ESI outcompetes other ion sources in LC/MS trace analysis

Choosing an appropriate ion source is a crucial step in liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC/MS) method development. In this paper, we compare four ion sources for LC/MS analysis of 40 pesticides in tomato and garlic matrices. We compare electrospray ionisation (ESI) source, thermally focused/heated electrospray (HESI), atmospheric pressure photoionisation (APPI) source with and without dopant, and multimode source in ESI mode, atmospheric pressure chemical ionisation (APCI) mode, and combined mode using both ESI and APCI, i.e. altogether seven different ionisation modes. The lowest limits of detection (LoDs) were obtained by ESI and HESI. Widest linear ranges were observed with the conventional ESI source without heated nebuliser gas. In comparison to HESI, ESI source was significantly less affected by matrix effect. APPI ranked second (after ESI) by not being influenced by matrix effect; therefore, it would be a good alternative to ESI if low LoDs are not required.

Graphical abstract

     

Optimization of electrospray interface and quadrupole ion trap mass spectrometer parameters in pesticide liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization mass spectrometry analysis

Optimization of both the ionization process and ion transportation in the mass spectrometer is of crucial importance in order to achieve high sensitivity and low detection limits and acceptable accuracy in liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (LC/ESI‐MS) analysis. In this paper four optimization procedures of electrospray interface and quadrupole ion‐trap mass spectrometer parameters (ESI‐MS) (nebulizer gas and drying gas flow rate, end plate voltage, capillary voltage, skimmer voltage, octopoles direct current and radio frequency, trap drive and lens voltages) were studied on three pesticides – thiabendazole, aldicarb and imazalil. The results demonstrate that the methodology of optimization strongly influences the effectiveness of finding true optima of the operating parameters. Both eluent flow rate and composition during optimization have to mimic the situation during real analysis as closely as possible in order to achieve parameters giving the highest sensitivity. Therefore, post‐column addition of analyte to the mobile phase identical in composition to the one in which analyte elutes during real analysis combined with software‐based optimization was found to be the most effective and fastest method for achieving intensity maxima. The parameters most strongly affecting ion formation and transportation, hence sensitivity, were capillary voltage, direct current of the first octopole, trap drive and the second lens for all pesticides under study. In addition to sensitivity and detection limit matrix effect was considered in the optimization process. It was found that the matrix effect can be reduced but not eliminated by adjusting the ESI and MS parameters. The optimal parameters from the point of view of the matrix effect can only be found with factorial design. Parameters giving higher sensitivity tended to be more affected by matrix effect causing higher ionization suppression by co‐eluting compounds. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Tutorial review on validation of liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry methods: Part I

This is the part I of a tutorial review intending to give an overview of the state of the art of method validation in liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC–MS) and discuss specific issues that arise with MS (and MS/MS) detection in LC (as opposed to the “conventional” detectors). The Part I briefly introduces the principles of operation of LC–MS (emphasizing the aspects important from the validation point of view, in particular the ionization process and ionization suppression/enhancement); reviews the main validation guideline documents and discusses in detail the following performance parameters: selectivity/specificity/identity, ruggedness/robustness, limit of detection, limit of quantification, decision limit and detection capability. With every method performance characteristic its essence and terminology are addressed, the current status of treating it is reviewed and recommendations are given, how to determine it, specifically in the case of LC–MS methods.     

Ion‐Mobility Mass Spectrometry for the Rapid Determination of the Topology of Interlocked and Knotted Molecules

A rapid screening method based on traveling‐wave ion‐mobility spectrometry (TWIMS) combined with tandem mass spectrometry provides insight into the topology of interlocked and knotted molecules, even when they exist in complex mixtures, such as interconverting dynamic combinatorial libraries. A TWIMS characterization of structure‐indicative fragments generated by collision‐induced dissociation (CID) together with a floppiness parameter defined based on parent‐ and fragment‐ion arrival times provide a straightforward topology identification. To demonstrate its broad applicability, this approach is applied here to six Hopf and two Solomon links, a trefoil knot, and a [3]catenate.     

