## 2 Results
### Chemical Composition of Methanolic Extract after Derivatization  
The GC analyses carried out on the silylated methanolic extract allowed the detection of twenty-five components belonging to different chemical classes (Table 4 and the identifiers were also reported (Table S4)). The sugar fraction was the most abundant since sucrose reached the highest percentage value (62.3%). Among detected alcohols, D-pinitol  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(\mathbf{N}^{\circ}\)**of**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**COMPONENT 1**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**LR1 2**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**LR1 3**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**(\%)**} \\ \hline
1 & palmitoleic acid, C16:1n7 & & 1930 & 2.9 \(\pm\) 0.02 \\
2 & palmitic acid, C16:0 & 1973 & 38.7 \(\pm\) 0.03 \\
3 & linoleic acid, C182:n6 & & 2130 & 5.9 \(\pm\) 0.03 \\
4 & linoleic acid, C18:3n3 & 2143 & 48.2 \(\pm\) 0.12 \\
5 & stearic acid, C18:0 & & 2178 & 4.3 \(\pm\) 0.03 \\ \hline  & SUM & & & 100.0 \\  & Saturated FAs & & & 43.0 \\  & Unsaturated FAs & & & 57.0 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* The components are reported according to their elution order on apolar column (VF-1 ms); 2 Linear Retention Indices measured on apolar column; 3 Linear Retention indices from literature.  
\end{table}
Table 3: FAs content (percentage mean value \(\pm\) standard deviation) of the transesterified extract, as determined by GC–MS.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(\mathbf{N}^{\circ}\)**of**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**\(m/z\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Chemical**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Tentative Identification**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Average**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Standard**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Emission**} \\ \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Compounds**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**\(m/z\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Formula**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Tentative Identification**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Samples**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Emission**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**(\%)**} \\ \hline
16 & 73.065 & C4H9O+ & Isobutanal/butanone/methylpropanal & 13.76 & 4.23 & 1.91 \\
17 & 83.086 & C6H11+ & C6 compounds (hexenal, & 1.16 & 0.57 & 0.16 \\
18 & 85.065 & C5H9O+ & Methyl butenal & 2.27 & 0.53 & 0.31 \\
19 & 87.044 & C4H7O2+ & 2,3-Butanedione; Butyrolactone & 1.06 & 0.31 & 0.15 \\
20 & 87.080 & C5H11O+ & Pentanal/3-methylbutanal & 11.87 & 3.28 & 1.65 \\
21 & 93.069 & C7H9+ & Terpene fragment & 2.28 & 0.37 & 0.32 \\
22 & 107.086 & C8H11+ & Terpene fragment & 1.69 & 1.06 & 0.23 \\
23 & 109.101 & C8H13+ & Terpene fragment & 2.10 & 0.55 & 0.29 \\
24 & 133.101 & C10H13+ & Terpene fragment & 1.5 & 0.34 & 0.21 \\ \hline
25 & 205.195 & C15H25+ & Sesquiterpenes like compounds & 1.58 & 0.40 & 0.22 \\ \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Total Terpene Emission (ppbv)} & 9.14 & 2.19 & 1.26 \\ \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Total VOCs Emission (ppbv)} & 720.90 & 152.55 & 100.00 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* The components are reported according to their elution order on apolar column (VF-1 ms); 2 Linear Retention Indices measured on apolar column; 3 Linear Retention indices from literature.  
\end{table}
Table 2: _Cont._(2.8%) was the major component, followed by glycerol (1.1%). Detected organic acids represented a minor share, where only pyruvate acid reached 0.1%. The relative chromatogram is reported in Figure S3.