaking practices [4] but can also reflect differences in concentration of odorants or their precursors in the original grape material [5; 6; 7]. Several grape volatiles are reported to be useful markers for eventual wine sensory qualities. For example, 3-isobutyl-2-methoxypyrazine (IBMP, \"green pepper aroma\") is a potent odorant found above its sensory threshold in Bordeaux-type grapes such as Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon. IBMP concentration in grapes is reported to be predictive of resulting red wine quality [8]. Monoterpenes such as linalool (\"honeysuckle, floral aroma\") are the key odorants primarily responsible for the aroma of Muscat-type grapes such as Muscat Blanc and Muscat of Alexandria [9] and is therefore a marker for the intensity of Muscat wine aroma [10]. However, one challenge with using odorants as part of routine quality assessments of grapes is that these compounds have low sensory thresholds and are present at trace concentrations, e.g., the odor threshold for IBMP in red wine is \(\sim\)10 ng/L [11] and, for linalool in white wine is 25 ug/L [12]. Trace odorants in grapes and other foodstuffs are typically measured by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), generally after a preconcentration and extraction step such as headspace solid-phase microextraction (SPME). In a typical SPME analysis, volatiles are isolated onto a fiber coated with an ab/adsorbent material, and the fiber subsequently desorbed into the GC injector port [13]. SPME-GC-MS is sensitive, robust, and easily automated, but is also throughput-limited (30-60 min/sample) due to the time necessary for GC separation and/or SPME extraction [14]. Several recent reviews have highlighted the advantages of using thin-film (TF)-SPME devices in place of classic fiber-based SPME geometries [15; 16; 17]. TF-SPME is readily coupled with ambient-ionization mass spectrometry approaches that allow for direct sample introduction into an MS without a chromatographic step, like direct analysis in real time (DART-MS). For example, TF-SPME devices consisting of a biocompatible polymer coated onto stainless steel meshes were successfully interfaced with DART-MS for analysis of pesticides, with low \(\upmu\)g/L detection limits and analysis times \(<1\) min/sample [15]. These reports of TF-SPME-DART-MS focused on applications for non-volatiles, likely because the adsorbent particles employed are less appropriate for volatile extraction. We have recently reported on an alternative TF-SPME approach, \"SPMESH\" (solid phase mesh enhanced sorption from headspace), which can be combined with DART-MS for rapid analysis of trace volatiles [18; 19; 20]. In its original form, SPMESH devices consisted of commercial OpenSpot(tm) cards, in which the stainless steel mesh of the cards was coated with an absorbent layer (polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), PDMS-divinylbenzene (DVB) [19; 20]. Extractions were performed by positioning the coated mesh in the headspace of a sample vial. Using these \"one-shot\" SPMESH devices, we evaluated the use of SPMESH-DART-MS against SPME-GC-MS for measurement of IBMP and linalool in real grape samples [19]. However, this work had several shortcomings, primarily that it could not be readily automated in the one-shot format and therefore method throughput was limited. Additionally, in our evaluation of the one-shot approach, a poor correlation was observed at native, low ng/L-level concentrations of IBMP [19]. In subsequent work, we produced SPMESH devices by laser-etching a fine mesh pattern (\(0.5\times 0.5\) mm) into thin PDMS sheets (\"SPMESH sheets\"). These sheets were of similar dimensions to standard multi-well plates, which allowed for parallel headspace extraction and preconcentration of volatiles from multiple samples [18].