4.5 Article

Optimization and Comparison of ESI and APCI LC-MS/MS Methods: A Case Study of Irgarol 1051, Diuron, and their Degradation Products in Environmental Samples

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13361-011-0191-z

关键词

Optimization strategy; Electrospray ionization; Atmospheric pressure chemical ionization; Phenylureas; Triazines; 3,4-Dichloroaniline; DOE (Design of Experiments); Ion ratio; confirmation; Matrix effect; Solvent effect

资金

  1. Greek State Scholarships Foundation
  2. Greek General Secretariat for Research and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A systematic and detailed optimization strategy for the development of atmospheric pressure ionization (API) LC-MS/MS methods for the determination of Irgarol 1051, Diuron, and their degradation products (M1, DCPMU, DCPU, and DCA) in water, sediment, and mussel is described. Experimental design was applied for the optimization of the ion sources parameters. Comparison of ESI and APCI was performed in positive- and negative-ion mode, and the effect of the mobile phase on ionization was studied for both techniques. Special attention was drawn to the ionization of DCA, which presents particular difficulty in API techniques. Satisfactory ionization of this small molecule is achieved only with ESI positive-ion mode using acetonitrile in the mobile phase; the instrumental detection limit is 0.11 ng/mL. Signal suppression was qualitatively estimated by using purified and non-purified samples. The sample preparation for sediments and mussels is direct and simple, comprising only solvent extraction. Mean recoveries ranged from 71% to 110%, and the corresponding (%) RSDs ranged between 4.1 and 14%. The method limits of detection ranged between 0.6 and 3.5 ng/g for sediment and mussel and from 1.3 to 1.8 ng/L for sea water. The method was applied to sea water, marine sediment, and mussels, which were obtained from marinas in Attiki, Greece. Ion ratio confirmation was used for the identification of the compounds.

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

4.5
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