PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München: Compound-specific chlorine isotope analysis: A comparison of gas chromatography/isotope ratio mass spectrometry and gas chromatography/quadrupole mass spectrometry methods in an interlaboratory study.

Informationen

Hinweise zu Qualitätskriterien von Zeitschriften

Open-Access-Richtlinie der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft 2016

CC Licencences

Metriken für Publikationen

Navigation

Startseite

English

EVA: Veröffentlichen

Neuer EVA Antrag

Recherche

Erweiterte Suche

Durchblättern nach ...

... HMGU-Autoren/Konsortien

... Organisationsstruktur

... Zeitschriften

... Publikationstypen

... Forschungsdaten

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Erscheinungsjahr

Publikationen im Überblick

Statistik

HGF Fortschrittsbericht

OA Publikationen

Eintragen

Neue Publikation eintragen

Neue Publikation holen aus...

...EVA

Fehlende Publikation melden

Highlights

Suche

Hilfe & Kontakt

Ansprechpartner

Hilfe

Datenschutz

Helmholtz Open Science

Bibliometrische Indikatoren

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Bernstein, A. ; Shouakar-Stash, O.* ; Ebert, K.* ; Laskov, C.* ; Hunkeler, D.* ; Jeannottat, S.* ; Sakaguchi-Söder, K.* ; Laaks, J.* ; Jochmann, M.A.* ; Cretnik, S. ; Jager, J.* ; Haderlein, S.B.* ; Schmidt, T.C.* ; Aravena, R.* ; Elsner, M.

Compound-specific chlorine isotope analysis: A comparison of gas chromatography/isotope ratio mass spectrometry and gas chromatography/quadrupole mass spectrometry methods in an interlaboratory study.

Anal. Chem. 83, 7624-7634 (2011)

DOI

PMC

Open Access Green möglich sobald Postprint bei der ZB eingereicht worden ist.

Abstract
Metriken
Zusatzinfos

Chlorine isotope analysis of chlorinated hydrocarbons like trichloroethylene (TCE) is of emerging demand because these species are important environmental pollutants. Continuous flow analysis of noncombusted TCE molecules, either by gas chromatography/isotope ratio mass spectrometry (GC/IRMS) or by GC/quadrupole mass spectrometry (GC/qMS), was recently brought forward as innovative analytical solution. Despite early implementations, a benchmark for routine applications has been missing. This study systematically compared the performance of GC/qMS versus GC/IRMS in six laboratories involving eight different instruments (GC/IRMS, Isoprime and Thermo MAT-253; GC/qMS, Agilent 5973N, two Agilent 5975C, two Thermo DSQII, and one Thermo DSQI). Calibrations of (37)Cl/(35)Cl instrument data against the international SMOC scale (Standard Mean Ocean Chloride) deviated between instruments and over time. Therefore, at least two calibration standards are required to obtain true differences between samples. Amount dependency of δ(37)Cl was pronounced for some instruments, but could be eliminated by corrections, or by adjusting amplitudes of standards and samples. Precision decreased in the order GC/IRMS (1σ ≈ 0.1‰), to GC/qMS (1σ ≈ 0.2-0.5‰ for Agilent GC/qMS and 1σ ≈ 0.2-0.9‰ for Thermo GC/qMS). Nonetheless, δ(37)Cl values between laboratories showed good agreement when the same external standards were used. These results lend confidence to the methods and may serve as a benchmark for future applications.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Web of Science
Times Cited

Scopus
Cited By

Altmetric

5.874

1.582