4.6 Article

Exploration of robust operating conditions in inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry

Journal

SPECTROCHIMICA ACTA PART B-ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY
Volume 58, Issue 11, Pages 1927-1944

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0584-8547(03)00180-0

Keywords

plasma; mass spectrometry; robust conditions

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

'Robust' conditions, as defined by Mermet and co-workers for inductively coupled plasma (ICP)-atomic emission spectrometry, minimize matrix effects on analyte signals, and are obtained by increasing power and reducing nebulizer gas flow. In ICP-mass spectrometry (MS), it is known that reduced nebulizer gas flow usually leads to more robust conditions such that matrix effects are reduced. In this work, robust conditions for ICP-MS have been determined by optimizing for accuracy in the determination of analytes in a multi-element solution with various interferents (Al, Ba, Cs, K, Na), by varying power, nebulizer gas flow, sample introduction rate and ion lens voltage. The goal of the work was to determine which operating parameters were the most important in reducing matrix effects, and whether different interferents yielded the same robust conditions. Reduction in nebulizer gas flow and in sample input rate led to a significantly decreased interference, while an increase in power seemed to have a lesser effect. Once the other parameters had been adjusted to their robust values, there was no additional improvement in accuracy attainable by adjusting the ion lens voltage. The robust conditions were universal, since, for all the interferents and analytes studied, the optimum was found at the same operating conditions. One drawback to the use of robust conditions was the slightly reduced sensitivity; however, in the context of 'intelligent' instruments, the concept of 'robust conditions' is useful in many cases. (C) 2003 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