Upload
others
View
13
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATIONS OF NOVEL
SOLVENT-MINIMIZED TECHNIQUES IN THE
DETERMINATION OF CHEMICAL WARFARE
AGENTS AND THEIR DEGRADATION PRODUCTS
LEE HOI SIM NANCY
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE
2008
DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATIONS OF NOVEL
SOLVENT-MINIMIZED TECHNIQUES IN THE
DETERMINATION OF CHEMICAL WARFARE
AGENTS AND THEIR DEGRADATION PRODUCTS
LEE HOI SIM NANCY
(M.Sc.), NUS
A THESIS SUBMITTED
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE
2008
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My most sincere gratitude goes to my bosses at DSO National Laboratories,
Ms. Sng Mui Tiang, Dr. Lee Fook Kay and Assoc. Prof. Lionel Lee Kim Hock, who
gave me the opportunity to pursue a part-time higher degree and provided me with
much encouragement and support throughout the course of my study. I had the
privilege of working under the expert guidance of Prof. Lee Hian Kee and Dr.
Chanbasha Basheer of the Department of Chemistry at the National University of
Singapore and would like to thank them for this enriching learning experience as well
as their friendship over the years. I sincerely appreciate the help and support from
everyone at the Defense Medical and Environmental Research Institute, DSO
National Laboratories, especially from the Organic Synthesis Group for providing the
analytes used in the study and all users of the GC MSD for sharing the use of the
instrument. Even though people come and go, the memories of the exciting times
especially during the Proficiency Tests, with Dr. Ang Kiam Wee, Ms. Chan Shu
Cheng, Mr. Leonard Chay Yew Leong, Dr. Alex Chin Piao, Dr. Chua Guan Leong,
Ms. Chua Hoe Chee, Mr. Willy Foo, Dr. Diana Ho Sook Chiang, Ms. Krystin Kee
Shwu Yee, Ms. Kwa Soo Tin, Mr. Le Tai Quoc, Dr. Lee Fook Kay, Ms. Leow Shee
Yin, Ms. Lim Hui, Mr. Neo Tiong Cheng, Ms. Ong Bee Leng, Ms. Linda Siow Siew
Lin, Ms. Sng Mui Tiang, Ms. Tan Sook Lan, Ms. Tan Yuen Ling, Ms. Jessica Woo
Huizhen, Ms. Veronica Yeo Mui Huang and Ms. Yong Yuk Lin, will remain with me
for a long time to come. Many thanks also to DSO National Laboratories for the co-
sponsorship throughout the course of my study. Lastly, special mention must be made
of my family members, especially Mum and Tony, who showed me much concern
despite being severely neglected while I worked long hours and throughout the
weekends. Thank you.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements i
Summary vii
List of Abbreviations ix
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 The Chemical Weapons Convention 1
1.2 Chemicals Related To The Chemicals Weapons Convention 2
1.3 The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
(OPCW) 8
1.4 The Official OPCW Proficiency Tests 9
1.5 Recommended Operating Procedures 13
1.6 Solvent Extraction 13
1.7 Solid-Phase Extraction 15
1.8 Motivation of the Project 16
Chapter 2 Development of Novel Solvent-Minimized Extraction Techniques
2.1 Solid-Phase Microextraction 17
2.1.1 Sol-gel SPME Fibers 19
2.1.2 Molecularly Imprinted Polymers for SPME Fibers 22
2.1.2.1 Molecular Imprinting 22
2.1.2.2 Sol-Gel Molecularly Imprinted Polymers 28
2.1.2.3 Current Status 30
2.1.3 Development of Novel SPME Coatings 32
2.2 Liquid-Phase Microextraction 34
iii
Chapter 3 Experimental
3.1 Sol-gel MIPs 40
3.1.1 Materials 41
3.1.2 Synthesis of MIPs and NIPs 42
3.1.3 Procedures 44
3.1.3.1 Evaluation of the effect of endcapping 44
3.1.3.2 Evaluation of the effect of elution solvents and
volume 45
3.1.3.3 Evaluation of binding properties 45
3.1.3.4 Comparison with other sample preparation
techniques 46
3.1.4 Instrumental Analysis 48
3.1.5 Synthesis of sol-gel MIP SPME fibers 48
3.2 SPME using PhPPP-coated fibers 49
3.2.1 Chemicals and Reagents 50
3.2.2 Preparation of PhPPP as a coating for SPME 50
3.2.3 Preparation of Stock Solutions and Samples 52
3.2.4 SPME Procedure 52
3.2.5 Instrumental Analysis 52
3.3 HF-LPME 53
3.3.1 Chemicals and Reagents 54
3.3.2 Preparation of Stock Solutions and Samples 55
3.3.3 Typical HF-LPME Procedures 56
3.3.4 Typical SPME Procedures 57
3.3.5 Instrumental Analysis 58
iv
3.4 Health and Safety Aspects 59
Chapter 4 Results and Discussion
4.1 Sol-gel MIPs 60
4.1.1 Effect of endcapping on PMPA-MIP-SPE 60
4.1.2 Evaluation of elution solvents and volume for
PMPA-MIP-SPE 63
4.1.3 Evaluation of binding properties by PMPA-MIP-SPE 64
4.1.4 Comparison of PMPA-MIP-SPE with other sample
preparation techniques 66
4.1.5 Evaluation of elution solvents and volume for
TDG-MIP-SPE 67
4.1.6 Evaluation of binding properties by TDG-MIP-SPE 69
4.1.7 Comparison of TDG-MIP-SPE with other sample
preparation techniques 70
4.1.8 Evaluation of elution solvents and volume for
TEA-MIP-SPE 71
4.1.9 Evaluation of binding properties by TEA-MIP-SPE 72
4.1.10 Comparison of TEA-MIP-SPE with other sample
preparation techniques 74
4.1.11 Evaluation of elution solvents and volume for
3Q-MIP-SPE 75
4.1.12 Evaluation of binding properties by 3Q-MIP-SPE 76
4.1.13 Comparison of 3Q-MIP-SPE with other sample
preparation techniques 77
v
4.1.14 Evaluation of elution solvents for MIP-SPE using a
mixture of MIPs 78
4.1.15 Comparison of MIP-SPE using a mixture of MIPs with
other sample preparation techniques 79
4.1.16 Preparation of sol-gel MIP fibers 81
4.1.17 Conclusion 81
4.2 SPME using PhPPP-coated fibers 83
4.2.1 Optimization of SPME conditions 85
4.2.2 Method validation 88
4.2.3 Comparison with commercial SPME fibers 89
4.2.4 Conclusion 90
4.3 HF-LPME 91
4.3.1 Optimization of parameters for HF-LPME of chemical
agents 91
4.3.2 Method validation for HF-LPME of chemical agents 96
4.3.3 Comparison of HF-LPME of chemical agents with SPME 97
4.3.4 Optimization of parameters for HF-LPME of CWA
degradation products 100
4.3.5 Method validation for HF-LPME of CWA degradation
products 109
4.3.6 Comparison of HF-LPME of CWA degradation products
with SPME 110
4.3.7 Optimization of parameters for HF-LPME of basic
degradation products 111
vi
4.3.8 Method validation for HF-LPME of basic degradation
products 122
4.3.9 Comparison of HF-LPME of basic degradation products
with SPME 123
4.3.10 Analysis of a 20th Official OPCW Proficiency Test water
sample 124
4.3.11 Conclusion 127
Chapter 5 Concluding Remarks 128
Chapter 6 References 131
Appendices
Appendix 1 List of Schedule 1-3 Chemicals 156
Appendix 2 Total Ion Chromatograms from the MIP-SPE Study 160
Appendix 3 Mass Spectra 166
Appendix 4 List of Poster Presentations and Publications 173
vii
SUMMARY
Two approaches towards the development of solvent-minimized
microextraction techniques are presented in this report. The first approach involved an
attempt to develop solid-phase microextraction (SPME) fibers based on molecularly
imprinted polymers (MIP) synthesized via the sol-gel route for the extraction of
degradation products of chemical warfare agents. In the second approach, hollow
fiber-protected liquid-phase microextraction (HF-LPME) was utilized for the
determination of various chemical warfare agents and their degradation products.
Prior to the development of sol-gel MIPs as SPME fiber coatings, sol-gel
MIPs were first synthesized as powder and evaluated as sorbent packings in solid-
phase extraction (SPE) cartridges. A series of MIPs was synthesized using pinacolyl
methylphosphonic acid (PMPA), thiodiglycol (TDG), triethanolamine (TEA) and 3-
quinuclidinol (3Q) as the templates. A non-imprinted polymer (NIP) was also
synthesized, but in the absence of a template. The polymers were evaluated for their
binding properties towards their respective target analytes in aqueous matrices using
SPE. The elution solvent and volume of elution solvent were optimized for each MIP.
The MIP-SPE procedure was compared with other sample preparation procedures,
namely strong anion-exchange (SAX) SPE and strong cation-exchange (SCX) SPE as
well as a direct rotary evaporation procedure for the analysis of a range of analytes in
an aqueous sample containing polyethylene glycol (PEG).
Commercially-available SPME fibers in which the polymer coatings have
been stripped-off or damaged but with an intact fused silica backbone were used for
the preparation of sol-gel MIP SPME fibers. Several attempts to synthesize the sol-gel
MIP SPME fibers did not proceed well as the fiber coatings cracked and flaked off
viii
upon drying. Hence, efforts were focused on the evaluation of a novel SPME coating
based on poly(1-hydroxy-4-dodecyloxy-p-phenylene) polymer (PhPPP).
PhPPP was investigated as a coating for the SPME of Lewisites from aqueous
samples. Several extraction parameters, namely the choice of derivatizing agent, pH,
salting, and extraction time were thoroughly optimized. Upon optimization of the
extraction parameters, the performance of the novel coating was compared against
that of commercially-available SPME coatings.
HF-LPME was investigated for the extraction of various chemical warfare
agents and their degradation products from aqueous samples. Optimization of several
extraction parameters was carried out where the effects of the extraction solvent, the
derivatizing agent, derivatization procedure, the amount of derivatizing agent (for
degradation products), salting, stirring speed and extraction time were thoroughly
investigated. Upon optimization of the extraction parameters, the HF-LPME
technique was compared against SPME. In addition, the applicability of the technique
for a 20th Official OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons)
Proficiency Test sample was demonstrated.
ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
A Absorptivity
ACN Acetonitrile
APTEOS 3-Aminopropyltriethoxysilane
BA Benzilic acid
BCVAA Bis(2-chlorovinyl)arsonous acid
BDT 1,4-Butanedithiol
BMPA Isobutyl methylphosphonic acid
BSTFA N,O-Bis(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide
BT Butanethiol
BZ 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate
CAR/PDMS carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane
CAS Chemical Abstracts Service
CEES 2-Chloroethyl ethyl sulfide
CEPF O-Cyclohexyl ethylphosphonofluoridate
CEPS Chloroethyl phenylsulfide
CMPA Cyclohexyl methylphosphonic acid
CMPF Cyclohexyl methylphosphonofluoridate
CVAA 2-Chlorovinylarsonous acid
CWA Chemical warfare agent
CWC Chemical Weapons Convention
CW/DVB carbowax/divinylbenzene
DBPP O,O-Dibutyl n-propylphosphonate
DCHMP or DCMP O,O-Dicyclohexyl methylphosphonate
DCM Dichloromethane
x
DEDEP or DEDEPA O,O-Diethyl N,N-diethylphosphoramidate
DIMP O,O-Diisopropyl methylphosphonate
DIPAE 2-(N,N-Diisopropylamino)ethanol
DMEP O,O-Dimethyl ethylphosphonate
DMMP O,O-Dimethyl methylphosphonate
DVB/CAR/PDMS divinylbenzene/carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane
ECPP O-Ethyl O-cyclohexyl n-propylphosphonate
EDEA N-Ethyldiethanolamine
EDEPC O-Ethyl N,N-diethylphosphoramidocyanidate
EDT 1,2-Ethanedithiol
EGDMA Ethylene glycol dimethacrylate
EHES Ethyl 2-hydroxyethyl sulfide
EMPA Ethyl methylphosphonic acid
EPA Ethylphosphonic acid
ET Ethanethiol
EtOH Ethanol
GA Tabun or ethyl N,N-dimethylphosphoramidocyanidate
GB Sarin or isopropyl methylphosphonofluoridate
GC MS Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry
GD Soman or pinacolyl methylphosphonofluoridate
GF Cyclohexyl methylphosphonofluoridate
h hour(s)
HD or SM Sulfur mustard or bis(2-chloroethyl) sulfide
HF-LPME Hollow fiber-protected liquid-phase microextraction
HMDS Hexamethyldisilazane
xi
HN1 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ethylamine
HN2 Bis(2-chloroethyl)methylamine
HN3 Tris(2-chloroethyl)amine
HP Hewlett Packard
HPLC High performance liquid chromatography
IMPA Isopropyl methylphosphonic acid
ISTD Internal standard
L Leak
LC MS Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry
LLE Liquid-liquid extraction
LOD Limit of detection
Log Kow Logarithm of octanol-water partition coefficient
L1 Lewisite 1 or 2-chlorovinyldichloroarsine
L2 Lewisite 2 or bis(2-chlorovinyl)chloroarsine
L3 Lewisite 3 or tris(2-chlorovinyl)arsine
MAA Methacrylic acid
MDEA N-Methyldiethanolamine
min minute(s)
MIP Molecularly imprinted polymer
MPA Methylphosphonic acid
MSD Mass selective detector
MTBSTFA N-(tert.-butyldimethylsilyl)-N-methyltrifluoroacetamide
MW Molecular weight
m/z mass-to-charge ratio
N Non-endcapped NIP
xii
NE Endcapped NIP
NIP Non-imprinted polymer
NMR Nuclear magnetic resonance spectrometry
nPPA n-Propylphosphonic acid
OPCW Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
P Non-endcapped PMPA-MIP
PA polyacrylate
PDMS polydimethylsiloxane
PDMS/DVB polydimethylsiloxane/divinylbenzene
PDT 1,3-Propanedithiol
PE Endcapped PMPA-MIP
PEG polyethylene glycol
PhPPP Poly(1-hydroxy-4-dodecyloxy-p-phenylene) polymer
PIPA Propyl isopropylphosphonic acid
pKa Negative logarithm of acid dissociation constant
PMPA Pinacolyl methylphosphonic acid
PPA Propylphosphonic acid
PT Propanethiol
PTMOS Phenyl trimethoxysilane
Q Sesquimustard or 1,2-bis(2-chloroethylthio)ethane
QOH 1,2-Bis(2-hydroxyethylthio)ethane
R Recovery
r2 Squared regression coefficient
ROP Recommended operating procedure
rpm Revolutions per minute
xiii
RSD Relative standard deviation
SAX Strong anion-exchange
SCX Strong cation-exchange
SD Standard deviation
S/N Signal-to-noise ratio
SPE Solid-phase extraction
SPME Solid-phase microextraction
T O-mustard or bis(2-chloroethylthioethyl)ether
TBDMS tert.-butyldimethylsilyl derivative
TDG Thiodiglycol
TDGS Thiodiglycol sulfoxide
TDGSO Thiodiglycol sulfone
TE Triethylamine
TEA Triethanolamine
TEOS Tetraethoxysilane
TFA Trifluoroacetic acid
TMCS Trimethylchlorosilane
TMS Trimethylsilyl derivative
TOH Bis(2-hydroxyethylthioethyl)ether
TPP Tripropyl phosphate
VERIFIN Finnish Institute for Verification of the Chemical Weapons
Convention
VX O-Ethyl S-2-diisopropylaminoethyl methylphosphonothiolate
w/v weight per volume
3Q 3-Quinuclidinol
1
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Chemical Weapons Convention
The Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production,
Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction, also known as
the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), was opened for signature in Paris, France
on 13 January 1993. The Convention had been the subject of nearly twenty years of
negotiation with the aim to finalize an international treaty banning chemical weapons,
and designed to ensure their worldwide elimination.
The CWC entered into force on 29 April 1997. Today, there are 184 State
Parties with an additional 4 Signatory States that have signed the CWC. A State Party
is one that has signed and ratified or acceded to the CWC and for which the initial 30-
day period has passed (the CWC enters into force for a State only 30 days after its
ratification or accession to the treaty) whereas a Signatory State is one that signed the
CWC prior to its entry into force in 1997 but has yet to deposit its instrument of
ratification with the United Nations in New York. Only 7 Non-Signatory States
world-wide have not taken any action on the Convention. They are Angola,
Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Somalia and Syrian
Arab Republic. Singapore signed on 14 January 1993 and ratified on 21 May 1997 [1-
4].
The Convention is unique because it is the first multilateral treaty to ban an
entire category of weapons of mass destruction and to provide for the international
verification of the destruction of these weapon stockpiles within stipulated deadlines.
The Convention was also negotiated with the active participation of the global
chemical industry, thus ensuring industry's on-going cooperation with the CWC's
industrial verification regime. The Convention mandates the inspection of industrial
2
facilities to ensure that toxic chemicals are used exclusively for purposes not
prohibited by the Convention [2].
For the purpose of implementing the CWC, several terms have been defined as
follows. Chemical Weapons refers to (a) toxic chemicals and their precursors,
except where intended for purposes not prohibited under this Convention, as long as
the types and quantities are consistent with such purposes; (b) munitions and devices,
specifically designed to cause death or other harm through the toxic properties of
those toxic chemicals specified in subparagraph (a), which would be released as a
result of the employment of such munitions and devices; (c) any equipment
specifically designed for use in connection with the employment of munitions and
devices specified in (b). Toxic Chemical refers to any chemical, which through its
chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation, or
permanent harm to humans or animals. This includes all such chemicals, regardless of
their origin or their method of production, and regardless of whether they are
produced in facilities, in munitions or elsewhere. Precursor refers to any chemical
reactant that takes part at any stage in the production, by whatever method, of a toxic
chemical [5].
1.2 Chemicals Related To The Chemicals Weapons Convention
Besides the definitions, toxic chemicals and precursors, which have been
identified for the application of verification measures, are grouped into lists known as
Schedule 1, 2 and 3. The list of chemicals is tabulated in Appendix 1. Schedule 1
chemicals include those that have been or can be easily used as chemical weapons and
which have very limited, if any, uses for peaceful purposes. These chemicals are
subject to very stringent restrictions, including a ceiling on production of one ton per
3
annum per State Party, a ceiling on total possession at any given time of one ton per
State Party, licensing requirements, and restrictions on transfers. These restrictions
apply to the relatively few industrial facilities that use Schedule 1 chemicals. Some
Schedule 1 chemicals are used as ingredients in pharmaceutical preparations or as
diagnostics. The Schedule 1 chemical, saxitoxin, is used as a calibration standard in
monitoring programs for paralytic shellfish poisoning, and is also used in neurological
research. Ricin, another Schedule 1 chemical, has been employed as a biomedical
research tool. Some Schedule 1 chemicals and/or their salts are used in medicine as
anti-neoplastic agents. Other Schedule 1 chemicals are usually produced and used for
protective purposes, such as for testing chemical weapons protective equipment and
chemical agent alarms. Schedule 2 chemicals include those that are precursors to, or
that in some cases can themselves be used as, chemical weapons agents, but have a
number of other commercial uses (such as ingredients in resins, flame-retardants,
additives, inks and dyes, insecticides, herbicides, lubricants and some raw materials
for pharmaceutical products). For example, BZ (3-quinuclidinyl benzilate) is a
neurotoxic chemical listed under Schedule 2, which is also an industrial intermediate
in the manufacture of pharmaceuticals such as clindinium bromide. Thiodiglycol is
both a mustard gas precursor as well as an ingredient in water-based inks, dyes and
some resins. Another example is dimethyl methylphosphonate, a chemical related to
certain nerve agent precursors that is used as a flame retardant in textiles and foamed
plastic products. Schedule 3 chemicals include those that can be used to produce, or
can be used as chemical weapons, but which are widely used for peaceful purposes
(including plastics, resins, mining chemicals, petroleum refining fumigants, paints,
coatings, anti-static agents and lubricants). Among the toxic chemicals listed under
Schedule 3 are phosgene and hydrogen cyanide, which have been used as chemical
4
weapons, but are also utilized in the manufacture of polycarbonate resins and
polyurethane plastics as well as certain agricultural chemicals. Triethanolamine, a
precursor chemical for nitrogen mustard, is found in a variety of detergents (including
shampoos, bubble baths and household cleaners) as well as being used in the
desulfurization of fuel gas streams [2].
Based on their mode of action, that is, the route of penetration and their effect
on the human body, chemical agents are commonly divided into several categories:
nerve, blister, blood and choking agents [6,7]. The nerve agents such as Tabun, Sarin,
Soman, VX, chlorosarin and chlorosoman are listed in Schedule 1. The blister agents,
namely sulfur mustards, nitrogen mustards and Lewisites, are also listed in Schedule
1. The blood agents, for example hydrogen cyanide and cyanogen chloride, are listed
in Schedule 3. Phosgene, is an example of a choking agent and is listed in Schedule 3.
The nerve agents, known as cholinesterase inhibitors, interfere with the central
nervous system by reacting with the enzyme acetylcholinesterase and creating an
excess of acetylcholine which affects the transmission of nerve impulses [8]. The
classical symptoms of nerve agent poisoning includes difficulty in breathing, drooling
and excessive sweating, vomiting, cramps, involuntary defecation and urination,
twitching, jerking and staggering, headache, confusion, drowsiness, convulsion,
coma, dimness of vision and pinpointing of the pupils [9]. Nerve agent poisoning may
be treated with timely administration of antidotes such as atropine and diazepam.
The blister agents cause blistering of the skin and extreme irritation of the eyes
and lungs. They can be very persistent in the environment. These chemicals cause
incapacitation rather than death but can kill in large doses [10]. Some blister agents
like Lewisite and phosgene oxime are immediately painful while mustard agents may
cause little or no pain for as long as several hours after exposure. No effective medical
5
care exists for the treatment of mustard exposure and care is directed towards
relieving the symptoms and preventing infections [8].
The blood agents are substances that block oxygen utilization or uptake from
the blood, causing rapid damage to body tissues [9,11]. Symptoms are irritation of the
eyes and respiratory tract, nausea, vomiting and difficulty in breathing. Death from
poisoning follows quickly after inhalation of a lethal dose. The victim may recover
quickly from a smaller dose without assistance [12].
The choking agents cause physical injury to the lungs through inhalation.
Membranes may swell and lungs become filled with liquid, and in serious cases, the
lack of oxygen causes death [8]. Phosgene and chlorine are classified as choking
agents but in fact have several industrial uses as well.
Besides the above-mentioned major classes of chemical agents, there exist
incapacitating agents such as vomiting, tearing and riot control agents. These are
generally non-lethal agents that cause temporary physical or mental incapacitation
rather than death. BZ is a hallucinating agent that produces similar effects to atropine
such as changes in heart rate, confusion, disorientation, delusions and slurred speech.
Tearing agents cause irritation to the eyes and skin. Some examples are
chloroacetophenone, o-chlorobenzylidene malononitrile and dibenz-(b,f)-1,4-
oxazepine, which are used as riot control agents. Vomiting agents cause nausea and
vomiting and can also induce cough, headache, and nose and throat irritation. The
vomiting agents are typically solids which when heated, vaporize and condense to
form aerosols. Adamsite, an arsenic-containing chemical, is an example of a vomiting
agent [9,10].
The chemical agents are usually not stable and when subjected to natural
degradation in the environment or decontamination, a myriad of degradation products
6
arise through chemical processes such as hydrolysis, oxidation and elimination [13-
18]. In cases where the parent agent no longer exists, verification of the presence of
CWAs would most likely be based on the detection of the corresponding degradation
products. Hence, the analysis of degradation products of CWAs is equally if not more
important than that of the original substances. Table 1-1 lists the chemical agents and
their corresponding degradation products investigated in this study.
Table 1-1. Chemical agents and degradation products investigated in this study.
Chemical Agent Degradation Product(s)
Tabun (GA)
Not investigated
Sarin (GB) Isopropyl methylphosphonic acid (IMPA)
Soman (GD) Pinacolyl methylphosphonic acid (PMPA)
Cyclohexyl methylphosphonofluoridate (GF)
Cyclohexyl methylphosphonic acid (CMPA)
O-Ethyl S-2-diisopropylaminoethyl methyl phosphonothiolate (VX)
Ethyl methylphosphonic acid (EMPA)
2-(N,N-Diisopropylamino)ethanol (DIPAE)
NP
O
O
N
P
O
OF
P
O
OHO
P
O
OOH
P
O
OF
PO
O
SN
P
O
OHO
NOH
P
O
OHO
P
O
OF
7
Chemical Agent Degradation Product(s)
Sulfur mustard (HD) Thiodiglycol (TDG)
Sesquimustard (Q) 1,2-Bis(2-hydroxyethylthio)ethane (QOH)
O-mustard (T) Bis(2-hydroxyethylthioethyl)ether (TOH)
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ethylamine (HN1)
N-ethyldiethanolamine (EDEA)
Bis(2-chloroethyl)methylamine (HN2)
N-methyldiethanolamine (MDEA)
Tris(2-chloroethyl)amine (HN3) Triethanolamine (TEA)
2-Chlorovinyldichloroarsine (L1) 2-Chlorovinylarsonous acid (CVAA)
Bis(2-chlorovinyl)chloroarsine (L2) Bis(2-chlorovinyl)arsonous acid (BCVAA)
Tris(2-chlorovinyl)arsine (L3)
Not investigated
ClS
Cl SOHOH
SOHS
OH
OS
OHS
OH
NOH OH
NOH OH
N
OH
OH OH
ClS
SCl
ClS
OS
Cl
ClN
Cl
ClN
Cl
ClN
Cl
Cl
AsCl
Cl
ClAs
OH
OH
Cl
As
Cl
Cl ClAs
OH
Cl Cl
AsCl Cl
Cl
8
Chemical Agent Degradation Product(s)
3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate (BZ)
Benzilic acid (BA)
3-Quinuclidinol (3Q)
1.3 The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)
The Chemical Weapons Convention mandated the Organization for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), an independent, international
organization based in The Hague, The Netherlands, to achieve the object and purpose
of the Convention, to ensure the implementation of its provisions, including those for
international verification of compliance with it, and to form a forum for consultation
and cooperation among State Parties. Among the numerous roles of the OPCW, a
complex verification regime is in place in order to ensure steps are taken towards
meeting the objectives of the Convention. On-site inspections and data monitoring are
conducted to ensure that activities within State Parties are consistent with the
objectives of the Convention and the contents of declarations submitted to the OPCW.
There are three types of inspections: routine inspections of chemical weapons-related
facilities and chemical industry facilities using certain dual-use chemicals; short-
notice challenge inspections which can be conducted at any location in any State
Party about which another State Party has concerns regarding non-compliance and
finally investigations of alleged use of chemical weapons [19].
During these inspections, sampling and on-site analysis may be undertaken to
check for the absence of undeclared scheduled chemicals. In cases of unresolved
OH
OHO
N
OH
NO
O
OH
9
ambiguities, samples may be sent to an off-site laboratory, subject to the inspected
State Party's agreement [5]. This off-site laboratory will be selected among several
OPCW designated laboratories. The designation of laboratories is determined through
their performance in the Official OPCW Proficiency Tests.
1.4 The Official OPCW Proficiency Tests
The OPCW proficiency testing scheme was set up with the objective to
simulate sample analysis in order to select laboratories that are capable of performing
trace analysis (at parts per million levels) of chemicals scheduled under the CWC
and/or their degradation products in a wide variety of matrices and of providing the
OPCW with a detailed report on the analysis results that contains analytical proof of
the presence of chemicals reported and provides high certainty of the absence of other
chemicals relevant for the implementation of the CWC and does not contain
information on chemicals not relevant to the CWC. Prior to the Official OPCW
Proficiency Tests, there were four international inter-laboratory comparison tests, also
known as round-robin tests, for laboratories to test the effectiveness of their
procedures for the recovery of CWC-related chemicals and their precursors and
degradation products from various sample matrices [20-23]. Thereafter, an additional
inter-laboratory comparison test [24] was conducted to further test the recommended
operating procedures [25] developed at the Finnish Institute for Verification of the
Chemical Weapons Convention (VERIFIN). Before the 1st Official OPCW
Proficiency Test in May 1996, two trial proficiency tests were held to train
laboratories and to establish procedures for the conduct of this first official test [26].
A laboratory may participate in the official proficiency tests as a regular
participant, whereby the laboratory is given fifteen calendar days to analyze the
10
samples and submit an analysis report to the OPCW [27]. Alternatively, a laboratory
may assist in one of two roles, that of the sample preparation laboratory or the
evaluating laboratory.
The sample preparation laboratory is tasked with formulating the composition
of test samples according to a test scenario, performing stability studies to ensure the
stability of spiking chemicals in the matrices, preparing the test samples as well as
dispatching a set to each of the participating laboratories in addition to two sets each
to the evaluating laboratory and the OPCW Laboratory. Thereafter, the sample
preparation laboratory proceeds to perform stability studies starting on the dispatch
date until the test period for all participants have expired. A sample preparation report
is submitted to the OPCW Laboratory within two weeks after the stability studies
have been completed. In addition, the sample preparation laboratory assists in the
categorization of the test chemicals and participates in the meeting held at the OPCW
Headquarters in The Hague to discuss the preliminary evaluation results with test
participants [28].
On the other hand, the evaluating laboratory is tasked with analyzing the
samples using at least two different analytical techniques, at least one of which must
be a spectrometric technique, to identify the test chemicals. Thereafter, the evaluating
laboratory submits a sample analysis report to the OPCW Laboratory within twenty
eight days upon receipt of the samples. Upon receipt of copies of the test reports from
participating laboratories (whereby pages identifying respective laboratories have
been removed by the OPCW Laboratory), the evaluating laboratory performs a
detailed evaluation of the reports and also assists in the categorization of the test
chemicals. A draft preliminary evaluation report will be sent to the OPCW Laboratory
within twenty eight days upon receipt of the complete set of copies of all participants'
11
reports. After discussion with the OPCW test coordinator on the draft preliminary
evaluation report, a preliminary evaluation report would be submitted to the OPCW
Laboratory within a week. The evaluating laboratory participates in the meeting held
at the OPCW Headquarters in The Hague to discuss the preliminary evaluation results
with test participants. Laboratories are allowed to submit comments on the
preliminary evaluation results in writing to the OPCW Laboratory within fourteen
calendar days following the preliminary evaluation meeting. If there are comments to
the preliminary evaluation results, the evaluating laboratory will conduct a re-
evaluation of the results affected by the comments, make corrections to the report and
submit the final evaluation report to the OPCW Laboratory within one week
following the receipt of the comments [29].
All participating laboratories that take part in an OPCW proficiency test will
be awarded a performance rating according to the extent to which the laboratory
fulfils the performance criteria as shown in Table 1-2. The sample preparation and
evaluating laboratories will be awarded the maximum performance rating of A
provided the test samples meet the required criteria and the evaluation of results is
performed satisfactorily and within set time lines.
Table 1-2. Method of evaluating performance rating [27].
Performance criteria fulfilled
Identification of chemicals
Performance scoring
Performance rating
Yes Laboratory identifies all chemicals
Maximum possible score
A
Yes Laboratory identifies all chemicals except one
Maximum possible score minus two
B
Yes Laboratory identifies more than half of the chemicals
Score between zero and (maximum possible minus two)
C
Yes Laboratory misses more chemicals than it identifies
Negative score D
No - No score Failure
12
The proficiency tests are a means for OPCW to assess laboratories in their
technical competence and for certifying laboratories that are seeking designation or
retention of designation status. To obtain designation, a laboratory should have
established a quality system and have a valid accreditation by an internationally
recognized accreditation body for the analysis of chemical warfare agents and related
compounds in various types of samples. In addition, a laboratory must obtain a rating
of three As or two As and a B in three consecutive proficiency tests in order for
designation. To retain the designation status, a laboratory must participate in the
proficiency tests at least once per calendar year and maintain the rating of three As or
two As and a B. Otherwise, it may be temporarily suspended or withdrawn in cases
where there is a substantial change in its accreditation status or deterioration in
performance in any proficiency test.
Since 1996 to 2007, a total of twenty two official OPCW proficiency tests
have been conducted. As of the 23rd Official OPCW Proficiency Test, there are
twenty designated laboratories worldwide, namely Belgium, China (two laboratories),
Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, India (two laboratories), The
Netherlands, Poland, Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, Singapore, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (two
laboratories) [30]. Singapore's participation in the official proficiency tests is
undertaken by the Verification Laboratory of DSO National Laboratories. The
laboratory has been actively taking part since the 2nd Official Proficiency Test and
obtained the designation status in 2003 after the 10th, 11th and 12th Official OPCW
Proficiency Tests. The laboratory has assisted as a sample preparation laboratory in
the 14th Official OPCW Proficiency Test and as an evaluating laboratory in the 20th
Official OPCW Proficiency Test.
13
1.5 Recommended Operating Procedures
The Recommended Operating Procedures (ROPs) for Sampling and Analysis
in the Verification of Chemical Disarmament were proposed by VERIFIN and were
subsequently tested and improved upon through the round-robin tests. In all these
tests and in later proficiency tests, these ROPs have been widely and successfully
applied [5].
The ROPs provide instructions on sampling, sample collection, packing and
handling of samples as well as sample preparation, that is, sample treatment of
various matrices, including air samples, soil, wipe (swab of solid surfaces using
cotton buds, filter paper or glass filter beds), active charcoal, aqueous liquid, concrete,
paint, rubber and other polymeric samples followed by analysis using various
instrumental techniques such as gas chromatography (GC), gas chromatography-mass
spectrometry (GC MS), liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC MS) and
nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectrometry. The ROPs on sample treatment are
essential for the determination of analytes of interest in samples since very often some
form of sample treatment is required in order to extract and/or pre-concentrate the
analytes of interest prior to instrumental analysis. The ROPs are largely based on
solvent extraction and solid-phase extraction (SPE).
1.6 Solvent Extraction
Solvent extraction, in this context of sample treatment, is taken to include both
liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) as well as extraction from solid matrices. Solvent
extraction is often used interchangeably with LLE or liquid-liquid distribution, the
term recommended by The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry
(IUPAC). LLE involves the distribution of a solute between two immiscible liquid
14
phases in contact with each other. The solute, initially dissolved in only one of the
two liquids, eventually distributes between the two phases when equilibrium is
reached. LLE commonly takes place with an aqueous solution as one phase and an
organic solvent as the other. Solvent extraction can facilitate the isolation of
analyte(s) from the major component (matrix) and/or the separation of the particular
analyte from concomitant trace or minor elements [31]. LLE has been proven to be an
attractive method of concentrating various organic compounds from aqueous matrices
[32]. On the other hand, solvent extraction can also be applied to the extraction of
solutes from solid materials such as soils, sludges and sediments [33].
With regards to the ROPs for sample treatment of matrices for the analysis of
CWC-related chemicals, LLE of aqueous liquid samples is performed using
dichloromethane as the organic solvent in the first and second extractions for neutral
and basic analytes respectively while a strong cation-exchange cartridge is used to
recover polar acidic analytes in the third extraction. For the solvent extraction of soil
samples, dichloromethane is used in the first extraction in order to extract any non-
polar CWC-related chemicals while distilled, deionized water is used in the second
extraction for polar analytes followed by the use of 1% triethylamine in methanol in
the third extraction to recover basic CWC-related chemicals. Acetone or
dichloromethane can be used in the first extraction of concrete and polymeric
samples, followed by distilled, deionized water in the second extraction. For the
solvent extraction of wipe samples, several non-polar organic solvents such as
acetone, ethyl acetate, dichloromethane or deuterated chloroform (for subsequent
NMR analysis) are recommended for the first extraction while polar solvents such as
acetonitrile, methanol or water can be used in the second extraction. Suitable solvents
15
for the solvent extraction of active charcoal samples are acetone, dichloromethane,
carbon disulfide and deuterated chloroform (for subsequent NMR analysis) [5,25].
