The potential and challenges of elemental speciation by capillary electrophoresis-inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and electrospray or ion spray mass spectrometry

Sample introduction systems for the analysis of liquid microsamples by ICP-AES and ICP-MS

“…Further measurements of the efficiency of the analyte transport towards the plasma (ε n ) indicated that for the HEN this parameter took a value close to 60% at 10 µl/min, whereas it dropped down to 8% at 120 µl/min [28,29]. At low liquid flow rates (c.a., 2 µl/min) aerosol transport efficiencies close to 90% were reported [25].…”

“…It has been claimed that, at low liquid flow rates, the transport of solution is favoured with respect to that obtained at conventional values of this parameter, because coalescence is less frequently produced than if the liquid flow rate rises [21,24,25].…”

Capillary electrophoresis‐inductively coupled plasma‐mass spectrometry: A report on technical principles and problem solutions, potential, and limitations of this technology as well as on examples of application

“…Usually, 200 000 -700 000 theoretical plates are achieved. The lack of a stationary phase having a big surface is considered as advantage of CE in speciation [5,18]. The molecules are moving with different velocity in the electric field.…”

“…Especially the separation potential of CE [3], the superior detection capability of inductively coupled plasma (ICP)-MS, and the diversity of potential applications brings CE-ICP-MS coupling into the central focus of element speciation, where typically the separation of species is followed by element-selective detection [1][2][3]. The key to successfully combining two techniques, such as CE and ICP-MS, is properly interfacing the techniques, learning how variables generally associated with one of the techniques can affect the other, and then controlling the relevant variables for best overall performance (depending on the criteria of interest) [4,5]. Three major requirements for interfacing both instruments have been described [4][5][6][7][8]: (i) the closing of electrical circuit from CE, (ii) optimized nebulization efficiency and mass transport into ICP-MS, and (iii) a low dead volume.…”

“…The key to successfully combining two techniques, such as CE and ICP-MS, is properly interfacing the techniques, learning how variables generally associated with one of the techniques can affect the other, and then controlling the relevant variables for best overall performance (depending on the criteria of interest) [4,5]. Three major requirements for interfacing both instruments have been described [4][5][6][7][8]: (i) the closing of electrical circuit from CE, (ii) optimized nebulization efficiency and mass transport into ICP-MS, and (iii) a low dead volume. Several successful approaches were described in the literature for setting up such an interface, mostly working with similar technical solutions based on pneumatic nebulization systems, e.g., [4,7,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15].…”