Levoglucosan in speleothems: An evaluation of various sample preparation methods.

Author(s):  
Julia Homann ◽  
Thorsten Hoffmann ◽  
Denis Scholz ◽  
Sebastian Breitenbach

<p>Secondary mineral deposits in caves, such as stalagmites or flowstones, are valuable paleoclimate archives because they have several advantages over other environmental archives. These include stable in-cave conditions, protecting the speleothems from external influences, and the potential to precisely date samples up to 600,000 years using <sup>230</sup>Th/U-dating. [1] Supplementing established climate proxies, such as stable isotopes and trace elements, organic proxies have been increasingly used in recent years to inform on local vegetation and soil dynamics. [2]</p><p>Biomass burning events are major sources of atmospheric particulate matter that influences global and local climate. [3] Investigating fire proxies in paleoclimate archives may therefore help determine the interactions of climate, hydrology, and fire activity. Levoglucosan, an anhydrosugar, naturally only originates from the combustion of cellulose and thus constitutes a biomass burning marker. Analysis of levoglucosan in sediments has shown high correlation with traditional burning markers, such as black charcoal. [4] Mannosan and galactosan, both stereoisomers of levoglucosan, are formed during combustion of hemicellulose. Previous work suggests that rather than absolute levoglucosan concentrations the ratio of levoglucosan to its isomers should be considered when characterizing burning events. [5] To date, no data on levoglucosan or its isomers in speleothems has been published, whereas the anhydrosugars are already utilised in other paleoclimate archives, such as sediments and ice cores. [2,3]</p><p>We test three approaches (solid phase extraction (SPE), soxhlet extraction and solid/liquid extraction) for the isolation and quantification of anhydrosugars using HILIC-MS instrumentation. As the anhydrosugars are highly polar molecules, extraction from the calcium carbonate matrix and subsequent sample preparation proved challenging. We evaluate the different approaches and compare the resulting concentrations and assumed recoveries. We find that the anhydrosugars do not show significant retention on any of the evaluated SPE materials. While solid/liquid extractions lead to detectable analyte concentrations, soxhlet extractions with methanol or dichloromethane/methanol mixtures are more efficient.</p><p> </p><p>[1] D. Scholz, D. Hoffmann, Quat. Sci. J. 57 (2008) 52–76 [2] A. Blyth et al. Quat. Sci. Rev. 149 (2016) 1-17 [3] P. Yao et al. J. of Glaciology 59 (2013) 599-611 [4] V. O. Elias et al. Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta 65 (2001) 267-272. [5] D. Fabbri et al. Atmos. Env. 43 (2009) 2286–2295</p>

2019 ◽  
Vol 102 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rada D Ðurović-Pejčev ◽  
Vojislava P Bursić ◽  
Tijana M Zeremski

Abstract Background: The increased use of pesticides leads to permanent pollution of soil, and there is a need for continuous monitoring of these agrochemicals in soil. Objective: Three methods for the simultaneous determination of 12 pesticides belonging to eight chemical groups in soil samples were tested and compared based on analytical parameters. Methods: The quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe (QuEChERS); traditional solid–liquid extraction (SLE); and Soxhlet extraction were used for soil sample preparation, while detection and quantification of pesticides were performed using gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Results: The tested methods featured good sensitivity, and with the exception for carbofuran (Soxhlet method, LOD = 29 μg/kg), for the rest of the pesticides, the studied LODs were less than 12 μg/kg. Except for simazine and carbofuran, LODs obtained by Soxhlet extraction were lower than values obtained by other two methods, whereas QuEChERS gave lower LODs than the traditional SLE method for all compounds except atrazine and acetochlor. The recoveries obtained applying QuEChERS, traditional SLE, and Soxhlet methods for multiple analyses of soil samples fortified at 10, 75, and 200 μg/kg of each pesticide were in the ranges 54–103, 40–91, and 12–92%, respectively. Except for chlorothalonil, the highest recoveries were obtained by the QuEChERS method. Soxhlet was better than traditional SLE method for chlorothalonil, heptachlor, and aldrin; organophosphorus pesticides (fenitrothion and diazinon) and trifluralin, gave similar recoveries for both methods. All three methods were proven to be repeatable, with RSDs lower than 19%. Conclusions: Although all tested methods showed as satisfactory regarding most analytical parameters, QuEChERS method showed much better results in terms of confidence, indicating that traditional SLE and Soxhlet extraction still need improvements for determination of multiclass pesticides in soil samples.


Molecules ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 657 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cody Williams ◽  
Astrid Buica

The aroma profile is an important marker for wine quality. Various classes of compounds are responsible for the aroma of wine, and one such class is terpenoids. In the context of this work, a validated gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS) method for the quantitation of terpenoids in red and white wine using headspace solid-phase microextraction (HS–SPME) and solid-phase extraction (SPE) was established. Calibrations were performed in the respective base wine using both sample preparation methods. The linearity, precision and accuracy evaluated for the respective matrices were excellent for both sample preparations. However, the HS–SPME approach was more sensitive and more accurate. For both sample preparations, the quantification limits were lower than the odor thresholds in wine. The terpenoid concentrations (µg/L) were evaluated for 13 white wines using both sample preparation methods. Importantly, the online HS–SPME approach was more sensitive than the offline SPE method. The major terpenoids identified in the white wines evaluated were linalool (0.2–63 µg/L), geraniol (nd–66 µg/L) and α-terpineol (nd–85 µg/L).


Metabolomics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Penghan Zhang ◽  
Silvia Carlin ◽  
Cesare Lotti ◽  
Fulvio Mattivi ◽  
Urska Vrhovsek

Abstract Introduction Aromas and tastes have crucial influences on the quality of fermented beverages. The determination of aromatic compounds requires global non-targeted profiling of the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the beverages. However, experimental VOC profiling result depends on the chosen VOC collection method. Objectives This study aims to observe the impact of using different sample preparation techniques [dynamic headspace (DHS), vortex-assisted liquid–liquid microextraction (VALLME), multiple stir bar sorptive extraction (mSBSE), solid phase extraction (SPE), and solid phase micro-extraction (SPME)] to figure out the most suitable sample preparation protocol for profiling the VOCs from fermented beverages. Methods Five common sample preparation methods were studied with beer, cider, red wine, and white wine samples. After the sample preparation, collected VOCs were analyzed by two-dimensional gas chromatography coupled with time of flight mass spectrometry (GCxGC-TOFMS). Results GCxGC oven parameters can be optimized with the Box–Behnken surface response model and response measure on peak dispersion. Due to the unavoidable column and detector saturation during metabolomic analysis, errors may happen during mass spectrum construction. Profiling results obtained with different sample preparation methods show considerable variance. Common findings occupy a small fraction of total annotated VOCs. For known fermentative aromas, best coverage can be reached by using SPME together with SPE for beer, and VALLME for wine and cider. Conclusions GCxGC-TOFMS is a promising tool for non-targeted profiling on VOCs from fermented beverages. However, a proper data processing protocol is lacking for metabolomic analysis. Each sample preparation method has a specific profiling spectrum on VOC profiling. The coverage of the VOC metabolome can be improved by combining complementary methods.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Mahdi Moein ◽  
Rana Said ◽  
Fatma Bassyouni ◽  
Mohamed Abdel-Rehim

In drug discovery and development, the quantification of drugs in biological samples is an important task for the determination of the physiological performance of the investigated drugs. After sampling, the next step in the analytical process is sample preparation. Because of the low concentration levels of drug in plasma and the variety of the metabolites, the selected extraction technique should be virtually exhaustive. Recent developments of sample handling techniques are directed, from one side, toward automatization and online coupling of sample preparation units. The primary objective of this review is to present the recent developments in microextraction sample preparation methods for analysis of drugs in biological fluids. Microextraction techniques allow for less consumption of solvent, reagents, and packing materials, and small sample volumes can be used. In this review the use of solid phase microextraction (SPME), microextraction in packed sorbent (MEPS), and stir-bar sorbtive extraction (SBSE) in drug analysis will be discussed. In addition, the use of new sorbents such as monoliths and molecularly imprinted polymers will be presented.


