Krupčík Ján, Májek Pavel, Gorovenko Roman, Blaško Jaroslav, Kubinec Robert, Sandra Pat
Institute of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry and Food Technology, STU, Bratislava, Slovak Republic.
Institute of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry and Food Technology, STU, Bratislava, Slovak Republic.
J Chromatogr A. 2015 May 29;1396:117-30. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2015.03.084. Epub 2015 Apr 11.
Methods based on the blank signal as proposed by IUPAC procedure and on the signal to noise ratio (S/N) as listed in the ISO-11843-1 norm for determination of the limit of detection (LOD) and quantitation (LOQ) in one-dimensional capillary gas chromatography (1D-GC) and comprehensive two-dimensional capillary gas chromatography (CG×GC) are described in detail and compared for both techniques. Flame ionization detection was applied and variables were the data acquisition frequency and, for CG×GC, also the modulation time. It has been stated that LOD and LOQ estimated according to IUPAC might be successfully used for 1D-GC-FID method. Moreover, LOD and LOQ decrease with decrease of data acquisition frequency (DAF). For GC×GC-FID, estimation of LOD by IUPAC gave poor reproducibility of results while for LOQ reproducibility was acceptable (within ±10% rel.). The LOD and LOQ determined by the S/N concept both for 1D-GC-FID and GC×GC-FID methods are ca. three times higher than those values estimated by the standard deviation of the blank. Since the distribution pattern of modulated peaks for any analyte separated by GC×GC is random and cannot be predicted, LOQ and LOD may vary within 30% for 3s modulation time. Concerning sensitivity, 1D-GC-FID at 2Hz and of GC×GC-FID at 50Hz shows a ca. 5 times enhancement of sensitivity in the modulated signal output.
详细描述了基于国际纯粹与应用化学联合会(IUPAC)程序提出的空白信号以及国际标准化组织(ISO)-11843-1标准中列出的信噪比(S/N)来测定一维毛细管气相色谱(1D-GC)和全二维毛细管气相色谱(CG×GC)中检测限(LOD)和定量限(LOQ)的方法,并对这两种技术进行了比较。采用火焰离子化检测,变量为数据采集频率,对于CG×GC,还有调制时间。据指出,根据IUPAC估算的LOD和LOQ可成功用于1D-GC-FID方法。此外,LOD和LOQ随数据采集频率(DAF)的降低而降低。对于GC×GC-FID,用IUPAC估算LOD时结果的重现性较差,而对于LOQ,重现性是可接受的(相对误差在±10%以内)。通过S/N概念确定的1D-GC-FID和GC×GC-FID方法的LOD和LOQ大约比由空白标准偏差估算的值高3倍。由于通过GC×GC分离的任何分析物的调制峰分布模式是随机的且无法预测,对于3s调制时间,LOQ和LOD可能在30%范围内变化。关于灵敏度,2Hz的1D-GC-FID和50Hz的GC×GC-FID在调制信号输出中灵敏度提高了约5倍。