4.6 Article

Comparison of several sorbents for continuous in situ derivatization and preconcentration of low-molecular mass aldehydes prior to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometric determination in water samples

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
Volume 1216, Issue 38, Pages 6554-6559

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2009.08.004

Keywords

Aldehydes; Sorbent comparison; Solid-phase extraction; In situ derivatization; 2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine; LC-MS/MS; Water samples

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education and Science [CTQ2007-63962]
  2. Junta de Andalucia [P07-FWM-02493]
  3. FEDER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A comparative study of six SPE conventional and non-conventional sorbent materials (silica RP-C-18, LiChrolut EN, Amberlite XAD-2, C-60 fullerene, multiwall carbon nanotubes and graphitized carbon black) was carried out for the in situ derivatization/preconcentration of eight aldehydes with 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine. Although two of the sorbents, LiChrolut EN and RP-C18, turned out to be the most suitable for ultratrace analysis of the aldehydes, LiChrolut EN showed higher capacity for 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine trapping (higher efficiency for the in situ derivatization reaction) and superior performance in terms of sensitivity (likely a result of its increased sample breakthrough volume). The LiChrolut EN-based method combined with LC-MS/MS allowed the determination of aldehydes over the linear range of 0.02-15 mu g l(-1), with limits of detection at 6-24 ng l(-1) and precision of 3.2-7.2%. The method was applied to determine low-molecular mass aldehydes in water samples. These results indicate that the method proposed is a straightforward and sensitive tool for the determination of these aldehydes in water samples providing better results than those LC-MS/MS reported alternatives in terms of the limit of detection, sample requirements for analysis and cost. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available