Determination of methylmercury and mercury(II) in a marine ecosystem using solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

Mishra, Saurabh; Tripathi, R. M.; Bhalke, Sunil; Shukla, Vikesh Kumar; Puranik, V. D.

doi:10.1016/j.aca.2005.07.026

Cited by 106 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) is widely used for analysing volatile and semi-volatile compounds in complex mixtures [1][2][3][4][5]. This technique is being increasingly employed in the area of metabolomics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An automated method for peak detection and matching in large gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry data sets

Dixon

Brereton

Soini

et al. 2006

Journal of Chemometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new approach for peak detection and matching has been developed and applied to two data sets. The first consisted of the Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) samples of 965 human sweat samples obtained from a population of 197 individuals. The second data set contained 500 synthetic chromatograms, and was generated to validate the peak detection and matching methods. The size of both of the data sets (around 500 000 detectable peaks over all chromatograms in data set 1, and around 100 000 in data set 2) would make it unfeasible to check manually whether peaks are matched. In the method described, the first procedure involves pre-processing the data before carrying out the second procedure of peak detection. The final procedure of peak matching consists of three stages: (a) finding potential target peaks in the full data set over all chromatograms; (b) matching peaks in the chromatograms to these targets to form clusters of spectra associated with each target; (c) merging targets where appropriate. Peak detection and matching were applied to both data sets, and the importance of stage (c) of peak matching described. In addition to the analysis of the synthetic chromatograms, the method was also validated by shuffling the original order of the sweat chromatograms and performing the methods independently on the newly shuffled data.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An automated method for peak detection and matching in large gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry data sets

Dixon

Brereton

Soini

et al. 2006

Journal of Chemometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Various preconcentration methods have been used for extraction of mercury from environmental samples, such as liquid liquid extraction (LLE) [3,4], liquid-liquid microextraction (LLME) [5][6][7], cloud point extraction (CPE) [8,9], solid phase extraction (SPE) [10,11] and solid phase microextraction (SPME) [12,13]. Also, other sequential and parallel extraction methods, formation of complexes and chelates and indirect methods have been much used in mercury ion studies [14][15][16][17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, other sequential and parallel extraction methods, formation of complexes and chelates and indirect methods have been much used in mercury ion studies [14][15][16][17]. Interestingly, speciation identification and determination are usually included, such as EtHg, MeHg and PhHg, together with Hg 2+ [5,6,8,9,11,14,15,18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of mercury(II) in water samples using dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction and back extraction along with capillary zone electrophoresis

Lü

et al. 2011

Microchim Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have developed a method for the determination of mercury in water samples that combines dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME) with backextraction (BE) and detection by capillary zone electrophoresis. DLLME is found to be a simple, cost-effective and rapid method for extraction and preconcentration. The BE procedure is based on the fact that the stability constant of the hydrophilic chelate of Hg(II) with Lcysteine is much larger than that of the respective complex with 1-(2-pyridylazo)-2-naphthol. Factors affecting complex formation and extraction efficiency (such as pH value, concentration of the chelating agent, time of ultrasonication and extraction, and type and quantity of disperser solvent) were optimized. Under the optimal conditions, the enrichment factor is 625, and the limit of detection is 0.62 μg L −1 . The calibration plot is linear in the range between 1 and 1,000 μg L −1 (R 2 =0.9991), and the relative standard deviation (RSD, for n=6) is 4.1%. Recoveries were determined with tap water and seawater spiked at levels of 10 and 100 μg L −1 , respectively, and ranged from 86.6% to 95.1%, with corresponding RSDs of 3.95-5.90%.

show abstract

“…While OTs have an anthropogenic source due to their past and present use as catalysts, stabilisers in plastics, wood preservatives, and biocides [2], MeHg + may be formed in the environment by methylation of elemental and ionic mercury in biological processes [3]. Due to the high bioaccumulation capacity and toxicity of these compounds, there is a pressing need for development of species-selective analytical methodologies for environmental matrices [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimisation of the headspace‐solid phase microextraction for organomercury and organotin compound determination in sediment and biota

Delgado¹,

Usobiaga

Prieto

et al. 2008

J of Separation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Headspace solid-phase microextraction was optimised for the simultaneous preconcentration of methylmercury (MeHg+), monobutyltin, dibutyltin, tributyltin, monophenyltin (MPhT), diphenyltin (DPhT), and triphenyltin (TPhT) from sediments and biota. Extraction time (3-24 min), extraction temperature (20-90 degrees C), desorption time (1-10.4 min), desorption temperature (152-260 degrees C), and sample volume (5-22 mL) were simultaneously optimised, while variables such as fibre type (30 microm polydimethylsiloxane, PDMS), pH (acetic acid/sodium acetate, HOAc/NaOAc, 2 mol/L, pH approximately 4.8), the concentration of the derivatisation agent (sodium tetraethylborate, NaBEt4, 0.1% m/v), and the ionic strength (fixed by the buffer solution) were kept constant. The variables were optimised according to the experiments proposed by the MultiSimplex program and the responses were considered in order to establish the optimum conditions. The repeatability (relative standard deviation, RSD, 5-20.6%) and limits of detection (LODs, 0.05-0.97 ng/g) of the overall method were also estimated. The lowest precisions were obtained for DPhT and TPhT. The optimised preconcentration method was applied to the determination of MeHg+), butyl- and phenyltins in certified reference materials (IAEA-405 MeHg+) in estuarine sediment, BCR-646 butyl- and phenyltins in marine sediment, BCR-463 MeHg+ in tuna fish, DOLT-2 MeHg+ in dogfish liver, and BCR-477 butyltins in mussel tissue) by GC with microwave-induced plasma/atomic-emission detection.

show abstract

Determination of methylmercury and mercury(II) in a marine ecosystem using solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

Cited by 106 publications

References 33 publications

An automated method for peak detection and matching in large gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry data sets

An automated method for peak detection and matching in large gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry data sets

Determination of mercury(II) in water samples using dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction and back extraction along with capillary zone electrophoresis

Optimisation of the headspace‐solid phase microextraction for organomercury and organotin compound determination in sediment and biota

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About