1.7 Solid-Phase Extraction
SPE is a form of step-wise chromatography designed to extract, partition,
and/or adsorb one or more components from a liquid phase (sample) onto a stationary
phase (sorbent or resin) [34]. Prior to the loading of the sample, the SPE sorbent is
first wetted and conditioned with solvents. The sorbent can be in the form of pre-
packed cartridges, columns or disks onto which analytes of interest are trapped. A
washing step is performed to remove contaminants trapped on the sorbent without
influencing the elution of the analytes of interest. Finally, elution with a suitable
solvent is carried out to recover the analytes of interest [35]. In this way, SPE may
serve to achieve concentration of the analytes, sample clean-up by removal of
interferences as well as sample matrix removal or solvent exchange into a form
compatible with instrumental analysis [36]. With SPE, many of the problems
associated with LLE, such as incomplete phase separations, less-than-quantitative
recoveries, use of expensive, breakable specialty glassware, and disposal of large
quantities of organic solvents, can be prevented. SPE is more efficient than LLE,
yields quantitative extractions that are easy to perform, is rapid, and can be
automated. Solvent use and laboratory time are reduced [37].
SPE is indeed an established sample treatment method [38] and has been
widely utilized in a variety of applications [36,37,39-49]. Besides, SPE has been
shown to be useful in the analysis of CWC-related chemicals in organic [26,50],
aqueous liquid [51-53], soil [54-56] and biological [57-61] matrices. The SPE
cartridges investigated included silica, C18, strong cation-exchange, strong anion-
16
exchange, quaternary amine and hydrophilic-lipophilic balance (HLB) cartridges. In
fact, SPE can be used in place of LLE in the ROPs for sample treatment of aqueous
samples for the analysis of CWC-related chemicals [62].
1.8 Motivation of the Project
The objective of the project is to improve on current extraction techniques for
the analysis of CWC-related chemicals through the development of solvent-
minimized extraction techniques. The current ROPs mainly utilize solvent extraction
which requires large volumes of organic solvents in addition to substantial amounts of
samples, typically 5 ml of aqueous samples or 5 g of soil samples or more.
Furthermore, the entire procedure is time-consuming and labor-intensive. Besides,
solvent extraction may not be specific such that analytes of interest are extracted
together with contaminants and interfering chemicals. To address these issues, two
approaches were undertaken.
The first approach involved an attempt to develop solid-phase microextraction
(SPME) fibers coated with molecularly-imprinted polymers (MIPs) synthesized via
the sol-gel route to address the issues of selectivity and analysis time. To date, there
have been hardly any reports on sol-gel MIP SPME fibers. At the same time, another
novel SPME coating based on a poly(paraphenylene) polymer was investigated. The
second approach utilized hollow fiber-protected liquid-phase microextraction (HF-
LPME) for the determination of various chemical warfare agents and their
degradation products. This approach allows the miniaturization of the extraction
procedure in terms of reducing the amount of sample, extracting solvents and
glassware required during sample treatment as well as shortening the entire sample
treatment process.
17
2 DEVELOPMENT OF NOVEL SOLVENT-MINIMIZED EXTRACTION
TECHNIQUES
2.1 Solid-Phase Microextraction
SPME is a solvent-free sample preparation technique [63]. Since its
introduction [64], SPME has been extensively investigated for a wide range of
applications [65-81]. In SPME, a 1 cm length of fused silica fiber, coated with a
polymer, is installed in a holder that looks like a modified microliter syringe. There is
also a stainless steel needle that the fiber can be withdrawn into to protect it. The
plunger moves the fused silica fiber into and out of the hollow needle. To use the unit,
the analyst draws the fiber into the needle, passes the needle through the septum that
seals the sample vial, and depresses the plunger, exposing the fiber to the sample or
the headspace above the sample. Organic analytes absorb into/adsorb onto the coating
on the fiber. After adsorption equilibrium is attained, usually in 2 to 30 minutes, the
fiber is drawn into the needle, and the needle is withdrawn from the sample vial.
Finally, the needle is introduced into the GC injector, where the adsorbed analytes are
thermally desorbed and delivered to the GC column, or into the SPME/HPLC
interface [82]. The SPME process is represented in Figure 2-1.
Figure 2-1. The extraction and desorption procedures in SPME [82].
18
SPME fibers are commercially available in various polymeric coatings and
thickness for both GC and LC applications. Commercially-available coatings include
polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane (CAR/PDMS),
polydimethylsiloxane/divinylbenzene (PDMS/DVB), polyacrylate (PA),
carbowax/divinylbenzene (CW/DVB), polyethylene glycol (PEG) and
divinylbenzene/carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane (DVB/CAR/PDMS) [83].
PDMS and PA fibers are absorptive fibers whereby analytes are extracted by
partitioning onto the liquid phase and are retained by the thickness of the coating.
PDMS/DVB, CW/DVB, CAR/PDMS and DVB/CAR/PDMS fibers are adsorptive
fibers which physically trap or chemically react and bond with analytes owing to their
porous nature and high surface area. The relatively new PEG fibers do not contain an
adsorbent polymer and are meant to replace the CW/DVB fibers [84]. In order to
select the best fiber for the target analyte, several parameters such as the molecular
weight and polarity of the analyte, the polarity and extraction mechanism of the fiber,
minimum detection limit and the linear range requirements have to be considered
[85,86].
A variety of commercial SPME coatings have been evaluated for the analysis
of chemical warfare agents and degradation compounds [87-96]. The coatings that
have been evaluated are 100 m PDMS, 85 m PA, 65 m PDMS/DVB, 65 m
CW/DVB and 75 m CAR/PDMS. Besides, a novel phenol-based polymer coating,
consisting of hydrogen bond acidic hexafluorobisphenol groups alternating with
oligo(dimethylsiloxane) segments, was designed for headspace SPME of Sarin [97].
19
2.1.1 Sol-gel SPME Fibers
Besides using commercial SPME fibers, SPME coatings made of silica-based
polymers can also be fabricated through a simple procedure known as the sol-gel
process. The sol-gel process refers to the preparation of ceramic materials by
preparation of a sol, gelation of the sol and removal of the solvent [98]. A sol is a
fluid, colloidal dispersion of solid particles in a liquid phase where the particles are
sufficiently small to remain suspended by Brownian motion. A gel is a solid
consisting of at least two phases wherein a solid phase forms a network that entraps
and immobilizes a liquid phase [99,100]. The sol-gel process involves mild reaction
conditions such that molecules, particularly those which are water soluble, may be
readily introduced within a highly crosslinked porous host without problems of
thermal or chemical decomposition. Materials in various configurations (for example,
films, fibers, monoliths and powders) can be prepared easily. Specific organic
functional groups can be combined with the inorganic precursor to introduce specific
chemical functionalities into the framework and improve molecular selectivity and
specificity. Furthermore, the materials are stable and the sol-gel processing conditions
can be varied to control the porosity and surface area of the resultant material [101].
The starting materials in the preparation of sol-gel materials are typically
inorganic metal salts or metal alkoxides (M(OR)n) such as tetramethoxysilane
(TMOS) or tetraethoxysilane (TEOS). A general sol-gel route is as follows:
Hydrolysis: M(OR)n + xH2O M(OR)n-x(OH)x + xROH
Condensation: M(OR)3(OH) + M(OR)3(OH) (RO)3M-O-M(OR)3 + H2O
or M(OR)3(OH) + M(OR)3(OH) (RO)3M-O-M(OR)2(OH) + ROH
20
At the end, every oxygen is bridging and hence a pure and highly
homogeneous oxide network is obtained [102]. Through the sol-gel process, materials
can be fabricated in many forms, such as thin films, membranes, powders, dense
ceramics and fibers. Useful applications of sol-gel materials include optical materials,
chemical sensors, catalysts, coatings, membranes, electronic materials and
chromatographic supports [103-109].
Several research groups are actively working on the area of sol-gel SPME
fibers because of the advantages of sol-gel SPME fibers over commercially-available
fibers. These advantages include enhanced thermal stability, solvent stability and the
ease with which inorganic or organic components can be incorporated into the
polymer framework. The enhanced thermal and solvent stability arises from the fact
that sol-gel coatings are chemically bonded to the fused silica backbone. In contrast,
most of the coatings of commercial fibers are physically deposited onto the fused
silica surface [110,111]. Another significant advantage is the fact that sol-gel coatings
contain polar moieties like silanol groups, resulting in the ability of seemingly non-
polar coatings such as PDMS or C11-PDMS to extract both polar and non-polar
analytes [112].
The pioneering work of Malik and co-workers demonstrated that sol-gel
PDMS coatings were capable of extracting both polar analytes such as
dimethylphenols, long chain alcohols and anilines as well as nonpolar analytes such
as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and alkanes [113]. In contrast,
conventionally-coated PDMS fibers do not show sufficient selectivity for polar
compounds. The sol-gel PDMS fibers exhibited higher thermal stability compared to
conventionally-coated PDMS fibers. The sol-gel fibers can be routinely used at 320 C
and higher without any signs of bleeding. Enhanced thermal stability of sol-gel-coated
21
fibers allowed the sample carryover problem, often encountered in SPME of polar
solutes with conventional PDMS fibers, to be overcome. Sol-gel coatings possess a
porous structure and reduced coating thickness that provide enhanced extraction and
mass transfer rates in SPME. High-temperature conditioning of sol-gel-coated PDMS
fibers led to consistent improvement in peak area repeatability for SPME-GC
analysis. Peak area relative standard deviation values of <1% was obtained for PAHs
and dimethylphenols on sol-gel PDMS fibers conditioned at 320 C.
Besides conventional PDMS [114-116], PDMS/DVB [117] and PEG [111,
118-119] coatings, novel sol-gel coatings have been developed and evaluated.
Oligomers [120], novel polymers [121-131], fullerol [132], acrylates [133-136],
crown ethers [137-144], calix[4]arenes [145-151], cyclodextrins [152-154], hybrid
organic-inorganic materials [155,156], silica particles [157] and carbon [158,159]
have been incorporated as fiber coatings on SPME fibers. The fibers showed
improved thermal and chemical stability as well as good extraction efficiency of
target analytes.
Zeng and co-workers have published numerous papers of their work on sol-gel
SPME fibers. Of special interest in the analysis of chemical warfare agents and related
compounds is the development and evaluation of sol-gel PDMS/DVB for the
extraction of trimethylphosphate, tributylphosphate and dimethyl methylphosphonate
(a simulant of Sarin) [117] as well as PDMS coatings with acrylate components for
the extraction of 2-chloroethyl ethyl sulfide (CEES), a simulant of HD [134]. The
authors showed that the performance of the sol-gel PDMS/DVB fiber surpassed that
of commercially-available fibers such as 100 m PDMS, PA and PDMS/DVB for the
extraction of the phosphates and phosphonates from air and water samples. In the
other study, a comparison of acrylate components added to the sol mixture was made
22
and it was found that butyl methacrylate (BMA) gave the best results as compared to
methyl acrylate or methyl methacrylate. The sol-gel PDMS/BMA fiber surpassed that
of commercial PA for the extraction of CEES from soil.
2.1.2 Molecularly Imprinted Polymers for SPME Fibers
One drawback of current SPME coatings is that, other than the target analytes,
the fibers may absorb/adsorb other compounds present in the matrix, which would
possibly interfere with the analysis. One way of introducing selectivity to SPME
fibers is through the use of MIPs as fiber coatings.
2.1.2.1 Molecular Imprinting
Molecular imprinting is a technique used for preparing polymers with
synthetic recognition sites having a predetermined selectivity for the analyte(s) of
interest. The imprinted polymer is obtained by arranging polymerizable functional
monomers around a template (target analyte). Complexes are then formed through
molecular interactions between the analyte and the monomer precursors. These
interactions can either be non-covalent bonds, for example, ionic bonds and hydrogen
bonds, or reversible covalent bonds, for example, through boronic esters. Figure 2-2
depicts examples of the various interactions which may be employed in molecular
imprinting [160]. The complexes are assembled in the liquid phase and fixed by cross-
linking polymerization. Removal of the template from the resulting polymer matrix
creates vacant recognition sites that exhibit affinity for the analyte [161]. The concept
of molecular imprinting is illustrated in Figure 2-3.
23
Figure 2-2. Types of binding interactions that can be exploited during templating: (a) -
interaction; (b) hydrophobic or van der Waals interaction; (c) covalent bonds; (d) (transition) metal-ligand binding; (e) hydrogen binding; (f) crown ether -ion interaction; (g) ionic interaction [160].
Figure 2-3. Illustration of the concept of molecular imprinting [162].
Besides the specificity of MIPs, the other attractive features of MIPs are that
they are easy to prepare in different configurations such as block polymers, particles,
films or membranes and fibers, physically and chemically stable and reusable without
loss of the imprinting effect [163-165]. Interest in molecular imprinting technology
has grown at a phenomenal rate in recent years as seen from the number of original
publications (Figure 2-4) and is being extensively investigated for applications in
separations [167-196], sensors [198-202] and in synthesis and catalysis [203-208].
template and monomers complexation polymerisation
template removal recognition
24
Figure 2-4. A graphical representation of the number of publications within the field of molecular imprinting between 1931 and 1997 [166].
Several research groups have reported good results on the analysis of chemical
warfare agents and their degradation products using MIPs. The techniques of
molecular imprinting and sensitized lanthanide luminescence were combined to create
the basis for sensors that can selectively measure pinacolyl methylphosphonic acid
(PMPA), the hydrolysis product of the nerve agent, Soman, in water [209-213]. The
sensor functions by selectively and reversibly binding PMPA to a functionality-
imprinted copolymer possessing a coordinatively-bound luminescent lanthanide ion,
Eu3+. The MIP is formed by cross-linking styrene with divinylbenzene and templated
for PMPA for the detection of PMPA and isopropyl methylphosphonic acid (IMPA),
the hydrolysis products of Soman and Sarin respectively. This is feasible since the
polymer-bound functional end of PMPA is the same for both PMPA and IMPA. The
sensor is made from a fiber optic probe utilizing a luminescent europium complex.
The use of lanthanide ions as spectroscopic probes of structure and content is an
established technique. The narrow excitation and emission peaks of lanthanide
spectra, typically in the order of 0.01-1 nm full width at half maximum, provide for
the sensitive and selective analyses. Lanthanide complexes exhibit long luminescent
25
lifetimes and are intensely luminescent when complexed by appropriate ligands.
Proper ligand choice, used both to immobilize the lanthanide probe and provide the
enhancements needed for trace analysis, has been shown to provide limits of detection
in parts per trillion or lower [214]. The device has been constructed using europium as
the probe ion since its luminescence spectrum is least complex. Detection of the nerve
agent is based upon changes that occur in the spectrum when the hydrolysis product is
coordinated to Eu3+. This is seen from the presence of a peak at 610 nm in the laser-
excited luminescence spectrum of Eu(DMMB)3(NO3)2(PMPA) as compared to that of
Eu(DMMB)3(NO3)3, where the peak is absent. DMMB refers to the ligand, methyl-
3,5-dimethylbenzoate, which can be converted into polymerizable methyl-3,5-
divinylbenzoate, providing an avenue for self-crosslinking. In addition, the sensor was
evaluated for its physical properties such as luminescence properties, lifetime,
response time and pH dependence. The effect of interferences was also investigated.
The combination of molecular imprinting and luminescence detection provides
multiple criteria of selectivity to virtually eliminate the possibilities of false positive
readings. The sensor can be used in detecting the presence of chemical agents or
pollutants near battlefields, in hospitals or military installations, or in community
water supplies. Investigations were further extended to the imprinting of nerve agents
in which the sensors were evaluated against the presence of nerve agents in various
types of water such as tap, reverse osmosis, and deionized water [215].
In a study of MIP-SPE for the determination of degradation products of nerve
agents (Figure 2-5) in human serum [216], the absorptivities of several degradation
products of nerve agents, namely pinacolyl methylphosphonic acid (PMPA,
degradation product of Soman), ethyl methylphosphonic acid (EMPA, degradation
product of VX), isopropyl methylphosphonic acid (IMPA, degradation product of
26
Sarin), cyclohexyl methylphosphonic acid (CMPA, degradation product of GF),
isobutyl methylphosphonic acid (BMPA, degradation product of Russian VX) and
methylphosphonic acid (MPA, the final degradation product of all nerve agents) on
MIPs imprinted with PMPA, EMPA and MPA were investigated. It was shown that
the MIPs showed cross-selectivity as they could recognize not only the print molecule
but also the degradation products of the other nerve agents because the degradation
products of all nerve agents differ only in the alkyl chain of the phosphonate esters.
On the other hand, the non-imprinted polymer (NIP) showed no absorptivity. The NIP
is a polymer synthesized under the same conditions as the MIP but in the absence of
the template. This is believed to have arisen from the imprinting effect. It was
demonstrated that the cross-selectivity of the PMPA-MIP enabled the extraction of
the possible degradation products of all the nerve agents from human serum with
extraction recoveries of up to 90.5%. The interfering components for the capillary
electrophoresis analysis were successfully removed. Detection limits of 0.1 g ml 1
and relative standard deviations of <9% were obtained.
Figure 2-5. The structures of the nerve agent degradation products investigated [216].
In a separate study [217], a PMPA-imprinted MIP (PMPA-MIP) was
investigated for the analysis of EMPA using solid phase extraction. Two acrylate-
based MIPs were prepared using methacrylic acid (MAA) as a monomer and ethylene
P
O
O
OH
P
O
O
OH
P
O
O
OH
P
O
O
OH
P
O
O
OH
P
O
OH
OH
IMPA (Sarin)
PMPA (Soman) EMPA (VX)
CMPA (GF) BMPA (Russian VX)
MPA
27
glycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA) or trimethylolpropane trimethacrylate (TRIM) as
cross-linkers in dichloromethane and acetonitrile respectively. It was found that both
the MIPs as well as the NIP showed absorptivity of the analyte. This was in contrast
to the results of Meng and co-workers [216] where the NIP did not show any
absorptivity of the analytes. In order to achieve a difference in the recovery between
the MIP and the NIP, a washing step using 10 ml of acetonitrile:methanol (95:5) was
performed. With this step, the MIP gave 87% recovery of EMPA whereas the NIP
gave 34% upon elution with water. The MIP was next evaluated for the sample
cleanup of soil spiked with IMPA and CMPA. An Oasis hydrophilic-lipophilic
balance cartridge was selected to be used prior to the MIP cartridge, resulting in
sample cleanup and 95% recovery of the analytes.
A plastic antibody, that is, an MIP for the specific recognition of sulfur
mustard was fabricated using MAA and EGDMA [218]. The uptake of the plastic
antibody was compared against that of the NIP and the imprinting efficiency was
found to be 1.3. The imprinting efficiency is defined as the ratio of the binding ratio
of the MIP to the NIP, where the binding ratio is the ratio of the adsorbed analyte to
that remaining in solution. The plastic antibody did not experience interference from a
stimulant, dichlorodiethyl ether. The same research group further designed an MIP-
based potentiometric sensor for the specific recognition of MPA, the final degradation
product of nerve agents [219]. The sensor was fabricated from MAA and EGDMA
particles, dispersed in 2-nitrophenyloctyl ether followed by embedding in polyvinyl
chloride matrix to form a polymer membrane. The polymer membrane sensor can be
used for the analysis of MPA in natural waters in the presence of interfering
compounds such as phosphoric acids.
28
In a different approach [220], covalent imprinting was carried out first by
reacting MAA and EGDMA with 3,3-dimethylbutan-2-yl-4-vinylphenyl
methylphosphonate, a vinylphenol template carrying functional groups of PMPA.
This was followed by hydrolysis of the template using caesium fluoride. The binding
affinity of the MIP was studied by colorimetric detection methods where the
imprinting efficiency was determined to be 2.4.
Another interesting approach involved the introduction of a strong nucleophile
(hydroxamic acid) into the MIP to efficiently attack the phosphorus-fluoride bond of
organophosphonate nerve agents [221]. The proof-of-concept study showed that the
MIPs synthesized to be specific for Sarin and Soman, led to accelerated hydrolysis of
corresponding p-nitrophenyl substrates as compared to simultaneous hydrolysis in
buffer. Further studies on actual nerve agents are currently underway.
2.1.2.2 Sol-Gel Molecularly Imprinted Polymers
Besides acrylate polymers, sol-gel MIP materials produced from silane
monomers, have also been extensively investigated for applications mainly in
separations and sensors [222-247]. Of particular interest is the work by Marx et al.
since some of the analytes of interest studied were organophosphorus pesticides. In a
study on the detection of organophosphate pesticides using thin film sol-gel MIPs
[248], it was shown that the parathion-imprinted sol-gel films were highly selective
for the template molecule and not for very closely similar analytes such as methyl-
parathion, paraoxon, triethylphosphate and fenitrothion (Figure 2-6). In addition, the
sol-gel MIP exhibited selective binding of the analyte even in an aqueous matrix. The
sol-gel MIP films were further investigated for specific binding of analytes in the gas
phase [249].
29
Figure 2-6. Results showing high selectivity of the parathion-imprinted MIP [248].
Direct comparisons between acrylic-based MIPs and sol-gel MIPs were made
[231]. It was demonstrated that the thin film sol-gel MIPs, imprinted using
propranolol as a template, possess superior properties over the acrylic MIPs in terms
of selectivity for propanolol as compared to the corresponding NIPs. Even though the
sol-gel system had a lower capacity for binding, the non-specific binding was lower
than the acrylic system. In another study [250], acrylic and sol-gel MIPs imprinted for
2-aminopyridine were compared in terms of specificity and selectivity. Specificity
was defined as the success of the imprinting process as seen from the difference in
binding between the MIP and the NIP while selectivity was defined as the efficiency
in binding structural analogues of the template. It was found that the sol-gel MIP
showed a higher degree of specificity over the NIP in a polar solvent as compared to
the acrylic polymers. In terms of selectivity, the selectivity of the polymers for the
template over its structural analogues could be improved upon.
30
The use of sol-gel MIPs for the analysis of chemical warfare agents and
degradation products is in fact fairly limited. The work by Markowitz et al. is of note
where silica particles were surface-imprinted with PMPA, the degradation product of
Soman [251]. The particle surfaces were imprinted during particle formation by
adding PMPA to a microemulsion. The particles were functionalized with the addition
of organotrialkoxysilanes such as N-trimethoxysilylpropyl-N,N,N-trimethyl
ammonium chloride, 2-(trimethoxysilyl ethyl)pyridine or N-(3-triethoxypropyl)-4,5-
dihydroimidazole and the particle size, surface area, adsorption properties and binding
affinity of organophosphate compounds were studied. It was found that surface-
imprinted quaternary amine, 2-ethylpyridine- and dihydroimidazole-functionalized
silicates had a significantly higher degree of specificity for PMPA than for
structurally similar organophosphates. The binding properties were conducted using
2-propanol as a solvent. Another study focused on the recognition of MPA, the final
degradation product of nerve agents, using surface imprinting whereby the surface of
an indium tin oxide electrode was modified with octadecylsiloxane [252]. High
specificity, selectivity, stability and speed were demonstrated for this potentiometric
chemosensor.
2.1.2.3 Current Status
Thus far, reports on the use of MIPs as SPME fiber coatings have been scarce.
The first reports on MIPs as SPME adsorbents were published in 2001. The first study
[253] involved the use of propranolol-MIP particles for use as a capillary column
material for the determination of propranolol in serum samples by in-tube SPME.
Another study [254], which is also the first report on MIPs as SPME fiber coatings,
showed the feasibility of combining the selectivity of MIPs with the simplicity of
31
SPME. Silica fibers were coated with clenbuterol-imprinted polymers which were
subsequently used for extraction of clenbuterol from biological samples.
Bromobuterol (Figure 2-7), which is a structural analogue of the template,
clenbuterol, and is baseline separated in the liquid chromatography system, was used
to study the extraction and desorption characteristics of the MIP-coated fibers.
Selectivity of the extraction with these fibers was evaluated by comparison with fibers
coated with a NIP in order to investigate the non-selective interactions of the MIP.
The NIP was prepared in the same way as the MIP but without the clenbuterol
template. The selectivity of the MIP-coated fiber was shown by extraction yields of
about 75 and <5% respectively, for brombuterol from acetonitrile, using the imprinted
and non-imprinted polymers. Application of the fiber to the extraction of brombuterol
from spiked human urine gave clean extracts and ~45% yield, demonstrating the
suitability of the fibers for the analysis of biological samples.
Figure 2-7. The structures of clenbuterol and its structural analogue, brombuterol [254].
After a lapse of several years, publications on MIPs as SPME fiber coatings
started emerging in the recent couple of years. An interesting method of making MIP
SPME fibers involved filling untreated fused silica capillaries with the MIP followed
by etching of the fused silica with ammonium hydrogen difluoride [255,256]. Upon
optimization of parameters such as fiber thickness, polymerization time, loading,
Cl
NH2
Cl
NH
OH
Br
NH2
Br
NH
OH
clenbuterol brombuterol
32
washing and elution solvents as well as time and temperature of the loading step, the
fibers were used for the extraction of triazines from soil and vegetable samples.
In an alternative method, prometryn-imprinted polymers were coated onto
silica fibers for SPME of triazines in soil and crop samples [257,258]. Further work
by this research group involved the preparation and evaluation of MIP SPME fibers
for the trace analysis of tetracycline antibiotics in chicken feed, chicken muscle and
milk samples [259].
Using another straight-forward preparation method, monolithic codeine-
imprinted SPME fibers were fabricated through the use specially-prepared moulds.
The resulting fibers were 2 cm in length and 0.3 mm in diameter [260]. The method
was also used to fabricate diacetylmorphine-imprinted SPME fibers for the selective
extraction of diacetylmorphine and its structural analogues followed by GC and/or
GC MS analysis [261].
2.1.3 Development of Novel SPME Coatings
The MIP SPME coatings mentioned in the previous section are solely
acrylate-based coatings formed using methacrylic acid as the monomer and ethylene
glycol dimethacrylate or trimethylolpropane trimethacrylate as the cross-linker.
Hence, one of the aims of this project was to combine the fields of sol-gel chemistry,
molecular imprinting and solid-phase microextraction in the development of novel
SPME coatings in the form of sol-gel MIP SPME fibers for the selective extraction of
degradation products of chemical warfare agents from water samples. To the best of
our knowledge, there has only been one report on sol-gel MIP SPME fibers, for the
determination of ascorbic acid [262].
33
At the same time, another novel SPME coating, based on an asymmetrically
substituted polyhydroxylated poly(paraphenylene) polymer, poly(1-hydroxy-4-
dodecyloxy-p-phenylene) (PhPPP) [263], was investigated. The chemical structure of
the functionalized polymer used in the coating of the fiber is shown in Figure 2-8.
Figure 2-8. The chemical structure of PhPPP.
The incorporation of a long alkoxy chain and hydroxyl groups on either side
of the polymer backbone confers amphiphilic properties to the polymer backbone.
The polymer has been characterized [263-266] and investigated as a coating for
polymer-coated hollow fiber microextraction (PC-HFME) in which it functioned as
the adsorbent for the enrichment of organochlorine pesticides in water [267].
In PC-HFME (Figure 2-9), a short length of the hollow fiber membrane is
coated with a selected polymer. The extraction device is then placed into the sample
solution and allowed to tumble freely and continuously throughout the extraction.
Upon completion of extraction, the fiber is removed prior to desorption of the analytes
in a suitable solvent [268-271].
Figure 2-9. Experimental set-up for PC-HFME [267].
OH
C12H25O
n
34
In our investigation of the PhPPP coating for extraction, the polymer was
coated onto recycled commercial SPME fibers in which the polymeric coating had
been removed, leaving the fused silica backbone intact. The performance of this novel
fiber coating for the extraction of Lewisites from water samples was evaluated against
that of commercially-available fibers.
2.2 Liquid-Phase Microextraction
Single-drop microextraction (SDME) and hollow-fiber protected liquid-phase
microextraction (HF-LPME) are relatively new, solvent-minimized microextraction
techniques. In SDME [80,272-275], also referred to as single drop extraction (SDE)
[276-278], liquid-phase microextraction (LPME) [279-284], solvent microextraction
(SME) [285-287], single-drop LPME (SD-LPME) [288] or liquid-liquid-liquid
microextraction (LLLME) [289], a microdrop of solvent is suspended from the tip of
a conventional microsyringe and then immersed in a sample solution in which it is
immiscible or suspended in the headspace above the sample. After sampling, the
microdrop is retracted into the syringe and transferred to the analytical instrument.
The experimental set-up for SDME is depicted in Figure 2-10.
Figure 2-10. Experimental set-up for SDME [80].
35
An evolution from SDME involves the utilization of a polypropylene hollow
fiber membrane to contain the acceptor phase either in a U-shaped or a rod-like
configuration (Figures 2-11 and 2-12). The former technique was also known as
LPME when it was first described [290-296] whereas the latter has been referred to as
hollow fiber-protected LPME (HF-LPME) [297-307]. In the literature, the term,
LPME , has been used to refer to different techniques and configurations and tends to
lead to some confusion. Hence, the term, HF-LPME , will be used throughout the
rest of this text to specifically refer to the use of the hollow fiber membrane in the
rod-like (the so-called Lee-type) configuration. Alternative terminology for two-phase
HF-LPME include liquid-liquid microextraction (LLME) and microporous membrane
liquid-liquid extraction (MMLLE) [277] while three-phase HF-LPME has also been
referred to as liquid-liquid-liquid microextraction (LLLME) [308-315] and supported
liquid membrane (SLM) LLE [316].
Figure 2-11. Experimental set-up for HF-LPME in the U-shaped configuration [290].
Figure 2-12. Experimental set-up for HF-LPME in the rod-like configuration [297].
36
HF-LPME can be carried out as a two-phase or three-phase procedure. In two-
phase HF-LPME, the hollow fiber is affixed to the tip of the syringe needle and
contains an organic solvent for the extraction of analytes of interest from an aqueous
sample. Upon completion of extraction, the organic solvent is withdrawn into the
syringe and injected directly into a GC instrument for analysis [317]. The hollow fiber
is then discarded and thus resolves any issues of carry-over. In contrast, three-phase
HF-LPME involves extraction from an aqueous sample matrix, through an organic
phase, that is immiscible with water, held in the pores of the hollow fiber, and back
into a fresh aqueous phase inside the lumen (channel) of the hollow fiber [311].
Similar to SPME, besides direct immersion into an aqueous sample, headspace
SDME [318-324] and HF-LPME [325-327] can be carried out over a sample. In
addition, improvement to the technique is possible through dynamic HF-LPME, in
which small volumes of the aqueous sample is a repeatedly pulled in and pushed out
of the hollow fiber with the aid of a syringe pump. During withdrawal of the aqueous
sample, a thin film of organic solvent builds up in the hollow fiber and vigorously
extracts analyte from the sample segment, whereas, during sample expulsion, this thin
film recombines with the bulk organic phase in the syringe. During this
recombination, the portion of analyte extracted in the current cycle is trapped in the
bulk organic solvent. After extraction, which includes many repeated cycles, a portion
of the bulk organic solvent is subjected to further chromatographic analysis [275,328-
333]. Further improvements to the techniques involve the use of ionic liquids [334-
339] or binary solvents [340,341] as the extraction solvent.
Both SDME and HF-LPME techniques are simple and fast techniques to carry
out with the use of inexpensive apparatus. In addition, minimal volumes of solvents,
typically 5 to 50 l, are consumed such that these techniques are practically solvent-
37
less. High pre-concentration of analytes and excellent clean-up can be achieved.
However, SDME has its limitations: (a) the direct immersion mode requires careful
and elaborate manual operation due to the problem of drop dislodgement and
instability; (b) since more complex matrices will compromise the stability of the
solvent drop during extraction, an extra filtration step of the sample is usually
necessary; (c) the sensitivity and precision of SDME are not high due to relatively
long extraction time and the slow stirring rates since fast stirring usually results in
drop dissolution and/or dislodgement; and (d) SDME is not yet a routinely applicable
on-line pre-concentration procedure. Even though HF-LPME is also limited by the
unavailability of commercial equipment, with the protection of the hollow fiber
membrane, the technique is far more robust where samples can be stirred or vibrated
vigorously without any loss of the micro-extract. HF-LPME is expected to be an
important sample preparation technique, complementing existing techniques like
LLE, SPE and SPME [273,275,342,343].
Both SDME and HF-LPME have been investigated for the analysis of CWAs
and their degradation products. In the first report on SDME of CWAs and related
compounds [344], three toxic CWAs and six non-toxic markers of organophosphorus
nerve agents were investigated. The structures of the compounds are shown in Figure
2-13. Extraction parameters were optimized, leading to extraction conditions
requiring a combination of dichloromethane and carbon tetrachloride (3:1) as the
extracting solvent, a stirring rate of 300 rpm, addition of 30% of sodium chloride and
an extraction time of 30 min. The optimized SDME procedure was compared against
SPME and LLE for the extraction of compounds E-I (Figure 2-13). SDME was shown
to be superior over LLE and managed to extract all the compounds when SPME failed
to extract Sarin.
38
Figure 2-13. Structures of CWAs investigated in SDME [344].
In another study [345], HF-LPME was investigated for the extraction of
CWAs from water. The structures of the analytes investigated are shown in Figure 2-
14. The optimized extraction conditions were found to be the use of trichloroethylene
as the extracting solvent, a stirring rate of 1000 rpm, an extraction time of 15 min and
a salt concentration of 30% sodium chloride. It was found that HF-LPME is
advantageous over SDME in terms of operation, sensitivity and reproducibility. The
hollow fiber also provide a clean-up capability that does not apply to SDME whose
drop is exposed directly to the sample.
Figure 2-14. Structures of CWAs investigated in HF-LPME [345].
In a subsequent study [346], the successful analysis of degradation products of
CWAs using HF-LPME with in-situ derivatization was demonstrated. The structures
C2H5
39
of the analytes investigated are shown in Figure 2-15. Prior to extraction, basification
of the spiked water with potassium carbonate, addition of propyl bromide and stirring
of the mixture at 100 C for 2 h were carried out. Upon completion of reaction,
extractions were performed by HF-LPME prior to GC MS analysis. The method was
successfully used in the analysis of the 19th Official OPCW Proficiency Test water
samples.
Figure 2-15. Structures of alkylphosphonic acids investigated in HF-LPME [346].
This approach of developing solvent-minimized extraction techniques for the
determination of various CWAs and related compounds by utilizing HF-LPME was
carried out at approximately the same time as that reported by Gupta and co-workers
described above [345,346]. Besides CWAs and acidic degradation products, basic
degradation products were investigated as well. The results have been published as
three separate articles [347-349] and are discussed in Sections 3.3 and 4.3 of this
report.
40
3 EXPERIMENTAL
3.1 Sol-gel MIPs
Prior to the development of sol-gel MIPs as SPME fiber coatings, sol-gel
MIPs were first synthesized as powder and evaluated as sorbent packings in SPE
cartridges. A series of MIPs was synthesized using pinacolyl methylphosphonic acid
(PMPA), thiodiglycol (TDG), triethanolamine (TEA) and 3-quinuclidinol (3Q) as the
templates. A non-imprinted polymer was also synthesized, but in the absence of a
template. Using the sol-gel process, the polymers formed were crushed up into
powder and sieved. The templates were removed from the polymers by Soxhlet
extraction in ethanol. The polymers were then dried under vacuum.
