Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 408, Issue 19, pp 5189–5198 | Cite as

Rapid detection of hazardous chemicals in textiles by direct analysis in real-time mass spectrometry (DART-MS)

  • Borbála Antal
  • Ákos Kuki
  • Lajos Nagy
  • Tibor Nagy
  • Miklós Zsuga
  • Sándor KékiEmail author
Research Paper


Residues of chemicals on clothing products were examined by direct analysis in real-time (DART) mass spectrometry. Our experiments have revealed the presence of more than 40 chemicals in 15 different clothing items. The identification was confirmed by DART tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) experiments for 14 compounds. The most commonly detected hazardous substances were nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEs), phthalic acid esters (phthalates), amines released by azo dyes, and quinoline derivates. DART-MS was able to detect NPEs on the skin of the person wearing the clothing item contaminated by NPE residuals. Automated data acquisition and processing method was developed and tested for the recognition of NPE residues thereby reducing the analysis time.


Direct analysis in real-time tandem mass spectrometry (DART-MS; DART-MS/MS) Hazardous substances Textile articles Nonylphenol ethoxylate (NPE) Phthalic acid ester (phthalate) Quinolines 



This work was financially supported by the grant K-101850 given by OTKA (National Found for Scientific Research Development, Hungary) and the grant TÁMOP-4.2.2.A-11/1/KONV-2012-0036 supported by the European Union and co-funded by the European Social Fund.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

216_2016_9603_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (538 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 537 kb)


  1. 1.
    Regulation (EC) no. 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council. Off J Eur Union. 2006; L396.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brigden K, Hetherington S, Wang M, Santillo D, Johnston P. Hazardous chemicals in branded luxury textile products on sale during 2013. Greenpeace Research Laboratories Technical Report 01, 2014. Accessed 29 Jan 2016.
  3. 3.
    Swedish Chemicals Agency. Chemicals in textiles—risks to human health and the environment report from a government assignment. Stockholm: Swedish Chemicals Agency. Arkitektkopia; 2014.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cioni F, Bartolucci G, Pieraccini G, Meloni S, Moneti G. Development of a solid phase microextraction method for detection of the use of banned azo dyes in coloured textiles and leather. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom. 1999;13:1833–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Luongo G, Thorsén G, Östman C. Quinolines in clothing textiles—a source of human exposure and wastewater pollution? Anal Bioanal Chem. 2014;406:2747–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang SX, Chai XS, Huang BX, Mai XX. A robust method for determining water-extractable alkylphenol polyethoxylates in textile products by reaction-based headspace gas chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2015;1406:94–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lv G, Wang L, Liu S, Li S. Determination of perfluorinated compounds in packaging materials and textiles using pressurized liquid extraction with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Anal Sci. 2009;25:425–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cody RB, Laramee JA, Durst HD. Versatile new ion source for the analysis of materials in open air under ambient conditions. Anal Chem. 2005;77:2297–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lam P-l, Kan C-w, Yuen MC-w, Cheung S-y, Gambari R, Lam K-h, et al. Studies on quinoline type dyes and their characterisation studies on acrylic fabric. Color Technol. 2012;128:192–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horai H, Arita M, Kanaya S, Nihei Y, Ikeda T, Suwa K, et al. MassBank: a public repository for sharing mass spectral data for life sciences. J Mass Spectrom. 2010;45:703–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    mzCloud.orgTM, Advanced Mass Spectral Database, HighChem LLC, Slovakia Accessed 29 Jan 2016.
  12. 12.
    Mohsin SB, Woodman M. Quantitation of trace level emerging contaminants in water using online SPE with LC/MS/MS. Agilent Technologies Application Note 5991-2731EN, 2013.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Porter DJ. Analysis of oil resins using electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies University of Ottawa. Ottawa: National Library of Canada; 2003Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Toxicological review of quinoline, EPA/635/R-01/005. Washington: US Environmental Protection Agency; 2001.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stellman JM, editor. Encyclopaedia of occupational health and safety: guides, indexes, directory. 4th ed. Geneva: International Labour Office; 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Libralato G, Volpi Ghirardini A, Avezzù F. Seawater ecotoxicity of monoethanolamine, diethanolamine and triethanolamine. J Hazard Mater. 2009;176:535–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Anastassiades M, Kolberg DI, Eichhorn E, Benkenstein A, Lukačević S, Mack D, et al. Quick method for the analysis of numerous highly polar pesticides in foods of plant origin via LC-MS/MS involving simultaneous extraction with methanol (QuPPe-Method). Stuttgart: EU Reference Laboratory for pesticides requiring Single Residue Methods (EURL-SRM); 2015. Accessed 29 Jan 2016.
  18. 18.
    European Communities. Directive 2005/84/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. Off J Eur Union. 2005;L 344:40.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    110th United States Congress. Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA). 2008. Accessed 29 Jan 2016.
  20. 20.
    Kuki Á, Nagy L, Zsuga M, Kéki S. Fast identification of phthalic acid esters in poly(vinyl chloride) samples by direct analysis in real time (DART) tandem mass spectrometry. Int J Mass Spectrom. 2011;303:225–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    TenEyck MC, Markee TP. Toxicity of nonylphenol, nonylphenol monoethoxylate, and nonylphenol diethoxylate and mixtures of these compounds to Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow) and Ceriodaphnia dubia. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2007;53:599–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Soares A, Guieysse B, Jefferson B, Cartmell E, Lestera JN. Nonylphenol in the environment: a critical review on occurrence, fate, toxicity and treatment in wastewaters. Environ Int. 2008;34:1033–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Loyo-Rosales JE, Rice CP, Torrents A. Octyl and nonylphenol ethoxylates and carboxylates in wastewater and sediments by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. Chemosphere. 2007;68:2118–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Johnson V, Patel SJ, Shah D, Patel KA, Mehta MH. ε-caprolactam waste liquor degradation by various yeasts. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 1994;10:524–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk to humans. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Accessed 29 Jan 2016.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Borbála Antal
    • 1
  • Ákos Kuki
    • 1
  • Lajos Nagy
    • 1
  • Tibor Nagy
    • 1
  • Miklós Zsuga
    • 1
  • Sándor Kéki
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Applied ChemistryUniversity of DebrecenDebrecenHungary

Personalised recommendations