4.6 Article

Determination of nitrosamines in water by gas chromatography/chemical ionization/selective ion trapping mass spectrometry

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1218, 期 14, 页码 1808-1814

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2011.02.009

关键词

Nitrosamines; Water analysis; Solid phase extraction; Gas chromatography/chemical ionization/selective ion trapping mass spectrometry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) method for determination of nine N-nitrosamines (NAs) in water is described. Two ionization modes, electron impact (El) and chemical ionization (CI) with methanol, as well as different ion analysis techniques, i.e. full scan, selected ion storage (SIS) and tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) were tested. Chemical ionization followed by SIS resulted the mass spectrometric method of choice, with detection limits in the range of 1-2 ng/L. Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) with coconut charcoal cartridges was applied to extract NAs from real samples, according EPA Method 521. Drinking water samples were collected from seven surface- and two groundwater treatment plants. Three surface water treatment plants were sampled before and after addition of O-3/CIO2 to observe the effect of disinfection on NAs' formation. N-nitrosodiethylamine (NDEA), n-nitrosodipropylamine (NDPA), n-nitrosomorpholine (NMOR) and n-nitrosodibutylamine (NDBA) were found up to concentrations exceeding three times the risk level of 10 ng/L set by the California Department of Public Health. Because dermal adsorption has been recently indicated as a new contamination route of exposure to NAs for people who practice swimming activity, water samples from five swimming pools in the Bologna (Italy) area were collected. N-nitrosopyrrolidine (NPYR) was detected in all samples at concentrations larger than 50 ng/L, likely as a disinfection by-product from the amino acid precursor proline, a main constituent of skin collagen. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据