Endcapping of the polymers was carried out by stirring the polymers in an
equimolar mixture of the endcapping reagents, trimethylchlorosilane (TMCS) and
hexamethyldisilazane (HMDS). The effect of endcapping of the polymers was
investigated by comparing the binding properties of the endcapped versus the non-
endcapped NIP and the PMPA-imprinted MIP when they were used as the sorbent in
SPE cartridges.
The various MIPs (PMPA-MIP, TDG-MIP, TEA-MIP and 3Q-MIP) and the
NIP were evaluated for their binding properties towards their respective target
analytes in aqueous matrices using SPE. The elution solvent and volume of elution
solvent were optimized for each MIP. Subsequently, the MIPs and the NIP were
challenged with water samples containing polyethylene glycol (PEG) to test their
binding properties for the analytes of interest in complex environmental samples
whereby the MIP-SPE procedure was compared with other sample preparation
procedures, namely strong anion-exchange (SAX) SPE and strong cation-exchange
(SCX) SPE as well as a direct rotary evaporation procedure for the analysis of a range
41
of analytes in an aqueous sample containing PEG. All experiments were carried out in
triplicate.
3.1.1 Materials
The monomers (Figure 3-1), tetraethoxysilane (TEOS) ( 99%, Fluka, Buchs,
Switzerland), phenyl trimethoxysilane (PTMOS) (98%, Lancaster, Lancashire,
England, UK) and 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane (APTEOS) (99%, Aldrich,
Milwaukee, WI, USA), were used without further purification. Chemicals,
methylphosphonic acid (MPA) (98%, Aldrich), ethyl methylphosphonate (EMPA)
(98%, Aldrich), thiodiglycol (TDG) (99%, Merck, Darmstadt, Germany), thiodiglycol
sulfoxide (TDGS) (Chem Service, West Chester, PA, USA), thiodiglycol sulfone
(TDGSO) (65% weight % in aqueous solution, Lancaster), methyl diethanolamine
(MDEA) (99+, Aldrich), ethyl diethanolamine (EDEA) (98%, Aldrich),
triethanolamine (TEA) (98%, Aldrich), 3-quinuclidinol (3Q) (>98%, Fluka) and the
internal standard, tripropyl phosphate (TPP) (99%, Aldrich), were commercially
available while isopropyl methylphosphonate (IMPA), pinacolyl methylphosphonate
(PMPA) and cyclohexyl methylphosphonate (CMPA) were synthesized by the
Organic Synthesis Group of DSO National Laboratories. The endcapping reagents
(Figure 3-2) used were trimethylchlorosilane (TMCS) (98%, Aldrich) and
hexamethyldisilazane (HMDS) (99+%, Lancaster). The solvents used included
absolute ethanol (EtOH) ( 99.9%, Merck), tetrahydrofuran (GR, Merck), methanol
(HPLC, J.T. Baker, Phillipsburg, NJ, USA), dichloromethane (DCM) (ultra resi, J.T.
Baker) and acetonitrile (ACN) (HPLC, J.T. Baker). Concentrated hydrochloric acid
(HCl) (min. 37% AR, Riedel-de Haën, Seelze, Germany) was used as a catalyst as
well as for preparing 0.2 M HCl in methanol while trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) (99+%,
42
Aldrich) and triethylamine (TE) (>99%, Merck) were used as solvent modifiers.
Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) (Merck), of 1.0 M concentration, was used to clean the
fused silica fibers. N,O-Bis(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide (BSTFA) (99% with 1%
TMCS, Aldrich) was used as a derivatizing agent for GC analysis. Poly(ethylene
glycol) (PEG) (Number average molecular weight, Mn, ca. 200, Aldrich) was used as
a background contaminant for the water matrix. Deionized water was obtained from a
Milli-Q system (Millipore, Bedford, MA, USA). Strong cation-exchange (SCX) and
strong anion-exchange (SAX) cartridges were commercially available as Varian Bond
Elute SCX (100 mg in 10 ml cartridges) and Supelco Supelclean LC-SAX (100 mg in
1 ml cartridges) respectively.
Figure 3-1. Structures of the monomers.
Figure 3-2. Structures of the endcapping reagents.
3.1.2 Synthesis of MIPs and NIPs
First, 120 ml of TEOS, 8 ml of PTMOS and 120 ml of ethanol were mixed.
Next, 4 ml of concentrated HCl, 8 ml of APTEOS and 40 ml of deionized water were
added dropwise in this order. The mixture was stirred at room temperature for 20 h.
Si Cl Si NH
Si
TMCS HMDS
SiO
OO
O Si
O
O
OO
NH2
SiOO
O
TEOS PTMOS APTEOS
43
For the PMPA-MIP, 100 ml portions of this sol were mixed with 10 ml of a 0.1 M
solution of PMPA (180 mg in ethanol). The solution was stirred for an additional 4 h.
The remaining mixture was used as the non-imprinted polymer [350,351]. The
solutions were then left to stand at room temperature until all the solvent evaporated
to yield hard and transparent polymers. The TDG-MIP, TEA-MIP and 3Q-MIP were
similarly synthesized. A 100 ml portion of the sol solution was mixed with 10 ml of a
0.1 M solution of TDG (127 mg in ethanol), 10 ml of 0.1 M solution of TEA (123 mg
in ethanol) and 10 ml of a 0.1 M solution of 3Q (149 mg in ethanol) respectively. The
polymers were crushed up and ground into fine powder using a mortar and pestle and
sieved through a 100 mesh (150 m) Coulter Particle Sizer sifter screen. The
polymers were repeatedly washed with ethanol using Soxhlet extraction. For the
MIPs, washing was stopped when the template could no longer be detected by GC
MS in the wash. The polymers were then dried under vacuum to constant weight.
Endcapping is a procedure in which the surface silanol groups were reacted
with an equimolar mixture of endcapping reagents. Here, TMCS and HMDS were
used [230]. Endcapping has been shown to prevent the non-specific adsorption of
analytes to surface silanol groups to a great extent and results in a higher imprint
factor [236].
In order to compare the effect of endcapping on the properties of both the NIP
and the MIPs, a portion of the various polymers were weighed out for the endcapping
procedure while the rest remained non-endcapped. Typically, 5 g of polymer was
stirred at room temperature for 24 h in an equimolar mixture of 2.5 g of TMCS and
3.75 g of HMDS. Next, the endcapped polymers were washed with anhydrous
tetrahydrofuran, followed by ACN to remove excess reagents [236] and then dried
under vacuum to constant weight.
44
3.1.3 Procedures
3.1.3.1 Evaluation of the effect of endcapping
First, 50 mg of PMPA-MIP or NIP was packed into recycled Varian 10 ml
SCX cartridges which have been emptied of the contents. The polymer powder was
packed between recycled frits in the cartridges. Next, 5 ml of a deionized water
sample containing 10 g ml 1 of MPA, EMPA, IMPA, PMPA and CMPA was
applied to the cartridges. The eluents collected were analyzed for the percentage
absorptivity, ie. the percentage of analyte that is retained on the polymer and is
obtained by subtracting from 100%, the percentage recovered in the eluent upon
loading of the sample. Elution with 5
2 ml of 1% TE in water, rotary evaporation to
dryness of the eluents and reconstitution in ACN, followed by derivatization using
BSTFA, gave the percentage recovery of the analytes from the polymers. TPP was
used as an internal standard (ISTD). The MIP-SPE procedure is shown in Figure 3-3.
Figure 3-3. Procedure for MIP-SPE.
Pack MIP or NIP intorecycled SCX cartridges.
Load sample. Rotary evaporate eluent to dryness.Reconstitute with 700 l of ACN.
Add 100 l of 100 ppm TPP (ISTD).Withdraw 400 l and add 100 l ofBSTFA. Heat at 60oC for 30 min.
Elute analytes withelution solvent.
Rotary evaporate eluent to dryness.Reconstitute with 700 l of ACN.
Add 100 l of 100 ppm TPP (ISTD).Withdraw 400 l and add 100 l ofBSTFA. Heat at 60oC for 30 min.
GC-MS analysis(% Recovery)
GC-MS analysis(% Absorptivity)
45
3.1.3.2 Evaluation of the effect of elution solvents and volume
The procedure for the packing of the SPE cartridges is as described in the
previous section. In the experiments, 5 ml of a deionized water sample containing 10
g ml 1 of PMPA was applied to the cartridges. For TDG-MIP SPE, 500 mg of TDG-
MIP or NIP were used. In the experiments, 0.5 ml of a deionized water sample
containing 10 g ml 1 of TDG was applied to the cartridges. For TEA-MIP SPE, 500
mg of TEA-MIP or NIP were used. In the experiments, 0.5 ml of a deionized water
sample containing 10 g ml 1 of TEA was applied to the cartridges. For 3Q-MIP SPE,
200 mg of 3Q-MIP or NIP were used. In the experiments, 0.5 ml of a deionized water
sample containing 100 g ml 1 of 3Q was applied to the cartridges.
In order to select the elution solvent that gives the highest recovery of the
analyte from the MIPs, 5
2 ml of ethanol, 1% TFA in water and 1% TE in water
were used separately as the elution solvent. In addition, the volume of elution solvent
required was investigated. Volumes of 1
1 ml, 1
2 ml, 3
2 ml, 4
2 ml, 5
2 ml
and 10
2 ml of elution solvent (giving a total volume of 1, 2, 6, 8, 10 and 20 ml
respectively) were applied to the cartridges.
3.1.3.3 Evaluation of binding properties
In order to evaluate the binding properties of the PMPA-MIP, 5 ml of a
deionized water sample containing 10 g ml 1 of MPA, EMPA, IMPA, PMPA and
CMPA was applied to the cartridges. For the TDG-MIP, 0.5 ml of a deionized water
sample containing 10 g ml 1 of TDG, TDGS and TDGSO was applied to the
cartridges. For the TEA-MIP, 0.5 ml of a deionized water sample containing 10 g
ml 1 of MDEA, EDEA and TEA was applied to the cartridges. For the 3Q-MIP, 0.5
46
ml of a deionized water sample containing 100 g ml 1 of 3Q was applied to the
cartridges. In these experiments, the NIPs were evaluated alongside the MIPs.
The eluents collected were analyzed for the absorptivity. Elution with the
optimal volume of the selected elution solvent, rotary evaporation to dryness of the
eluents and reconstitution in ACN, followed by derivatization using BSTFA, gave the
recovery of the analytes from the polymers. In addition, the polymers were further
challenged with a tap water sample containing the analytes as well as 500 g ml 1 of
PEG as a background contaminant. For such samples, the SPE procedure included a
washing step of 5 ml of water (Figure 3-4).
Figure 3-4. Procedure for MIP-SPE for samples with PEG.
3.1.3.4 Comparison with other sample preparation techniques
The MIP-SPE procedures were compared against other sample preparation
techniques using commercially-available SPE cartridges as well as with a procedure
Pack MIP or NIP intorecycled SCX cartridges.
Load sample.Rotary evaporate eluent to dryness.Reconstitute with 700 l of ACN.
Add 100 l of 100 ppm TPP (ISTD).Withdraw 400 l and add 100 l ofBSTFA. Heat at 60oC for 30 min.
Elute analytes withelution solvent.
Rotary evaporate eluent to dryness.Reconstitute with 700 l of ACN.
Add 100 l of 100 ppm TPP (ISTD).Withdraw 400 l and add 100 l ofBSTFA. Heat at 60oC for 30 min.
GC-MS analysis(% Recovery)
GC-MS analysis(% Absorptivity)
Wash with 5 ml of water.GC-MS analysis
(% Leak)
47
involving no sample clean-up. To evaluate the PMPA-MIP, the sample consisted of
10 g ml 1 EMPA, IMPA, MPA, PMPA and CMPA with 500 g ml 1 PEG in tap
water. For the TDG-MIP, 0.5 ml of 10 g ml 1 TDG, TDGS and TDGSO with 500 g
ml 1 PEG in tap water was loaded onto the cartridges. For the TEA-MIP, 0.5 ml of 10
g ml 1 MDEA, EDEA and TEA with 500 g ml 1 PEG in tap water was loaded onto
the cartridges. For the 3Q-MIP, 0.5 ml of 100 g ml 1 3Q with 500 g ml 1 PEG in
tap water was loaded onto the cartridges. Figures 3-5 and 3-6 illustrate the SCX and
SAX SPE procedures respectively. For the procedure without sample clean-up, the
water sample was directly rotary evaporated to dryness, followed by reconstitution
with ACN and derivatization with BSTFA.
Figure 3-5. Procedure for SCX SPE. Figure 3-6. Procedure for SAX SPE.
Lastly, the respective MIPs (PMPA-MIP, TDG-MIP, TEA-MIP and 3Q-MIP)
were mixed in the ratio of 1:10:10:4 respectively and used for the extraction of the
Check pH of solution to ensurepH <\= 7
Load sample.
Condition SCX cartridge:a) 3 x 1 ml of MeOH
b) 3 x 1 ml of deionised water
Yes
No
Repeat CationExchange procedurewith another fresh
SCX cartridge
Rotary evaporate eluent to dryness.Reconstitute with 350 l of ACN.
Add 50 l of 100 ppm TPP (ISTD) and100 l of BSTFA. Heat at 60oC for 30 min.
GC-MS analysis(% Recovery)
Wash with 1 ml deionised waterand 1 ml of MeOH.
Load sample.
Condition SAX cartridge:a) 2 x 1 ml of MeOH
b) 2 x 1 ml of deionised water
Rotary evaporate eluent to dryness.Reconstitute with 350 l of ACN.
Add 50 l of 100 ppm TPP (ISTD) and100 l of BSTFA. Heat at 60oC for 30 min.
GC-MS analysis(% Recovery)
Elute analytes with 1 ml of0.2M HCl in MeOH.
48
four main template molecules from an aqueous sample. A 500 mg mixture of the
MIPs and corresponding NIP were used for the evaluation of the three elution
solvents, namely ethanol, 1% TFA in water and 1% TE in water. Next, 0.5 ml of a tap
water sample containing 10 g ml 1 PMPA, TDG and TEA and 100 g ml 1 3Q with
500 g ml 1 PEG as a matrix interference was loaded onto the MIP-SPE cartridges.
Elution with 5 × 2 ml of solvents was carried out. This procedure was similarly
compared against the SCX, SAX SPE procedures and the direct rotary evaporation
procedure.
3.1.4 Instrumental Analysis
GC MS analyses were performed on a HP6890 GC/5973 MSD system
(Agilent Technologies, San Jose, CA, USA). Separation was carried out on a HP-5MS
column, 30 m
0.25 mm internal diameter, 0.25 m film thickness, together with a 3
m precolumn. Splitless injections were performed. The temperature program used
was: 60 C, held for 2 min, ramped at 10 C min 1 to 220 C, then 20 C min 1 to
280 C, held for 4 min. The carrier gas was helium at 35 cm s 1. The split/splitless
injector was maintained at 200 C while the transfer line was maintained at 280 C.
The MS source and quadrupole were maintained at 230 and 150 C, respectively. All
analyses were performed in GC MS full scan mode over the range of m/z 40 550 at a
scan rate of 1.49 scans s 1.
3.1.5 Synthesis of sol-gel MIP SPME fibers
Commercially-available SPME fibers (Supelco, Bellefonte, PA, USA) in
which the polymer coatings have been stripped-off or damaged but with an intact
fused silica backbone were used for the preparation of sol-gel fibers. Any remaining
49
coating on the fibers was removed by dipping the fibers in DCM, after which the
coating could be stripped off easily. Prior to coating, the fused silica fibers were
dipped in 1 M NaOH for 1 h to expose the maximum number of silanol groups on the
surface, rinsed with deionized water, dipped in 0.1 M HCl for 30 min to neutralize
excess NaOH, rinsed with deionized water and dried at room temperature in a
desiccator.
To prepare the sol solution, 750 l of TEOS, 50 l of PTMOS and 750 l of
ethanol were mixed. Then, 25 l of concentrated HCl, 50 l of APTEOS and 250 l
of deionized water were added dropwise in this order. The mixture was stirred at
room temperature for 2 h. After this, 1 ml of this sol was mixed with 100 l of a 0.1
M solution of PMPA. The remaining mixture was used as the NIP coating. The
solutions were stirred for 24 h. A fused silica fiber was repeatedly dipped into the sol
solution such that a coating was formed on the fiber. The sol-gel fibers were dried at
room temperature in a desiccator.
3.2 SPME using PhPPP-coated fibers
PhPPP was investigated as a novel coating for the SPME of Lewisites from
aqueous samples. Several extraction parameters, namely the choice of derivatizing
agent, pH, salting, and extraction time were thoroughly optimized. Upon optimization
of the extraction parameters, the performance of the novel coating was compared
against that of commercially-available SPME coatings. All experiments were carried
out in triplicate, unless stated otherwise.
50
3.2.1 Chemicals and Reagents
The analytes, 2-chlorovinyldichloroarsine (L1), bis(2-chlorovinyl)chloroarsine
(L2) and tris(2-chlorovinyl)arsine (L3), were synthesized by the Organic Synthesis
Group of DSO National Laboratories and shown to be 95%, 88% and 92% pure by
NMR analysis respectively.
The solvents used included hexane, dichloromethane and acetonitrile (99.8%,
J.T. Baker). Sodium chloride (NaCl) (Merck) and sodium sulfate (Na2SO4) (J.T.
Baker) were used to investigate the effect of ionic strength of the sample during
extraction. Hydrochloric acid (0.1 M, Merck) and ammonium hydroxide (28-30 wt %
solution of NH3 in water, Acros Organics, Geel, Belgium) were used for adjustment
of sample pH. The derivatizing agents (Figure 3-7) used were ethanethiol (ET),
propanethiol (PT), butanethiol (BT) (97%, Fluka), 1,2-ethanedithiol (EDT) (98%,
Fluka), 1,3-propanedithiol (PDT) (99%, Aldrich) and 1,4-butanedithiol (BDT) (90%,
Fluka,). Deionized water was obtained from a Milli-Q system.
Figure 3-7. Structures of the mono- and dithiol derivatizing agents.
3.2.2 Preparation of PhPPP as a coating for SPME
PhPPP was synthesized as summarized in the following scheme [263]:
(i) Br2 in glacial acetic acid, 80%; (ii) NaOH, CH3(CH2)11Br, 45-50 C, 10 h, 65%;
(iii) K2CO3, C6H5CH2Br, 50 C, 10 h, 90%; (iv) n-butyllithium, tetrahydrofuran,
SHSH
SH
SHSH SHSH
SHSH
ET PT BT
EDT PDT BDT
51
78 C, triisopropyl borate, room temperature, 10 h, 70%; (v) 2 M K2CO3, toluene, 3.0
mol % Pd(PPh3)4, reflux, 3 days, (vi) H2, 10% Pd/C,
chloroform/ethanol/tetrahydrofuran.
Figure 3-8. Synthetic scheme of PhPPP [263].
Commercially-available SPME fibers with polymer coatings that were
stripped off but with the fused silica backbone intact were used for coating with
PhPPP. Thin films of the polymers on bare fused silica fibers were prepared by drop-
casting from 0.5 mg ml 1 polymer in chloroform solution under ambient conditions,
without any air flow or temperature control aids. SEM images were taken with a
JEOL JSM 6700 scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and the thickness of the fiber
was measured to be approximately 7 µm.
OH
HO
OH
HO
Br Br BrBr
OR
HO
Br Br
OR
BnO
(ii)
B(OH)2(HO)2B
OR
BnO
(i) (iii)
(iv)
1 2 3 4
5
BrBr
OR
BnOn
OBn
RO
OBn
RO
(v)
(vi)
n
OH
RO
OH
RO
R=C12H25
6
52
3.2.3 Preparation of Stock Solutions and Samples
A stock solution of a mixture of the analytes at a concentration of 1 mg ml 1
was prepared in acetonitrile and stored at 20 C. Aqueous samples (3 ml) were
freshly prepared by spiking deionized water with the analytes at a concentration of 0.5
µg ml 1. Quantitation of the analytes was done by external calibration where a series
of standard solutions was obtained by dilution of the stock solution with
dichloromethane, addition of the respective derivatizing agents and analysis by GC to
obtain linear calibration plots for each analyte based on the total ion chromatographic
peak area.
3.2.4 SPME Procedure
Prior to use, the network fiber was conditioned at 220 C for 30 min in the GC
injection port while the commercially-available fibers from Supelco, 30 m and 100
m PDMS, 65 m PDMS/DVB, 75 m CAR/PDMS, 85 m PA, and 65 m
CW/DVB, were conditioned according to the manufacturer's recommendations [83].
SPME analyses were performed by direct immersion of the fiber to a water sample
spiked with the analytes. Prior to extraction, 1 l of derivatizing agent was added. The
sample was stirred at the maximum rate during the extraction. After extraction, the
fiber was desorbed in the heated injection port of the GC for 5 min.
3.2.5 Instrumental Analysis
Optimization experiments were performed with a HP6890 GC, equipped with
a flame ionization detector (FID) (Agilent Technologies). Separation was carried out
on a HP-5 column, 30 m
0.25 mm internal diameter, 0.25 m film thickness.
Splitless injections were performed. The temperature program used was: 60 C, held
53
for 2 min, ramped at 10 C min 1 to 205 C, then 30 C min 1 to 280 C and held for 4
min. The carrier gas was helium at 35 cm s 1. The split/splitless injector was
maintained at 250 C while the detector was maintained at 280 C.
The limits of detection (LODs) for the analytes were estimated at S/N = 3
under GC MS full scan conditions. GC MS analyses were performed in electron
ionization mode (70 eV) on a HP6890 GC/5973 MSD system (Agilent Technologies).
Separation was carried out on a HP-5MS column, 30 m
0.25 mm internal diameter,
0.25 m film thickness, together with a 2 m precolumn. The split/splitless injector
was maintained at 250 C while the transfer line was maintained at 280 C. The
temperature program was identical to that used for the GC FID. The MS source and
quadrupole were maintained at 230 C and 150 C respectively. Analyses were
performed in GC MS full scan mode over the range of m/z 40-400 at a scan rate of
1.36 scans s 1.
3.3 HF-LPME
HF-LPME was investigated for the extraction of various chemical warfare
agents and degradation products from aqueous samples. Optimization of several
extraction parameters was carried out where the effects of the extraction solvent, the
derivatizing agent and derivatization procedure and the amount of derivatizing agent
(for degradation products), salting, stirring speed and extraction time were thoroughly
optimized. Upon optimization of the extraction parameters, the HF-LPME technique
was compared against SPME. In addition, the applicability of the technique for a 20th
Official OPCW Proficiency Test sample was demonstrated. All experiments were
carried out in triplicate, unless stated otherwise.
54
3.3.1 Chemicals and Reagents
The chemical warfare agents, isopropyl methylphosphonofluoridate (Sarin,
GB), pinacolyl methylphosphonofluoridate (Soman, GD), ethyl N,N-
dimethylphosphoramidocyanidate (Tabun, GA), bis(2-chloroethyl)sulfide (Sulfur
mustard, HD) and O-ethyl-S-[(2-(diisopropylamino)ethyl] methylphosphonothiolate
(VX), were synthesized by the Organic Synthesis Group of DSO National
Laboratories. Ethyl methylphosphonic acid (EMPA) (98%), ethyl 2-hydroxyethyl
sulfide (EHES) (97%), methylphosphonic acid (MPA) (98%) and n-propylphosphonic
acid (nPPA) (95%) were purchased from Aldrich, thiodiglycol (TDG) (99%) and
benzilic acid (BA) (98%) were bought from Merck and 1,2-bis(2-
hydroxyethylthio)ethane (QOH) (98%) was supplied by Acros. Isopropyl
methylphosphonic acid (IMPA), pinacolyl methylphosphonic acid (PMPA) and bis(2-
hydroxyethylthioethyl)ether (TOH) were synthesized by the Organic Synthesis Group
of DSO National Laboratories. The basic degradation products, 2-(N,N-
diisopropylamino)ethanol (DIPAE) (98%) and 3-quinuclidinol (3Q) (98%) were
bought from Fluka while N-methyldiethanolamine (MDEA) (99%), N-
ethyldiethanolamine (EDEA) (98%) and triethanolamine (TEA) (98%), were from
Aldrich.
The solvents used included chloroform (CHCl3) (99.9%) and trichloroethylene
(C2HCl3) (99%) from Aldrich, carbon tetrachloride (CCl4) (99.9%) and toluene
(99.9%) from Merck, tetrachloroethylene (C2Cl4) (99.7%), dichloromethane (CH2Cl2,
DCM) (99.8%) and acetonitrile (ACN) (99.8%) from J.T. Baker. Deionized water was
obtained from a Milli-Q system.
Sodium chloride (NaCl) from Merck and sodium sulfate (Na2SO4) from J.T.
Baker were used to investigate the effect of ionic strength of the sample on the
55
extraction. Solutions of hydrochloric acid (Aldrich) and sodium hydroxide (Acros
Organics) were used to adjust the pH of the samples. N,O-
Bis(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide (BSTFA) (99% with 1% TMCS) and N-(tert.-
butyldimethylsilyl)-N-methyltrifluoroacetamide (MTBSTFA) (97% with 1% tert.-
butyldimethylchlorosilane) purchased from Aldrich were used as derivatizing agents.
Figure 3-9. Structures of the silylating agents used in this work.
3.3.2 Preparation of Stock Solutions and Samples
A stock solution of a mixture of the CWAs at a concentration of 1 mg ml 1
was prepared in acetonitrile and stored at 20 C. Aqueous samples (3 ml) were
freshly prepared by spiking deionized water with CWAs at a concentration of 0.5 g
ml 1 of each while slurry samples were prepared by mixing 60 mg of soil (total
organic content 30 g kg 1) with 3 ml of deionized water prior to spiking CWAs at a
concentration of 0.5 g ml 1 (sample pH 6.5). Extraction of the samples was
performed after 20 min upon preparation. Quantitation of the analytes was done by
external calibration where a series of standard solutions was obtained by dilution of
the stock solution with dichloromethane and analysis by GC MS to obtain linear
calibration plots for each analyte based on the total ion chromatographic peak area.
A stock solution of a mixture of the analytes at a concentration of 2 mg ml 1
for EMPA, IMPA, BA, QOH and TOH, 1 mg ml 1 for EHES and PMPA and 20 mg
Si
OCF3
Si
NNCF3
Si
O
BSTFA MTBSTFA
56
ml 1 for MPA, nPPA and TDG was prepared in acetonitrile and stored at 20 C.
Additionally, a stock solution of a mixture of the analytes at a concentration of 10 mg
ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA and 1 mg ml 1 for DIPAE was prepared in
acetonitrile and stored at 20 C. Based on the results of preliminary experiments the
analytes were prepared at varying concentrations as the extraction efficiency varies
significantly among the analytes. If all the analytes were spiked at a particular
concentration, analytes that were not easily extracted would not be detected while
those that were easily extracted would give saturated signals. Aqueous samples (3 ml)
were freshly prepared by spiking deionized water with the stock solution of the
mixture of analytes. Quantitation of the analytes was done by external calibration
where a series of standard solutions was obtained by dilution of the stock solution
with dichloromethane, addition of BSTFA or MTBSTFA respectively, heating at
60 C for 30 min and analysis by GC MS to obtain linear calibration plots for each
analyte based on the total ion chromatographic peak area.
3.3.3 Typical HF-LPME Procedures
The HF-LPME device consisted of a 10 l microsyringe with 0.63 mm outer
diameter cone-tip needle (SGE, Sydney, Australia) and a 1.2 cm Accurel Q3/2
polypropylene hollow fiber membrane (Membrana, Wuppertal, Germany) with the
dimensions, 600 m inner diameter, 200 m wall thickness and 0.2 m pore size,
attached to the needle tip.
For the extraction of the chemical agents, 5 l of solvent was drawn into the
syringe before a hollow fiber was affixed onto the tip of the syringe needle. The fiber
was immersed in solvent for three seconds to immobilize the solvent in the pores of
the hollow fiber prior to extraction. Upon immersion of the hollow fiber into the
57
sample solution, the syringe plunger was depressed to fill the hollow fiber with
solvent. The sample was stirred during the extraction with a Heidolph MR 3001K
(Kelheim, Germany) magnetic stirrer. After extraction, the analyte-enriched solvent
was drawn back into the syringe and the hollow fiber was discarded. A volume of 1 l
of solvent was injected into the GC MS. In a typical extraction of the degradation
products, a solvent-derivatizing agent mixture was first prepared by mixing
chloroform and MTBSTFA in equal amounts. The procedure is similar to that
described previously. The extraction of the basic degradation products follows that for
the degradation products except that 1 l of extract was injected into the GC MS
together with another microliter of derivatizing agent.
3.3.4 Typical SPME Procedures
The optimized extraction conditions for direct immersion SPME of the
chemical warfare agents were based on a previously-reported procedure [88].
Extractions were performed using a 65 m PDMS/DVB fiber. Prior to use, the fiber
was conditioned at 250 C for 30 min in the GC injection port. The fiber was directly
exposed to a sample spiked with the analytes with 40% (w/v) NaCl. The sample was
stirred at the maximum rate during the 30 min extraction. After extraction, the fiber
was desorbed in the heated injection port of the GC MS for 5 min. Direct immersion
SPME analysis of the water and slurry samples was performed using the same
extraction conditions.
The optimized extraction conditions for SPME of the degradation products
were based on a previously-reported procedure [90]. Extractions of the acidic
degradations were performed using a variety of fibers, namely 100 m PDMS, 65 m
PDMS/DVB, 75 m CAR/PDMS, 65 m CW/DVB and 85 m PA (Supelco) while
58
for SPME of the basic degradation products, the 30 m PDMS was used in place of
the 100 m PDMS fiber and in addition, the newly-introduced 60 m PEG fiber was
evaluated as well. Prior to use, the fibers were conditioned in the GC injection port
according to the manufacturer s recommendations [83]. The extraction procedure
involves first exposing a fiber to the MTBSTFA headspace for 5 min before directly
inserting into a sample spiked with the analytes. The sample was saturated with salt
and stirred during the entire extraction process. After extraction, the fiber was
exposed to the MTBSTFA headspace again for 15 min prior to desorption in the GC
injection port for 5 min.
3.3.5 Instrumental Analysis
GC MS analyses were performed in electron ionization mode (70 eV) with a
HP6890 GC/5973 MSD system. Separation was carried out on a HP-5MS column, 30
m×0.25 mm internal diameter, 0.25 m film thickness, together with a 2 m
precolumn. Splitless injections were performed. The carrier gas was helium at 35 cm
s 1. The split/splitless injector was maintained at 250 C while the transfer line was
maintained at 280 C. The MS source and quadrupole were maintained at 230 and
150 C, respectively. For the analysis of the chemical agents, the oven temperature
program used was: 40 C, held for 2 min, ramped at 10 C min 1 to 205 C, then 30 C
min 1 to 280 C and held for 4 min. All analyses were performed in GC MS full scan
mode over the range of m/z 40 400 at a scan rate of 1.36 scans s 1. The oven
temperature program used with BSTFA derivatization was: 60 C, held for 2 min,
ramped at 10 C min 1 to 205 C, 25 C min 1 to 280 C and held for 4 min while with
MTBSTFA derivatization it was: 60 C, held for 2 min, ramped at 10 C min 1 to
59
280 C and held for 4 min. All analyses were performed in GC MS full scan mode
over the range of m/z 40 550 at a scan rate of 1.49 scans s 1.
3.4 Health and Safety Aspects
Caution: extreme care was taken for synthesis of these compounds, as they are
highly toxic. Trained professionals should prepare, handle and use these compounds
in a fume hood equipped with an alkaline scrubber system and adopt proper protective
measures; and international treaties and legal issues when synthesizing or working
with these agents should be adhered to.
60
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Sol-gel MIPs
4.1.1 Effect of endcapping on PMPA-MIP-SPE
Preliminary experiments on the binding properties of the PMPA-MIP and the
NIP showed that the NIP did not demonstrate zero absorptivity of the analytes. It was
reported in the study on MIP SPE of nerve agent degradation products using acrylate-
based MIPs that the NIP could not absorb any of the analytes [216]. Hence, an
attempt was made to endcap the surface silanol groups of the sol-gel MIPs and NIPs
synthesized in order to reduce the non-specific adsorption of analytes to the surface
silanol groups to a certain extent and achieve a higher imprint factor [236].
Figure 4-1 shows the structures of the analytes of interest. These analytes are
of particular interest as they are the degradation products of a group of chemical
warfare agents known as the nerve agents. The phosphonic acids, EMPA, IMPA,
PMPA and CMPA, are the degradation products of VX, GA, GD and GF respectively
while MPA is the final degradation product of the phosphonic acids. The difference in
binding properties between the non-endcapped NIP (N) and the endcapped NIP (NE)
as well as that between the non-endcapped PMPA-MIP (P) and endcapped PMPA-
MIP (PE) for selected phosphonic acids, is shown in Figures 4-2 and 4-3 respectively.
Figure 4-1. Structures of the phosphonic acids investigated.
P
O
OHOH
P
O
OHO
P
O
OHO
P
O
OOH
P
O
OHO
MPA EMPA IMPA PMPA CMPA
61
Figure 4-2. Comparison of % absorptivity and recovery between non-endcapped and endcapped NIPs.
The percentage absorptivity (%A) is defined as the percentage of analyte that
is retained on the polymer and is obtained by subtracting from 100%, the percentage
recovered in the eluent upon loading of the sample. The percentage recovery (%R) is
defined as the percentage recovered in the eluent upon elution with elution solvent.
It is expected that the endcapping procedure would reduce non-specific
interactions between the analytes and the polymer. The % absorptivities of the
analytes were observed to be reduced by more than half except for MPA. MPA is the
most polar analyte and shows strong adsorption to the polymer. With endcapping,
recovery of the analytes from the NIP was negligible.
Ideally, the NIP should not show absorptivity of the analytes. The results
imply that the endcapping procedure may be insufficient to completely endcap all the
silanol groups on the polymer and hence eliminate all the non-specific interactions
between the analytes and the polymer such that the NIP shows zero absorptivity. The
endcapping procedure can either be repeated several times or the amounts of
endcapping reagents can be increased. However, as discussed below, endcapping of
the PMPA-MIP adversely affected the binding properties of the MIP.
0
20
40
60
80
100
EMPA IMPA MPA PMPA CMPA
%
%A (N) %R (N) %A (NE) %R (NE)
62
Figure 4-3. Comparison of % absorptivity and recovery between non-endcapped and endcapped PMPA-MIPs.
The non-endcapped PMPA-MIP shows 100% absorptivity for the analytes in
water as none of the analytes was detected in the eluent upon loading of the sample.
On the other hand, the endcapped PMPA-MIP does not show 100% absorptivity. This
observation can be attributed to two factors. Firstly, the process of endcapping has
reduced the non-specific interactions between the PMPA-MIP and the analytes to a
certain extent, hence the endcapped PMPA-MIP is expected to show lower
absorptivity of the analytes. Secondly, there exists competition between the analyte
and the water molecules in the aqueous matrix for binding sites on the polymer. This
would further reduce the absorptivity of the polymer for the analytes.
The recoveries of the analytes with 1% TE in water from the non-endcapped
and endcapped PMPA-MIPs were not quantitative. This indicates relatively strong
binding of the analytes with the polymer matrix such that even a strongly basic eluent
like 1% TE in water was unable to disrupt most of the analyte-polymer interactions. It
was observed that endcapping adversely affected the recovery of the analytes from the
endcapped MIP. Since the non-endcapped MIP showed better binding properties as
compared to the endcapped MIP, the non-endcapped PMPA-MIP and the other non-
endcapped MIPs were used, together with non-endcapped NIPs, for further
experiments.
