MilliporeSigma
  • Home
  • Search Results
  • Determination of organophosphate flame retardants and plasticizers in lipid-rich matrices using dispersive solid-phase extraction as a sample cleanup step and ultra-high performance liquid chromatography with atmospheric pressure chemical ionization mass spectrometry.

Determination of organophosphate flame retardants and plasticizers in lipid-rich matrices using dispersive solid-phase extraction as a sample cleanup step and ultra-high performance liquid chromatography with atmospheric pressure chemical ionization mass spectrometry.

Analytica chimica acta (2015-08-02)
Shaogang Chu, Robert J Letcher
ABSTRACT

A fast, robust and highly sensitive analysis method for determination of trace levels of organophosphate ester (OPE) flame retardants and plasticizers in lipid-rich samples was presently developed, and based on ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry coupled to a positive atmospheric pressure chemical ionization source (UHPLC-MS/MS-APCI(+)). The target OPEs in the sample were extracted from the biota samples, such as egg and liver, by ultrasonic extraction, and cleaned up further by dispersive solid phase extraction (d-ESP). As a result, background contamination was largely reduced. Different dispersive ESP sorbents were tested and primary secondary amine (PSA) bonded silica sorbents showed the best recoveries for these target OPEs. The recoveries obtained were in the range 54-113% (RSD<17%), with method limits of quantification (MLOQs) ranging between 0.06 and 0.29ng/g in egg, and 0.05 and 0.50ng/g w.w. in liver sample. The matrix effects (MEs) associated with using APCI(+) and ESI(+) sources were investigated. APCI(+) showed much less ion suppression than ESI(+) for the determination of these OPEs. For egg and liver samples, the APCI(+) ME values ranged from 40% to 94%, while ESI(+) ME values ranged from 0% to 36%. Although APCI(+) was used for the determination of OPEs, the ionization mechanism might mainly be a thermospray ionization process. This UHPLC-MS/MS-APCI(+) method showed good response linearity for calibration (R2>0.99). The proposed method was applied to real environmental bird egg and fish samples, where several OPE were quantifiable and different OPE patterns was observed between samples.

MATERIALS
Product Number
Brand
Product Description

Sigma-Aldrich
Deuterium, 99.8 atom % D
Supelco
Dichloromethane, ≥99.9%
Supelco
Hexane, suitable for HPLC, ≥95%
Sigma-Aldrich
Triethyl phosphate, ReagentPlus®, ≥99.8%
Sigma-Aldrich
Dichloromethane, anhydrous, ≥99.8%, contains 40-150 ppm amylene as stabilizer
Sigma-Aldrich
Hexarelin, ≥90% (HPLC)
Supelco
Dichloromethane solution, contains 10 % (v/v) methanol
Sigma-Aldrich
Deuterium, 99.96 atom % D
Sigma-Aldrich
Methanol-12C, 99.95 atom % 12C
Sigma-Aldrich
Dichloromethane, suitable for HPLC, ≥99.9%, contains 40-150 ppm amylene as stabilizer
Sigma-Aldrich
Hexane, anhydrous, 95%
Sigma-Aldrich
Deuterium, 99.9 atom % D
Sigma-Aldrich
Deuterium hydride, extent of labeling: 96 mol% DH, 98 atom % D
Sigma-Aldrich
Hexane, HPLC Plus, for HPLC, GC, and residue analysis, ≥95%
Supelco
Methanol solution, NMR reference standard, 4% in methanol-d4 (99.8 atom % D), NMR tube size 5 mm × 8 in.
Sigma-Aldrich
Methanol solution, NMR reference standard, 4% in methanol-d4 (99.8 atom % D), NMR tube size 3 mm × 8 in.
Supelco
Methanol solution, contains 0.10 % (v/v) formic acid, UHPLC, suitable for mass spectrometry (MS), ≥99.5%
Sigma-Aldrich
Methanol, suitable for HPLC, gradient grade, 99.93%
Sigma-Aldrich
Methanol, anhydrous, 99.8%
Sigma-Aldrich
Methanol, NMR reference standard
Sigma-Aldrich
Methanol, HPLC Plus, ≥99.9%, poly-coated bottles