The Efficient Extraction of Some Common Organic Explosives from Hand Swabs for Analysis by Gas Liquid and Thin-Layer Chromatography

Twibell, J. D.; Wright, T. E.; Sanger, D.G.; Bramley, Robert K.; Lloyd, John; Downs, Norman S.

doi:10.1520/jfs11660j

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Analyte recoveries of less than 20% were returned for the cotton ball swabs and less than 50% for the rayon swabs using either extraction solvent. These values are well below previously reported recoveries using cotton ball swabs with alternative extraction methods and solvents (2,14,26,27,29,31). The decreased analyte recoveries were attributed to the length of the wait time (15 min) which allowed for residual solvent evaporation and greater residue binding.…”

Section: Influence Of Extraction Solvent On the Recovery Of Organic Esupporting

confidence: 65%

“…Procedures for the extraction of organic residues from cotton balls and alcohol swabs have included the use of centrifugal extraction, whereby a swab is suspended in a tube and centrifuged to remove residues , syringe elution which involves the swab being placed into a syringe barrel and solvent drawn up through the syringe , ultrasonication , and the use of physical agitation of the swab surface . Reported analyte recoveries using centrifugal extraction have ranged from 63% to 74% to greater than 80% with slightly lower recoveries reported using the syringe elution method .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparison of Common Swabbing Materials for the Recovery of Organic and Inorganic Explosive Residues

DeTata

Collins

McKinley

2013

Journal of Forensic Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The efficiency of solvent based extraction methods used to remove explosive residues from four different swab types was investigated. Known amounts of organic and inorganic residues were spiked onto a swab surface with acetonitrile or ethanol:water combined with ultrasonication or physical manipulation used to extract the residues from each swab. The efficiency of each procedure was then calculated using liquid chromatography-ultraviolet detection for organic residues and ion chromatography for inorganic residues. Results indicated that acetonitrile combined with physical agitation proved to be the most efficient method; returning analyte recoveries c. 95% for both alcohol based swabs and cotton balls. Inorganic residues were efficiently extracted using ethanol:water, while the use of acetonitrile followed by water significantly reduced the recovery of inorganic residues. Swab storage conditions were then investigated with results indicating decreased storage temperatures are required to retain the more volatile explosives.

show abstract

Section: Influence Of Extraction Solvent On the Recovery Of Organic Esupporting

confidence: 65%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Common Swabbing Materials for the Recovery of Organic and Inorganic Explosive Residues

DeTata

Collins

McKinley

2013

Journal of Forensic Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are many techniques by which explosives have been analyzed (). These include the following: gas chromatog raphy ( − ), liquid chromatography ( − ), mass spectrometry ( − ), thin-layer chromatography ( − ), and various colorimetric test kits involving both chemical reactions and immunoassays ( − ). Of these, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) is by far the most widely used and accepted as the analytical standard for environmental analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of a Portable Immunosensor To Detect the Explosives TNT and RDX in Groundwater Samples

Bart

Judd

Hoffman

et al. 1997

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the summer of 1995, the EPA conducted a performance evaluation of several commercially available test kits and two prototype biosensor devices to determine if any of these technologies were feasible as an alternative to the standard EPA SW-846 Method 8330 test for explosives in aqueous samples. These on-site assays offer potential advantages in cost, assay time, and convenience over the traditional analysis via high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The continuous flow immunosensor (CFI) was one of the biosensors participating in this trial, which took place at two Superfund sites located on military bases. The CFI uses a small column filled with plastic beads containing immobilized antibodies against the explosive being assayed and a fluorescent dye-labeled explosive analog. Detection occurs when the native explosive in the sample is swept into the column and displaces some of the dye-labeled analog, which is quantified via a fluorometer. Results from these tests showed that the CFI could produce data comparable to HPLC with no significant problems with cross-reactivity of the antibodies against other explosives or their breakdown products.

show abstract

Advances in Analysis of Gunshot Residue

Romolo

2019

Emerging Technologies for the Analysis of Forensic Traces

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Efficient Extraction of Some Common Organic Explosives from Hand Swabs for Analysis by Gas Liquid and Thin-Layer Chromatography

Cited by 12 publications

References 2 publications

A Comparison of Common Swabbing Materials for the Recovery of Organic and Inorganic Explosive Residues

A Comparison of Common Swabbing Materials for the Recovery of Organic and Inorganic Explosive Residues

Application of a Portable Immunosensor To Detect the Explosives TNT and RDX in Groundwater Samples

Advances in Analysis of Gunshot Residue

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About