0
20
40
60
80
100
EMPA IMPA MPA PMPA CMPA
%
%A (P) %R (P) %A (PE) %R (PE)
63
4.1.2 Evaluation of elution solvents and volume for PMPA-MIP-SPE
Three elution solvents were evaluated for their ability to recover the template,
PMPA, from the PMPA-MIP. Ethanol [249] was chosen as it successfully removed
the templates from the MIPs during MIP synthesis. The two other elution solvents,
1% TFA in water and 1% TE in water, were evaluated since TFA and TE are common
modifiers added to elution solvents used in molecular imprinting studies [352,353].
Although ethanol was effective in the removal of template from the polymer
by Soxhlet extraction, it could not be used as an elution solvent as it was not able to
elute PMPA from the PMPA-MIP. The elution solvents, 1% TFA in water (pH 0) and
1% TE in water (pH 11) were able to elute PMPA from the MIP, however, 1% TE in
water was more effective as it recovered a higher percentage of the analyte loaded.
Hence, 1% TE in water was chosen as the elution solvent in subsequent experiments.
Figure 4-4. Comparison of % recovery of PMPA with the various elution solvents.
Next, the volume of elution solvent required was investigated. Volumes of 1
1 ml, 1
2 ml, 3
2 ml, 4
2 ml, 5
2 ml and 10
2 ml of 1% TE in water (giving a
total volume of 1, 2, 6, 8, 10 and 20 ml respectively) were applied to the cartridges. A
comparison of percentage recovery using the various volumes of elution solvent is
presented in Figure 4-5. As seen from the graph, the optimum volume of elution
solvent was 10 ml. Increasing the volume of elution solvent to 20 ml did not increase
0
5
10
15
20
25
EtOH 1% TFA in H2O 1% TE in H2O
Elution solvent
% R
eco
very
of
PM
PA
64
the % recovery of the analyte significantly. Hence 5 × 2 ml of 1% TE in water was
used in subsequent experiments.
Figure 4-5. Comparison of % recovery of PMPA with the various elution volumes.
4.1.3 Evaluation of binding properties by PMPA-MIP-SPE
In order to study the binding properties of the PMPA-MIP as well as the NIP,
the polymers were challenged with a water matrix spiked with the phosphonic acids, a
range of analytes of similar structure to the template.
Figure 4-6. Comparison of % absorptivity and recovery of PMPA-MIP and NIP.
The % absorptivity and recovery of the PMPA-MIP and the NIP for the
analytes from deionized water are compared in Figure 4-6. It can be seen that the
PMPA-MIP shows 100% absorptivity for all the analytes while the NIP shows 100%
absorptivity for only MPA and particularly low absorptivity for PMPA.
0
10
20
30
0 5 10 15 20 25
Elution volume
% R
eco
very
of
PM
PA
0
20
40
60
80
100
EMPA IMPA MPA PMPA CMPA
%
%A (MIP) %R (MIP) %A (NIP) %R (NIP)
65
The study by Marx et. al. [249] showed that there was low cross-selectivity of
the parathion-imprinted films for other similar organophosphate pesticides and that
the non-imprinted films showed relatively lower binding. In this case, the PMPA-MIP
was able to quantitatively bind with all the phosphonates. This may not be a
disadvantage when it is necessary for the extraction of a range of unknown analytes of
interest from an environmental sample. Ideally, the NIP should not show binding of
the analytes. However, due to non-specific interactions of the analytes with the silanol
groups on the polymer, the NIP was able to bind to the analytes to a certain extent.
This problem was also encountered by other workers investigating the same polymer
system but with lisinopril dihydrate as the template [238]. The PMPA-MIP showed
similar recoveries of the analytes as compared to the NIP, except for the template
molecule PMPA, where the ratio in % recoveries of the PMPA-MIP to that of the NIP
was 5:1, the highest imprinting efficiency obtained among all the analytes.
Next, the polymers were challenged with a typical water matrix, one of most
common sample types prepared for analysis during the proficiency tests organized by
the OPCW. The analytes were spiked at a concentration of 10 g ml 1, together with
500 g ml 1 of PEG as a background contaminant, into tap water from the laboratory.
The % absorptivity, leak and recovery of the PMPA-MIP and the NIP of the analytes
from this water matrix are compared in Figure 4-7. The % leak (%L) is defined as the
% of analytes found in the wash during the washing step.
It was found that the presence of PEG and the use of tap water as the matrix
did not adversely affect the binding properties of the MIP and NIP as compared to
when deionized water was used as the matrix. The MIP showed a slight decrease in %
recovery for IMPA, PMPA and CMPA and an increase in % recovery for MPA. The
NIP showed a slight decrease in % absorptivity for EMPA, IMPA and PMPA and a
66
decrease in % recovery for all the analytes except for an MPA, for which there was an
increase. On comparison of the MIP and the NIP, it is observed that the ratio of the %
recovery of the MIP to that of the NIP for PMPA was 8:1, the highest among the
range of analytes.
The polymers did not retain much of the PEG present in the sample as PEG
was found in the eluent upon loading of the sample. The purpose of the additional
washing step was to remove more PEG from the polymers. The analytes did not elute
from the MIP during the washing step, whereas for the NIP, the analytes, except for
MPA, were detected in the wash eluent. The final eluent contained very insignificant
amounts of PEG, showing that the MIP-SPE procedure is effective in the sample
clean-up of a water matrix containing PEG as a background contaminant.
Figure 4-7. Comparison of % absorptivity, leak and recovery of PMPA-MIP and NIP for PEG samples.
4.1.4 Comparison of PMPA-MIP-SPE with other sample preparation
techniques
The PMPA-MIP-SPE procedure was compared against other SPE techniques,
namely SCX and SAX as well as a procedure without sample preparation. SCX and
SAX SPE cartridges are used for the removal of cations and PEG in water samples
respectively. These are usually present as background contaminants which may
0
20
40
60
80
100
EMPA IMPA MPA PMPA CMPA
%
%A (MIP) %L (MIP) %R (MIP) %A (NIP) %L (NIP) %R (NIP)
67
interfere with the analysis. Figure 4-8 shows the % recovery of the analytes using the
various procedures.
Figure 4-8. Comparison of % recovery of the phosphonic acids using the various procedures.
Of the four procedures, only the MIP-SPE and SAX SPE procedures were
capable of sample clean-up such that PEG was detected in insignificant amounts in
the final eluent. PEG was still present in the SCX SPE eluent as well as the sample
which was directly evaporated to dryness. Even though the % recovery of the analytes
from the MIP-SPE procedure cannot surpass that of the SAX SPE procedure, it has
been shown to be effective in the sample clean-up of aqueous samples containing
PEG for the analysis of phosphonates. The total ion chromatograms of the various
procedures are compiled in Appendix 2. The chromatograms were obtained by
reconstitution with DCM instead of ACN as ACN gives split peaks with the HP-5MS
column whereas DCM does not. This is due to the use of ACN, a more polar solvent
as compared to DCM, on the relatively non-polar HP-5MS column.
4.1.5 Evaluation of elution solvents and volume for TDG-MIP-SPE
Preliminary experiments with TDG-MIP showed that the polymer does not
give 100% absorptivity of TDG as TDG was detected in the eluent upon loading the
0
20
40
60
80
100
EMPA IMPA MPA PMPA CMPA
% R
eco
very
MIP-SPE Direct SCX SAX
68
sample. Hence, to improve on the % absorptivity, a larger amount of polymer was
used (500 mg) together with a smaller volume of sample (0.5 ml) as compared to
those used for PMPA-MIP-SPE. Figure 4-9 shows the % recovery of TDG from the
three elution solvents evaluated. EtOH and 1% TE in water gave comparable
recoveries while 1% TFA in water was unable to recover TDG from the MIP. The
highly acidic elution solvent promoted the interaction between the silanol groups and
TDG such that TDG could not be eluted from the MIP. Since 1% TE gave the highest
% recovery, it was used in subsequent experiments.
Figure 4-9. Comparison of % recovery of TDG with the various elution solvents.
Figure 4-10. Comparison of % recovery of TDG with the various elution volumes.
0
20
40
60
80
100
EtOH 1% TFA in H2O 1% TE in H2O
Elution solvent
% R
eco
very
of
TD
G
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 5 10 15 20 25
Volume of elution solvent (ml)
% R
eco
very
of
TD
G
69
From the graph, the optimum volume of elution solvent was 10 ml. A decrease
in % recovery was observed upon increasing the volume of elution solvent to 20 ml.
Hence 5 × 2 ml of 1% TE in water was used for subsequent experiments.
4.1.6 Evaluation of binding properties by TDG-MIP-SPE
Figure 4-11. Structures of the degradation products of HD.
Figure 4-11 shows the structures of the range of analytes used in the
evaluation of the binding properties of the TDG-MIP and the NIP. TDG is the
degradation product of the blister agent, HD, while TDGS and TDGSO are oxidation
products of TDG.
The % absorptivity and recovery of the TDG-MIP and the NIP for the analytes
from deionized water are compared in Figure 4-12. The TDG-MIP shows 100%
absorptivity only for TDGS while the NIP shows no recovery for TDGS. The %
absorptivity and recovery of the NIP are generally lower than that of the MIP.
Figure 4-12. Comparison of % absorptivity and recovery of TDG-MIP and NIP.
0
20
40
60
80
100
TDG TDGS TDGSO
%
%A (MIP) %R (MIP) %A (NIP) %R (NIP)
SOHOH
SOHOH
O
SOHOH
O
OTDG TDGS TDGSO
70
Next, the polymers were challenged with tap water samples containing the
range of analytes with 500 g ml 1 of PEG. An attempt to include a washing step to
remove PEG in the TDG-MIP-SPE procedure resulted in the loss of the analytes as
the analytes were eluted during the washing step. Hence, the TDG-MIP-SPE
procedure was carried out according to Figure 3-3, that is, without a washing step.
This ensured reasonable recovery while compromising sample clean-up.
Figure 4-13. Comparison of % absorptivity and recovery of TDG-MIP and NIP for PEG samples.
The % absorptivity and recovery of the TDG-MIP of the analytes from PEG
samples was comparable with that from deionized water sample. The % absorptivity
of the analytes of the NIP showed a decrease in the presence of PEG. The % recovery,
however, remained unaffected. Again, it was observed that the % absorptivity and
recovery of the NIP are generally lower than that of the MIP.
4.1.7 Comparison of TDG-MIP-SPE with other sample preparation techniques
The TDG-MIP-SPE procedure was compared against other SPE techniques,
namely SCX and SAX as well as a procedure without sample preparation. Figure 4-14
shows the % recovery of the analytes using the various procedures.
0
20
40
60
80
100
TDG TDGS TDGSO
%
%A (MIP) %R (MIP) %A (NIP) %R (NIP)
71
Figure 4-14. Comparison of % recovery of the mustard degradation products using the various procedures.
Of the four sample preparation techniques, only SAX SPE was able to
completely remove PEG from the sample such that PEG could not be observed in the
GC chromatogram. However, none of the compounds were recovered. It was
observed that the compounds were not retained on the cartridge and were eluted upon
loading of the sample onto the cartridge. This implies that TDG, TDGS and TDGSO
were not anionic at the sample pH (pH 6) and were thus not retained on the SAX
cartridge. Even though the TDG-MIP-SPE, SCX and direct rotary evaporation
methods could recover the analytes of interest, PEG could not be totally removed
from the aqueous sample. However, on comparison of the residual amount of PEG, it
is observed that the TDG-MIP-SPE procedure has considerably reduced the amount
of PEG. The total ion chromatograms of the various procedures are compiled in
Appendix 2.
4.1.8 Evaluation of elution solvents and volume for TEA-MIP-SPE
Like the TDG-MIP, the TEA-MIP does not give 100% absorptivity of TEA.
Hence, 500 mg of polymer was used together with 0.5 ml of sample. Figure 4-15
show the % recovery of TEA from the three elution solvents evaluated. All three
0
20
40
60
80
100
TDG TDGS TDGSO
%
MIP-SPE Direct SCX SAX
72
elution solvents gave comparable recoveries with 1% TE giving the highest %
recovery. Hence, the latter was used in subsequent experiments.
Figure 4-15. Comparison of % recovery of TEA with the various elution solvents.
The volume of elution solvent did not significantly affect the % recovery of
TEA. A volume of 1 ml of 1% TE in water was sufficient for a reasonable recovery of
TEA from the MIP. The % recovery did not improve with the use of 10 or 20 ml of
elution solvent. From the graph, 4
2 ml of 1% TE was determined to be the
optimum volume of elution solvent required.
Figure 4-16. Comparison of % recovery of TEA with the various elution volumes.
4.1.9 Evaluation of binding properties by TEA-MIP-SPE
Figure 4-17 shows the structures of the analytes used in the evaluation of the
binding properties of the TEA-MIP and the NIP. The ethanolamines, EDEA, MDEA
0
10
20
30
40
50
EtOH 1% TFA in H2O 1% TE in H2O
Elution solvent
% R
eco
very
of
TE
A
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 5 10 15 20 25
Volume of elution solvent (ml)
% R
eco
very
of
TE
A
73
and TEA, are the degradation products of the nitrogen mustards, HN1, HN2 and HN3
respectively.
Figure 4-17. Structures of the ethanolamines.
The % absorptivity and recovery of the TEA-MIP and the NIP for the analytes
from deionized water are compared in Figure 4-18. Both the TEA-MIP and NIP show
similar % absorptivity and recovery for each of the analytes. The NIP shows slightly
higher % absorptivity of the analytes but lower % recovery as compared to the TEA-
MIP.
Figure 4-19 shows the % absorptivity and recovery of TEA-MIP for PEG
samples. The presence of PEG in the tap water resulted in a slight decrease in the %
absorptivity and recovery as compared to the deionized water sample for both the
TEA-MIP and the NIP. The % absorptivity and recovery of the NIP is generally lower
as compared to that of the TEA-MIP.
Figure 4-18. Comparison of % absorptivity and recovery of TEA-MIP and NIP.
0
20
40
60
80
100
MDEA EDEA TEA
%
%A (MIP) %R (MIP) %A (NIP) %R (NIP)
NOHOH
NOHOH
OH
NOHOH
MDEA EDEA TEA
74
Figure 4-19. Comparison of % absorptivity and recovery of TEA-MIP and NIP for PEG samples.
4.1.10 Comparison of TEA-MIP-SPE with other sample preparation techniques
The TEA-MIP-SPE procedure was compared against other SPE techniques,
namely SCX and SAX as well as a procedure without sample preparation. Figure 4-20
shows the % recovery of the analytes using the various procedures.
Only the TEA-MIP-SPE and the direct rotary evaporation procedures were
able to recover the ethanolamines from the PEG sample. The SCX and SAX SPE
procedures could not recover the ethanolamines, implying that the ethanolamines are
cationic at the sample pH (pH 6). The cationic ethanolamines were retained on the
SCX cartridge while they eluted upon loading onto the SAX cartridge. Only the SAX
SPE procedure was able to remove PEG from the sample. The total ion
chromatograms are compiled in Appendix 2.
The recovery of the ethanolamines using the TEA-MIP-SPE procedure was
less than half that of the direct rotary evaporation procedure. However, in terms of
sample cleanup, the amount of PEG introduced into the GC system was considerably
less as compared to the direct rotary evaporation procedure.
0
20
40
60
80
100
MDEA EDEA TEA
%
%A (MIP) %R (MIP) %A (NIP) %R (NIP)
75
Figure 4-20. Comparison of % recovery of the ethanolamines using the various procedures.
4.1.11 Evaluation of elution solvents and volume for 3Q-MIP-SPE
Here, 200 mg of polymer was used together with 0.5 ml of sample. Figure 4-
21 shows the % recovery of 3Q from the three elution solvents evaluated. As 1% TFA
gave the highest % recovery of 3Q, it was used in subsequent experiments.
Figure 4-21. Comparison of the % recovery of 3Q with the various elution solvents.
Figure 4-22. Comparison of the % recovery of 3Q with the various elution volumes.
0
20
40
60
80
100
MDEA EDEA TEA%
MIP-SPE Direct SCX SAX
0
10
20
30
40
50
EtOH 1% TFA in H2O 1% TE in H2O
Elution solvent
% R
eco
very
of
3Q
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 5 10 15 20 25
Elution volume
% R
eco
very
of
3Q
76
From the graph, the optimum volume of elution solvent was determined to be
10 ml. Increasing the volume to 20 ml led to a decrease in the % recovery. Hence, 5 ×
2 ml of 1% TFA in water was used in subsequent experiments.
4.1.12 Evaluation of binding properties by 3Q-MIP-SPE
Figure 4-23 shows the structure of 3Q which is the degradation product of the
psychogenic agent, BZ. The % absorptivity and recovery of the 3Q-MIP and the NIP
for 3Q from deionized water are compared in Figure 4-24. Both the 3Q-MIP and the
NIP do not show 100% absorptivity of the analyte. The % absorptivity and the
recovery of the NIP are lower as compared to that of the 3Q-MIP.
Figure 4-23. The structure of 3Q.
Figure 4-24. Comparison of the % absorptivity and recovery of 3Q-MIP and NIP.
Figure 4-25. Comparison of the % absorptivity and recovery of 3Q-MIP and NIP for PEG samples.
0
20
40
60
80
100
3Q
%
%A (MIP) %R (MIP) %A (NIP) %R (NIP)
0
20
40
60
80
100
3Q
%
%A (MIP) %R (MIP) %A (NIP) %R (NIP)
N
OH
3Q
77
The polymers were further challenged with a tap water sample containing 3Q
with 500 g ml 1 of PEG. Both the 3Q-MIP and NIP show a decrease in %
absorptivity with the tap water sample containing PEG. On the other hand, the %
recovery of the analyte is slightly higher as compared to the deionized water sample.
Here, the ratio of % recovery improved slightly over the deionized water sample.
4.1.13 Comparison of 3Q-MIP-SPE with other sample preparation techniques
The 3Q-MIP-SPE procedure was compared against other SPE techniques,
namely SCX and SAX as well as a procedure without sample preparation. Figure 4-26
shows the % recovery of the analytes using the various procedures.
Figure 4-26. Comparison of % recovery of 3Q using the various procedures.
Only the 3Q-MIP-SPE and the direct rotary evaporation procedures were able
to recover 3Q from the PEG sample. Similar to the experiments with TEA, the SCX
and SAX SPE procedures could not recover 3Q, implying that 3Q is also cationic at
the sample pH (pH 8). The cationic 3Q was retained on the SCX cartridge [23] while
it eluted upon loading onto the SAX cartridge. Only the SAX SPE procedure was able
to remove PEG from the sample (Appendix 2).
The recovery of 3Q using the 3Q-MIP-SPE procedure marginally surpasses
that of the direct rotary evaporation procedure. In addition, in terms of sample
0
20
40
60
80
100
3Q
%
MIP-SPE Direct SCX SAX
78
cleanup, the amount of PEG introduced into the GC system was considerably less as
compared to the direct rotary evaporation procedure.
4.1.14 Evaluation of elution solvents for MIP-SPE using a mixture of MIPs
Next, MIP-SPE using a mixture of the various MIPs was investigated for the
extraction of the various template molecules from aqueous matrices. From the
evaluation studies, 50 mg of PMPA-MIP, 500 mg of TDG-MIP and TEA-MIP and
200 mg of 3Q were used. Hence the MIPs, PMPA-MIP, TDG-MIP, TEA-MIP and
3Q-MIP, were mixed in the ratio of 1:10:10:4 respectively. The % absorptivity and
recovery using the elution solvents, ethanol, 1% TFA in water and 1% TE in water,
are compared in Figures 4-27 to 4-29.
Figure 4-27. Comparison of % absorptivity and % recovery of the mixture of MIPs and NIP with EtOH.
Figure 4-28. Comparison of % absorptivity and % recovery of the mixture of MIPs and NIP with 1% TFA in water.
0
20
40
60
80
100
3Q PMPA TDG TEA
%
%A (MIP) %R (MIP) %A (NIP) %R (NIP)
0
20
40
60
80
100
3Q PMPA TDG TEA
%
%A (MIP) %R (MIP) %A (NIP) %R (NIP)
79
Figure 4-29. Comparison of % absorptivity and % recovery of the mixture of MIPs and NIP with 1% TE in water.
Except for 1% TFA for the recovery of TDG where no recovery was obtained,
all the solvents were able to recover the analytes to varying extents. The highest %
recovery of 3Q and PMPA was obtained with 1% TFA while ethanol gave the highest
% recovery of TDG and TEA. This is in contrast with the results from the evaluation
of elution solvents for each MIP where deionized water samples without PEG were
used. Those results showed that the highest % recovery for 3Q was obtained with 1%
TFA while 1% TE gave the highest recovery for PMPA, TDG and TEA. The presence
of the other analytes, presence of PEG and the use of tap water may have contributed
to this observation. In terms of the biggest ratio of % recovery between the MIP and
the NIP, 1% TFA was the solvent of choice for 3Q, 1% TE for PMPA and ethanol for
TDG and TEA. The % absorptivity and recovery were generally lower for the NIP as
compared to that of the mixture of MIPs.
4.1.15 Comparison of MIP-SPE using a mixture of MIPs with other sample
preparation techniques
The % recovery of the analytes using the mixture of MIPs with the different
elution solvents as well as the different sample preparation procedures are compared
0
20
40
60
80
100
3Q PMPA TDG TEA
%
%A (MIP) %R (MIP) %A (NIP) %R (NIP)
80
in Figure 4-30. SAX SPE is the only method capable of removing PEG from the
aqueous samples. However, it has its limitations. It is unable to recover the entire
range of analytes as only PMPA was detected. SCX SPE was unable to remove PEG
from the aqueous samples and in addition; it was only able to recover PMPA and
TDG. Except for TDG using TFA as the elution solvent, the MIP-SPE procedure was
able to recover the entire range of analytes. As expected, all the analytes were
detected using the direct rotary evaporation procedure. The total ion chromatograms
of the various procedures are compiled in Appendix 2. The chromatograms were
obtained by reconstitution with DCM instead of ACN, as ACN gave split peaks with
the HP-5MS column whereas DCM did not.
Figure 4-30. Comparison of % recovery using the various procedures.
Both the MIP-SPE and direct rotary evaporation procedures have their
advantages and disadvantages. The direct rotary evaporation procedure is fast and
gives a higher recovery of analytes. However, the procedure was found to introduce
more PEG into the GC column as seen from the great difference in areas under the
PEG peaks when the chromatograms are overlaid. This is important as it is not
0
20
40
60
80
100
3Q PMPA TDG TEA
%
MIP-SPE (EtOH) MIP-SPE (TFA) MIP-SPE (TE)Direct SCX SAX
81
advisable to introduce high concentrations of matrix interference into the GC MS
system as this may not only result in contamination of the column and MS detector
but also in shortening the lifespan of the MSD filament. On the other hand, the MIP-
SPE procedure gives lower recovery, and introduces less PEG into the GC column.
4.1.16 Preparation of sol-gel MIP fibers
Next, the development of sol-gel MIP fibers was attempted. Upon coating the
sol solution onto the fused silica fiber, the coating was dried at room temperature in a
desiccator. The coating solidified to give a shiny crystalline layer, however, it was of
unequal thickness along the length of the fiber. Prior to use, the fiber was conditioned
at 250 C for 1 h in the GC inlet. The heat treatment caused some of the coating to
flake off. Preliminary experiments with the fiber for the extraction of analytes of
interest from a water matrix and subsequent desorption in the heated inlet of the GC
caused further flaking off of the coating. As such, further investigation of sol-gel MIP
SPME was not carried out and efforts were instead focused on the evaluation of the
novel PhPPP coating.
4.1.17 CONCLUSION
The MIPs as well as the NIP were evaluated for their binding properties for a
range of analytes in deionized water samples as well as tap water samples containing
PEG as a background contaminant. The MIPs were not only able to bind to their
respective template but also to structurally similar compounds. This is an advantage
for the analysis of a wide range of similar analytes. The NIPs used in this study
showed some adsorption of the analytes. Ideally, they should not show adsorption of
analytes. However, the absorptivity and recovery were generally lower than that of the
MIPs. Only the PMPA-MIP showed 100% absorptivity of the analytes.
82
Each MIP-SPE procedure was compared with other sample preparation
procedures, namely SAX SPE and SCX SPE as well as a direct rotary evaporation
procedure for the analysis of a range of analytes in an aqueous sample containing
PEG. All the procedures were able to recover the phosphonates. However, only the
PMPA-MIP-SPE and SAX SPE procedures were capable of removing PEG from the
sample. Except for PMPA-MIP-SPE, a problem encountered for the other MIP-SPE
procedures was that analytes were eluted during the washing step. Hence to ensure
recovery of the analytes, the washing step was omitted and this compromised the
capability for sample clean-up. All the procedures except for SAX SPE were able to
recover TDG while only the MIP-SPE and the direct rotary evaporation procedures
were able to recover TEA and 3Q.
The various MIPs were mixed together for the analysis of a range of analytes,
namely the templates used during the polymer synthesis. The MIP-SPE procedures
using ethanol or 1% TE in water as the elution solvent, as well as the direct rotary
evaporation procedure, were able to recover the entire range of analytes. This is in
contrast to the procedures using commercially available SPE cartridges which did not
work for all of the analytes investigated. Although the direct rotary evaporation
procedure gave higher recovery, it was observed that the MIP-SPE procedure
introduces a lower amount of PEG into the GC column.
The development of sol-gel MIP SPME fibers posed a problem as the sol-gel
coatings synthesized using alkoxysilane monomers cracked and flaked off upon
drying at room temperature. Flaking off of the SPME coating was also observed upon
exposure to the heated GC inlet.
83
4.2 SPME using PhPPP-coated fibers
L1 is an organoarsenic agent listed under Schedule 1 of the Chemicals
Weapons Convention. The synthesized agent is actually composed of cis and trans
isomers and contains impurities such as L2 and L3. The structures of the compounds
are shown in Figure 4-31. Similar to sulfur mustard, L1 possesses vesicant properties.
However, in contrast to sulfur mustard, it is known to produce an immediate burning
sensation upon contact with the skin. Several arsenic-containing compounds were
introduced as chemical warfare agents during World War I. Among arsine,
diphenylchloroarsine, phenyldichloroarsine, diphenylaminechloroarsine,
diphenylcyanoarsine, methyldichloroarsine, ethyldichloroarsine and
ethyldibromoarsine, Lewisite was considered as the best arsenical war gas [354].
Unlike other chemical warfare agents, L1 requires derivatization in order to be
amenable to GC MS analysis as direct analysis leads to deterioration of the column
performance and corrosion of the detector [58].
Figure 4-31. Structures of the Lewisites.
Upon contact with water, L1 is rapidly hydrolyzed to 2-chlorovinylarsonous
acid (CVAA) which is as toxic. Subsequently, 2-chlorovinylarsenous oxide (CVAO)
and polymerized chlorovinylarsenous oxide is formed. The hydrolysis pathway is
shown in Figure 4-32. Similarly, L2 is expected to undergo similar hydrolysis to the
corresponding bis(2-chlorovinyl)arsonous acid (BCVAA) [356]. Except in old
abandoned chemical bombs where intact Lewisites 1 and 2 could still be found [357],
AsCl
Cl
ClAs
Cl
Cl ClAs
Cl Cl
Cl
L1 L2 L3
84
the existence of Lewisites in the environment would most likely be indicated by the
presence of CVAA, BCVAA, L3 or other degradation products. The SPME of CVAA
from aqueous and soil samples [89] as well as in urine [92] has previously been
investigated. In these studies, dithiols such as 1,2-ethanedithiol and 1,3-propanedithiol
were used as the derivatizing agents. In this study, we explored the use of the novel
PhPPP fiber for the extraction of the arsenic compounds as well as using monothiols
as derivatizing agents in SPME.
Figure 4-32. Hydrolysis pathway of L1 [355].
In the evaluation of the PhPPP-coated SPME fiber for the analysis of
Lewisites, extraction conditions such as sample pH, ionic strength, derivatizing agent
and extraction time were first optimized. Using the optimal extraction conditions, the
precision, linearity and limit of detection of the method were investigated using
spiked deionized water samples. The performance of the network fiber was compared
Cl OHAs
OH
AsCl
Cl
Cl
ClAs
O
ClAs
O
+ 2 H2O + 2 HCl
CVAA
CVAO
n
L1
+ H2O
85
0
20
40
60
80
0 2 4 6 8
pH
Up
take
(n
g)
L3
L2-PT
L1-PT
against that of a series of commercially available fibers, namely 30 m and 100 m
PDMS, 85 m PA, 65 m PDMS/DVB, 75 m CAR/PDMS and 65 m CW/DVB.
All experiments were performed in triplicate, unless stated otherwise.
4.2.1 Optimization of SPME conditions
Recommended operating procedures for the extraction of Lewisite in aqueous
samples involve the adjustment of the pH of the sample to 2 [62]. Hence, the effect of
sample pH on uptake by the fiber was investigated. The water sample was adjusted to
an acidic pH of 0 and 2, left unadjusted at pH 6 and adjusted to a basic pH of 8.
Figure 4-33 shows the uptake of the analytes with respect to sample pH. It was
found that adjustment of pH to 2 or analysis without pH adjustment did not
significantly affect the uptake. On the other hand, an extremely acidic pH of 0 and a
moderately basic pH of 8 adversely affected the uptake of the analytes. The behavior
of the analytes at extreme acidity is not well-understood and the lower uptake may be
due to the degree of ionization of the analytes while the poor uptake at pH 8 is the
result of decomposition in alkaline media [354]. Hence, in subsequent experiments,
the pH of the sample was not adjusted.
Figure 4-33. Effect of pH on uptake of the Lewisites. Spiking concentration: 0.5 µg ml 1; derivatizing agent: PT; salt concentration: 40% (w/v) NaCl; extraction time: 15 min.
86
Increasing the ionic strength of the aqueous sample by the addition of salt has
been shown to improve the SPME uptake of nerve agents [88]. However, the reverse
is observed for the Lewisites. As seen from Figure 4-34, saturating the sample with
the addition of 40 % (w/v) NaCl or Na2SO4 led to a decrease in uptake of the analytes.
Since the derivatized analytes were relatively non-polar as compared to the nerve
agents, salting was not required for uptake onto the fiber. Hence, further experiments
were conducted without the addition of salt. Omitting the need for adjustment of
sample pH and addition of salt resulted in a simple and straightforward extraction
procedure.
Figure 4-34. Effect of salting on uptake of the Lewisites. Spiking concentration: 0.5 µg ml 1; pH: 6; derivatizing agent: PT; extraction time: 15 min.
L1 can be chromatographed on a new column but leads to rapid deterioration
of the column. L2 can be chromatographed but is better derivatized. L3, on the other
hand, does not require derivatization [358]. The dithiols form cyclic derivatives with
L1 while for L2, a free thiol group remains. In other studies on CVAA, 1,2-
ethanedithiol and 1,3-propanedithiol were commonly used as derivatizing agents
[89,91,92,359]. An interesting fact to note is that derivatization of L1 or CVAA with
any particular thiol leads to the same derivative. The same is true for L2 and BCVAA.
0
40
80
120
L3 L2-PT L1-PT
Up
take
(n
g)
0%
40% Sodium sulfate
40% Sodium chloride
87
0
50
100
150
L3 L2 L1
Up
take
(n
g)
Ethanethiol Propanethiol ButanethiolEthanedithiol Propanedithiol
A series of monothiols and dithiols as derivatizing agents for the analytes was
investigated. The monothiols investigated included ethanethiol, propanethiol and
butanethiol while the dithiols were 1,2-ethanedithiol and 1,3-propanedithiol. The
structures of the derivatives are presented in Figure 4-35. The results are shown in
Figure 4-36. As 1,4-Butanedithiol was not fully soluble in water, it was excluded from
further investigations.
Figure 4-35. Structures of the various derivatives of L1 and L2.
Figure 4-36. Effect of derivatizing agents on uptake of the Lewisites. Spiking concentration: 0.5 µg ml 1; pH: 6; salt concentration: 0%; extraction time: 15 min.
Cl
S
AsS Cl
S
SAs
Cl
S
SAs
Cl
S
AsClCl
S
AsClCl
S
AsCl
Cl
S
AsCl
SH
Cl
S
AsCl
SH
S
S
AsCl
AsS
S
Cl
L1-ET L1-PT L1-BT
L1-EDT L1-PDT
L2-ET L2-PT L2-BT
L2-EDT L2-PDT
88
Since L3 does not require derivatization, its uptake did not vary significantly
with the derivatizing agent used while that of L2 and L1 showed significant variation.
It was obvious that the monothiols were superior over the dithiols as derivatizing
agents for L2 and L1. As our findings indicated that propanethiol gave the highest
uptake of L2 and L1, propanethiol was thus selected as the derivatizing agent for the
analytes in water samples in subsequent experiments.
Extraction time profiles (Figure 4-37) were obtained at extraction times
ranging from 5 min to 60 min. It was observed that equilibrium was achieved for the
analytes at 30 min. Hence, subsequent experiments were conducted using an
extraction time of 30 min.
Figure 4-37. Effect of extraction time on uptake of the analytes. Spiking concentration: 0.5 µg ml 1; pH: 6; derivatizing agent: PT; salt concentration: 0%; extraction time: 15 min.
4.2.2 Method validation
Using the optimal extraction conditions, the precision, linearity and limit of
detection of the method were investigated using spiked deionized water samples. The
results are compiled in Table 4-1.
0
50
100
150
0 15 30 45 60
Extraction Time (min)
Up
take
(n
g)
L3
L2-PT
L1-PT
89
0
5
10
15
20
25
L3 L2-PT L1-PT
Up
take
(n
g)
PhPPP fibre
30 um PDMS
100 um PDMS
PDMS/DVB
CAR/PDMS
PA
CW/DVB
Table 4-1. Quantitative results of SPME of the Lewisites.
Analyte Equationa
r2
% RSD (n = 6)
LODb
(µg l 1)
LODc
(µg l 1)
L3 y = 0.2799x + 2.1886 0.9975
8 0.31 0.17
L2-PT y = 0.4502x
0.5715 0.9997
6 0.19 0.24
L1-PT y = 0.5856x + 3.8997 0.9901
8 0.08 0.10
a linear range 0.001-0.5 µg ml 1
b LODs of SPME using PhPPP fiber at S/N = 3. c LODs of SPME using 100 m PDMS fiber at S/N = 3.
The linearity of SPME calibration plots was investigated over a concentration
range of 0.001-0.5 g ml 1. The analytes exhibited good linearity with good squared
regression coefficients of >0.990. This allowed the quantification of the compounds
by the method of external calibration. The relative standard deviations (RSDs) for six
extractions were below 8% for all the analytes. The limits of detection (LODs) for the
analytes were estimated at S/N = 3 under GC MS full scan conditions. The LODs
ranged between 0.08-0.31 g l 1.
4.2.3 Comparison with commercial SPME fibers
Figure 4-38. Comparison of uptake using the various fibers. Spiking concentration: 10 g l 1; pH: 6; derivatizing agent: PT; salt concentration: 0%; extraction time: 30 min.
90
The performance of the novel PhPPP fiber in the uptake of the analytes in
aqueous samples was compared against that of several commercially available fibers
from Supelco. As seen in Figure 4-38, the CAR/PDMS fiber gave the lowest uptake
of the analytes since it is more suitable for gases and low molecular weight
compounds up to a molecular weight of 225. Furthermore, it is not surprising that the
CW/DVB and PA fibers, suitable for polar compounds, showed poor uptake of the
analytes since they are considered to be relatively non-polar. Our results showed that
the PhPPP fiber performed better than all the commercial fibers in the uptake of
derivatives of CVAA and BCVAA but marginally poorer than the 100 m PDMS and
PDMS/DVB fibers in the uptake of L3. The LODs for the analytes using the PhPPP
fiber and the best-performing fiber, the 100 m PDMS fiber, are compared in Table
4-1. The use of propanethiol instead of propanedithiol as derivatizing agent for
CVAA lowered the LOD of 1 g l 1 obtained in a previous study [89] by an order of
magnitude. The lowest LOD reported for the analysis of CVAA is 7 pg ml 1 in urine
using an automated SPME GC MS system [92].
