• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Springer Open Choice >Comparison of electrospray and UniSpray a novel atmospheric pressure ionization interface for LC-MS/MS analysis of 81 pesticide residues in food and water matrices
【2h】

Comparison of electrospray and UniSpray a novel atmospheric pressure ionization interface for LC-MS/MS analysis of 81 pesticide residues in food and water matrices

机译：电喷雾和UniSpray（一种新型的常压电离界面）的比较用于LC-MS / MS分析食品和水基质中的81种农药残留

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In mass spectrometry, the type and design of ionization source play a key role on the performance of a given instrument. Therefore, it is of paramount importance to evaluate newly developed sources for their suitability to analyze food contaminants like pesticide residues. Here, we carried out a head-to-head comparison of key extraction and analytical performance parameters of an electrospray ionization (ESI) source with a new atmospheric pressure ionization source, UniSpray (US). The two interfaces were evaluated in three matrices of different properties (coffee, apple, and water) to determine if multiresidue analysis of 81 pesticides by QuEChERS extraction and LC-MS/MS analysis could be improved. Depending on the matrix and irrespective of the chemical class, US provided a tremendous gain in signal intensity (22- to 32-fold in peak area, 6- to 7-fold in peak height), a threefold to fourfold increase in signal-to-noise ratio, a mild gain in the range of compounds that can be quantified, and up to twofold improvement of recovery. UniSpray offered comparable linearity and precision of the analyses with ESI, and did not affect the ion ratio. A gain in sensitivity of many compounds was observed with US, but in general, the two ionization interfaces did not show significant difference in LOD and LOQ. UniSpray suffered less signal suppression; the matrix effect was in average 3 to 4 times more pronounced, but showed better values than ESI. With no effect on recovery efficiency, US improved the overall process efficiency 3 to 4 times more than ESI. Graphical abstract
机译：在质谱法中，电离源的类型和设计对给定仪器的性能起关键作用。因此，评估新开发的来源是否适合分析食品污染物（如农药残留）至关重要。在这里，我们对电喷雾电离（ESI）源与新的大气压电离源UniSpray（US）的关键提取和分析性能参数进行了正面对比。在三种不同性质的基质（咖啡，苹果和水）中评估了这两种界面，以确定是否可以改善QuEChERS萃取和LC-MS / MS分析对81种农药的多残留分析。取决于基质和化学类别，US提供了巨大的信号强度增益（峰面积增加了22到32倍，峰高增加了6到7倍），信号强度增加了3到4倍-噪音比，在可以量化的化合物范围内温和提高，回收率提高两倍。 UniSpray具有与ESI相当的线性度和分析精度，并且不影响离子比率。使用US观察到许多化合物的灵敏度有所提高，但总的来说，两个电离界面在LOD和LOQ上没有显示出显着差异。 UniSpray受较少的信号抑制；平均而言，基质效应要明显高出3到4倍，但显示出比ESI更好的值。在不影响回收效率的情况下，美国的整体流程效率比ESI提高了3-4倍。 <！-fig ft0-> <！-fig @ position =“ position” anchor“ == f4-> <！-fig mode =” anchred“ f5-> <！-fig / graphic | fig / alternatives / graphic mode =“ anchored” m1-> <！-caption a7->图形摘要

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号