PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 8995774

Sample preparation for gas chromatography with solid-phase extraction and solid-phase microextraction.

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Z E Penton. 1997. Sample preparation for gas chromatography with solid-phase extraction and solid-phase microextraction.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8995774/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Leaching behaviour of wood treated with creosote.

The results of a laboratory investigation on the leaching behaviour of wood treated with creosote and of untreated wood are reported. A special leaching test derived from the German standard method DEV S4 test (DIN 38414) has been developed. Samples were leached in deionized water, in a solution buffered at pH 4.7 and in a solution of humic substances. The organic fraction of the leachate was extracted using liquid-liquid extraction. The extracts were analysed qualitatively with GC/MSD and quantified with GC/FID. The results were compared with those of Soxhlet-extracts from creosote-treated wood.

Chromatography, Gas↗

Selectivity equivalence of poly(ethylene glycol) stationary phases for gas chromatography.

The solvation parameter model is used to study differences in selectivity for poly(ethylene glycol) stationary phases for packed column (Carbowax 20M) and fused-silica, open-tubular column (HP-20M, AT-Wax, HP-INNOWax and DB-FFAP) gas chromatography. All phases are dipolar, strongly hydrogen-bond basic with no hydrogen-bond acidity and of moderate cohesion. No two phases are exactly alike, however, and selectivity differences identified with cavity formation and dispersion interactions, n- and pi-electron pair interactions, dipole-type interactions and hydrogen-bond interactions are quantified by differences in the system constants at a fixed temperature where retention occurs solely by gas-liquid partitioning. The system constants vary linearly with temperature over the range 60-140 degrees C (except for n- and pi-electron pair interactions which are temperature invariant) facilitating a general comparison of the importance of temperature on selectivity differences for compared phases. From a mechanistic point of view it is demonstrated that selectivity differences can result from chemical differences between the poly(ethylene glycol) stationary phases and from differences in the relative contribution of interfacial adsorption to the retention mechanism. The latter depends on both system properties and solute characteristics.

Chromatography, Gas↗

Heroin impurity profiling. A harmonization study for retrospective comparisons.

Three laboratories present a harmonised system for the retrospective comparison of south west Asian heroin. It consists of an improved gas chromatographic (GC) profiling method and a computerised data retrieval. The investigations of the GC were necessary with a view to improve the reproducibility of the system. The necessity of a strict quality control is emphasized. The peaks of the GC profile were investigated for abundance, intensity, GC behaviour (reproducibility) and correlations; 16 of them were selected for describing the heroin profile in the database. The results from intra-lab profile comparisons are reported. The reproducibility of the analysis was good and the variation between the samples was large, thus, allowing conclusions with a high degree of certainty. The criteria of similarity were defined. The system is successfully running in all three labs. In connection with inter-laboratory comparison, the aspects of method harmonisation and standardisation are discussed. It appeared that the GC method is a very subtile one, urging for a strict standardisation between the three labs. Despite a long cooperation between three well-equipped and experienced labs, a more or less serious loss of reproducibility was noticed in the inter-lab results in comparison with the intra-lab results. The loss could for the greater part be attributed to the (limits of the) GC technique; a number of compounds, necessary for making the discrimination between samples, showed difficult chromatographic behaviour, leading to insufficient inter-lab reproducibility. Using the actual variables, improvements in performance can hardly be expected in the near future. The loss of reproducibilty implies that the number of false positive matches in a database search increases. This may strongly reduce the value of a relatively large, international database. The study shows that so far, the best option for international comparison is the analysis in a central laboratory. The idea of local determination at a large number of national labs and the use of a common database is not a realistic aim for this type of analysis.

Chromatography, Gas↗