4.2.4 Conclusion
The novel PhPPP fiber shows great promise as an alternative to commercially
available fibers for the SPME of Lewisites in aqueous samples. PhPPP fibers are easy
to prepare and are significantly less costly than commercial fibers.
91
4.3 HF-LPME
4.3.1 Optimization of parameters for HF-LPME of chemical agents
The chemical warfare agents investigated included the nerve agents, GB, GD,
GA and VX as well as the blister agent, HD. The structures of the analytes are
presented in Figure 4-39. Factors affecting the extraction efficiency such as stirring
speed, sample ionic strength, and extraction time were optimized. All experiments
were performed in triplicate.
Figure 4-39. The chemical warfare agents investigated in this study.
Several commonly-used organic solvents in microextraction such as toluene,
cyclohexane, isooctane and their combinations were initially investigated. However,
higher extraction efficiency was observed with chlorinated solvents and their
combinations [344,345]. Hence, dichloromethane, chloroform, carbon tetrachloride,
trichloroethylene and their combinations were studied. For each solvent, extractions
were performed using deionized water spiked with CWAs, 30% (w/v) NaCl and with
stirring at 700 rpm for 15 min. Figure 4-40 shows the effect of the different solvents
on extraction efficiency.
P
O
OF
P
O
OF
NP
O
O
N
ClS
ClP
O
O
SN
GB GD GA
HD VX
92
Figure 4-40. Effect of extraction solvent on uptake of the CWAs. Salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 700 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
Dichloromethane, when used as a single solvent, was not suitable as it
evaporated too easily during the course of the extraction. As seen from Figure 4-40,
chloroform gave the highest uptake for GB and VX and relatively similar uptake for
GD, GA and HD as compared to the other solvents. In other preliminary studies, the
uptake was found to decrease when chloroform was used in combination with other
solvents. There is no observed relationship between the uptake of the CWAs as
related to the polarity indices [360] or octanol/water partition coefficients (log Kow)
[361] of the solvents and the log Kow of the CWAs [15]. The polarity indices of the
solvents as well as the log Kow of the CWAs are compiled in Tables 4-2 and 4-3.
Chloroform, the most polar solvent among the chlorinated solvents investigated, was
able to extract the two analytes with extreme log Kow values, GB and VX. On the
other hand, trichloroethylene, the least polar solvent, showed poor uptake for most of
the analytes. The results are in contrast to those reported previously [345] where
chloroform, among other solvents, was discarded due to problems with non-
0
10
20
30
40
50
GB GD GA HD VX
ChloroformCarbon tetrachlorideDichloromethane-Carbon tetrachloride 1:1Dichloromethane-Carbon tetrachloride 3:1TrichloroethyleneToluene
Up
take
(n
g)
93
compatibility with fiber pores, instability and miscibility with water. Our results show
that the extraction efficiency of the CWAs with chloroform is significantly better than
that with toluene and with trichloroethylene. Several of the solvents were unable to
extract VX. Hence, chloroform was selected as the extraction solvent.
Table 4-2. Data of the solvents. Table 4-3. Data of the CWAs.
Extractions without the addition of salt were performed. However, uptake of
the analytes was poor, particularly for VX which was not recovered. Hence
experiments were performed with addition of salt. Increasing the ionic strength of the
water sample has been shown to decrease the affinities of the chemical agents for the
aqueous matrix and hence enhancing their uptake [88]. The effect of two different
salts, NaCl and Na2SO4, was compared in Figure 4-41. At the same salinity level of
30% (w/v), neither NaCl nor Na2SO4 was the obvious choice. The uptake of VX was
better whereas the uptake of HD was adversely affected with Na2SO4. However, since
NaCl gave higher uptake of most the analytes, further experiments were conducted
with NaCl. Salt concentrations were varied from a low salinity level of 10% (w/v) to a
saturation level of 40% (w/v).
Solvent Polarity Index [360] Chloroform 4.1 Dichloromethane 3.1 Toluene 2.4 Carbon tetrachloride 1.6 Trichloroethylene 1.0
CWA Log Kow
[361]
GB 0.299 GD 1.824 GA 0.384 HD 1.37 VX 2.09
94
0
10
20
30
40
10 20 30 40
Salt concentration (w/v % )
Up
take
(n
g) GB
GDGAHDVX
Figure 4-41. Effect of salt on uptake of the CWAs. Extraction solvent: chloroform; stirring speed: 700 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
Figure 4-42. Effect of salt concentration on uptake of the CWAs. Extraction solvent: chloroform; stirring speed: 700 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
Figure 4-42 shows the effect of salt concentration on extraction efficiency. It
was observed that the optimum salt concentration for all the analytes was 30% (w/v).
At higher salinity levels of 33% or higher, the sample solution was saturated such that
the presence of suspended salt particles interfered with the uptake and led to the
0
10
20
30
40
50
GB GD GA HD VX
Up
take
(n
g)
Sodium chloride
Sodium sulfate
95
0
20
40
60
80
300 500 700 900 1100
Stirring Speed (rpm)
Up
take
(n
g)
GBGDGAHDVX
decrease in recoveries observed. The salt concentration was thus maintained at 30%
(w/v) NaCl for subsequent experiments.
Although agitation of the sample can enhance the extraction and reduce the
time to thermodynamic equilibrium, higher agitation speed may result in drop
dislodgement and solvent loss particularly for SDME, over long extraction times. As
mentioned above, an obvious advantage of HF-LPME over SDME is the fact that
higher stirring speeds can be employed without affecting the solvent drop. The effect
of stirring speed on the extraction efficiency was investigated over a range of 300 rpm
to the maximum of 1250 rpm. Figure 4-43 shows the effect of stirring speed on
extraction efficiency. The uptake of VX was relatively unaffected by stirring speed or
extraction time due to its slow rate of diffusion [88], the extraction efficiencies of the
other analytes increased with increasing stirring speeds. Hence the maximum
allowable stirring speed on the magnetic stirrer, i.e. 1250 rpm, was used in subsequent
experiments.
Figure 4-43. Effect of stirring speed on uptake of the CWAs. Extraction solvent: chloroform; salt concentration: 30% (w/v); extraction time: 15 min.
96
0
25
50
75
100
125
15 30 45 60
Extraction Time (min)
Up
take
(n
g) GB
GD
GA
HD
VX
HF-LPME is an equilibrium-based rather than exhaustive extraction process.
Generally, the equilibrium time is selected as extraction time. However, it is usually
not practical to prolong an extraction unnecessarily for equilibrium to be established.
This is because the longer the extraction, the greater the potential of solvent loss due
to dissolution in the sample solution. Additionally, there are obvious benefits in
conducting more time-efficient extraction. Thus, for quantitative analysis, achieving
equilibrium is not necessary as long as extraction conditions are kept rigorously
constant. Figure 4-44 shows the effect of extraction time on extraction efficiency.
Except for VX which was relatively unaffected by extraction time, the other analytes
showed increasing uptake with increasing extraction times. The extraction time of 30
min was selected since reasonable uptake was achieved in this shorter analysis time.
Figure 4-44. Effect of extraction time on uptake of the CWAs. Extraction solvent: chloroform; salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 1250 rpm.
4.3.2 Method validation for HF-LPME of chemical agents
Using the optimal extraction conditions, the precision, linearity and limit of
detection of the method were investigated using spiked deionized water samples. The
results are shown in Table 4-4. External calibration was performed for all
97
experiments. To evaluate the linearity of the calibration plots, samples were spiked
with CWA over a concentration range of 0.01 1 g ml 1 and then extracted. The GC
peak area counts were plotted against the respective analyte concentrations to
generate calibration curves. The CWAs exhibited good linearity with very good
squared regression coefficients of >0.9950. This allowed the quantification of the
compounds by the method of external calibration. The limits of detection for the
CWAs were estimated at S/N = 3 under GC MS full scan conditions. The LODs
ranged between 0.02 and 0.09 g l 1 and were better than those reported for SDME
and HF-LPME using trichloroethylene [344,345]. Also, these values better the
requirement for the safe level (50-200 g l 1 in 2-3 L) in drinking water contaminated
with CWAs [88]. The RSDs for six extractions were below 10% for all the analytes.
Table 4-4. Quantitative results of HF-LPME of the CWAs.
Analyte
Equationa
r2
% RSD
(n = 6) LODb
LODc
LODd
LODe
LODf
GB
y = 0.1164x + 1.0640
0.9950
5
0.03
0.03
10
75
0.05
GD
y = 0.1840x + 0.0447
0.9999
7
0.09
0.10
-
-
0.05
GA
y = 0.1802x + 0.2885
1.0000
6
0.02
0.02
-
-
0.05
HD
y = 0.1698x + 0.3817
0.9999
9
0.09
0.10
1.0
30
-
VX
y = 0.0375x + 1.9906
0.9977
7
0.09
0.20
-
-
0.5
a linear range 0.01-1 µg ml 1
b LODs (in g l 1) of HF-LPME for water samples at S/N = 3. c LODs (in g l 1) of HF-LPME for slurry samples at S/N = 3. d LODs (in g l 1) of HF-LPME using trichloroethylene as a solvent at S/N = 10 [345]. e LODs (in g l 1) of SDME using dichloromethane:carbon tetrachloride as a solvent at S/N = 10 [344]. f LODs (in g l 1) of SPME using 65 m PDMS/DVB fiber at S/N =3 [88].
4.3.3 Comparison of HF-LPME of chemical agents with SPME
In order to demonstrate the capability of HF-LPME in the extraction of the
CWAs, a relatively simple matrix such as deionized water samples as well as the
much more complex slurry samples (20 mg of soil in 1 ml of water) were employed.
98
Figure 4-45 shows typical total ion chromatograms after HF-LPME extraction of the
CWAs. As compared to the deionized water samples, the slurry samples were meant
to pose a greater challenge to the extraction procedure due to the presence of soil
particles as well as extraneous materials.
Figure 4-45. Total ion chromatograms after HF-LPME extraction of spiked deionized water sample (a) and spiked slurry sample (b) at a concentration of 0.5 µg ml 1. Extraction solvent: chloroform; salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 1250 rpm; extraction time: 30 min.
The extraction efficiency of HF-LPME was also compared with that of direct
immersion-SPME. Previously-reported optimum conditions for direct immersion
SPME were utilized [88]. As seen from Figure 4-46, neither technique demonstrated
6.00 7.00 8.00 9.0010.0011.0012.0013.0014.0015.0016.0017.0018.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
5000000
5500000
6000000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: WCF2.D
VX
HD
GA
GD
GB
Time (min)
6.00 7.00 8.00 9.0010.0011.0012.0013.0014.0015.0016.0017.0018.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
5000000
5500000
6000000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: SCF2.D
VX
HDG
A
GD
GB
Time (min)
99
superiority over the other. The HF-LPME technique gave higher uptake for GB, GA
and VX while direct immersion SPME showed higher uptake of GD and HD. The
PDMS/DVB fiber showed higher uptake of GD and HD, over the other CWAs, owing
to their relative hydrophobicity. Except for VX, the uptake of the analytes using HF-
LPME was not affected by the more complex slurry matrix. On the other hand, a
difference between the uptake of the analytes by direct immersion SPME from water
and slurry samples is observed. In fact, VX was not recovered at all from slurry
samples by direct immersion-SPME. This experiment demonstrated an obvious
advantage of HF-LPME over direct immersion SPME where the hollow fiber served
as a filter that prevented the soil particles in the complex slurry matrix from
interfering with the analysis. After each extraction, the hollow fiber can be discarded
and a fresh one used for the next extraction. In contrast, the fiber was observed to
deteriorate with repeated direct immersion SPME from the slurry samples.
Figure 4-46. Comparison of HF-LPME and SPME extraction efficiency for the CWAs. HF-LPME extraction solvent: chloroform; salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 1250 rpm; extraction time: 30 min. SPME salt concentration: 40% (w/v); stirring speed: 1250 rpm; extraction time: 30 min.
0
50
100
150
200
GB GD GA HD VX
Up
take
(n
g)
HF-LPME (water)
HF-LPME (slurry)
SPME (water)
SPME (slurry)
100
4.3.4 Optimization of parameters for HF-LPME of CWA degradation products
Several main degradation products of CWAs were selected, ranging from
those of nerve agents such as GB, GD, VX to blister agents, including HD, 1,2-bis(2-
chloroethylthio)ethane (sesquimustard, Q), bis(2-chloroethylthioethyl)ether (O-
mustard, T), and a psychotomimetic agent, BZ. The actual analytes of interest were
EMPA (from VX), IMPA (from GB), PMPA (from GD), MPA which is the final
degradation product of alkyl methylphosphonic acids, n-propylphosphonic acid
(nPPA), ethyl 2-hydroxyethyl sulfide (EHES), thiodiglycol (TDG) (from HD), 1,2-
bis(2-hydroxyethylthio)ethane (QOH) (from Q), bis(2-hydroxyethylthioethyl)ether
(TOH) (from T), and benzilic acid (BA) (from BZ). The structures of the analytes are
shown in Figure 4-47 while the pKa and log Kow data of the analytes are compiled in
Table 4-5. Factors affecting the extraction efficiency such as extraction solvent, pH,
sample ionic strength, stirring speed, and extraction time were optimized. All
experiments were performed in triplicate.
Figure 4-47. CWA degradation products investigated in this study.
P
O
OHOH
P
O
OHO
P
O
OHO
P
O
OOH
SOHOH
OS
OHS
OH
SOHS
OH
P
O
OHOH
SOH
OH
OHO
MPA
EMPA IMPA PMPA
TDG QOH
TOH
nPPA
EHES
BA
101
Table 4-5. pKa and log Kow data of the CWA degradation products.
Analyte pKa [362,363]
Log Kow
[362]
EMPA 2.32 -0.15 EHES 14.73 0.44 IMPA 2.32 0.27 PMPA 2.30 Not available MPA 2.12a
-0.70 nPPA 3.13 0.28 TDG 14.68 -0.63 BA 3.05a
2.30 QOH 14.64 Not available TOH Not available Not available
a Obtained from the Interactive PhysProp Database [362].
HF-LPME for analytes requiring derivatization prior to GC MS analysis has
been carried out by extracting the analytes of interest first using pure solvent before
drawing up derivatizing agent into the hollow fiber prior to injection [364], or
introducing derivatizing agent into the GC injection port immediately after injection
of the extract [365]. Alternatively, the derivatizing agent is added to the sample for
simultaneous derivatization and extraction of analytes [366,367]. Coupled two-step
derivatizations in which hydroxycarbonyls were first extracted and derivatized with
O-(2,3,4,5-pentafluorobenzyl)-hydroxylamine by HF-LPME followed by single drop
microextraction over the headspace of bis(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide (BSTFA)
have been reported [368]. Another successful approach for derivatization was to use a
mixture of solvent and derivatizing agent as the extraction medium held within a HF
for the simultaneous clean-up, extraction and derivatization of 11-nor- 9-
tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid from urine [369]. The solvent mixture
consisted of BSTFA and octane in the ratio of 5:1. After an 8-min extraction, 6 l of
the mixture was analyzed by GC MS. Similarly, a HF-LPME technique involving
simultaneous in-fiber silylation for unconjugated anabolic steroids in urine has been
developed [370]. The hollow fiber was first pre-conditioned with dihexyl ether and
102
then filled with a mixture of N-methyl-N-(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide (MSTFA),
ammonium iodide and dithioerythritol as the acceptor phase. The extraction was
performed at 45 C for 30 min. A 2- l portion of the acceptor phase was then drawn
from the fiber and injected directly into the GC MS instrument.
In-situ derivatization HF-LPME of alkylphosphonic acids has been carried
out by basification of the spiked water with potassium carbonate, addition of propyl
bromide and stirring of the mixture at 100 C for 2 h. Upon completion of reaction,
extractions were performed by HF-LPME prior to GC MS analysis [346]. Here, HF-
LPME with in-situ derivatization was investigated for the extraction of degradation
products of CWAs from aqueous samples in which extractions were performed using
a mixture of solvent and derivatizing agent held in the hollow fiber. Although the
derivatizing agent used, N-(tert.-butyldimethylsilyl)-N-methyltrifluoroacetamide
(MTBSTFA), is moisture-sensitive, it is protected within the hollow fiber and allowed
the successful extraction of the analytes of interest prior to GC MS analysis. In
addition, tert.-butyldimethylsilyl (TBDMS) derivatives are known to be 104 times
more stable to hydrolysis than trimethylsilyl (TMS) derivatives [371].
In order to determine an optimum derivatization method, three derivatization
procedures were compared. In the first method, pure solvent (chloroform) was held in
the hollow fiber for the extraction of the analytes. Extractions were performed using
deionized water spiked with the analytes, 30% (w/v) NaCl and with stirring at 700
rpm. After 15 min of extraction, 1 l of MTBSTFA was combined with 1 l of extract
in the syringe for injection. In the second method, a mixture of chloroform and
MTBSTFA in a 1:1 ratio was held in the hollow fiber for extraction, followed by
injection of 1 l of the extract. The third method was essentially identical to the
second except that the 1 l of extract was combined with another 1 l of MTBSTFA
103
prior to injection. It was concluded from our experiments that the second method
using the chloroform/MTBSTFA solvent-derivatizing agent mixture (1:1) without the
additional microliter of derivatizing agent was optimum for extractions. The effect of
the derivatization procedure on the uptake of the analytes is shown in Figure 4-48.
Figure 4-48. Effect of derivatization method on uptake of the degradation products. Spiking concentration: 2 µg ml 1 for EMPA, IMPA, BA, QOH and TOH, 1 µg ml 1
for EHES and PMPA and 20 µg ml 1 for MPA, nPPA and TDG; extraction solvent: solvent/MTBSTFA (1:1); pH: 1.5; salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 700 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
The experiments on HF-LPME of CWAs, as discussed in Section 4.3.1,
demonstrated that chlorinated solvents were ideal for this class of compounds. Hence,
several chlorinated solvents, namely chloroform, carbon tetrachloride,
trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene, were evaluated together with a commonly-
used non-chlorinated solvent, toluene. Each of the solvents was mixed in a 1:1 ratio
with MTBSTFA and 5 l of the solvent-derivatizing agent mixture was held in the
hollow fiber for extraction. From Figure 4-49, it can be seen that none of the solvents
gave the highest extraction for all the analytes. Chloroform was selected for further
experiments as it gave the optimum extraction for most of the analytes.
0
50
100
150
200
EMPA EHES IMPA PMPA MPA nPPA TDG BA QOH TOH
Up
take
(n
g)
Chloroform:MTBSTFA 1:1
Chloroform:MTBSTFA 1:1 + MTBSTFA
Chloroform + MTBSTFA
104
0
300
600
900
1200
EMPA EHES IMPA PMPA MPA nPPA TDG BA QOH TOH
Up
take
(n
g)
MTBSTFA
BSTFA
Figure 4-49. Effect of extraction solvent on uptake of the degradation products. Spiking concentration: 2 µg ml 1 for EMPA, IMPA, BA, QOH and TOH, 1 µg ml 1
for EHES and PMPA and 20 µg ml 1 for MPA, nPPA and TDG; extraction solvent: solvent/MTBSTFA (1:1); pH: 1.5; salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 700 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
Next, two commonly-used silylating derivatizing agents, BSTFA and
MTBSTFA, were compared in order to determine the derivatizing agent of choice.
The results are presented in Figure 4-50. Except for BA where BSTFA gave higher
uptake than MTBSTFA, MTBSTFA is the derivatizing agent of choice for the rest of
the analytes. Subsequent experiments were carried out using MTBSTFA as the
derivatizing agent.
Figure 4-50. Effect of derivatizing agent on uptake of the degradation products. Spiking concentration: 2 µg ml 1 for EMPA, IMPA, BA, QOH and TOH, 1 µg ml 1
for EHES and PMPA and 20 µg ml 1 for MPA, nPPA and TDG; extraction solvent: chloroform/derivatizing agent (1:1); pH: 1.5; salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 700 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
0
50
100
150
EMPA EHES IMPA PMPA MPA nPPA TDG BA QOH TOH
Up
take
(ng
)
ChloroformCarbon tetrachlorideTrichloroethyleneTetrachloroethyleneToluene
105
0
50
100
150
200
10 20 30 40 50 60
% MTBSTFA
Up
take
(n
g)
EMPA
EHES
IMPA
PMPA
MPA
nPPA
TDG
BA
QOH
TOH
The amount of MTBSTFA required for derivatization was investigated (Figure
4-51). The use of 100% MTBSTFA was not feasible as the liquid rapidly solidified
upon exposure to water. Solidification was also observed with an MTBSTFA content
of 65% and above. Hence, experiments were conducted using chloroform with an
MTBSTFA content of 10%, 40%, 50% and a maximum of 60% as extracting solvent.
It was found that 50% of MTBSTFA in chloroform, that is, chloroform/MTBSTFA
(1:1), gave optimal results and was hence used in subsequent experiments.
Figure 4-51. Effect of MTBSTFA content on uptake of the degradation products. Spiking concentration: 2 µg ml 1 for EMPA, IMPA, BA, QOH and TOH, 1 µg ml 1
for EHES and PMPA and 20 µg ml 1 for MPA, nPPA and TDG; extraction solvent: chloroform/MTBSTFA; pH: 1.5; salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 700 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
As the analytes possess acidic protons, pH has a significant impact on the
degree of ionization and hence extraction. A comparison of the extraction of the
analytes at an extreme pH of 0, pH 1.5 and pH 4, where the sample pH was
unadjusted, was made. Figure 4-52 clearly shows that pH 0 was optimum for the
extraction of the analytes since they are expected to be fully unionized at this pH.
Hence the pH of the samples was adjusted to 0 in subsequent experiments.
106
0
50
100
150
200
0 2 4
pH
Up
take
(n
g)
EMPAEHESIMPAPMPAMPAnPPATDGBAQOHTOH
Figure 4-52. Effect of pH on uptake of the degradation products. Spiking concentration: 2 µg ml 1 for EMPA, IMPA, BA, QOH and TOH, 1 µg ml 1 for EHES and PMPA and 20 µg ml 1 for MPA, nPPA and TDG; extraction solvent: chloroform/MTBSTFA (1:1); salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 700 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
Increasing the ionic strength of the water sample has been shown to decrease
the affinities of the CWAs for the aqueous matrix, thus enhancing their extraction by
the extractant solvent [88]. The effect of two different salts, NaCl and Na2SO4, was
compared. At the same salinity level of 30% (w/v), NaCl gave higher uptake of most
of the analytes as compared to Na2SO4 (Figure 4-53).
Figure 4-53. Effect of salt on the uptake of the degradation products. Spiking concentration: 0.7 µg ml 1 for EMPA, IMPA, BA, QOH and TOH, 0.3 µg ml 1 for EHES and PMPA and 7 µg ml 1 for MPA, nPPA and TDG; extraction solvent: chloroform/derivatizing agent (1:1); pH: 1.5; salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 700 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
0
10
20
30
40
EMPA EHES IMPA PMPA MPA nPPA TDG BA QOH TOH
Up
take
(n
g)
Sodium chloride
Sodium sulfate
107
0
20
40
60
20 30 40
% NaCl
Up
take
(ng
)
EMPAEHESIMPAPMPAMPAnPPATDGBAQOHTOH
NaCl concentrations were then varied from a salinity level of 20% (w/v) to a
highly saturated level of 40% (w/v). PMPA and nPPA showed vastly opposite trends
with increasing ionic strength. This can be explained by the fact that nPPA is
relatively more polar than PMPA and its uptake is enhanced by increasing salt
concentration. From Figure 4-54, the optimum salt concentration was determined to
be 33% (w/v). The salt concentration was adjusted to 33% (w/v) NaCl for subsequent
experiments.
Figure 4-54. Effect of salt concentration on the uptake of the degradation products. Spiking concentration: 0.7 µg ml 1 for EMPA, IMPA, BA, QOH and TOH, 0.3 µg ml 1 for EHES and PMPA and 7 µg ml 1 for MPA, nPPA and TDG; extraction solvent: chloroform/MTBSTFA (1:1); pH: 0; stirring speed: 700 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
The effect of stirring speed on the extraction efficiency was investigated over
a range of 300 rpm to the maximum of 1250 rpm. As seen from Figure 4-55
extraction of several of the analytes were relatively unaffected by the stirring speed.
However, it was observed that the extraction of PMPA, IMPA and TOH increased
with increasing stirring speed up to 1000 rpm. Increasing the stirring speed led to
increased diffusion of these analytes, which possess branched or long alkyl chains.
108
0
25
50
75
300 500 700 900 1100
Stirring speed (rpm)
Up
take
(n
g)
EMPAEHESIMPAPMPAMPAnPPATDGBAQOHTOH
Hence the stirring speed was set at 1000 rpm in subsequent experiments, since at this
value, most of the analytes were optimally extracted.
Figure 4-55. Effect of stirring on uptake of the degradation products. Spiking concentration: 0.7 µg ml 1 for EMPA, IMPA, BA, QOH and TOH, 0.3 µg ml 1 for EHES and PMPA and 7 µg ml 1 for MPA, nPPA and TDG; extraction solvent: chloroform/MTBSTFA (1:1); pH: 0; salt concentration: 33% (w/v); extraction time: 15 min.
Figure 4-56. Effect of extraction time on uptake of the degradation products. Spiking concentration: 0.7 µg ml 1 for EMPA, IMPA, BA, QOH and TOH, 0.3 µg ml 1 for EHES and PMPA and 7 µg ml 1 for MPA, nPPA and TDG; extraction solvent: chloroform/MTBSTFA (1:1); pH: 0; salt concentration: 33% (w/v); stirring speed: 1000 rpm.
0
50
100
150
200
15 30 45 60
Extraction time (min)
Up
take
(n
g)
EMPAEHESIMPAPMPAMPAnPPATDGBAQOHTOH
109
Figure 4-56 shows the time profile of extraction up to 60 min. Except for
EHES and BA which were relatively unaffected by extraction time, the uptake of the
other analytes increased with increasing extraction times up to 45 min. The extraction
time of 45 min was selected since it was the optimum extraction time for most of the
analytes.
4.3.5 Method validation for HF-LPME of CWA degradation products
Using the optimum extraction conditions, the precision, linearity and LODs of
the method were investigated using spiked water samples. The results are shown in
Table 4-6.
Table 4-6. Quantitative results of HF-LPME of the degradation products.
Analyte Equation r2
% RSD (n = 6)
LODa
(µg l 1) EMPA y = 0.1108x + 0.4105 0.9997 17 0.16 EHES y = 0.0436x + 5.4783 1.0000 9 0.08 IMPA y = 0.1751x + 1.7730 0.9977 12 0.03 PMPA y = 0.4045x + 2.7154 0.9989 13 0.05 MPA y = 0.0022x + 2.4999 0.9940 14 0.02 nPPA y = 0.0187x + 3.5046 0.9995 13 0.01 TDG y = 0.0079x
0.8692 0.9996 11 0.10 BA y = 0.0073x + 0.7016 0.9987 22 0.54 QOH y = 0.1434x
5.6745 0.9934 22 0.46 TOH y = 0.2744x
4.9917 0.9929 20 0.39 a at S/N = 5.
The linearity of HF-LPME calibration plots was investigated over a
concentration range of 0.005 5 g ml 1. The analytes exhibited good linearity with
squared regression coefficients of >0.993. This allowed the quantification of the
compounds by the method of external calibration. The LODs for the analytes were
estimated at S/N = 5 under GC MS full scan conditions by considering the lowest
concentration of each of the analytes that could be detected. The LODs ranged
110
between 0.01 and 0.54 g l 1. The relative standard deviations for six extractions were
between 9 and 22% for the analytes. Due to the need for derivatization, the % RSD
values tend to be larger in general than that of extractions without the need for this
additional step.
4.3.6 Comparison of HF-LPME of CWA degradation products with SPME
In order to compare the performance of HF-LPME with in-situ derivatization
with that of SPME, extractions of the degradation products from deionized water
samples were conducted under the optimized HF-LPME conditions and previously-
reported optimum conditions for SPME [90]. Several commercially available SPME
fibers were used, ranging from non-polar PDMS to polar PA fibers. Figure 4-57
shows the results obtained. It was obvious that HF-LPME with in-situ derivatization
surpassed that of SPME for all of the analytes except for BA. The CW/DVB fiber
gave the highest extraction for BA owing to the polarity as well as porosity of the
CW/DVB coating. Due to its hydrophilic nature as compared to the other analytes,
MPA posed a problem for both extraction techniques as seen from the low recoveries
of both procedures. Besides the simplicity and low cost, an added advantage of HF-
LPME over SPME is that after each extraction, the hollow fiber can be discarded and
a fresh one used for the next extraction. In contrast, the SPME fiber required
additional conditioning steps prior to and after extractions in order to prevent
carryover problems. The limited lifetime of an SPME fiber subjected to direct
immersion extraction is also an unfavorable consideration.
111
Figure 4-57. Comparison of HF-LPME and SPME of the degradation products. Spiking concentration: 1 µg ml 1 for EMPA, IMPA, BA, QOH and TOH, 0.5 µg ml 1
for EHES and PMPA and 10 µg ml 1 for MPA, nPPA and TDG; HF-LPME extraction solvent: chloroform/MTBSTFA (1:1); pH: 0; salt concentration: 33% (w/v); stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 45 min. SPME pH: 1.5; salt concentration: 40% (w/v); stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 30 min.
4.3.7 Optimization of parameters for HF-LPME of basic degradation products
Several basic degradation products of CWAs were selected, namely those of a
nerve agent (VX), the nitrogen mustards blister agents (HN1, HN2 and HN3) and a
psychotomimetic agent (BZ). The actual analytes of interest were 2-(N,N-
diisopropylamino)ethanol (DIPAE) (from VX), N-methyldiethanolamine (MDEA)
(from HN2), N-ethyldiethanolamine (EDEA) (from HN1), triethanolamine (TEA)
(from HN3) [15] and 3-quinuclidinol (3Q) (from BZ) [372]. The structures of the
analytes are shown in Figure 4-58. The negative logarithm of the acid dissociation
constants (pKa) and logarithms of the octanol-water coefficients (log Kow) of the
analytes are tabulated in Table 4-7.
Figure 4-58. Structures of the basic analytes investigated in this study.
0
50
100
150
200
250
EMPA EHES IMPA PMPA MPA nPPA TDG BA QOH TOH
Up
take
(ng
)HF-LPMEPDMSPDMS/DVBCAR/PDMSCW/DVBPA
NOH OH
N
OH
OH OHN
OH OH
N
OHNOH
DIPAE 3Q
MDEA EDEA TEA
112
Table 4-7. pKa and log Kow data of the basic analytes.
Analyte pKa
[362,363] Log Kow
[362]
DIPAE 10.1 0.88 3Q 9.16a
0.17
MDEA 8.52 -1.50 EDEA 8.75a
-1.01
TEA 7.76 -1.00 a Based on the SPARC On-Line Calculator [363]
Factors affecting the extraction efficiency such as choice of derivatizing agent,
extraction solvent for HF-LPME, pH, sample ionic strength, stirring speed, and
extraction time were optimized. All experiments were performed in triplicate.
In order to determine an optimum derivatization method for HF-LPME, three
derivatization procedures were compared together with the evaluation of MTBSTFA
and BSTFA as the more suitable derivatizing agent. In the first method, pure solvent
(chloroform) was held in the hollow fiber for the extraction of the analytes.
Extractions were performed using deionized water spiked with the analytes, 30%
(w/v) NaCl and with stirring at 1000 rpm. After 15 min of extraction, 1 l of
derivatizing agent was combined with 1 l of extract in the syringe for injection. In
the second method, a mixture of chloroform and derivatizing agent in a 1:1 ratio was
held in the hollow fiber for extraction, followed by injection of 1 l of the extract.
The third method was essentially identical to the second except that the 1 l of extract
was combined with another 1 l of derivatizing agent prior to injection. The results
are shown in Figure 4-59.
113
Figure 4-59. Effect of derivatization method on uptake of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 1 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 10 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; extraction solvent: chloroform/derivatizing agent (1:1); pH: 10; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) NaCl; stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
It is interesting to note that in the case of derivatization with MTBSTFA, 3Q
was largely underivatized, and only a small amount of the MTBSTFA derivative was
observed. This problem did not occur with BSTFA derivatization. This observation
can conceivably be attributed to the steric bulk of both 3Q and MTBSTFA that
prevents effective derivatization. Furthermore, the secondary alcohol group of 3Q
could have affected its reactivity towards MTBSTFA. Hence, quantification was
based on the underivatized 3Q instead of the MTBSTFA derivative for all subsequent
experiments that involved MTBSTFA.
The extraction with the chloroform:MTBSTFA mixture followed by another 1
l of MTBSTFA gave the highest uptake of 3Q even though, as mentioned above, it
remained largely underivatized in the presence of MTBSTFA. Separate experiments
were performed to investigate the recovery of 3Q using HF-LPME without
MTBSTFA which resulted in negligible recovery of 3Q. Hence it is speculated that
MTBSTFA probably aided in the uptake of 3Q similar to an ion-pairing mechanism
0
50
100
150
DIPAE 3Q MDEA EDEA TEA
Up
take
(n
g)
Chloroform + MTBSTFA
Chloroform:MTBSTFA 1:1
Chloroform:MTBSTFA 1:1 + MTBSTFA
Chloroform + BSTFA
Chloroform:BSTFA 1:1
Chloroform:BSTFA 1:1 + BSTFA
114
but eventually failed to fully derivatize the compound. This phenomenon has not been
thoroughly investigated and hence is not yet fully understood. This could be the
subject of future studies. It was concluded from our experiments that the third method
using the chloroform/BSTFA solvent-derivatizing agent mixture (1:1) together with
the additional microliter of derivatizing agent was optimum for HF-LPME as it gave
the highest uptake for most of the analytes, especially TEA which could not be
extracted using the other methods. On the other hand, SPME using derivatization with
BSTFA gave negligible recoveries of the analytes. Hence, SPME experiments were
conducted using MTBSTFA as the derivatizing agent.
The experiments on HF-LPME of CWAs and degradation products, as
discussed in Sections 4.3.1 and 4.3.4, demonstrated that chlorinated solvents were
ideal for this class of compounds. Hence, several chlorinated solvents, namely
chloroform, carbon tetrachloride, trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene, were
evaluated together with a commonly-used non-chlorinated solvent, toluene. Each of
the solvents was mixed in a 1:1 ratio with BSTFA and 5 l of the solvent-derivatizing
agent mixture was held in the hollow fiber for extraction. As seen from Figure 4-
60(a), chloroform was the best extraction solvent and was selected for further
experiments. On the other hand, the uptake of the analytes using various fibers was
evaluated. Several fibers gave negligible uptake of the analytes. As seen from Figure
4-60(b), even though the PDMS fiber gave the highest uptake of DIPAE, the most
non-polar analyte, the CAR/PDMS gave the highest uptake for the other analytes and
was thus used in subsequent experiments.
