Evaluation of preconcentration methods in the analysis of synthetic musks in whole-water samples

Joana Cavalheiro, Ailette Prieto, Olatz Zuloaga, Hugues Preudhomme, David Amouroux, Mathilde Monperrus

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

According to the European Water Framework Directive, environmental assessment of organic compounds should be made in whole-water samples, but due to their hydrophobicity and strong attraction to organic content these compounds can be found bound to suspended particle matter or in the dissolved fraction. In this work, the extraction of musk compounds was studied in whole-water samples exhibiting different amounts of dissolved organic carbon and suspended particulate matter using polyethersulfone preconcentration technique. Matrix effects in estuarine and wastewater (both influent and effluent) were evaluated for filtered and unfiltered samples. For unfiltered samples, estuarine water exhibited matrix effects <20%, while for effluent it was up to 48% and for influent ranged from 85 to 99%. To compensate matrix effects and determine total concentrations in unfiltered samples, different quantification approaches were tested: the use of deuterated analogues and standard additions. Standard additions provided the best results for unfiltered samples. Finally, filtered and unfiltered samples were analyzed using both polyethersulfone preconcentration and membrane-assisted solvent extraction and results showed a good agreement between the two methods. In both cases unfiltered samples provided concentrations 1.5-2.6 times higher than filtered samples.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2298-2304
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Separation Science
Volume38
Issue number13
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Water
Effluents
Particulate Matter
Solvent extraction
Hydrophobicity
Organic carbon
Organic compounds
Wastewater
Membranes
polyether sulfone
musk
Environmental assessments

Keywords

  • Gas chromatography with mass spectrometry
  • Preconcentration
  • Synthetic musks
  • Whole water

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Analytical Chemistry
  • Filtration and Separation

Cite this

Evaluation of preconcentration methods in the analysis of synthetic musks in whole-water samples. / Cavalheiro, Joana; Prieto, Ailette; Zuloaga, Olatz; Preudhomme, Hugues; Amouroux, David; Monperrus, Mathilde.

In: Journal of Separation Science, Vol. 38, No. 13, 01.07.2015, p. 2298-2304.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cavalheiro, Joana ; Prieto, Ailette ; Zuloaga, Olatz ; Preudhomme, Hugues ; Amouroux, David ; Monperrus, Mathilde. / Evaluation of preconcentration methods in the analysis of synthetic musks in whole-water samples. In: Journal of Separation Science. 2015 ; Vol. 38, No. 13. pp. 2298-2304.
@article{329915f8c65c47178556a1af3859e44a,
title = "Evaluation of preconcentration methods in the analysis of synthetic musks in whole-water samples",
abstract = "According to the European Water Framework Directive, environmental assessment of organic compounds should be made in whole-water samples, but due to their hydrophobicity and strong attraction to organic content these compounds can be found bound to suspended particle matter or in the dissolved fraction. In this work, the extraction of musk compounds was studied in whole-water samples exhibiting different amounts of dissolved organic carbon and suspended particulate matter using polyethersulfone preconcentration technique. Matrix effects in estuarine and wastewater (both influent and effluent) were evaluated for filtered and unfiltered samples. For unfiltered samples, estuarine water exhibited matrix effects <20{\%}, while for effluent it was up to 48{\%} and for influent ranged from 85 to 99{\%}. To compensate matrix effects and determine total concentrations in unfiltered samples, different quantification approaches were tested: the use of deuterated analogues and standard additions. Standard additions provided the best results for unfiltered samples. Finally, filtered and unfiltered samples were analyzed using both polyethersulfone preconcentration and membrane-assisted solvent extraction and results showed a good agreement between the two methods. In both cases unfiltered samples provided concentrations 1.5-2.6 times higher than filtered samples.",
keywords = "Gas chromatography with mass spectrometry, Preconcentration, Synthetic musks, Whole water",
author = "Joana Cavalheiro and Ailette Prieto and Olatz Zuloaga and Hugues Preudhomme and David Amouroux and Mathilde Monperrus",
year = "2015",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/jssc.201500192",
language = "English",
volume = "38",
pages = "2298--2304",
journal = "Journal of Separation Science",
issn = "1615-9306",
publisher = "Wiley-VCH Verlag",
number = "13",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of preconcentration methods in the analysis of synthetic musks in whole-water samples

AU - Cavalheiro, Joana

AU - Prieto, Ailette

AU - Zuloaga, Olatz

AU - Preudhomme, Hugues

AU - Amouroux, David

AU - Monperrus, Mathilde

PY - 2015/7/1

Y1 - 2015/7/1

N2 - According to the European Water Framework Directive, environmental assessment of organic compounds should be made in whole-water samples, but due to their hydrophobicity and strong attraction to organic content these compounds can be found bound to suspended particle matter or in the dissolved fraction. In this work, the extraction of musk compounds was studied in whole-water samples exhibiting different amounts of dissolved organic carbon and suspended particulate matter using polyethersulfone preconcentration technique. Matrix effects in estuarine and wastewater (both influent and effluent) were evaluated for filtered and unfiltered samples. For unfiltered samples, estuarine water exhibited matrix effects <20%, while for effluent it was up to 48% and for influent ranged from 85 to 99%. To compensate matrix effects and determine total concentrations in unfiltered samples, different quantification approaches were tested: the use of deuterated analogues and standard additions. Standard additions provided the best results for unfiltered samples. Finally, filtered and unfiltered samples were analyzed using both polyethersulfone preconcentration and membrane-assisted solvent extraction and results showed a good agreement between the two methods. In both cases unfiltered samples provided concentrations 1.5-2.6 times higher than filtered samples.

AB - According to the European Water Framework Directive, environmental assessment of organic compounds should be made in whole-water samples, but due to their hydrophobicity and strong attraction to organic content these compounds can be found bound to suspended particle matter or in the dissolved fraction. In this work, the extraction of musk compounds was studied in whole-water samples exhibiting different amounts of dissolved organic carbon and suspended particulate matter using polyethersulfone preconcentration technique. Matrix effects in estuarine and wastewater (both influent and effluent) were evaluated for filtered and unfiltered samples. For unfiltered samples, estuarine water exhibited matrix effects <20%, while for effluent it was up to 48% and for influent ranged from 85 to 99%. To compensate matrix effects and determine total concentrations in unfiltered samples, different quantification approaches were tested: the use of deuterated analogues and standard additions. Standard additions provided the best results for unfiltered samples. Finally, filtered and unfiltered samples were analyzed using both polyethersulfone preconcentration and membrane-assisted solvent extraction and results showed a good agreement between the two methods. In both cases unfiltered samples provided concentrations 1.5-2.6 times higher than filtered samples.

KW - Gas chromatography with mass spectrometry

KW - Preconcentration

KW - Synthetic musks

KW - Whole water

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84936846265&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84936846265&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jssc.201500192

DO - 10.1002/jssc.201500192

M3 - Article

VL - 38

SP - 2298

EP - 2304

JO - Journal of Separation Science

JF - Journal of Separation Science

SN - 1615-9306

IS - 13

ER -