Sucralose screening in European surface waters using a solid-phase extraction-liquid chromatography–triple quadrupole mass spectrometry method

Photo Degradation of Cotnaminants of Emerging concern (CECs) under Simulated Solar Radiation: Implications for their Environmental Fate

“…Previous studies using offline sample preparation in surface water, drinking water, groundwater and sewage effluents reported MDLs in the range of 10 ng/L to 25 µg/L (Loos et al, 2009b;Scheurer et al, 2009b;Ferrer and Thurman, 2010a;Mawhinney et al, 2011b;Minten et al, 2011b;Oppenheimer et al, 2011a;Ordonez et al, 2012a), which are consistent with the present study. Heeb et al and Neset et al have previously reported an online SPE LC-MS/MS determination of sucralose in wastewater, surface and drinking water; however presenting higher detection limits (Heeb et al, 2012) or similar detection with larger volume of sample (20mL) (Neset et al, 2010).…”

“…The monthly average concentration was 9.1 ± 2.9 µg/L. The concentrations found in reclaimed water are comparable with previously published levels of sucralose in wastewater (Minten et al, 2011b;Ordonez et al, 2012a) and at least 10 times higher than concentrations found in surface and groundwaters (Loos et al, 2009b;Scheurer et al, 2009b;Ferrer and Thurman, 2010a;Mawhinney et al, 2011b;Minten et al, 2011b;Oppenheimer et al, 2011a). Based on the results obtained, month wise distribution of sucralose in reclaimed water was uniform; with no observed temporal trend and statistically difference between the wet season (April to October) and the dry season (November to March) as seen in Figure 39.…”

“…Thus the source of variation in the concentration of sucralose among samples might be caused by the time of sample collection, residence time of the waters before distribution in drinking water treatment plant and most likely be by point sources of contamination. Levels of sucralose in drinking water samples were similar to surface and groundwater in Europe (Loos et al, 2009a;Scheurer et al, 2009a;Mawhinney et al, 2011a;Minten et al, 2011a). Recent reports on U.S. ground and drinking waters (Ferrer and Thurman, 2010b;Mawhinney et al, 2011a) showed concentration of sucralose in the µg/L range, relatively higher than those reported in Europe and in the present study.…”

“…Sucralose is a chlorinated derivative of sucrose and used as an artificial sweetener in many consumer products worldwide. Because of its magnitude of usage over the last few years, sucralose is one of the most frequently detected artificial sweeteners in river, coastal and marine waters in concentrations reaching up to 1 µg/L (Loos et al, 2009b;Mead et al, 2009b). The surfactant used for the oil spill cleanup, DOSS was detected 300 km away from application site and 64 days after its application has been ceased (Kujawinski et al, 2011).…”

“…To date, artificial sweeteners have been determined by HPLC with reverse phase chromatography using different buffer systems, ion pairing reagents and specific derivatization procedures (Ferrer and Thurman, 2010a) and by GC-MS (Mead et al, 2009b). More recently, studies employing liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-ESI-MS/MS) have been published for the analysis of sucralose in water samples by direct injection (higher detection limits) or offline SPE (Loos et al, 2009b;Scheurer et al, 2009b;Ferrer and Thurman, 2010a;Mawhinney et al, 2011b;Minten et al, 2011b;Ordonez et al, 2012a). Nowadays the use of online SPE has shown important improvements such as higher sensitivity, analysis of smaller sample volumes, limited sample loss, no carry-over and robust and reproducible detection, while increasing sample throughput (Neset et al, 2010;Heeb et al, 2012;Panditi et al, 2013;Quinete et al, 2013).…”