Tutorial review on validation of liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry methods: Part II

This is the part II of a tutorial review intending to give an overview of the state of the art of method validation in liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC–MS) and discuss specific issues that arise with MS (and MS–MS) detection in LC (as opposed to the “conventional” detectors). The Part II starts with briefly introducing the main quantitation methods and then addresses the performance related to quantification: linearity of signal, sensitivity, precision, trueness, accuracy, stability and measurement uncertainty. The last section is devoted to practical considerations in validation. With every performance characteristic its essence and terminology are addressed, the current status of treating it is reviewed and recommendations are given, how to handle it, specifically in the case of LC–MS methods.     

Semi‐quantitative non‐target analysis of water with liquid chromatography/high‐resolution mass spectrometry: How far are we?

Combining high‐resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) with liquid chromatography (LC) has considerably increased the capability of analytical chemistry. Among others, it has stimulated the growth of the non‐target analysis, which aims at identifying compounds without their preceding selection. This approach is already widely applied in various fields, such as metabolomics, proteomics, etc. The applicability of LC/HRMS‐based non‐target analysis in environmental analyses, such as water studies, would be beneficial for understanding the environmental fate of polar pollutants and evaluating the health risks exposed by the new emerging contaminants. During the last five to seven years the use of LC/HRMS‐based non‐target analysis has grown rapidly. However, routine non‐target analysis is still uncommon for most environmental monitoring agencies and environmental scientists. The main reasons are the complicated data processing and the inability to provide quantitative information about identified compounds. The latter shortcoming follows from the lack of standard substances, considered so far as the soul of each quantitative analysis for the newly discovered pollutants. To overcome this, non‐target analyses could be combined with semi‐quantitation. This Perspective aims at describing the current methods for non‐target analysis, the possibilities and challenges of standard substance‐free semi‐quantitative analysis, and proposes tools to join these two fields together.     

Tutorial on estimating the limit of detection using LC-MS analysis,part II: Practical aspects

In part II of this tutorial, the investigated approaches of estimating the limit of detection (LOD) are applied to experimental data from LC-MS measurements. Important practical aspects specific to LC-MS and related to LOD are reviewed. The results of different tests of estimating linearity and scedasticity are compared. LOD estimates obtained with different approaches (for both simple characterization of the analysis method and accurate interpretation of the results) are applied to the data and the obtained values are compared. As a conclusion, a decision tree is proposed for estimating LOD for analytical methods using the LC-MS technique.     

Adduct Formation in ESI/MS by Mobile Phase Additives

Adduct formation is a common ionization method in electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (ESI/MS). However, this process is poorly understood and complicated to control. We demonstrate possibilities to control adduct formation via mobile phase additives in ESI positive mode for 17 oxygen and nitrogen bases. Mobile phase additives were found to be a very effective measure for manipulating the formation efficiencies of adducts. An appropriate choice of additive may increase sensitivity by up to three orders of magnitude. In general, sodium adduct [M + Na]⁺ and protonated molecule [M + H]⁺ formation efficiencies were found to be in good correlation; however, the former were significantly more influenced by mobile phase properties. Although the highest formation efficiencies for both species were observed in water/acetonitrile mixtures not containing additives, the repeatability of the formation efficiencies was found to be improved by additives. It is concluded that mobile phase additives are powerful, yet not limiting factors, for altering adduct formation.

Open image in new window

Graphical Abstract ?

     

Matrix effects in pesticide multi-residue analysis by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry

Three sample preparation methods: Luke method (AOAC 985.22), QuEChERS (quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged and safe) and matrix solid-phase dispersion (MSPD) were applied to different fruits and vegetables for analysis of 14 pesticide residues by high-performance liquid chromatography with electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry (HPLC/ESI/MS). Matrix effect, recovery and process efficiency of the sample preparation methods applied to different fruits and vegetables were compared. The Luke method was found to produce least matrix effect. On an average the best recoveries were obtained with the QuEChERS method. MSPD gave unsatisfactory recoveries for some basic pesticide residues. Comparison of matrix effects for different apple varieties showed high variability for some residues. It was demonstrated that the amount of co-extracting compounds that cause ionization suppression of aldicarb depends on the apple variety as well as on the sample preparation method employed.