GEN-MKT-18-7897-A
Dec 14, 2021 | Blogs, Environmental / Industrial, Food and Beverage | 0 comments
US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Defense (DoD) methods for testing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in drinking water require using solid phase extraction (SPE). SPE has been used extensively in environmental contaminant analysis both for concentrating large sample volumes (improving method sensitivity) and removing matrix interferences (sample cleanup).
Although SPE is a highly selective method for sample cleanup, there are some instances where testing laboratories might prefer to use direct injection, also known as large volume injection. Direct injection can be a much quicker and simpler option for high-throughput applications such as testing drinking water. Direct injection methods benefit from minimal sample preparation and decreased risk of lab-based PFAS contamination.
Both sample preparation methods are useful as the need for rapid and robust PFAS testing increases. So which method is right for your application? Here, we look at the pros and cons of using SPE vs. using large volume injection.
Using SPE Using SPE for testing drinking water ensures that your methods meet EPA and DoD requirements. SPE is also required by some US states. This makes SPE a great option when testing for any governmental requirements. SPE is also a well-proven method that delivers robust results for large sample volumes, and SPE cartridges are widely available commercially.
There are some downsides to using SPE, however. SPE requires longer sample preparation times than direct injection, and it requires additional training for sample prep technicians to ensure that samples are not contaminated. SPE can also add some quantitative method variability. This can be largely mitigated by the use of internal standards, but LOQs for PFAS analysis are often limited not by the analytical LC-MS/MS method, but by the variability and background contamination introduced by performing SPE. This can limit the usefulness of SPE.
Using direct injection/large volume injection Direct injection is less time consuming than SPE and requires less sample preparation, which decreases the risk of lab-based contamination. Direct injection also requires no extraction. This method is suitable for cleaner samples, such as drinking water and some surface and ground waters, and it allows testing laboratories to provide more high-throughput offerings to clients and therefore more environmental testing options.
There are also some cons to using direct injection. It is not allowed in many regulated methods, which limits its application, and it has not been evaluated by the EPA. In addition, dirtier, more complex sample matrices can result in LC system and column clogging or high matrix effects.
When to use which The method best suited to your application will depend on your unique situation and the needs of your lab. Learn more from our experts about the benefits of using direct injection or SPE methods for PFAS testing to help you make the right choice.
Produced by certain moulds, thriving in crops such as grain, nuts and coffee, mycotoxins have contaminated agriculture and food production industries for a long time. To intensify the challenge, mycotoxins are resilient, not easily broken down and ensuring the safety of food supply chains requires comprehensive solutions and we are here to share those solutions with you.
Electron-Activated Dissociation (EAD) is transforming the fields of metabolomics and lipidomics by providing enhanced fragmentation techniques that offer deeper insights into molecular structures. In September, Technology Networks hosted a webinar, “Enhancing Mass-Based Omics Analysis in Model Organisms,” featuring Dr. Valentina Calabrese from the Institute of Analytical Sciences at the University of Lyon. Valentina shared her insights on improving omics-based mass spectrometry analysis for toxicology studies using model organisms, particularly in metabolomics and lipidomics. This blog explores the additional functionalities EAD offers, its benefits in untargeted workflows, its incorporation into GNPS and molecular networking, and the future role it could play in these scientific domains.
Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) has gained significant attention in the clinical laboratory due to its ability to provide best-in-class sensitivity and specificity for the detection of clinically relevant analytes across a wide range of assays. For clinical laboratories new to LC-MS/MS, integrating this technology into their daily routine operations may seem like a daunting task. Developing a clear outline and defining the requirements needed to implement LC-MS/MS into your daily operations is critical to maximize the productivity and success of your clinical laboratory.
Posted by
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Share this post with your network