115
Figure 4-60. (a) Effect of extraction solvent on uptake of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 1 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 10 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; extraction solvent: chloroform/BSTFA (1:1); pH: 10; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) NaCl; stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 15 min. (b) Effect of SPME fiber on uptake of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 5 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 50 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; pH: 10; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) Na2SO4; stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
The amount of BSTFA required for derivatization in HF-LPME was
investigated through experiments using chloroform with a BSTFA content of 25%,
50% and 75% and pure BSTFA as extracting solvent. It was found that 50% of
BSTFA in chloroform, that is, chloroform/BSTFA (1:1), gave optimal results (Figure
0
20
40
60
80
100
DIPAE 3Q MDEA EDEA TEA
Up
take
(ng
)
Chloroform
Carbon tetrachloride
Trichloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
0
50
100
150
200
3Q DIPAE MDEA EDEA TEA
Up
take
(ng
)
PDMS
PDMS/DVB
CAR/PDMS
(b)
(a)
116
0
20
40
60
80
25 50 75 100
% BSTFA
Up
take
(n
g)
DIPAE
3Q
MDEA
EDEA
TEA
4-61) and was hence used in subsequent experiments. The reason for the decreasing
recoveries at higher amounts of BSTFA could be attributed to the decreasing
solubility of the analytes with decreasing amounts of CHCl3 solvent. The use of
BSTFA means that the poor derivatization of 3Q by MTBSTFA as observed earlier
was no longer a concern in HF-LPME.
Figure 4-61. Effect of amount of derivatizing agent on uptake of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 1 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 10 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; extraction solvent: chloroform/BSTFA; pH: 10; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) NaCl; stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
As they are basic compounds (Table 4-7), pH has a significant impact on the
degree of ionization and hence extraction of the analytes. A comparison of HF-LPME
of the analytes at an extreme pH of 14, pH 12, pH 10 and pH 7, where the sample pH
was unadjusted, was made. On the other hand, the extraction pH using SPME was
evaluated at pH 8, pH 9, pH 10 and pH 11, which was the maximum acceptable
working pH of the Carboxen/PDMS fiber. Figure 4-62 shows that pH 12 and pH 10
117
was optimum for HF-LPME and SPME respectively. Hence, the pH of the samples
was adjusted accordingly in subsequent experiments.
Figure 4-62. (a) Effect of pH on HF-LPME of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 1 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 10 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; extraction solvent: chloroform/BSTFA (1:1); salt concentration: 30% (w/v) NaCl; stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 15 min. (b) Effect of pH on SPME of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 5 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 50 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) Na2SO4; stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
0
20
40
60
80
100
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
pH
Up
take
(n
g)
DIPAE
3Q
MDEA
EDEA
TEA
(a)
0
40
80
120
160
8 9 10 11
pH
Up
take
(n
g)
3Q
DIPAE
MDEA
EDEA
TEA
(b)
118
Increasing the ionic strength of the water sample has been shown to decrease
the affinities of analytes for the aqueous matrix and hence enhancing their extraction
by the extractant solvent [90]. The effect of two different salts, NaCl and Na2SO4, was
compared. At the same salinity level of 30% (w/v), Na2SO4 gave higher uptake of the
analytes as compared to NaCl for both HF-LPME and SPME (Figure 4-63).
Figure 4-63. (a) Effect of salt on HF-LPME of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 1 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 10 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; extraction solvent: chloroform/BSTFA (1:1); pH 12; salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 15 min. (b) Effect of salt on SPME of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 5 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 50 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; pH 10; salt concentration: 30% (w/v); stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
0
50
100
150
DIPAE 3Q MDEA EDEA TEA
Up
take
(n
g)
Sodium chloride
Sodium sulfate
0
50
100
150
3Q DIPAE MDEA EDEA TEA
Up
take
(n
g)
Sodium chloride
Sodium sulfate
(a)
(b)
119
0
20
40
60
20 25 30 35 40
% Na2SO4
Up
take
(n
g)
DIPAE
3Q
MDEA
EDEA
TEA
(a)
0
50
100
150
200
15 20 25 30 35
% Na2SO4
Up
take
(n
g)
3Q
DIPAE
MDEA
EDEA
TEA
(b)
The concentration of Na2SO4 was then varied from a salinity level of 20%
(w/v) to a highly saturated level of 40% (w/v) for HF-LPME while that of SPME was
varied from 15% (w/v) to 35% (w/v). Extractions without the addition of salt are
expected to yield negligible recoveries of the analytes. Figure 4-64 shows the effect of
salt concentration on extraction efficiency where the optimum salt concentration was
determined to be 30% (w/v). In both cases, increasing salt concentration aided in the
uptake of the polar analytes except for HF-LPME of DIPAE, where increasing salt
concentration led to a decrease in the uptake of the least polar analyte. The salt
concentration was adjusted to 30% (w/v) Na2SO4 for subsequent experiments.
Figure 4-64. (a) Effect of salt concentration on HF-LPME of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 0.5 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 5 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; extraction solvent: chloroform/BSTFA (1:1); pH 12; stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 15 min. (b) Effect of salt concentration on SPME of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 5 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 50 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; pH 10; stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 15 min.
120
The effect of stirring speed on the extraction efficiency was investigated over
a range from 300 rpm to the maximum of 1250 rpm. As seen from Figure 4-65, the
optimum stirring speed was achieved at 1000 rpm for HF-LPME while the uptake of
DIPAE and 3Q by SPME showed opposite trends with increasing stirring speed. This
observation may be attributed to competition between DIPAE and 3Q, both relatively
bulky molecules, for uptake onto the fiber. Hence the stirring speed was set at 1000
rpm for HF-LPME and at 700 rpm for SPME in subsequent experiments.
Figure 4-65. (a) Effect of stirring on HF-LPME of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 0.5 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 5 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; extraction solvent: chloroform/BSTFA (1:1); pH 12; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) Na2SO4; extraction time: 15 min. (b) Effect of stirring on SPME of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 5 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 50 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; pH 10; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) Na2SO4; extraction time: 15 min.
0
20
40
60
300 450 600 750 900 1050 1200
Stirring speed (rpm)
Up
take
(n
g)
DIPAE
3Q
MDEA
EDEA
TEA
(a)
0
50
100
150
200
300 450 600 750 900 1050 1200
Stirring speed (rpm)
Up
take
(n
g)
3Q
DIPAE
MDEA
EDEA
TEA
(b)
121
Figure 4-66 shows the time profile from 10 min to 25 min for HF-LPME and
from 15 min to 60 min for SPME respectively. Extraction times of 20 min for HF-
LPME and 30 min for SPME were selected since these were the optimum extraction
times for virtually all of the analytes.
Figure 4-66. (a) Effect of extraction time on HF-LPME of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 0.5 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 5 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; extraction solvent: chloroform/BSTFA (1:1); pH 12; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) Na2SO4; stirring speed: 1000 rpm. (b) Effect of extraction time on SPME of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 2.5 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 25 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; pH 10; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) Na2SO4; stirring speed: 700 rpm.
0
20
40
60
80
100
10 15 20 25
Extraction time (min)
Up
take
(n
g)
DIPAE
3Q
MDEA
EDEA
TEA
(a)
0
50
100
150
200
15 30 45 60
Extraction time (min)
Upt
ake
(ng
)
3Q
DIPAE
MDEA
EDEA
TEA
(b)
122
4.3.8 Method validation for HF-LPME of basic degradation products
Using the optimum extraction conditions, the precision, linearity and limit of
detection of both methods were investigated using spiked deionized water samples.
The results are shown in Tables 4-8 and 4-9.
Table 4-8. Quantitative results of HF-LPME of the basic analytes.
Analyte Equation r2
% RSD
(n = 6)
LOD
(S/N = 5) (µg l 1)
DIPAE y = 0.0556x + 2.2385 0.9966 9 0.04 3Q y = 0.0016x
0.1049 0.9996 6 0.22 MDEA y = 0.0009x
1.7186 0.9975 10 0.09 EDEA y = 0.0072x
8.1536 0.9959 9 0.08 TEA y = 0.0001x
0.0649 0.9982 8 0.36
Table 4-9. Quantitative results of SPME of the basic analytes.
Analyte Equation r2
% RSD
(n = 6)
LOD
(S/N = 5) (µg l 1)
DIPAE y = 0.0434x + 45.988 0.9997 14 0.06 3Q y = 0.0022x
1.6675 0.9998 5 0.34 MDEA y = 0.0001x
0.0444 0.9985 22 0.11 EDEA y = 0.0005x
0.7572 0.9946 21 0.19 TEA y = 0.0001x
0.8472 0.9965 6 0.77
The linearity of calibration plots was investigated over a concentration range
of 0.05-25 µg ml 1 for HF-LPME and 0.5-25 µg ml 1 for SPME. The analytes
exhibited good linearity with squared regression coefficients of >0.994 for both
techniques. This allowed the quantification of the compounds by the method of
external calibration. The limits of detection for the analytes were estimated at a S/N
ratio of 5 under GC MS full scan conditions. The LODs ranged between 0.04 and
0.36 µg l 1 for HF-LPME and 0.06 and 0.77 µg l 1 for SPME. The relative standard
deviations for six extractions were between 6 and 10% for LPME and 5 and 22% for
SPME.
123
4.3.9 Comparison of HF-LPME of basic degradation products with SPME
In order to compare the performance of HF-LPME with in-situ derivatization
with that of SPME, extractions of the degradation products from deionized water
samples were conducted under the respective optimized HF-LPME and SPME
conditions. Figure 4-67 shows the results obtained.
Figure 4-67. Comparison of HF-LPME and SPME of the basic analytes. Spiking concentration: 1 µg ml 1 for DIPAE and 10 µg ml 1 for 3Q, MDEA, EDEA and TEA; HF-LPME extraction solvent: chloroform/BSTFA (1:1); pH 12; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) Na2SO4; stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 20 min. SPME pH 10; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) Na2SO4; stirring speed: 700 rpm; extraction time: 30 min.
It was obvious that HF-LPME with in-situ derivatization surpassed that of
SPME for all of the analytes. Besides the simplicity and low cost, an added advantage
of HF-LPME over SPME is that after each extraction, the hollow fiber can be
discarded and a fresh one used for the next extraction. In contrast, the SPME fiber
required additional conditioning steps prior to and after extractions in order to prevent
carryover problems. Furthermore, unlike SPME where the fibers are limited to a
0
100
200
300
400
500
3Q DIPAE MDEA EDEA TEA
Up
take
(n
g)
HF-LPME
SPME
124
working pH range, HF-LPME does not have this constraint. In addition, the limited
lifetime of an SPME fiber subjected to direct immersion extraction is an unfavorable
consideration.
4.3.10 Analysis of a 20th Official OPCW Proficiency Test water sample
The OPCW conducts a biannual proficiency test for chemical verification
laboratories around the world to benchmark their capability. In the 20th Official
OPCW Proficiency Test held in October 2006, two chemicals, namely EMPA and 2-
(N,N-diisopropylamino)ethanol (DIPAE), were spiked into an aqueous waste sample.
The samples were prepared by Centre d Etudes du Bouchet (CEB), France. Using
only 0.3 ml of sample adjusted to pH 0 and topped up to 3 ml with deionized water,
EMPA was successfully detected by HF-LPME with in-situ derivatization using the
optimized extraction conditions discussed in Section 4.3.4. Similarly, after adjusting
the pH to 12 of only 0.3 ml of sample topped up to 3 ml with deionized water, DIPAE
was successfully detected by the same technique using the optimized extraction
conditions described in Section 4.3.7. Figures 4-68 and 4-69 show the respective
chromatograms obtained. The large signal at 11.39 min in Figure 4-68 was confirmed
to be ethyl tert.-butyldimethylsilylmethyl phosphonate (the TBDMS derivative of
EMPA) while this analyte was absent in the blank, as expected. The large signal at
9.38 min in Figure 4-69 was confirmed to be 2-(N,N-diisopropylamino)ethyl
trimethylsilyl ether (the TMS derivative of DIPAE) which was not present in the
blank.
125
Figure 4-68. Total ion chromatograms of HF-LPME under acidic conditions with in-situ derivatization of a 20th Official OPCW Proficiency Test aqueous sample (top) and blank (bottom). HF-LPME extraction solvent: chloroform/MTBSTFA (1:1); pH 0; salt concentration: 33% (w/v); stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 45 min.
11.00 11.20 11.40 11.60 11.80 12.00 12.20 12.40 12.60 12.80 13.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
5000000
5500000
6000000
6500000
7000000
7500000
8000000
8500000
9000000
9500000
1e+07
1.05e+07
1.1e+07
1.15e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: WB_1.D
10.80 11.00 11.20 11.40 11.60 11.80 12.00 12.20 12.40 12.60 12.80 13.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
5000000
5500000
6000000
6500000
7000000
7500000
8000000
8500000
9000000
9500000
1e+07
1.05e+07
1.1e+07
1.15e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: W_1.D
EMPA-TBDMS
126
Figure 4-69. Total ion chromatograms of HF-LPME under basic conditions with in-situ derivatization of a 20th Official OPCW Proficiency Test aqueous sample (top) and blank (bottom). HF-LPME extraction solvent: chloroform/BSTFA (1:1); pH 12; salt concentration: 30% (w/v) Na2SO4; stirring speed: 1000 rpm; extraction time: 20 min.
8.00 8.20 8.40 8.60 8.80 9.00 9.20 9.40 9.60 9.80 10.00 10.20 10.40 10.60
5000000
1e+07
1.5e+07
2e+07
2.5e+07
3e+07
3.5e+07
4e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: WSI_1.D
DIPAE-TMS
8.00 8.20 8.40 8.60 8.80 9.00 9.20 9.40 9.60 9.80 10.00 10.20 10.40 10.60
5000000
1e+07
1.5e+07
2e+07
2.5e+07
3e+07
3.5e+07
4e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: WBSI_1.D
127
These experiments show that the technique can be applied to a wide range of
analytes of interest, whether they are acidic or basic in nature and only a very small
amount of sample and extraction solvent are required. The technique will continue to
be further tested and evaluated in future OPCW proficiency tests in order to
demonstrate its applicability to the entire range of analytes of interest. It is hoped that
the technique will complement and even substitute liquid-liquid extraction in the
recommended operating procedures for the analysis of CWAs and related compounds.
4.3.11 Conclusion
HF-LPME has been successfully utilized for the analysis of the several CWAs
and degradation products in aqueous samples. For analytes that required
derivatization, even though the derivatizing agents used were moisture-sensitive,
protection afforded by the hollow fiber allowed simultaneous extraction and
derivatization to be carried out followed by direct injection into the GC MS, without
the need for an additional off-line or separate derivatization step which requires
heating of the samples prior to HF-LPME. The procedure is simple, convenient to
perform and only a few microliters of organic solvent and derivatizing agents are
required. In addition, HF-LPME significantly improved the LODs over that of SPME.
The significantly lower cost of the hollow fiber membrane (one bundle of 2600 pieces
of 53.5 cm length costs only ~$200 USD) [297] as compared to commercially-
available SPME fibers (~$120 USD) further enhances its advantages over SPME. The
successful analysis of an OPCW Proficiency Test sample further affirms the
capability of the procedure.
128
5 CONCLUDING REMARKS
Thus far, there have been many reports on sol-gel solid-phase microextraction
(SPME) fibers, sol-gel molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs), MIP SPME fibers but
very few reports on sol-gel MIP SPME fibers. In an attempt to develop sol-gel MIP
SPME fibers, the synthesized MIPs were first evaluated as sorbent material for solid-
phase extraction (SPE). It was found that the non-imprinted polymers (NIPs) did not
show zero absorptivity of the analytes. Hence, endcapping of the polymers was
carried out to reduce the non-specific adsorption of analytes on the surface silanol
groups of the polymers in order to achieve a high imprint factor. With endcapping, the
non-specific interaction of analytes with the NIPs was reduced but not totally
eliminated. Moreover, endcapping resulted in lower absorptivities and recoveries of
the analytes with the MIPs. Hence, non-endcapped MIPs and NIPs were used in
subsequent experiments. The various MIPs were evaluated for their binding properties
towards their respective templates as well as similar analytes. In addition, the MIP-
SPE procedure was compared against several sample preparation techniques for the
extraction of analytes of interest in samples with polyethylene glycol (PEG) as matrix
interference. Next, the development of sol-gel MIP SPME fibers was attempted.
However, the sol-gel coatings were prone to cracking, and flaked off upon drying at
room temperature. To successfully develop sol-gel MIP SPME fibers, it is expected
that a lot more effort has to be invested in optimizing the composition of the sol-gel
solution used for coating of the fibers. This can be achieved by using computer
modeling for the selection of the best monomers for molecular imprinting [373] prior
to the synthesis of the actual polymer systems.
On the other hand, a simple method of fabricating SPME fibers was achieved
by coating a novel poly(1-hydroxy-4-dodecyloxy-p-phenylene) polymer (PhPPP) as
129
the SPME coating. The novel PhPPP-coated fibers were evaluated for the analysis of
Lewisites after derivatization with thiols. The in-house prepared PhPPP fibers gave
comparable performance as compared to commercially-available SPME fibers. In
addition, they were easy to prepare and were significantly less costly in contrast to the
fairly expensive commercially-available fibers.
The extraction and determination of selected CWAs and degradation products
has been successfully demonstrated using hollow fiber-protected liquid-phase
microextraction (HF-LPME) and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC MS).
In-situ derivatization of degradation products with silylating agents such as BSTFA
and MTBSTFA was possible as a result of the protection of the moisture-sensitive
derivatizing agents afforded by the hollow fiber. In order for HF-LPME to fully
substitute liquid-liquid extraction as a recommended operating procedure in the
analysis of chemical warfare agents and their degradation products, it is essential to
show that HF-LPME is applicable to all the various classes of chemicals. Future work
on HF-LPME will include the investigation of HF-LPME for the determination of
extremely volatile chemicals such as pinacolyl alcohol and chloropicrin as well as for
the determination of Lewisites with in-situ derivatization using mono- or dithiols as
derivatizing agents.
Future Work
A recently-introduced sample preparation technique, dispersive liquid-liquid
microextraction (DLLME), is being extensively investigated for various applications
[374-377] but has yet to be explored for the analysis of chemical warfare agents and
their degradation products. DLLME is a very simple and rapid method for extraction
and pre-concentration of organic compounds from water samples. In this method
130
(Figure 5-1), an appropriate mixture of extraction solvent (8.0 l of C2Cl4) and
disperser solvent (1.0 ml of acetone) is rapidly injected into the aqueous sample (5.0
ml) using a syringe. As a result, a cloudy solution is formed consisting of fine droplets
of extraction solvent dispersed entirely into the aqueous phase. Through
centrifugation, the extraction solvent is collected at the bottom of a conical sample
vial, withdrawn with a microsyringe and injected into a GC. DLLME is characterized
by very short extraction times, mainly due to the large surface area between the
solvent and the aqueous phase. Other advantages are the simplicity of operation, low
cost, high recoveries (82-111% at a spiking level of 5 g l 1) and enrichment factors
(603-1113), offering potential for ultra trace analysis (LODs between 0.007 and 0.030
g l 1, with RSD below 10% at 2 g l 1) [374]. It will be highly worthwhile to
investigate this microextraction technique in comparison with SPME and HF-LPME.
It is proposed that this be explored in a future study.
Figure 5-1. Photography of different steps in DLLME: (a) before injection of mixture of disperser solvent (acetone) and extraction solvent (C2Cl4) into sample solution, (b) starting of injection, (c) end of injection, (d) optical microscopic photography, magnitude 1000 (that shows fine particles of C2Cl4 in cloudy state), (e) after centrifuging and (f) enlarged view of sedimented phase (5.0±0.2 l) [374].
131
6 REFERENCES
[1] Chemical Weapons Ban: Facts and Figures, Organization for the Prohibition
of Chemical Weapons, The Hague, May 2007 edition.
[2] Basic Facts on Chemical Disarmament, Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons, 8th edition, The Hague, June 2007.
[3] Membership of the OPCW: Status of Participation in the Chemical Weapons
Convention; http://www.opcw.org. (Accessed on 13 September 2008.).
[4] Asia and the OPCW, Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons,
The Hague, March 2007 edition.
[5] M. Mesilaakso, Chemical Weapons Convention Chemical Analysis: Sample
Collection, Preparation and Analytical Methods, John Wiley & Sons Ltd,
Chichester, 2005.
[6] Fact Sheet 4: What is a Chemical Weapon?, Technical Secretariat of the
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, The Hague, 2000.
[7] F.R. Sidell, W.C. Patrick, T.R. Dashiell, Jane's Chem-Bio Handbook, Jane's
Information Group, Alexandria, 1998.
[8] J.R. Cashman, Emergency Response to Chemical and Biological Agents, CRC
Press LLC, Boca Raton, 2000.
[9] J.A.F. Compton, Military Chemical and Biological Agents: Chemical and
Toxicology Properties, The Telford Press, Caldwell, 1987.
[10] T.K. Ghosh, M.A. Prelas, D.S. Viswanath, S.K. Loyalka, Science and
Technology of Terrorism and Counterterrorism, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New
York, 2002.
[11] E. Croddy, Chemical and Biological Warfare: A Comprehensive Survey for
the Concerned Citizen, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2002.
132
[12] T. Findlay, Chemical Weapons and Missile Proliferation With Implications for
the Asia/Pacific Region, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc., Boulder, 1991.
[13] M.J. Small, Compounds Formed from the Chemical Decontamination of HD,
GB, and VX and their Environmental Fate, Technical Report 8304, US Army
Medical Research and Development Command, Fort Detrick, Maryland, 1984.
[14] D.N. Clark, Review of Reactions of Chemical Agents in Water, Battelle
Columbus Division, Columbus, 1989.
[15] N.B. Munro, S.S. Talmage, G.D. Griffin, L.C. Waters, A.P. Watson, J.F. King,
V. Hauschild, Environ. Health Perspect. 107 (1999) 933.
[16] Y.-C. Yang, J.A. Baker, J.R. Ward, Chem. Rev. 92 (1992) 1729.
[17] Y.-C. Yang, Chem. & Ind. (1995) 337.
[18] Chemistry of Lethal Chemical Warfare (CW) Agents, Noblis Inc., VA, 2007;
http://www.noblis.org. (Accessed on 28 January 2008.).
[19] Fact Sheet 5: Three Types of Inspection, Technical Secretariat of the
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, The Hague, 2000.
[20] M. Rautio, F.1 International Inter-Laboratory Comparison (Round-Robin) Test
for the Verification of Chemical Disarmament: Testing of Existing
Procedures, The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland, Helsinki, 1990.
[21] M. Rautio, F.2 International Inter-Laboratory Comparison (Round-Robin) Test
for the Verification of Chemical Disarmament: Testing of Procedures on
Simulated Industry Samples, The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland,
Helsinki, 1991.
[22] M. Rautio, F.3 International Inter-Laboratory Comparison (Round-Robin) Test
for the Verification of Chemical Disarmament: Testing of Procedures on
133
Simulated Military Facility Samples, The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of
Finland, Helsinki, 1992.
[23] M. Rautio, F.4 International Inter-Laboratory Comparison (Round-Robin) Test
for the Verification of Chemical Disarmament: Validating of Procedures for
Water and Soil Samples, The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland,
Helsinki, 1993.
[24] M. Rautio, H.1 Inter-Laboratory Comparison Test Coordinated by the
Provisional Technical Secretariat for the Preparatory Commission for the
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons: First Interlaboratory
Comparison Test, The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland, Helsinki, 1994.
[25] M. Rautio, Recommended Operating Procedures for Sampling and Analysis in
the Verification of Chemical Disarmament, The Ministry Foreign Affairs of
Finland, Helsinki, 1994 edition.
[26] J. Hendrikse, A Comprehensive Review of the Official OPCW Proficiency
Test, Master of Science thesis, Leiden University, 2002.
[27] Standard Operating Procedure for the Organization of OPCW Proficiency
Tests, Technical Secretariat of the Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons, The Hague, Quality System Document No.:
QDOC/LAB/SOP/PT01, 10 March 2008.
[28] Work Instruction for the Preparation of Test Samples for OPCW Proficiency
Tests, Technical Secretariat of the Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons, The Hague, Quality System Document No.:
QDOC/LAB/WI/PT02, 10 March 2008.
[29] Work Instruction for the Evaluation of the Results of OPCW Proficiency
Tests, Technical Secretariat of the Organization for the Prohibition of
134
Chemical Weapons, The Hague, Quality System Document No.:
QDOC/LAB/WI/PT03, 10 March 2008.
[30] Status of Laboratories Designated for the Analysis of Authentic Samples,
Technical Secretariat of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical
Weapons, The Hague, Document No.: S/711/2008, 4 September 2008.
[31] J. Rydberg, M. Cox, C. Musikas, G.R. Choppin, Solvent Extraction Principles
and Practice, 2nd edition, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 2004.
[32] T.R. Crompton, Organics: Solvent Extraction Methods (Chapter 13) in
Preconcentration Techniques for Natural and Treated Waters, Spon Press,
London, 2003.
[33] J. Rawe, G. Wahl, Solvent Extraction (Chapter 18) in J. R. Boulding, EPA
Environmental Engineering Sourcebook, Ann Arbor Press, Inc., Chelsea,
1996.
[34] Supelco Solid Phase Extraction Products, product catalogue, Sigma-Aldrich
Co., Bellefonte, 2006.
[35] Solid Phase Extraction (Chapter 4) in J.R. Dean, Extraction Methods for
Environmental Analysis, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester, England, 1998.
[36] N.J.K. Simpson, Solid-Phase Extraction Principles, Techniques, and
Applications, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 2000.
[37] Supelco Bulletin 910, Guide to Solid Phase Extraction, Sigma-Aldrich Co.,
Bellefonte, 1998.
[38] I. Li ka, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 3.
[39] N.J.K. Simpson, K.C. Van Horne, Handbook of Sorbent Extraction
Technology, Varian Associates, Harbor City, 1993.
[40] V. Pichon, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 195.
135
[41] H. Sabik, R. Jeannot, B. Rondeau, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 217.
[42] M.J.M. Wells, L.Z. Yu, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 237.
[43] Y. Picó, G. Font, J.C. Moltó, J. Mañes, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 251.
[44] R.M. Marcé, F. Borrull, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 273.
[45] I. Rodríguez, M.P. Llompart, R. Cela, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 291.
[46] U.J. Nilsson, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 305.
[47] V. Ruiz-Gutiérrez, M.C. Pérez-Camino, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 321.
[48] M.C. Carson, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 343.
[49] M.J. Telepchak, T.F. August, G. Chaney, Forensic and Clinical Applications
of Solid Phase Extraction, Humana Press Inc., Totowa, 2004.
[50] T. Jagadeshwar Reddy, U.V.R. Vijaya Saradhi, S. Prabhakar, M. Vairamani, J.
Chromatogr. A 1038 (2004) 225.
[51] V.M.A. Häkkinen, J. High Res. Chromatogr. 14 (1991) 811.
[52] G.A. Sega, B.A. Tomkins, W.H. Griest, J. Chromatogr. A 790 (1997) 143.
[53] P.K. Kanaujia, D. Pardasani, A.K. Gupta, D.K. Dubey, J. Chromatogr. A 1139
(2007) 185.
[54] M. Kataoka, N. Tsunoda, H. Ohta, K. Tsuge, H. Takesako, Y. Seto, J.
Chromatogr. A 824 (1998) 211.
[55] M. Noami, M. Kataoka, Y. Seto, Anal. Chem. 74 (2002) 4709.
[56] P.K. Kanaujia, D. Pardasani, A.K. Gupta, R. Kumar, R.K. Srivastava, D.K.
Dubey, J. Chromatogr. A 1161 (2007) 98.
[57] M. Katagi, M. Tatsuno, M. Nishikawa, H. Tsuchihashi, J. Chromatogr. A 833
(1999) 169.
[58] T.P. Logan, J.R. Smith, E.M. Jakubowski, R.E. Nielson, Toxicol. Method. 9
(1999) 275.
136
[59] E.M. Jakubowski, L.S. Heykamp, H.D. Durst, S.A. Thomson, Anal. Lett. 34
(2001) 727.
[60] F.L. Ciner, C.E. McCord, R.W. Plunkett, Jr., M.F. Martin, T.R. Croley, J.
Chromatogr. B 846 (2007) 42.
[61] D.B. Mawhinney, E.I. Hamelin, R. Fraser, S.S. Silva, A.J. Pavlopoulos, R.J.
Kobelski, J. Chromatogr. B 852 (2007) 235.
[62] M.-L. Kuitunen, Sample Preparation for Analysis of Chemicals Related to the
Chemical Weapons Convention in an Off-site Laboratory (Chapter 9) in M.
Mesilaakso, Chemical Weapons Convention Chemical Analysis: Sample
Collection, Preparation and Analytical Methods, John Wiley & Sons Ltd,
West Sussex, England, 2005, p. 163.
[63] J. Pawliszyn, Solid Phase Microextraction Theory and Practice, Wiley-VCH,
New York, 1997.
[64] C.L. Arthur, J. Pawliszyn, Anal. Chem. 62 (1990) 2145.
[65] J. Pawliszyn, Applications of Solid Phase Microextraction, The Royal Society
of Chemistry, Cambridge, 1999.
[66] Supelco Bulletin 925B, SPME Applications Guide, 3rd ed., Sigma-Aldrich,
2001; http://www.sigma-aldrich.com/supelco. (Accessed on 9 January 2008.).
[67] R. Eisert, K. Levsen, J. Chromatogr. A 733 (1996) 143.
[68] K.G. Furton, J. Wang, Y.-L. Hsu, J. Walton, J.R. Almirall, J. Chromatogr. Sci.
38 (2000) 297.
[69] H. Kataoka, H.L. Lord, J. Pawliszyn, J. Chromatogr. A 880 (2000) 35.
[70] J. Beltran, F.J. López, F. Hernández, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 389.
[71] J. Namie nik, B. Zygmunt, A. Jastrzebska, J. Chromatogr. A 885 (2000) 405.
[72] M. de Fátima Alpendurada, J. Chromatogr. A 889 (2000) 3.
137
[73] J.S. Fritz, M. Macka, J. Chromatogr. A 902 (2000) 137.
[74] H. Lord, J. Pawliszyn, J. Chromatogr. A 902 (2000) 17.
[75] S. Ulrich, J. Chromatogr. A 902 (2000) 167.
[76] G.A. Mills, V. Walker, J. Chromatogr. A 902 (2000) 267.
[77] G. Theodoridis, E.H.M. Koster, G.J. de Jong, J. Chromatogr. B 745 (2000) 49.
[78] R.J. Flanagan, P.E. Morgan, E.P. Spencer, R. Whelpton, Biomed. Chromatogr.
20 (2006) 530.
[79] G.F. Ouyang, J. Pawliszyn, Trends Anal. Chem. 25 (2006) 692.
[80] W. Wardencki, J. Cury o, J. Namie nik, J. Biochem. Biophys. Methods 70
(2007) 275. Figure 2-10 reprinted from reference, Copyright (2006), with
permission from Elsevier.
[81] F. M. Musteata, J. Pawliszyn, Trends Anal. Chem. 26 (2007) 36.
[82] Solid Phase Microextraction: Theory and Optimization of Conditions by ©
Sigma-Aldrich Co., Supelco Bulletin 923, 1 (1998); http://www.sigma-
aldrich.com/supelco. (Accessed on 9 January 2008.).
[83] Solid Phase Microextraction Fiber Assemblies, Supelco Product Data Sheet,
Bellefonte, 1999.
[84] Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) SPME Fibers, Supelco Product Information
T407068, Sigma-Aldrich, 2007; http://www.sigma-aldrich.com/supelco.
(Accessed on 9 January 2008.).
[85] R.E. Shirey, R.F. Mindrup, A Systematic Approach for Selecting the
Appropriate SPME Fiber, Supelco Product Information T400156, Sigma-
Aldrich, 1999; http://www.sigma-aldrich.com/supelco. (Accessed on 9
January 2008.).
138
[86] S.A. Scheppers Wercinski, Solid Phase Microextraction A Practical Guide,
Marcel Dekker, Inc, New York, 1999.
[87] A. Alcaraz, S.S. Hulsey, R.E. Whipple, B.D. Andresen, On-Site Sample
Work-up Procedures to Isolate Chemical Warfare Related Compounds Using
Solid-Phase Extraction and Solid-Phase Microextraction Technology in M.
Heyl and R. McGuire, Analytical Chemistry Associated with the Destruction
of Chemical Weapons, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1997, p. 65.
[88] H.-Å. Lakso, W.F. Ng, Anal. Chem. 69 (1997) 1866.
[89] B. Szostek, J.H. Aldstadt, J. Chromatogr. A 807 (1998) 253.
[90] M.T. Sng, W.F. Ng, J. Chromatogr. A 832 (1999) 173.
[91] B.A. Tomkins, G.A. Sega, C.-H. Ho, J. Chromatogr. A 909 (2001) 13.
[92] J.V. Wooten, D.L. Ashley, A.M. Calafat, J. Chromatogr. B 772 (2002) 147.
[93] J.F. Schneider, A.S. Boparai, L.L. Reed, J. Chromatogr. Sci. 39 (2001) 420.
[94] G.L. Kimm, G.L. Hook, P.A. Smith, J. Chromatogr. A 971 (2002) 185.
[95] G.L Hook, G. Kimm, D. Koch, P.B. Savage, B.W. Ding, P.A. Smith, J.
Chromatogr. A 992 (2003) 1.
[96] G.L. Hook, C.J. Lepage, S.I. Miller, P.A. Smith, J. Sep. Sci. 27 (2004) 1017.
[97] S.D. Harvey, D.A. Nelson, B.W. Wright, J.W. Grate, J. Chromatogr. A 954
(2002) 217.
[98] C. J. Brinker, G. W. Scherer, Sol-Gel Science, The Physics and Chemistry of
Sol-Gel Science, Academic Press Inc., Boston, 1990.
[99] L.L. Hench, J.K. West, Chem. Rev. 90 (1990) 33.
[100] E. J. A. Pope, S. Sakka, L. C. Klein, Sol-Gel Science and Technology, The
American Ceramic Society, Westerville, 1995.
[101] M.M. Collinson, Crit. Rev. Anal. Chem. 29 (1999) 289.
139
[102] A. Celzard, J.F. Marêché, J. Chem. Educ. 79 (2002) 854.
[103] L.C. Klein, Sol-Gel Technology for Thin Films, Fibers, Preforms, Electronics,
and Specialty Shapes, Noyes Publications, New Jersey, 1988.
[104] R.W. Jones, Fundamental Principles of Sol-Gel Technology, The Institute of
Metals, London, 1989.
[105] M.M. Collinson, Mikrochim. Acta 129 (1998) 149.
[106] J. D. Wright, N. A. J. M. Sommerdijk, Sol-Gel Materials: Chemistry and
Applications, Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, Amsterdam, 2001.
[107] M.M. Collinson, Trends Anal. Chem. 21 (2002) 30.
[108] J.D. Mackenzie, J. Sol-Gel Sci Tech. 26 (2003) 23.
[109] M. Kato, K. Sakai-Kato, T. Toyo'oka, J. Sep. Sci. 28 (2005) 1893.
[110] A. Kumar, Gaurav, A.K. Malik, D.K. Tewary, B. Singh, Anal. Chim. Acta 610
(2008) 1.
[111] H. Bagheri, A. Es-haghi, M.-R. Rouini, J. Chromatogr. B 818 (2005) 147.
[112] A. Malik, New Polymeric Extraction Materials (Chapter 32) in J. Pawliszyn,
Sampling and Sample Preparation for Field and Laboratory, Elsevier Science
B.V., Amsterdam, 2002, 1023.
[113] S.L. Chong, D.X. Wang, J.D. Hayes, B.W. Wilhite, A. Malik, Anal. Chem. 69
(1997) 3889.
