Next Article in Journal
Rydberg-State Double-Well Potentials of Van der Waals Molecules
Previous Article in Journal
Ringing the Changes: Effects of Heterocyclic Ring Size on Stereoselectivity in [(η5-C5Me5)RhCl], [(η5-C5Me5)IrCl] and [Ru(η6-cymene)Cl] Complexes of Chiral 3-Amino-1-Azacycles
Previous Article in Special Issue
Multiclass Analysis for the Determination of Pharmaceuticals and Their Main Metabolites in Leafy and Root Vegetables
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

Systematic Comparison of Extract Clean-Up with Currently Used Sorbents for Dispersive Solid-Phase Extraction

Department of Pharmacy, Center for Drug Research, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 81377 Munich, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Molecules 2024, 29(19), 4656; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules29194656
Submission received: 27 August 2024 / Revised: 24 September 2024 / Accepted: 27 September 2024 / Published: 30 September 2024

Abstract

Dispersive solid-phase extraction (dSPE) is a crucial step for multiresidue analysis used to remove matrix components from extracts. This purification prevents contamination of instrumental equipment and improves method selectivity, sensitivity, and reproducibility. Therefore, a clean-up step is recommended, but an over-purified extract can lead to analyte loss due to adsorption to the sorbent. This study provides a systematic comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of the well-established dSPE sorbents PSA, GCB, and C18 and the novel dSPE sorbents chitin, chitosan, multi-walled carbon nanotube (MWCNT), and Z-Sep® (zirconium-based sorbent). They were tested regarding their clean-up capacity by visual inspection, UV, and GC-MS measurements. The recovery rates of 98 analytes, including pesticides, active pharmaceutical ingredients, and emerging environmental pollutants with a broad range of physicochemical properties, were determined by GC-MS/MS. Experiments were performed with five different matrices, commonly used in food analysis (spinach, orange, avocado, salmon, and bovine liver). Overall, Z-Sep® was the best sorbent regarding clean-up capacity, reducing matrix components to the greatest extent with a median of 50% in UV and GC-MS measurements, while MWCNTs had the largest impact on analyte recovery, with 14 analytes showing recoveries below 70%. PSA showed the best performance overall.
Keywords: dSPE; GC-MS/MS; matrix effects; pesticides; pollutants; QuEChERS dSPE; GC-MS/MS; matrix effects; pesticides; pollutants; QuEChERS

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Peter, M.; Müller, C. Systematic Comparison of Extract Clean-Up with Currently Used Sorbents for Dispersive Solid-Phase Extraction. Molecules 2024, 29, 4656. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules29194656

AMA Style

Peter M, Müller C. Systematic Comparison of Extract Clean-Up with Currently Used Sorbents for Dispersive Solid-Phase Extraction. Molecules. 2024; 29(19):4656. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules29194656

Chicago/Turabian Style

Peter, Michelle, and Christoph Müller. 2024. "Systematic Comparison of Extract Clean-Up with Currently Used Sorbents for Dispersive Solid-Phase Extraction" Molecules 29, no. 19: 4656. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules29194656

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop