Sun Peiyan, Bao Mutai, Li Guangmei, Wang Xinping, Zhao Yuhui, Zhou Qing, Cao Lixin
Key Laboratory of Marine Spill Oil Identification and Damage Assessment Technology, SOA, Qingdao 266033, China.
J Chromatogr A. 2009 Jan 30;1216(5):830-6. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.100. Epub 2008 Dec 10.
This paper describes a case study in which advanced chemical fingerprinting and data interpretation techniques were used to characterize the chemical composition and determine the source of an unknown spilled oil reported on the beach of China Bohai Sea in 2005. The spilled oil was suspected to be released from nearby platforms. In response to this specific site investigation need, a tiered analytical approach using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and gas chromatography-flame ionization detection (GC-FID) was applied. A variety of diagnostic ratios of "source-specific marker" compounds, in particular isomers of biomarkers, were determined and compared. Several statistical data correlation analysis methods were applied, including clustering analysis and Student's t-test method. The comparison of the two methods was conducted. The comprehensive analysis results reveal the following: (1) The oil fingerprinting of three spilled oil samples (S1, S2 and S3) positively match each other; (2) The three spilled oil samples have suffered different weathering, dominated by evaporation with decrease of the low-molecular-mass n-alkanes at different degrees; (3) The oil fingerprinting profiles of the three spilled oil samples are positive match with that of the suspected source oil samples C41, C42, C43, C44 and C45; (4) There are significant differences in the oil fingerprinting profiles between the three spilled oil samples and the suspected source oil samples A1, B1, B2, B3, B4, C1, C2, C3, C5 and C6.
本文描述了一个案例研究,其中运用先进的化学指纹识别和数据解读技术来表征化学成分,并确定2005年在中国渤海海滩报道的一起未知溢油事故的源头。该溢油被怀疑是从附近平台泄漏的。针对这一特定现场调查需求,采用了一种分层分析方法,运用气相色谱 - 质谱联用仪(GC-MS)和气相色谱 - 火焰离子化检测器(GC-FID)。测定并比较了多种“源特异性标志物”化合物的诊断比率,特别是生物标志物的异构体。应用了几种统计数据相关性分析方法,包括聚类分析和学生t检验法。对这两种方法进行了比较。综合分析结果表明:(1)三个溢油样本(S1、S2和S3)的油指纹图谱相互匹配;(2)三个溢油样本经历了不同程度的风化,主要以蒸发为主,低分子质量正构烷烃不同程度减少;(3)三个溢油样本的油指纹图谱与疑似源油样本C41、C42、C43、C44和C45的油指纹图谱匹配;(4)三个溢油样本与疑似源油样本A1、B1、B2、B3、B4、C1、C2、C3、C5和C6的油指纹图谱存在显著差异。