Comparison of gas- and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry for trace analysis of anilines in groundwater

Three chromatographic procedures were investigated regarding their potential for the quantification of aniline and 19 of its methylated and chlorinated derivatives in groundwater. These methods were based on liquid-liquid-extraction in combination with gas chromatography and single quadrupole mass s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of environmental analytical chemistry 2023-12, Vol.ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print), p.1-13
Main Authors: Dorgerloh, Ute, Hofmann, Andrea, Riedel, Juliane, Becker, Roland
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aniline
chloroanilines
Chromatography
Gas chromatography
GC/MS
GC/MS-MS
Groundwater
Groundwater pollution
Injection
Intercomparison
interlaboratory comparison
LC/MS-MS
Liquid chromatography
Liquid-liquid extraction
Mass spectrometry
Mass spectroscopy
methylanilines
Quadrupoles
Sample preparation
Scientific imaging
Solvent extraction
Substitutes
Water analysis
Water pollution
Water sampling
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Three chromatographic procedures were investigated regarding their potential for the quantification of aniline and 19 of its methylated and chlorinated derivatives in groundwater. These methods were based on liquid-liquid-extraction in combination with gas chromatography and single quadrupole mass spectrometry (GC/MS) according to German standard DIN 38407-16:1999 and its extension using tandem mass spectrometry (GC/MS-MS), both following liquid-liquid extraction, and as third alternative the direct injection of the water sample into a liquid chromatograph coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS-MS). Results were compared using fortified water and real-world contaminated groundwater used in an interlaboratory comparison. It could be shown that GC/MS and GC/MS-MS yielded results deviating less than 10% from each other, while all three procedures displayed quantification results deviating less than 15% from the intercomparison reference values in case of each analyte in the concentration range between 1 and 45 µg L −1 . Though GC/MS-MS displays a ten-fold higher sensitivity than single quadrupole GC/MS, the precision of both methods in the concentration range was similar. LC/MS-MS has the advantage of no further sample preparation due to direct injection and leads for methylanilines and meta-, para-substituted chloroanilines to results sufficiently equivalent to the standardised GC/MS method. However, LC/MS-MS is not suitable for ortho-chloroaniline derivatives due to significantly lower ion yields than meta- and para-substituted chloroanilines.
ISSN:0306-7319
1029-0397
DOI:10.1080/03067319.2021.1987423