2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 178-190
Author(s):  
Mária Andraščíková ◽  
Svetlana Hrouzková

Abstract The current trend in sample preparation methods is devoted to minimizing or eliminating the volume of extractive solvent. In this review, the focus on solid phase microextraction (SPME) as a solvent free sample preparation method for the isolation of pesticides residues in different food matrices is given. To achieve satisfactory extraction efficiency, selection of the fiber coating is an important step in the method development. Here, recent trends in new supporting materials and new fiber coatings development are discussed. Finally, applicability of SPME for the pesticide residues analysis in various food matrices using mainly chromatographic methods is also reviewed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamil Mikulášek ◽  
Hana Konečná ◽  
David Potěšil ◽  
Renata Holánková ◽  
Jan Havliš ◽  
...  

Quantitative protein extraction from biological samples, as well as contaminants removal before LC-MS/MS, is fundamental for the successful bottom-up proteomic analysis. Four sample preparation methods, including the filter-aided sample preparation (FASP), two single-pot solid-phase-enhanced sample preparations (SP3) on carboxylated or HILIC paramagnetic beads, and protein suspension trapping method (S-Trap) were evaluated for SDS removal and protein digestion from Arabidopsis thaliana (AT) lysate. Finally, the optimized carboxylated SP3 workflow was benchmarked closely against the routine FASP. Ultimately, LC-MS/MS analyses revealed that regarding the number of identifications, number of missed cleavages, proteome coverage, repeatability, reduction of handling time, and cost per assay, the SP3 on carboxylated magnetic particles proved to be the best alternative for SDS and other contaminants removal from plant sample lysate. A robust and efficient 2-h SP3 protocol for a wide range of protein input is presented, benefiting from no need to adjust the amount of beads, binding and rinsing conditions, or digestion parameters.


2017 ◽  
pp. 65-68
Author(s):  
Éva Nagy ◽  
Anna Novák ◽  
Lajos Daróczi ◽  
András Jávor

The aim of this research was to prove that the syrup containing ragweed used for feeding the bees was transferred to the honey. To reach this goal we developed a method to analyse the volatile components of the samples. We applied two sample preparation methods. The first one was SPME (Solid Phase Micro Extraction) preparation from the headspace of all of the samples. In the second case only the raw leaves of the ragweed were extracted with n-hexane and dichloromethane to complete the SPME results. The measurements were performed on GC-MS equipment. Chromatograms and data evolution showed that the components of the ragweed were also present in honey so they were transferred by bees.


Molecules ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (23) ◽  
pp. 7064
Author(s):  
Nina Huynh ◽  
Emilie Caupos ◽  
Caroline Soares Peirera ◽  
Julien Le Roux ◽  
Adèle Bressy ◽  
...  

Non-target screening (NTS) has gained interest in recent years for environmental monitoring purposes because it enables the analysis of a large number of pollutants without predefined lists of molecules. However, sample preparation methods are diverse, and few have been systematically compared in terms of the amount and relevance of the information obtained by subsequent NTS analysis. The goal of this work was to compare a large number of sample extraction methods for the unknown screening of urban waters. Various phases were tested for the solid-phase extraction of micropollutants from these waters. The evaluation of the different phases was assessed by statistical analysis based on the number of detected molecules, their range, and physicochemical properties (molecular weight, standard recoveries, polarity, and optical properties). Though each cartridge provided its own advantages, a multilayer cartridge combining several phases gathered more information in one single extraction by benefiting from the specificity of each one of its layers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document