The detection of acid herbicides and urons by large volume injection

Sep 26, 2016 | Blogs, Environmental / Industrial | 0 comments

Pre-treatment versus direct injection – that is the question posed in the application note, “The Detection of Acidic Herbicides and Phenyl Ureas by LC-MS/MS with Large Volume Injection and Automated Column Switching.” It’s just one of the dozens of articles you will find within the Environmental Compendium (pages 1 to 4, pesticides) now available for download.Download Compendium >

Here’s the thing with Pesticides. They are taking a hit for their toxic pervasiveness to wildlife and suspected hormone-disrupting qualities. A problem as they find their way into drinking water via agriculture runoff or rogue dumping. This is not just in happening in Europe but the world over. However, since this particular report focuses on the UK, here is some background information on the state of water testing within the region. According to a Eurostat Report, seven percent of groundwater stations have reported excessive levels of one or more pesticides. However, as this application note points out, detection improvements are correlating with lowered acceptable limits. Hence, the need for a testing method that removes both cost and time associated with solid phase extraction and/or liquid/liquid extraction traditionally used for GC-MS analysis.

To give you an idea of what you will find not only in this study but throughout the environmental compendium, we’ve outlined some key points. For instance, you will discover how river and groundwater samples were obtained, filtered and directly injected into the LC-MS/MS system. Researchers thus follow up with graphics and content about:

Column details
Mass spectrometry
Gradient profiles
Calibration figures
MRM transitions
Signal to noise (S/N) calculations

Real-life scenarios and enforcing safety is a theme for the environmental compendium, and this application note demonstrates its effectiveness as the method is sensitive enough to be applied to U.K. surveillance work.

Getting PFAS right: Why sample preparation matters

Ultra‑low reporting limits, expanding target lists, and the constant risk of background contamination mean that even small missteps before injection can compromise data integrity. PFAS can be introduced at nearly every stage of prep, from sampling containers and PPE to SPE cartridges, filters, solvents, and lab consumables, making contamination control as critical as analyte recovery.

CE‑SDS in monoclonal antibody therapeutic development

In monoclonal antibody (mAb) development, assessment of purity and integrity of the protein in question is critical. CE‑SDS is the gold standard assay and is routinely run from analytical development through QC and lot release. It’s trusted because it consistently delivers quantitative, size‑based insight into purity and fragmentation, and it fits naturally into regulated environments.

EAD vs. ETD: Choosing the right fragmentation technique for small molecule Met ID studies

In drug discovery and development, Metabolite Identification (Met ID) plays a critical role in understanding biotransformation pathways, ensuring safety, and meeting regulatory requirements. Advanced mass spectrometry techniques have revolutionized this process, particularly through electron-based fragmentation methods such as Electron Activated Dissociation (EAD) and Electron Transfer Dissociation (ETD). While both techniques leverage electron interactions to generate informative fragment ions, they differ significantly in mechanism, performance, and suitability for Met ID workflows.

Posted by

Craig Butt

Craig has worked in the mass spectrometry industry for over 20 years and has been with SCIEX since 2016. As a senior product application specialist, he works with customers to understand their targeted screening workflows and provide solutions using high-resolution accurate mass spectrometry technologies.

0 Comments