[114] Z.P. Zhou, Z.Y. Wang, C.Y. Wu, W. Zhan, Y. Xu, Anal. Lett. 32 (1999) 1675.
[115] A. Fernandes de Oliveira, C. Berto da Silveira, S. Denofre de Campos, E.
Antônio de Campos, E. Carasek, Chromatographia 61 (2005) 277.
[116] D. Budziak, E. Martendal, E. Carasek, J. Chromatogr. A 1187 (2008) 34.
[117] M.M. Liu, Z.R. Zeng, C.L. Wang, Y.J. Tan, H. Liu, Chromatographia 58
(2003) 597.
140
[118] Z.Y. Wang, C.H. Xiao, C.Y. Wu, H.M. Han, J. Chromatogr. A 893 (2000)
157.
[119] R.G.C. Silva, F. Augusto, J. Chromatogr. A 1072 (2005) 7.
[120] C. Basheer, S. Jegadesan, S. Valiyaveettil, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1087
(2005) 252.
[121] M. Yang, Z.R. Zeng, W.L. Qiu, Y.L. Wang, Chromatographia 56 (2002) 73.
[122] L.S. Cai, J. Xing, L. Dong, C.Y. Wu, J. Chromatogr. A 1015 (2003) 11.
[123] A.L. Lopes, F. Augusto, J. Chromatogr. A 1056 (2004) 13.
[124] L.M. Wei, Q.Y. Ou, J.B. Li, Chin. Chem. Lett. 15 (2004) 1127.
[125] M. Azenha, C. Malheiro, A. Fernando Silva, J. Chromatogr. A 1069 (2005)
163.
[126] C.Z. Dong, Z.R. Zeng, M. Yang, Water Res. 39 (2005) 4204.
[127] Y.L. Hu, Y.L. Fu, G.K. Li, Anal. Chim. Acta 567 (2006) 211.
[128] W.M. Liu, Y. Hu, J.H. Zhao, Y. Xu, Y.F. Guan, J. Chromatogr. A 1102 (2006)
37.
[129] F. Bianchi, F. Bisceglie, M. Careri, S.D. Berardino, A. Mangia, M. Musci, J.
Chromatogr. A 1196-1197 (2008) 15.
[130] J.B. Zeng, J.M. Chen, Z.Q. Lin, W.F. Chen, X. Chen, X.R. Wang, Anal.
Chim. Acta 619 (2008) 59.
[131] H. Bagheri, E. Babanezhad, F. Khalilian, Anal. Chim. Acta 616 (2008) 49.
[132] J.X. Yu, L. Dong, C.Y. Wu, L. Wu, J. Xing, J. Chromatogr. A 978 (2002) 37.
[133] M.M. Liu, Z.R. Zeng, B. Xiong, J. Chromatogr. A 1065 (2005) 287.
[134] M.M. Liu, Z.R. Zeng, H.F. Fang, J. Chromatogr. A 1076 (2005) 16.
[135] M.M. Liu, Z.R. Zeng, Y. Tian, Anal. Chim. Acta 540 (2005) 341.
[136] H.F. Fang, M.M. Liu, Z.R. Zeng, Talanta 68 (2006) 979.
141
[137] Z.R. Zeng, W.L. Qiu, Z.F. Huang, Anal. Chem. 73 (2001) 2429.
[138] Z.R. Zeng, W.L. Qiu, M. Yang, X. Wei, Z.F. Huang, F. Li, J. Chromatogr. A
934 (2001) 51.
[139] L. Yun, Anal. Chim. Acta 486 (2003) 63.
[140] L.S. Cai, Y.Y. Zhao, S.L. Gong, L. Dong, C.Y. Wu, Chromatographia 58
(2003) 615.
[141] D.H. Wang, J. Xing, J.G. Peng, C.Y. Wu, J. Chromatogr. A 1005 (2003) 1.
[142] D.H. Wang, J.G. Peng, J. Xing, C.Y. Wu, Y. Xu, J. Chromatogr. Sci. 42
(2004) 57.
[143] J.X. Yu, C.Y. Wu, J. Xing, J. Chromatogr. A 1036 (2004) 101.
[144] L.S. Cai, S.L. Gong, M. Chen, C.Y. Wu, Anal. Chim. Acta 559 (2006) 89.
[145] X.J. Li, Z.R. Zeng, J.J. Zhou, Anal. Chim. Acta 509 (2004) 27.
[146] X.J. Li, Z.R. Zeng, S.Z. Gao, H.B. Li, J. Chromatogr. A 1023 (2004) 15.
[147] X.J. Li, Z.R. Zeng, J.J. Zhou, S.L. Gong, W. Wang, Y.Y. Chen, J.
Chromatogr. A 1041 (2004) 1.
[148] F.R. Zhou, X.J. Li, Z.R. Zeng, Anal. Chim. Acta 538 (2005) 63.
[149] C.Y. Li, C.F. Wang, B. Guan, Y.Y. Zhang, S.S. Hu, Sens. Actuators, B 107
(2005) 411.
[150] M.M. Liu, Z.R. Zeng, Y. Lei, H.B. Li, J. Sep. Sci. 28 (2005) 2306.
[151] X.J. Li, Z.R. Zeng, M.B. Hu, M. Mao, J. Sep. Sci. 28 (2005) 2489.
[152] J.J. Zhou, Z.R. Zeng, Anal. Chim. Acta 556 (2006) 400.
[153] Y.L. Fu, Y.L. Hu, Y.J. Zheng, G.K. Li, J. Sep. Sci. 29 (2006) 2684.
[154] J.J. Zhou, F.X. Yang, D.M. Cha, Z.R. Zeng, Y. Xu, Talanta 73 (2007) 870.
[155] M.M. Liu, Y. Liu, Z.R. Zeng, T.Y. Peng, J. Chromatogr. A 1108 (2006) 149.
[156] X.J. Li, J. Gao, Z.R. Zeng, Anal. Chim. Acta 590 (2007) 26.
142
[157] M. Azenha, P. Nogueira, A. Fernando-Silva, Anal. Chim. Acta 610 (2008)
205.
[158] K. Farhadi, M. Mamaghanian, R. Maleki, J. Hazard. Mater. 152 (2008) 677.
[159] J.B. Zeng, B.B. Yu, W.F. Chen, Z.J. Lin, L.M. Zhang, Z.Q. Lin, X. Chen,
X.R. Wang, J. Chromatogr. A 1188 (2008) 26.
[160] Figure 2-2 reprinted from J. Steinke, D.C. Sherrington, I.R. Dunkin, Adv.
Polym. Sci. 123 (1995) 81 Figure 9, with kind permission of Springer Science
+ Business Media.
[161] P.K. Owens, L. Karlsson, E.S.M. Lutz, L.I. Andersson, Trends Anal. Chem.
18 (1999) 146.
[162] O. Ramström, Molecular Imprinting Technology - A Way to Make Artificial
Locks for Molecular Keys, 1996; http://www.molecular-
imprinting.org/story/MIT.htm. (Accessed on 10 September 2008.).
[163] R.A. Bartsch, M. Maeda, Molecular and Ionic Recognition with Imprinted
Polymers, American Chemical Society, Oxford University Press, Washington
DC, 1998.
[164] M. Komiyama, T. Takeuchi, T. Mukawa, H. Asanuma, Molecular Imprinting:
From Fundamentals to Applications, Wiley-Vch Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA,
Weinheim, 2003.
[165] M.D. Yan, O. Ranström, Molecularly Imprinted Materials: Science and
Technology, Marcel Dekker, New York, 2005.
[166] Figure 2-4 reprinted from P.A.G. Cormack, K. Mosbach, React. Funct. Polym.
41 (1999) 115, Copyright (1999), with permission from Elsevier.
143
[167] G. Wulff, Biorecognition in Molecularly Imprinted Polymers, in T.T. Ngo,
Molecular Interactions in Bioseparations, Plenum Press, New York, 1993, p.
363.
[168] L.I. Andersson, I.A. Nicholls, K.H. Mosbach, Molecular imprinting - a
versatile technique for the preparation of separation materials of
predetermined selectivity, in G. Street, Highly Selective Separations in
Biotechnology, Blackie Academic & Professional, Glasgow, 1994, p. 207.
[169] S. Vidyasankar, F.H. Arnold, Curr. Opin. Biotech. 6 (1995) 218.
[170] M. Kempe, K. Mosbach, J. Chromatogr. A 694 (1995) 3.
[171] B. Sellergren, Trends Anal. Chem. 16 (1997) 310.
[172] A.G. Mayes, K. Mosbach, Trends Anal. Chem. 16 (1997) 321.
[173] M.J. Whitcombe, C. Alexander, E.N. Vulfson, Trends Food Sci. Technol. 8
(1997) 140.
[174] O. Ramström, R.J. Ansell, Chirality 10 (1998) 195.
[175] K. Mosbach, K. Haupt, J. Mol. Recogn. 11 (1998) 62.
[176] K. Haupt, K. Mosbach, Trends Biotechnol. 16 (1998) 468.
[177] V.T. Remcho, Z.J. Tan, Anal. Chem. (1999) 248A.
[178] T. Takeuchi, J. Haginaka, J. Chromatogr. B 728 (1999) 1.
[179] K. Ensing, T. de Boer, Trends Anal. Chem. 18 (1999) 138.
[180] O. Brüggemann, K. Haupt, L. Ye, E. Yilmaz, K. Mosbach, J. Chromatogr. A
889 (2000) 15.
[181] L.I. Andersson, J. Chromatogr. B 739 (2000) 163.
[182] L.I. Andersson, J. Chromatogr. B 745 (2000) 3.
144
[183] B. Sellergren, Molecularly Imprinted Polymers: Man-Made Mimics of
Antibodies and their Applications in Analytical Chemistry, Elsevier Science
B.V., Amsterdam, 2001.
[184] F. Lanza, B. Sellergren, Adv. Chromatogr. 41 (2001) 169.
[185] K. Haupt, Analyst 126 (2001) 747.
[186] F. Lanza, B. Sellergren, Chromatographia 53 (2001) 599.
[187] A. Martín-Esteban, Fresenius J. Anal. Chem. 370 (2001) 795.
[188] K. Ensing, C. Berggren, R.E. Majors, LCGC 19 (2001) 942.
[189] N. Masqué, R.M. Marcé, F. Borrull, Trends Anal. Chem. 20 (2001) 477.
[190] S.A. Piletsky, S. Alcock, A.P.F. Turner, Trends Biotechnol. 19 (2001) 9.
[191] O. Brüggemann, Adv. Biochem. Eng./Biotechnol. 76 (2002) 161.
[192] K. Haupt, Anal. Chem. (2003) 377A.
[193] V.B. Kanimalla, H. Ju, Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 380 (2004) 587.
[194] J.O. Mahony, K. Nolan, M.R. Smyth, B. Mizaikoff, Anal. Chim. Acta 534
(2005) 31.
[195] V. Pichon, K. Haupt, J. Liq. Chromatogr. Related Technol. 29 (2006) 989.
[196] W.K. Li, S.J. Li, Adv Polym. Sci. 206 (2007) 191.
[197] E.L. Holthoff, F.V. Bright, Anal. Chim. Acta 594 (2007) 147.
[198] D. Kriz, O. Ramström, K. Mosbach, Anal. Chem. 69 (1997) 345A.
[199] F.L. Dickert, O. Hayden, Trends Anal. Chem. 18 (1999) 192.
[200] K. Yano, I. Karube, Trends Anal. Chem. 18 (1999) 199.
[201] K. Haupt, K. Mosbach, Chem. Rev. 100 (2000) 2495.
[202] K.J. Shea, M.J. Roberts, M. Yan, Molecularly Imprinted Materials - Sensors
and Other Devices, The Materials Research Society, PA, 2002.
145
[203] G. Wulff, Molecular Recognition in Polymers Prepared by Imprinting with
Templates, in W.T. Ford, Polymeric Reagents and Catalysts, American
Chemical Society, Washington DC, 1986.
[204] L.I. Andersson, B. Ekberg, K. Mosbach, Bioseparation and Catalysis in
Molecularly Imprinted Polymers, in T.T. Ngo, Molecular Interactions in
Bioseparations, Plenum Press, New York, 1993, p. 383.
[205] G. Wulff, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 34 (1995) 1812.
[206] T. Takeuchi, J. Matsui, Acta Polymer. 47 (1996) 471.
[207] K. Mosbach, O. Ramström, Bio/Technol. 14 (1996) 163.
[208] C. Alexander, L. Davidson, W. Hayes, Tetrahedron 59 (2003) 2025.
[209] G.M. Murray, A.L. Jemkins, A. Bzhelyansky, O.M. Uy, John Hopkins APL
Tech. Dig. 18 (1997) 464.
[210] B.R. Arnold, A.C. Euler, A.L. Jenkins, O.M. Uy, G.M. Murray, John Hopkins
APL Tech. Dig. 20 (1999) 190.
[211] A.L. Jenkins, O.M. Uy, G.M. Murray, Anal. Chem. 71 (1999) 373.
[212] J.W. Boyd, G.P. Cobb, G.E. Southard, G.M. Murray, John Hopkins APL
Tech. Dig. 25 (2004) 44.
[213] G.E. Southard, K.A. Van Houten, E.W. Ott Jr., G.M. Murray, Anal. Chim.
Acta 581 (2007) 202.
[214] A.L. Jenkins, G.M. Murray, Anal. Chem. 68 (1996) 2974.
[215] A.L. Jenkins, S.Y. Bae, Anal. Chim. Acta 542 (2005) 32.
[216] Z.-H. Meng, Q. Liu, Anal. Chim. Acta 435 (2001) 121.
[217] S. Le Moullec, L. Truong, C. Montauban, A. Begos, V. Pichon, B. Bellier, J.
Chromatogr. A 1139 (2007) 171.
146
[218] M. Boopathi, M.V.S. Suryanarayana, A.K. Nigam, P. Pandey, K. Ganesan, B.
Singh, K. Sekhar, Biosens. Bioelectron. 21 (2006) 2339.
[219] K.P. Prathish, K. Prasad, T. Prasada Rao, M.V.S. Suryanarayana, Talanta 71
(2007) 1976.
[220] P. Taranekar, C.Y. Huang, R.C. Advincula, Polymer 47 (2007) 6485.
[221] B.S. Green, A.G. Strikovsky, I. Pergament-Tzomik, R. Arad-Yellin, Y.
Ashani, Polym. Prepr. 46 (2005) 1209.
[222] C. Pinel, P. Loisil, P. Gallezot, Adv. Mater. 9 (1997) 582.
[223] S. Dai, Y.S. Shin, C.E. Barnes, L.M. Toth, Chem. Mater. 9 (1997) 2521.
[224] R. Makote, M. M. Collinson, Chem. Commun. (1998) 425.
[225] R. Makote, M.M. Collinson, Chem. Mater. 10 (1998) 2440.
[226] S.W. Lee, I. Ichinose, T. Kunitake, Langmuir 14 (1998) 2857.
[227] K.J. Ciuffi, H.C. Sacco, J.B. Valim, C.M.C.P. Manso, O.A. Serra, O.R.
Nascimento, E.A.Vidoto, Y. Iamamoto, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 247 (1999) 146.
[228] D.Y. Sasaki, T.M. Alam, Chem. Mater. 12 (2000) 1400.
[229] M.F. Lulka, S.S. Iqbal, J.P. Chambers, E.R. Valdes, R.G. Thompson, M.T.
Goode, J.J. Valdes, Mat. Sci. Eng. C 11 (2000) 101.
[230] A. Katz, M. E. Davis, Nature 403 (2000) 286.
[231] S. Marx, Z. Liron, Chem. Mater. 13 (2001) 3624.
[232] M.K.-P. Leung, C.-F. Chow, M.H.-W. Lam, J. Mater. Chem. 11 (2001) 2985.
[233] F.L. Dickert, K. Halikias, O. Hayden, L. Piu, R. Sikorski, Sens. Actuators, B
76 (2001) 295.
[234] A.L. Graham, C.A. Carlson, P.L. Edmiston, Anal. Chem. 74 (2002) 458.
[235] S. Ini, J.L. Defreese, N. Parra-Vasquez, A. Katz, Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc.
723 (2002) M.2.3.1.
147
[236] C.I. Lin, A.K. Joseph, C.K. Chang, Y.C. Wang, Y.D. Lee, Anal. Chim. Acta,
481 (2003) 175.
[237] G. Shustak, S. Marx, I. Turyan, D. Madler, Electroanalysis 15 (2003) 398.
[238] A. Olwill, H. Hughes, M. O Riordain, P. McLoughlin, Biosens. Bioelectron.
20 (2004) 1045.
[239] J.K. Park, H. Khan, J.W. Lee, Enzyme Microb. Technol. 35 (2004) 688.
[240] H.-H. Yang, S.-Q. Zhang, W. Yang, X.-L. Chen, Z.-X. Zhuang, J.-G. Xu, X.-
R. Wang, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 126 (2004) 4054.
[241] S.L. Gong, Z.J. Yu, L.Z. Meng, L. Hu, Y.B. He, J. App. Polym. Sci. 93 (2004)
637.
[242] A. Fernández-González, R.B. Laíño, M.E. Díaz-García, L. Guardia, A. Viale,
J. Chromatogr. B 804 (2004) 247.
[243] M.E. Díaz-García, R.B. Laíño, Microchim. Acta 149 (2005) 19.
[244] Z.H. Zhang, H.P. Liao, H. Li, L.H. Nie, S.Z. Yao, Anal. Biochem. 336 (2005)
108.
[245] S. Fireman-Shoresh, I. Popov, D. Anvir, S. Marx, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 127
(2005) 2650.
[246] C.Y. Li, C.F. Wang, B. Guan, Y.Y. Zhang, S.S. Hu, Sens. Actuators, B 107
(2005) 411.
[247] R.G.C. Silva, J. Chromatogr. A 1114 (2006) 216.
[248] S. Marx, M. Zaltsman, I. Turyan, D. Mandler, Molecular Imprinting of
Organophosphate Pesticides Detection in Gas and Liquid Phase, poster
presentation at the Second International Workshop on Molecularly Imprinted
Polymers (MIP2002), La Grande Motte, France, 16 19 Sep 2002.
[249] S. Marx, A. Zaltsman, I. Turyan, D. Mandler, Anal. Chem. 76 (2004) 120.
148
[250] W. Cummins, P. Duggan, P. McLoughlin, Anal. Chim. Acta 542 (2005) 52.
[251] M.A. Markowitz, G. Deng, B.P. Gaber, Langmuir 16 (2000) 6148.
[252] Y.X. Zhou. B. Yu, E. Shiu, K. Levon, Anal. Chem. 76 (2004) 2689.
[253] W.M. Mullett, P. Martin, J. Pawliszyn, Anal. Chem. (2001) 2383.
[254] E.H.M. Koster, C. Crescenzi, W. den Hoedt, K. Ensing, G.J. de Jong, Anal.
Chem. 73 (2001) 3140.
[255] F.G. Tamayo, E. Turiel, A. Martín-Esteban, J. Chromatogr. A 1152 (2007) 32.
[256] E. Turiel, J.L. Tadeo, A. Martín-Esteban, Anal. Chem. 79 (2007) 3099.
[257] X.G. Hu, Y.L. Hu, G.K. Li, Anal. Lett. 40 (2007) 645.
[258] X.G. Hu, Y.L. Hu, G.K. Li, J. Chromatogr. A 1147 (2007) 1.
[259] X.G. Hu, J.L. Pan, Y.L. Hu, Y. Huo, G.K. Li, J. Chromatogr. A 1188 (2008)
97.
[260] Dj. Djozan, T. Baheri, M.H. Pournaghi Azar, M. Mahkam, Mater. Manuf.
Processes 22 (2007) 758.
[261] Dj. Djozan, T. Baheri, J. Chromatogr. A 1166 (2007) 16.
[262] B.B. Prasad, K. Tiwari, M. Singh, P.S. Sharma, A.K. Patel, S. Srivastava, J.
Chromatogr. A 1198-1199 (2008) 59.
[263] C. Baskar, Y.H. Lai, F. S. Valiyaveettil, Macromolecules 34 (2001) 6255.
Figure 3-8 reprinted from reference with permission from Reference Citation.
Copyright 2001 American Chemical Society.
[264] F. Fitrilawati, R. Renu, C. Baskar, L.G. Xu, H. S. O. Chan, S. Valiyaveettil, K.
Tamada, W. Knoll, Langmuir 21 (2005) 12146.
[265] R. Renu, P.K. Ajikumar, R.C. Advincula, W. Knoll, S. Valiyaveettil,
Langumir 22 (2006) 9002.
149
[266] M.H. Nurmawati, R. Renu, P.K. Ajikumar, S. Sindhu, F.C. Cheong, C.H.
Sow, S Valiyaveettil, Adv. Funct. Mater. 16 (2006) 2340.
[267] C. Basheer, S. Valiyaveettil, R. Renu, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1033
(2004) 213. Figure 2-9 reprinted from reference, Copyright (2004), with
permission from Elsevier.
[268] C. Basheer, A. Parthiban, A. Jayaraman, H.K. Lee, S. Valiyaveettil, J.
Chromatogr. A 1087 (2005) 274.
[269] C. Basheer, A. Jayaraman, M.K. Kee, S. Valiyaveettil, H.K. Lee, J.
Chromatogr. A 1100 (2005) 137.
[270] C. Basheer, H.J. Wang, A. Jayaraman, S. Valiyaveettil, H.K. Lee, J.
Chromatogr. A 1128 (2006) 267.
[271] C. Basheer, M. Vetrichelvan, S. Valiyaveettil, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A
1139 (2007) 157.
[272] D.C. Wood, J.M. Miller, I. Christ, LCGC North America 22 (2004) 516.
[273] L. Xu, C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1152 (2007) 184.
[274] K. Demeestere, J. Dewulf, B. De Witte, H. Van Langenhove, J. Chromatogr.
A 1153 (2007) 130.
[275] D.A. Lambropoulou, T.A. Albanis, J. Biochem. Biophys. Methods 70 (2007)
195.
[276] H. Lord, J. Pawliszyn, J. Chromatogr. A 902 (2000) 17.
[277] M. Marczak, L. Wolska, W. Chrzanowski, J. Namie nik, Microchim. Acta 155
(2006) 331.
[278] A. Kloskowski, W. Chrzanowski, M. Pilarczyk, J. Namie nik, Crit. Rev. Anal.
Chem. 37 (2007) 15.
[279] Y. He, H.K. Lee, Anal. Chem. 69 (1997) 4634.
150
[280] L.M. Zhao, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 919 (2001) 381.
[281] L.M. Zhao, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 931 (2001) 95.
[282] L. Hou, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 976 (2002) 377.
[283] E. Psillakis, N. Kalogerakis, Trends Anal. Chem. 21 (2002) 53.
[284] H. Shioji, S. Tsunoi, H. Harino, M. Tanaka, J. Chromatogr. A 1048 (2004) 81.
[285] M. A. Jeannot, F. F. Cantwell, Anal. Chem. 69 (1997) 235.
[286] L.S. de Jager, A.R.J. Andrews, Chromatographia 50 (1999) 733.
[287] D.A. Lambropoulou, T.A. Albanis, J. Chromatogr. A 1049 (2004) 17.
[288] E.M. Gioti, D.C. Skalkos, Y.C. Fiamegos, C.D. Stalikas, J. Chromatogr. A
1093 (2005) 1.
[289] L.Y. Zhu, C.B. Tay, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 963 (2002) 231.
[290] K.E. Rasmussen, S. Pedersen-Bjergaard, M. Krogh, H.G. Ugland, T.
Grønhaug, J. Chromatogr. A 873 (2000) 3. Figure 2-11 reprinted from
reference, Copyright (2000), with permission from Elsevier.
[291] H.G. Ugland, M. Krogh, K.E. Rasmussen, J. Chromatogr. B 749 (2000) 85.
[292] T.G. Halvorsen, S. Pedersen-Bjergaard, K.E. Rasmussen, J. Chromatogr. A
909 (2001) 87.
[293] T.G. Halvorsen, S. Pedersen-Bjergaard, K.E. Rasmussen, J. Chromatogr. B
760 (2001) 219.
[294] S. Andersen, T.G. Halvorsen, S. Pedersen-Bjergaard, K.E. Rasmussen, J.
Chromatogr. A 963 (2002) 303.
[295] T.S. Ho, T.G. Halvorsen, S. Pedersen-Bjergaard, K.E. Rasmussen, J.
Chromatogr. A 998 (2003) 61.
[296] E. González-Peñas, C. Leache, M. Viscarret, A. Pérez de Obanos, C. Araguás,
A. López de Cerain, J. Chromatogr. A 1025 (2004) 163.
151
[297] G. Shen, H.K. Lee, Anal. Chem. 74 (2002) 648. Figure 2-12 reprinted from
reference with permission from Reference Citation. Copyright 2002 American
Chemical Society.
[298] L.M. Zhao, H.K. Lee, Anal. Chem. 74 (2002) 2486.
[299] C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, J.P. Obbard, J. Chromatogr. A 968 (2002) 191.
[300] E. Psillakis, N. Kalogerakis, J. Chromatogr. A 999 (2003) 145.
[301] C. Basheer, R. Balasubramanian, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1016 (2003) 11.
[302] E. Psillakis, D. Mantzavinos, N. Kalogerakis, Anal. Chim. Acta 501 (2004) 3.
[303] H.-J. Pan, W.-H. Ho, Anal. Chim. Acta 527 (2004) 61.
[304] C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, J.P. Obbard, J. Chromatogr. A 1022 (2004) 161.
[305] C. Basheer, H.K Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1057 (2004) 163.
[306] D.A. Lambropoulou, T.A. Albanis, J. Chromatogr. A 1061 (2004) 11.
[307] C. Basheer, J.P. Obbard, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1068 (2005) 221.
[308] L.M. Zhao, L.Y. Zhu, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 963 (2002) 239.
[309] L.Y. Zhu, K.H. Ee, L.M. Zhao, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 963 (2002) 335.
[310] L. Hou, X.J. Wen, C.H. Tu, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 979 (2002) 163.
[311] H.G. Ugland, M. Krogh, L. Reubsaet, J. Chromatogr. B 798 (2003) 127.
[312] S. Andesen, T.G. Halvorsen, S. Pedersen-Bjergaard, K.E. Rasmussen, L.
Tanum, H. Refsum, J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 33 (2003) 263.
[313] M. Marlow, R.J. Hurtubise, Anal. Chem. Acta 526 (2004) 41.
[314] J.M. Wu, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1092 (2005) 182.
[315] T. Barri, J.-Å. Jönsson, J. Chromatogr. A 1186 (2008) 16.
[316] T. Hyötyläinen, M.-L. Riekkola, Anal. Chim. Acta 614 (2008) 27.
[317] L. Zhu, L. Zhu, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 924 (2001) 407.
[318] R.-S. Zhao, W.-J. Lao, X.-B. Xu, Talanta 62 (2004) 751.
152
[319] A.Y. Nazarenko, Am. Lab. August (2004) 30.
[320] M. Saraji, J. Chromatogr. A 1062 (2005) 15.
[321] L. Vidal, A. Canals, N. Kalogerakis, E. Psillakis, J. Chromatogr. A 1089
(2005) 25.
[322] C.-L. Ye, Q.-X. Zhou, X.-M. Wang, Anal. Chim. Acta 572 (2006) 165.
[323] C.H. Deng, X.H. Yang, X.M. Zhang, Talanta 68 (2005) 6.
[324] C.-L. Ye, Q.-X. Zhou, X.M. Wang, Anal. Chim. Acta 572 (2006) 165.
[325] G. Shen, H.K. Lee, Anal. Chem. 75 (2003) 98.
[326] J. Zhang, T. Su, H.K. Lee, Anal. Chem. 77 (2005) 1988.
[327] X.M. Jiang, C. Basheer, J. Zhang, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1087 (2005)
289.
[328] L. Hou, H.K. Lee, Anal. Chem. 75 (2003) 2784.
[329] L. Hou, G. Shen, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 985 (2003) 107.
[330] L. Hou, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1038 (2004) 37.
[331] X.M. Jiang, S.Y. Oh, H.K. Lee, Anal. Chem. 77 (2005) 1689.
[332] J.M. Wu, K.H. Ee, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1082 (2005) 121.
[333] S.-P. Huang, S.-D. Huang, J. Chromatogr. A 1135 (2006) 6.
[334] J.-F. Liu, G.-B. Jiang, Y.-G. Chi, Y.-Q. Cai, Q.-X. Zhou, J.-T. Hu, Anal.
Chem. 75 (2003) 5870.
[335] J.-F. Liu, Y.-G. Chi, G.-B. Jiang, C. Tai, J.-F. Peng, J.-T. Hu, J. Chromatogr.
A 1026 (2004) 143.
[336] J.-F. Peng, J.-F. Liu, G.-B. Jiang, C. Tai, M.-J. Huang, J. Chromatogr. A 1072
(2005) 3.
[337] J.-F. Liu, J.-F. Peng, Y-G. Chi, G.-B. Jiang, Talanta 65 (2005) 705.
153
[338] L. Vidal, E. Psillakis, C.E. Domini, N. Grané, F. Marken, A. Canals, Anal.
Chim. Acta 584 (2007) 189.
[339] J.-F. Peng, J.-F. Liu, X.-L. Hu, G.-B. Jiang, J. Chromatogr. A 1139 (2007)
165.
[340] C. Basheer, A.A. Alnedhary, B.S.M. Rao, H.K. Lee, Anal. Chim. Acta 605
(2007) 147.
[341] M.S. Zhang, J.R. Huang, C.L. Wei, B.B. Yu, X.Q. Yang, X. Chen, Talanta 74
(2008) 599.
[342] K.E. Rasmussen, S. Pedersen-Bjergaard, Trends Anal. Chem. 23 (2004) 1.
[343] S. Pedersen-Bjergaard, K.E. Rasmussen, J. Chromatogr. A 1184 (2008) 132.
[344] M. Palit, D. Pardasani, A.K. Gupta, D.K. Dubey, Anal. Chem. 77 (2005) 711.
Figure 2-13 reprinted from reference with permission from Reference Citation.
Copyright 2005 American Chemical Society.
[345] D.K. Dubey, D. Pardasani, A.K. Gupta, M. Palit, P.K. Kanaujia, V. Tak, J.
Chromatogr. A 1107 (2006) 29. Figure 2-14 reprinted from reference,
Copyright (2005), with permission from Elsevier.
[346] D. Pardasani, P.K. Kanaujia, A.K. Gupta, V. Tak, R.K. Shrivastava, D.K.
Dubey, J. Chromatogr. A 1141 (2007) 151. Figure 2-15 reprinted from
reference, Copyright (2006), with permission from Elsevier.
[347] H.S.N. Lee, C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1124 (2006) 91.
[348] H.S.N. Lee, M.T. Sng, C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1148 (2007) 8.
[349] H.S.N. Lee, M.T. Sng, C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1196-1197
(2008) 125.
[350] S. Fireman-Shoresh, D. Avnir, S. Marx, Chem. Mater. 15 (2003) 3607.
[351] S. Marx, A. Zaltsman, Intern. J. Environ. Anal. Chem. 83 (2003) 671.
154
[352] D. Stevenson, Trends Anal. Chem. 18 (1999) 154.
[353] P. Martin, I.D. Wilson, D.E. Morgan, G.R. Jones, K. Jones, Anal. Commun.
34 (1997) 45.
[354] M. Goldman, J.C. Dacre, Rev. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 110 (1989) 75.
[355] W.A. Waters, J.H. Williams, J. Chem. Soc. (1950) 18.
[356] X. Chaudot, A. Tambuté, M. Caude, J. Chromatogr. A 888 (2000) 327.
[357] S. Hanaoka, K. Nomura, T. Wada, J. Chromatogr. A 1101 (2006) 268.
[358] R.M. Black, B. Muir, J. Chromatogr. A 1000 (2003) 253.
[359] W.K. Fowler, D.C. Stewart, D.S. Weinberg, J. Chromatogr. 558 (1991) 235.
[360] J.F. Rubinson, K.A. Rubinson, Contemporary Chemical Analysis, Prentice-
Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1998, p. 590.
[361] P. H. Howard, W.M. Meylan, Handbook of Physical Properties of Organic
Chemicals, CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL, 1997.
[362] Interactive PhysProp Database Demo, Syracuse Research Corporation
PhysProp Database, North Syracuse, NY, 1999;
http://www.syrres.com/esc/physdemo.htm. (Accessed on 28 March 2008.).
[363] SPARC On-Line Calculator, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, release
w4.2.1374-s4.2.1370, 2008; http://ibmlc2.chem.uga.edu/sparc. (Accessed on
28 March, 2008.).
[364] J. Zhang, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1117 (2006) 31.
[365] C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1057 (2004) 163.
[366] M. Kawaguchi, R. Ito, N. Endo, N. Okanouchi, N. Sakui, K. Saito, H.
Nakazawa, J. Chromatogr. A 1110 (2006) 1.
[367] K.-J. Chia, S.-D. Huang, J. Chromatogr. A 1103 (2006) 158.
[368] P.-S. Chen, S.-D. Huang, J. Chromatogr. A 1118 (2006) 161.
155
[369] K.E. Kramer, A.R.J. Andrews, J. Chromatogr. B 760 (2001) 27.
[370] A Leinonen, K. Vuorensola L.-M. Lepola T. Kuuranne, T. Kotiaho, R.A.
Ketola, R. Kostiainen, Anal. Chim. Acta 559 (2006) 166.
[371] K. Blau, J.M. Halket, Handbook of Derivatives for Chromatography, Wiley
Chichester, 1993, p. 51.
[372] G.D. Byrd, R.C. Paule, L.C. Sander, L.T. Sniegoski, E. White, H.T. Bausum,
J. Anal. Toxicol. 16 (1992) 182.
[373] D. Pavel, J. Lagowski, C.J. Lepage, Polymer 47 (2006) 8389.
[374] M. Rezaee, Y. Assadi, M.R. Milani Hosseini, E. Aghaee, F. Ahmadi, S.
Berijani, J. Chromatogr. A 1116 (2006) 1. Figure 5-1 reprinted from reference,
Copyright (2006), with permission from Elsevier.
[375] E. Zeini Jahromi, A. Bidari, Y. Assadi, M.R. Milani Hosseini, M.R. Jamali,
Anal. Chim. Acta 585 (2007) 305.
[376] A.S. Yazdi, N. Razavi, S.R. Yazdinejad, Talanta 75 (2008) 1293.
[377] A.P. Birjandi, A. Bidari, F. Rezaei, M.R. Milani Hosseini, Y. Assadi, J.
Chromatogr. A 1193 (2008) 19.
156
Schedule number
Chemical name CAS number Chemical Structure Molecular formula (Molecular Weight)
1.A.01 O-Alkyl (<C10, incl. cycloalkyl) alkyl (Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr)-phosphonofluoridates
e.g. Sarin: O-Isopropyl methylphosphonofluoridate (GB) 107-44-8
C4H10FO2P (140)
e.g. Soman: O-Pinacolyl methylphosphonofluoridate (GD)
96-64-0
C7H16FO2P (182)
1.A.02 O-Alkyl (<C10, incl. cycloalkyl) N,N-dialkyl (Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr) phosphoramidocyanidates
e.g. Tabun: O-Ethyl N,N-dimethyl phosphoramidocyanidate (GA) 77-81-6
C5H11N2O2P (162)
1.A.03 O-Alkyl (H or <C10, incl. cycloalkyl) S-2-dialkyl(Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr)-aminoethyl alkyl(Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr) phosphonothiolates and corresponding alkylated or protonated salts
e.g. VX: O-Ethyl S-2-diisopropylaminoethyl methyl phosphonothiolate 50782-69-9
C11H26NO2PS (267)
1.A.04 Sulfur mustards: 2-Chloroethylchloromethylsulfide 2625-76-5
C3H6Cl2S (144)
Mustard gas: Bis(2-chloroethyl)sulfide (HD)
505-60-2
C4H8Cl2S (158)
Bis(2-chloroethylthio)methane
63869-13-6
C5H10Cl2S2 (204)
Sesquimustard: 1,2-Bis(2-chloroethylthio)ethane (Q)
3563-36-8
C6H12Cl2S2 (218)
1,3-Bis(2-chloroethylthio)-n-propane
63905-10-2
C7H14Cl2S2 (232)
1,4-Bis(2-chloroethylthio)-n-butane
142868-93-7
ClS
SCl
C8H16Cl2S2 (246)
1,5-Bis(2-chloroethylthio)-n-pentane
142868-94-8
ClS S
Cl
C9H18Cl2S2 (260)
Bis(2-chloroethylthiomethyl)ether
63918-90-1
C6H12Cl2OS2 (234)
O-Mustard: Bis(2-chloroethylthioethyl)ether (T) 63918-89-8
ClS
OS
Cl
C8H16Cl2OS2 (262)
1.A.05 Lewisites: Lewisite 1: 2-Chlorovinyldichloroarsine (L1) 541-25-3
C2H2AsCl3 (206)
Lewisite 2: Bis(2-chlorovinyl)chloroarsine (L2) 40334-69-8
C4H4AsCl3 (232)
Lewisite 3: Tris(2-chlorovinyl)arsine (L3) 40334-70-1
C6H6AsCl3 (258)
P
O
OF
P
O
OF
NP
O
O
N
PO
O
SN
AsCl
Cl
Cl
Appendix 1 List of Schedule 1-3 Chemicals
ClS Cl
ClS
Cl
ClS S
Cl
ClS
SCl
ClS S
Cl
ClS O S
Cl
As
Cl
Cl Cl
AsCl Cl
Cl
157
Schedule number
Chemical name CAS number Chemical Structure Molecular formula (Molecular Weight)
1.A.06 Nitrogen mustards: HN1: Bis(2-chloroethyl)ethylamine 538-07-8
C6H13Cl2N (169)
HN2: Bis(2-chloroethyl)methylamine 51-75-2
C5H11Cl2N (155)
HN3: Tris(2-chloroethyl)amine 555-77-1
C6H12Cl3N (203)
1.A.07 Saxitoxin 35523-89-8
C10H17N7O4 (299)
1.A.08 Ricin 9009-86-3
Structure undefined 60 kDa
1.B.09 Alkyl (Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr) phosphonyldifluorides
e.g. DF: Methylphosphonyldifluoride
676-99-3 CH3F2OP (100)
1.B.10 O-Alkyl (H or <C10, incl. cycloalkyl) O-2-dialkyl(Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr)-aminoethyl alkyl(Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr) phosphonites and corresponding alkylated or protonated salts e.g. QL: O-Ethyl O-2-diisopropylaminoethyl methylphosphonite
57856-11-8 C11H26NO2P (235)
1.B.11 Chlorosarin: O-Isopropyl methylphosphonochloridate 1445-76-7
C4H10ClO2P (156)
1.B.12 Chlorosoman: O-Pinacolyl methylphosphonochloridate 7040-57-5
C7H16ClO2P (198)
2.A.01 Amiton: O,O-Diethyl S-[2-(diethylamino)ethyl] phosphorothiolate and corresponding alkylated or protonated salts 78-53-5
C10H24NO3PS (269)
2.A.02 PFIB: 1,1,3,3,3-Pentafluoro-2-(trifluoromethyl)-1-propene 382-21-8
C4F8 (200)
2.A.03 BZ: 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate 6581-06-2
C21H23NO3 (337)
ClN
Cl
ClN
Cl
ClN
Cl
Cl
P
O
FF
PO O
N
P
O
OCl
P
O
OCl
PO
O
SN
O
F
FF
F
F
FF
F
NO
O
OH
158
Schedule number
Chemical name CAS number Chemical Structure Molecular formula (Molecular Weight)
2.B.04 Chemicals, except for those listed in Schedule 1, containing a phosphorus atom to which is bonded one methyl, ethyl or propyl (normal or iso) group but not further carbon atoms e.g. Methylphosphonyl dichloride 676-97-1
CH3Cl2OP (132)
Dimethyl methylphosphonate 756-79-6
C3H9O3P (124)
Exemption: Fonofos: O-Ethyl S-phenyl ethylphosphonothiolothionate 944-22-9
C10H15OPS2 (246)
2.B.05 N,N-Dialkyl (Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr) phosphoramidic dihalides
2.B.06 Dialkyl (Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr) N,N-dialkyl(Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr)-phosphoramidates
2.B.07 Arsenic trichloride 7784-34-1
AsCl3 (180)
2.B.08 Benzilic acid: 2,2-Diphenyl-2-hydroxyacetic acid 76-93-7
C14H12O3 (228)
2.B.09 Quinuclidin-3-ol 1619-34-7
C7H13NO (127)
2.B.10 N,N-Dialkyl (Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr) aminoethyl-2-chlorides and corresponding protonated salts
2.B.11 N,N-Dialkyl (Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr) aminoethane-2-ols and corresponding protonated salts
Exemptions: N,N-Dimethylaminoethanol and corresponding protonated salts 108-01-0
C4H11NO (89)
Exemptions: N,N-Diethylaminoethanol and corresponding protonated salts 100-37-8
C6H15NO (117)
2.B.12 N,N-Dialkyl (Me, Et, n-Pr or i-Pr) aminoethane-2-thiols and corresponding protonated salts
2.B.13 Thiodiglycol: Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)sulfide 111-48-8
C4H10O2S (122)
P
S
SO
P
O
ClCl
P
O
OO
PN
O
XX
R
R
PN
O
OO
R
R R
R
AsCl
Cl
Cl
OH
O
OH
NOH
ClN
R
R
OHN
R
R
OHN
OHN
SHN
R
R
OHS
OH
159
Schedule number
Chemical name CAS number Chemical Structure Molecular formula (Molecular Weight)
2.B.14 Pinacolyl alcohol: 3,3-Dimethylbutan-2-ol 464-07-3
C6H14O (102)
3.A.01 Phosgene: Carbonyl dichloride 75-44-5
CCl2O (98)
3.A.02 Cyanogen chloride 506-77-4
CClN (61)
3.A.03 Hydrogen cyanide 74-90-8
CHN (27)
3.A.04 Chloropicrin: Trichloronitromethane 76-06-2
CCl3NO2 (163)
3.B.05 Phosphorus oxychloride 10025-87-3
POCl3 (152)
3.B.06 Phosphorus trichloride 7719-12-2
PCl3 (136)
3.B.07 Phosphorus pentachloride 10026-13-8
PCl5 (206)
3.B.08 Trimethyl phosphite 121-45-9
C3H9O3P (124)
3.B.09 Triethyl phosphite 122-52-1
C6H15O3P (166)
3.B.10 Dimethyl phosphite 868-85-9
C2H7O3P (110)
3.B.11 Diethyl phosphite 762-04-9
C4H11O3P (138)
3.B.12 Sulfur monochloride 10025-67-9
S2Cl2 (134)
3.B.13 Sulfur dichloride 10545-99-0
SCl2 (102)
3.B.14 Thionyl chloride 7719-09-7
SOCl2 (118)
3.B.15 Ethyldiethanolamine 139-87-7
C6H15NO2 (133)
3.B.16 Methyldiethanolamine 105-59-9
C5H11NO2 (117)
3.B.17 Triethanolamine 102-71-6
C6H15NO3 (149)
OH
Cl Cl
O
NCl
NH
NO2
Cl
Cl
Cl
PCl
O
ClCl
PCl Cl
Cl
PCl Cl
ClCl
Cl
PO O
O
PO O
O
PO O
O
H
PO O
O
HS
SCl
ClS
ClCl
SClCl
O
OHN
OH
OHN
OH
OHN
OH
OH
160
APPENDIX 2 Total Ion Chromatograms from the MIP-SPE Study
Figure A2-1. Total ion chromatograms of samples upon (a) direct rotary evaporation; (b) SCX; (c) SAX; (d) loading onto PMPA-MIP-SPE; (e) washing of PMPA-MIP-SPE; (f) elution of PMPA-MIP-SPE cartridges.
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
1e+07
1.2e+07
1.4e+07
1.6e+07
1.8e+07
2e+07
2.2e+07
2.4e+07
2.6e+07
2.8e+07
3e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: P5_A.D(d) Absorptivity of
PMPA-MIP-SPE
TP
P
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: P5_W.D(e) Washing of
PMPA-MIP-SPE T
PP
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
5000000
5500000
6000000
6500000
7000000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: SAX2.D
(c) SAX
IMPA
-TM
S
MP
A-T
MS
PMPA
-TM
S
TP
P
CM
PA-T
MS
EM
PA-T
MS
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
1e+07
1.2e+07
1.4e+07
1.6e+07
1.8e+07
2e+07
2.2e+07
2.4e+07
2.6e+07
2.8e+07
3e+07
3.2e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: V2.D(a) Direct
IMPA
-TM
S M
PA
-TM
S
PM
PA-T
MS
TP
P
CM
PA-T
MS
EM
PA
-TM
S
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
1e+07
1.2e+07
1.4e+07
1.6e+07
1.8e+07
2e+07
2.2e+07
2.4e+07
2.6e+07
2.8e+07
3e+07
3.2e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: SCX1.D(b) SCX
IMPA
-TM
S M
PA-T
MS
PMPA
-TM
S
TPP
CM
PA-T
MS
EM
PA-T
MS
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
5000000
5500000
6000000
6500000
7000000
7500000
8000000
8500000
9000000
9500000
1e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: P5_R.D (f) Recovery of
PMPA-MIP-SPE
IMPA
-TM
S M
PA
-TM
S
PMPA
-TM
S
TPP
CM
PA-T
MS
EM
PA-T
MS
161
Figure A2-2. Total ion chromatograms of samples upon (a) direct rotary evaporation; (b) SCX; (c) SAX; (d) loading onto TDG-MIP-SPE; (e) elution of TDG-MIP-SPE cartridges.
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.000
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
6000000
7000000
8000000
9000000
1e+07
1.1e+07
1.2e+07
1.3e+07
1.4e+07
1.5e+07
1.6e+07
1.7e+07
1.8e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: VAP1.D
TP
P
TD
G-T
MS
TD
GS-T
MS
TD
GS
O-T
MS
(a) Direct
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.000
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
6000000
7000000
8000000
9000000
1e+07
1.1e+07
1.2e+07
1.3e+07
1.4e+07
1.5e+07
1.6e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: SCX3.D
TP
P
TD
G-T
MS
TD
GS
-TM
S
TD
GSO
-TM
S
(b) SCX
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.000
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
1600000
1800000
2000000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: SAX4.D
TPP
(c) SAX
6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
5000000
5500000
6000000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: T4_A.D
TPP
TD
G-T
MS
TD
GSO
-TM
S
(d) Absorptivity of
TDG-MIP-SPE
6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
5000000
5500000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: T4_R.D
TPP
TD
G-T
MS
TD
GS
-TM
S
TD
GSO
-TM
S
(e) Recovery of
TDG-MIP-SPE
162
Figure A2-3. Total ion chromatograms of samples upon (a) direct rotary evaporation; (b) SCX; (c) SAX; (d) loading onto TEA-MIP-SPE; (e) elution of TEA-MIP-SPE cartridges.
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
1e+07
1.2e+07
1.4e+07
1.6e+07
1.8e+07
2e+07
2.2e+07
2.4e+07
2.6e+07
2.8e+07
3e+07
3.2e+07
3.4e+07
3.6e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: VAP5.D
TPP
MD
EA
-TM
S
TE
A-T
MS
ED
EA
-TM
S
(a) Direct
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
1e+07
1.2e+07
1.4e+07
1.6e+07
1.8e+07
2e+07
2.2e+07
2.4e+07
2.6e+07
2.8e+07
3e+07
3.2e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: SCX5.D
TPP
(b) SCX
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
1600000
1800000
2000000
2200000
2400000
2600000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: SAX5.D
TPP
(c) SAX
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
800000
900000
1000000
1100000
1200000
1300000
1400000
1500000
1600000
1700000
1800000
1900000
2000000
2100000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: TPEG4_A.D
TPP
MD
EA
-TM
S
TE
A-T
MS
ED
EA
-TM
S
(d) Absorptivity of
TEA-MIP-SPE
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
6000000
7000000
8000000
9000000
1e+07
1.1e+07
1.2e+07
1.3e+07
1.4e+07
1.5e+07
1.6e+07
1.7e+07
1.8e+07
1.9e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: TPEG4_R.D
TPP
MD
EA
-TM
S
TE
A-T
MS
ED
EA
-TM
S
(e) Recovery of
TEA-MIP-SPE
163
Figure A2-4. Total ion chromatograms of samples upon (a) direct rotary evaporation; (b) SCX; (c) SAX; (d) loading onto 3Q-MIP-SPE; (e) elution of 3Q-MIP-SPE cartridges.
7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 13.00 14.00 15.00 16.00 17.00 18.00 19.00
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
1e+07
1.2e+07
1.4e+07
1.6e+07
1.8e+07
2e+07
2.2e+07
2.4e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: VAP5.D
TPP
3Q-T
MS
(a) Direct
(b) SCX
7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 13.00 14.00 15.00 16.00 17.00 18.00 19.00
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
1e+07
1.2e+07
1.4e+07
1.6e+07
1.8e+07
2e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: SCX5.D
TPP
(c) SAX
7.00 8.00 9.00 10.0011.0012.0013.0014.00 15.0016.0017.0018.0019.00
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
800000
900000
1000000
1100000
1200000
1300000
1400000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: SAX5.D
TPP
TPP
3Q-T
MS
7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 13.00 14.00 15.00 16.00 17.00 18.00 19.00
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
1600000
1800000
2000000
2200000
2400000
2600000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: 3Q_DCM_A.D(d) Absorptivity of
3Q-MIP-SPE
TP
P
3Q-T
MS
7.00 8.00 9.00 10.0011.0012.0013.0014.0015.0016.0017.0018.0019.00
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
1e+07
1.2e+07
1.4e+07
1.6e+07
1.8e+07
2e+07
2.2e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: 3Q_DCM_R.D (e) Recovery of
3Q-MIP-SPE
164
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
1e+07
1.2e+07
1.4e+07
1.6e+07
1.8e+07
2e+07
2.2e+07
2.4e+07
2.6e+07
2.8e+07
3e+07
3.2e+07
3.4e+07
3.6e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: VAP5.D
3Q-T
MS
PMPA
-TM
S
TD
G-T
MS
TP
P
TE
A-T
MS
(a) Direct
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
1e+07
1.2e+07
1.4e+07
1.6e+07
1.8e+07
2e+07
2.2e+07
2.4e+07
2.6e+07
2.8e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: SCX5.D
PM
PA
-TM
S
TD
G-T
MS
TPP
(b) SCX
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
1600000
1800000
2000000
2200000
2400000
2600000
2800000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: SAX5.D
PMPA
-TM
S
TPP
(c) SAX
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: MET4_A.D
3Q-T
MS
TD
G-T
MS
TPP
TE
A-T
MS
(d) Absorptivity of
MIP-SPE
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
5000000
5500000
6000000
6500000
7000000
7500000
8000000
8500000
9000000
9500000
1e+07
1.05e+07
1.1e+07
1.15e+07
1.2e+07
1.25e+07
1.3e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: MET4_R.D
3Q-T
MS PM
PA-T
MS
TD
G-T
MS
TPP
TE
A-T
MS
(e) Recovery of MIP-SPE
with EtOH
165
Figure A2-5. Total ion chromatograms of samples upon (a) direct rotary evaporation; (b) SCX; (c) SAX; (d) loading onto MIP-SPE; (e) elution of MIP-SPE cartridges with EtOH; (f) loading onto MIP-SPE; (g) elution of MIP-SPE cartridges with 1% TFA in water; (h) loading onto MIP-SPE; (i) elution of MIP-SPE cartridges with 1% TE in water.
(f) Absorptivity of
MIP-SPE
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
5000000
5500000
6000000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: MTFA4_A.D
3Q-T
MS
TD
G-T
MS
TPP
TE
A-T
MS
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
6000000
7000000
8000000
9000000
1e+07
1.1e+07
1.2e+07
1.3e+07
1.4e+07
1.5e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: MTFA4_R.D
3Q-T
MS
PMP
A-T
MS
TPP
TE
A-T
MS
(g) Recovery of MIP-SPE
with 1% TFA in water
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
3500000
4000000
4500000
5000000
5500000
6000000
6500000
7000000
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: MTE4_A.D3Q-T
MS
TD
G-T
MS
TPP
TE
A-T
MS
(h) Absorptivity of
MIP-SPE
8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
5000000
6000000
7000000
8000000
9000000
1e+07
1.1e+07
1.2e+07
1.3e+07
1.4e+07
Time-->
Abundance
TIC: MTE4_R.D
3Q-T
MS
PM
PA
-TM
S
TD
G-T
MS
TP
P
TE
A-T
MS
(i) Recovery of MIP-SPE with 1% TE in water
166
APPENDIX 3 MASS SPECTRA
Figure A3-1. Mass spectrum of GB (MW: 140) Figure A3-2. Mass spectrum of GD (MW: 182)
Figure A3-3. Mass spectrum of GA (MW: 162) Figure A3-4. Mass spectrum of HD (MW: 158)
Figure A3-5. Mass spectrum of VX (MW: 267) Figure A3-6. Mass spectrum of L3 (MW: 258)
Figure A3-7. Mass spectrum of L2-ET (MW: 258) Figure A3-8. Mass spectrum of L1-ET (MW: 258)
20PPMCWA #81-89 RT: 5.52-5.54 AV: 6 SB: 18 5.34-5.45 , 5.81-5.96 NL: 2.28E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-209.00]
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Re
lativ
e A
bund
ance
99
125
8143
7947 9867 10059 12682
20PPMCWA #792-796 RT: 9.28-9.30 AV: 3 SB: 12 7.28-8.54 , 9.63-10.37 NL: 1.38E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-139.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Re
lativ
e A
bund
ance
12699
8269
41
5783
4381 85
9855 67 12745 12570 8649 79 100
20PPMCWA #1051 RT: 10.65 AV: 1 SB: 9 9.66-10.35 , 11.06-11.49 NL: 1.52E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-165.00]
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Re
lativ
e A
bund
ance
7043
44
133
162106
117
108
4765 92 135119 1479071 93 161 16376 13655 60
20PPMCWA #1235-1250 RT: 11.66-11.70 AV: 8 SB: 32 10.93-11.38 , 12.26-13.38 NL: 3.77E4T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-162.00]
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
109
111
15863
160
45 59 736547 9658 123 162989557 12581 113
20PPMCWA #2515-2522 RT: 18.39-18.41 AV: 4 NL: 2.29E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-267.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
114
72
127
70 79 84 11543 112 13985 1675649 98 25261 144
50ET #1966-1972 RT: 15.49-15.52 AV: 7 NL: 3.72E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-264.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
136
77
145
110
113147
100
51
17187 135 161115101 148 173
150 19775 1248961 163 25849 1348463 17560 151 262187 201
50ET #2093-2097 RT: 16.16-16.18 AV: 3 NL: 3.88E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-264.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
136
145107
258171
113 203
260147
205229
173197119100 23185 12287 16114859
615845 262124 19314994 20775 163 233159 22317563 79 208
50ET #2221-2225 RT: 16.84-16.86 AV: 3 NL: 7.63E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-264.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
107 136148
171
197258
229
143173108
165260
23119910959 15061
1358945 17510058 122 20387 19675 16157 26123362 223
P
O
OF
P
O
OF
NP
O
O
N
ClS
Cl
PO
O
SN
AsCl Cl
Cl
Cl
S
AsCl Cl
S
AsS
167
Figure A3-9. Mass spectrum of L2-PT (MW: 272) Figure A3-10. Mass spectrum of L1-PT (MW: 286)
Figure A3-11. Mass spectrum of L2-BT (MW: 286) Figure A3-12. Mass spectrum of L1-BT (MW: 314)
Figure A3-13. Mass spectrum of L1-EDT (MW: 228) Figure A3-14. Mass spectrum of L2-EDT (MW: 290)
Figure A3-15. Mass spectrum of L1-PDT (MW: 242) Figure A3-16. Mass spectrum of L2-PDT (MW: 304)
50PT #2294-2298 RT: 17.22-17.24 AV: 5 NL: 3.74E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-278.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
43
145
272150
274
107127 203
13685 110 229171
205169
161 23111910184211
17345 185 27659 19794 15951 75 21323361 17576 239 277
50PT #2593-2600 RT: 18.81-18.82 AV: 3 NL: 8.85E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-292.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
176
15043
107
286169 211
143116 185 243
165 288139 213
151 24518745 136101 201 22559 1527558 117 2899473 21419376 246
50BT #2502-2507 RT: 18.33-18.34 AV: 3 NL: 6.35E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-293.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
57
286
145
41288
164147
85107
229141 171110 20316155
23120511947 10084 22558 173135 197 2908959 149 176
19375 232207 25173 291
50BT #2870-2874 RT: 20.27-20.29 AV: 5 NL: 1.72E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-320.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
204
57164
314
107 169225
41257
130 143 316205171 227201 20655 259139 14547 58 197 224 253110101 31789 183 2282218775 279260
50EDT #2791-2794 RT: 19.85-19.86 AV: 2 SB: 17 19.34-19.69 , 20.41-20.56 NL: 9.06E3T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-281.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
61
121
168145
107 123119 167
147169110 161 19659
10045 1369447 173149 198 22863 9253 85 132 20375 184 23115984
50PDT #2467-2474 RT: 18.14-18.17 AV: 7 NL: 6.44E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-248.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
242
107
149
181
244
106
148165
45
142110 132 1537346 100 20718316858 64 75 112 24678 201121 2091848549 17115693
50PDT #2914-2918 RT: 20.50-20.52 AV: 2 NL: 1.42E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-282.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
107
73
106
14541 16747147
133 169109 14975 18113679 1006149 112 203197132 24288 207157 229
Cl
S
AsCl Cl
S
SAs
Cl
S
AsCl Cl
S
SAs
S
S
AsCl
Cl
S
AsCl
SH
AsS
S
ClCl
S
AsCl
SH
50EDT #2212-2218 RT: 16.79-16.82 AV: 7 NL: 7.54E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-234.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
167
165
107 228
230
200
16945 139110 14258 202100 121 13675 1476046 23257 92 12311885 174 193156 204
168
Figure A3-17. Mass spectrum of EMPA-TMS (MW: 196) Figure A3-18. Mass spectrum of EMPA-TBDMS (MW: 238)
Figure A3-19. Mass spectrum of IMPA-TMS (MW: 210) Figure A3-20. Mass spectrum of IMPA-TBDMS (MW: 252)
Figure A3-21. Mass spectrum of MPA-TMS (MW: 240) Figure A3-22. Mass spectrum of MPA-TBDMS (MW: 324)
Figure A3-23. Mass spectrum of nPPA-TMS (MW: 268) Figure A3-24. Mass spectrum of nPPA-TBDMS (MW: 352)
20_10SI #358-369 RT: 7.76-7.77 AV: 2 NL: 2.29E4T: + c EI Full ms [41.00-318.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
153
75
73
45
77 121 1371025949 154 17291 18156 61 79 15186 107 16998 18751 12384 19615570 14493 17313065 119 167
20PPM_10MT #293-300 RT: 11.46-11.47 AV: 2 NL: 4.04E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-310.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
153
181
75
154155 18212173 77 19545 137 151 1835947 107 2239184 179
20_10SI #445 RT: 8.16 AV: 1 NL: 4.39E4T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-209.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
153
7543 151
7745 73 169154
121107 13747 9149 79 19561 15512384 119 1701681067255 9265 139135 197 209179
20PPM_10MT #370-379 RT: 11.81-11.82 AV: 2 NL: 2.87E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-269.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
153
15475
19515512173 2371517741 13745 57 19610784 193
20_10SI #559 RT: 8.69 AV: 1 NL: 7.80E4T: + c EI Full ms [41.00-243.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
225
7773
133
22645135 147
227105 24059 11547 20912191 137 1951511077261 1818958 123 165 210 22892 241196138
20PPM_10MT #1078 RT: 15.10 AV: 1 NL: 3.69E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-326.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
267
268
73
269153135 195
212 225 3091477559 105 251 27012157 181 197 213 226154
REFSTD5 #505-508 RT: 10.95-10.98 AV: 2 NL: 2.22E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-342.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
253
226
254225211
195135 25573 147 237
224209121 228 26845 75 149136 24118111759 165105
20PPM_10MT #1422-1429 RT: 16.72-16.73 AV: 4 NL: 7.50E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-426.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300 350m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
295
296
29773
195135 181 337147 253240198 223 29812175 279 33859 18241 165
P
O
OO
Si
P
O
OO
Si
P
O
OO
Si
P
O
OO
Si
P
O
OO
Si
Si
P
O
OO
Si
Si
P
O
OO
Si
Si
P
O
OO
Si
Si
169
Figure A3-25. Mass spectrum of PMPA-TMS (MW: 252) Figure A3-26. Mass spectrum of PMPA-TBDMS (MW: 294)
Figure A3-27. Mass spectrum of CMPA-TMS (MW: 250) Figure A3-28. Mass spectrum of CMPA-TBDMS (MW: 292)
Figure A3-29. Mass spectrum of BA-TMS (MW: 372) Figure A3-30. Mass spectrum of BA-TBDMS (MW: 456)
Figure A3-31. Mass spectrum of EHES-TMS (MW: 178) Figure A3-32. Mass spectrum of EHES-TBDMS (MW: 220)
20_10SI #1084-1097 RT: 11.13-11.16 AV: 2 NL: 1.99E4T: + c EI Full ms [41.00-237.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
153
41
7516915157 121
19573
4313777 15469 196
5545 16813685 91 107 170 19761 179120 135103 163 237198138 181
20PPM_10MT #990-994 RT: 14.70-14.71 AV: 2 NL: 4.18E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-310.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
153
237154
21175 121 182155 19573 151 23841 57 12377 193137 27969 21285 179 196107
20PPM #649-651 RT: 14.10-14.13 AV: 3 NL: 1.50E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-600.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
153
169
1547515173 155 17013712141 776755 84 221107 179167
20PPMPA #1393-1397 RT: 15.97-15.98 AV: 2 NL: 2.90E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-310.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
153
15475 211
15573 19541 12155 7767 152137 23521284 179107 196
BASI
#1006 RT: 18.53 AV: 1 NL: 2.95E6T: + c EI Full ms [41.00-361.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
255
73
256
147165
239 257 32916645 74 240105 148135 330258179 35722511559 207
BAMT
#1345-1349 RT: 22.74-22.75 AV: 2 NL: 2.47E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-445.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
297
147
73 371
298 399165
372239166 400
299240 37375 133 167 401105 20959 225 241 26877 374300281 325 441
20_10SI #385-396 RT: 7.89-7.91 AV: 2 NL: 6.02E4T: + c EI Full ms [41.00-180.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
73
75
89
16345
11910359
61
47 8858178
43 101 11691877749 72 93 10555 16412062 13386 18070 147135
100_10MT #831-835 RT: 11.60-11.60 AV: 2 NL: 1.21E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-208.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
89163
75
119574161 73
4547 16491
887756 11710193 121 2057253 85 166135115 149
P
O
OO
Si
P
O
OO
Si
O
O
Si
OSi
O
O
Si
OSi
SO
Si
SO
Si
P
O
OO
Si
P
O
OO
Si
170
Figure A3-33. Mass spectrum of TDG-TMS (MW: 266) Figure A3-34. Mass spectrum of TDG-TBDMS (MW: 350)
Figure A3-35. Mass spectrum of TDGS-TMS (MW: 282) Figure A3-36. Mass spectrum of TDGSO-TMS (MW: 298)
Figure A3-37. Mass spectrum of QOH-TMS (MW: 326) Figure A3-38. Mass spectrum of QOH-TBDMS (MW: 410)
Figure A3-39. Mass spectrum of TOH-TMS (MW: 370) Figure A3-40. Mass spectrum of TOH-TBDMS (MW: 454)
20_10SI #1420 RT: 12.69 AV: 1 NL: 3.22E4T: + c EI Full ms [41.00-284.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
73
11675 147
103133
45 59
1171018747 61149 161105 17613566 9349 77 242154120 192106 251165
20PPM_10MT #1805-1809 RT: 18.48-18.48 AV: 2 NL: 2.15E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-338.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300 350m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
147
73
293
87
75 189148119 233
133 29414959101
29516345 66 190103 23413484 21912099 296265165 335
20PPM_T #829-830 RT: 16.33-16.35 AV: 2 NL: 9.30E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-600.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
73
117
75 166267
147135116103 26523845 1335966 268104 14887 16747 122 223177 239136 26489 191
20PPM_T #842-844 RT: 16.49-16.52 AV: 3 NL: 8.18E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-600.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
73
283
117
14775284
28510166 239885945 116 13387 11897 148 193 28647 255240139 167115 13190
20_10SI #2577 RT: 18.07 AV: 1 NL: 2.74E4T: + c EI Full ms [41.00-236.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
73
11775103
45 87 17759 61 130 17686 13447 101 104 149 161 17814749 23621766 210
20PPM_10MT #2799-2801 RT: 23.10-23.11 AV: 2 NL: 3.11E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-400.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
219
73
159 220119
75 22110387 16159 133 14845 207 353195179 222 251
20_10SI #3156 RT: 20.76 AV: 1 NL: 7.50E4T: + c EI Full ms [41.00-282.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
73
103116
75
117
45 1771198759 133101 16347 72 86 104 17814991 174
20PPM_10MT #3325-3331 RT: 25.55-25.57 AV: 2 NL: 1.37E5T: + c EI Full ms [41.00-324.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
219
73
159
22011575
22120787 103 133 16159 8145 134 170 191 222 281 295
SOO
SiSi SOO
SiSi
SOO
SiSi
O
SOO
SiSi
OO
SOS
OSi
Si
SOS
OSi
Si
OS
OS
OSi Si
OS
OS
OSi Si
171
Figure A3-41. Mass spectrum of DIPAE-TMS (MW: 217) Figure A3-42. Mass spectrum of DIPAE-TBDMS (MW: 259)
Figure A3-43. Mass spectrum of MDEA-TMS (MW: 263) Figure A3-44. Mass spectrum of MDEA-TBDMS (MW: 347)
Figure A3-45. Mass spectrum of EDEA-TMS (MW: 277) Figure A3-46. Mass spectrum of EDEA-TBDMS (MW: 361)
Figure A3-47. Mass spectrum of TEA-TMS (MW: 365) Figure A3-48. Mass spectrum of TEA-TBDMS (MW: 491)
20_5NSI #444-449 RT: 9.42-9.43 AV: 3 NL: 1.63E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-372.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
114
72
73 11520243 14470 8659 75 160 21749 94 116100 203128 14561 103
20_5NMT #1038-1040 RT: 12.47-12.48 AV: 2 SB: 5 11.78-12.34 , 12.59-13.26 NL: 3.36E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-281.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
114
72115
7324443 75 14759 70 144 23356 86 259245100 202116 160128
20_5NSI #767-770 RT: 11.46-11.48 AV: 4 NL: 3.15E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-267.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
160
73
161147
11716275 2485942 11684 13045 101 14870 86 263144
20_5NMT #2074-2080 RT: 16.85-16.87 AV: 6 NL: 5.95E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-351.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300 350m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
202
203
73
204 290147130 3327559 116101 159 29142 84 200 205
20_5NSI #876-880 RT: 12.15-12.16 AV: 2 NL: 1.84E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-281.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
174
73
175
147117 1767559 130 26284 10145 144 24486 14811672 172 277188
20_5NMT #2193-2200 RT: 17.36-17.38 AV: 4 NL: 5.84E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-365.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300 350m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
216
217
73
218147130 304 34659 75 11510157 15989 219214
20_5NSI #1424-1428 RT: 15.64-15.66 AV: 3 NL: 4.71E6T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-369.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300 350m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
262
26373
264350130 147117
7559 351101 174 26545 14886
NO
Si NO
Si
NO O
Si Si NO O
Si Si
NO O
Si Si NO O
Si Si
NO O
Si Si
OSi
50PPM_1 #1820 RT: 20.18 AV: 1 SB: 1 20.00-20.13 , 20.23-20.25 NL: 1.25E5T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-537.00]
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
346
73
347
348144
57 13075 101 35522141 434281115 295 476186 313172 267 344 401
NO O
Si Si
OSi
172
Figure A3-49. Mass spectrum of 3Q (MW: 127) Figure A3-50. Mass spectrum of 3Q-TMS (MW: 199)
Figure A3-51. Mass spectrum of 3Q-TBDMS (MW: 241)
20_5NMT #460-467 RT: 10.03-10.06 AV: 7 SB: 53 9.52-9.87 , 10.19-10.26 NL: 8.21E4T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-207.00]
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
42
127
58
43 98
7082
57 11255 12644 11069 9683 9971
8473 1285467 8681 108947952 65 11345 59 10093
20_5NSI #677-680 RT: 10.90-10.91 AV: 2 SB: 8 10.25-10.81 , 10.97-11.04 NL: 8.94E4T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-207.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
73
19912996
184
198110101 14542
75 15617014270 116 13010844
55 20082 15712759 83 18568 9453 14180 146 158126 20161 172 18692 147 1598752 140
100_5NMT #1407-1411 RT: 14.03-14.05 AV: 4 NL: 7.75E4T: + c EI Full ms [40.00-245.00]
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240m/z
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rel
ativ
e A
bund
ance
110184
96
73
18575
241
41 101
8449 141 1561278659 157108 226111
13155 70 81 142 186170 240115 24217114368 21319812694 158 227 243132 172144 214
N
OH N
OSi
N
OSi
173
APPENDIX 4 LIST OF POSTER PRESENTATIONS AND
PUBLICATIONS
Poster Presentations
[1] N.H.S. Lee, M.T. Sng, C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, Sol-Gel Molecularly Imprinted
Polymers for Solid Phase Extraction, 4th Singapore International Symposium
on Protection Against Toxic Substances (4th SISPAT) in association with
Chemical and Biological Medical Treatment Series, 6-10 December 2004,
Shangri-La Hotel, Singapore.
[2] N.H.S. Lee, M.T. Sng, C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, Hollow-Fibre Protected Liquid-
Phase Microextraction for the Analysis of Chemical Warfare Agents and
Degradation Products, Workshop on the Analysis related to Chemical
Weapons to Mark the Tenth Anniversary of the Entry into Force of the
Convention, 5 - 7 September 2007, Gustavelund Conference Hotel, Tuusula,
Finland.
[3] N.H.S. Lee, M.T. Sng, C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, Hollow-Fibre Protected Liquid-
Phase Microextraction for the Determination of Basic Degradation Products of
Chemical Warfare Agents, SICC-5: Singapore International Chemistry
Conference 5 & APCE 2007: 7th Asia-Pacific International Symposium on
Microscale Separation and Analysis, 16-19 December 2007, Singapore
International Convention & Exhibition Centre (Suntec Singapore), Singapore.
Publications
[1] H.S.N. Lee, C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1124 (2006) 91.
[2] H.S.N. Lee, M.T. Sng, C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1148 (2007) 8.
[3] H.S.N. Lee, M.T. Sng, C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, J. Chromatogr. A 1196-1197
(2008) 125.
This document was created with Win2PDF available at http://www.win2pdf.com.The unregistered version of Win2PDF is for evaluation or non-commercial use only.This page will not be added after purchasing Win2PDF.