Download PDF

Chinese Science Bulletin

, Volume 58, Issue 2, pp 150–161 | Cite as

Recent advances in speciation analysis of mercury, arsenic and selenium

Open Access
Review Special Issue Toxic Metal Pollution Progress of Projects Supported by NSFC
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Mercury (Hg), arsenic (As) and selenium (Se) are ubiquitous in the environment and exist in a variety of species, which have great influence on their transport, bioaccumulation and toxicity. This review presents the recent research progress in speciation analysis of Hg, As, and Se, with emphasis on enhanced cold vapor generation as interface for liquid chromatography and atomic spectrometry, speciation of volatile species in gas phase, and isotope dilution technique to improve the precision and accuracy of speciation. Hyphenated techniques to characterize the complexes of Hg and As with phytochelatins and chromatographic separation coupled with multi-collector-inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry to measure species-specific isotopic ratios, are also briefly discussed.

Keywords

speciation mercury arsenic selenium chromatographic separation atomic spectrometry photonic crystal slab air-slot nanocavity mode gap quality factor 
Download to read the full article text

References

  1. 1.
    Boening D W. Ecological effects, transport, and fate of mercury: A general review. Chemosphere, 2000, 40: 1335–1351Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mandal B K, Suzuki K T. Arsenic round the world: A review. Talanta, 2002, 58: 201–235Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lenz M, Lens P N L. The essential toxin: The changing perception of selenium in environmental sciences. Sci Total Environ, 2009, 407: 3620–3633Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Compeau G C, Bartha R. Sulfate-reducing bacteria-principal methylators of mercury in anoxic estuarine sediment. Appl Environ Microbiol, 1985, 50: 498–502Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fleming E J, Mack E E, Green P G, et al. Mercury methylation from unexpected sources: Molybdate-inhibited freshwater sediments and an iron-reducing bacterium. Appl Environ Microbiol, 2006, 72: 457–464Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li Y B, Yin Y G, Liu G L, et al. Advances in speciation analysis of mercury in the environment. In: Liu G L, Cai Y, O’driscoll N. Environemntal Chemistry and Toxicology of Mercury. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2012. 15–58Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Horvat M, Liang L, Bloom N S. Comparison of distillation with other current isolation methods for the determination of methyl mercury-compounds in low-level environmental-samples. 2. Water. Anal Chim Acta, 1993, 282: 153–168Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Demuth N, Heumann K G. Validation of methylmercury determinations in aquatic systems by alkyl derivatization methods for GC analysis using ICP-IDMS. Anal Chem, 2001, 73: 4020–4027Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huang J H. Artifact formation of methyl- and ethyl-mercury compounds from inorganic mercury during derivatization using sodium tetra(n-propyl)borate. Anal Chim Acta, 2005, 532: 113–120Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mao Y X, Liu G L, Meichel G, et al. Simultaneous speciation of monomethylmercury and monoethylmercury by aqueous phenylation and purge-and-trap preconcentration followed by atomic spectrometry detection. Anal Chem, 2008, 80: 7163–7168Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mao Y X, Yin Y G, Li Y B, et al. Occurrence of monoethylmercury in the Florida Everglades: Identification and verification. Environ Pollut, 2010, 158: 3378–3384Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cai Y, Jaffe R, Jones R. Ethylmercury in the soils and sediments of the Florida Everglades. Environ Sci Technol, 1997, 31: 302–305Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gong Z L, Lu X F, Ma M S, et al. Arsenic speciation analysis. Talanta, 2002, 58: 77–96Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    McSheehy S, Szpunar J, Morabito R, et al. The speciation of arsenic in biological tissues and the certification of reference materials for quality control. Trac-Trends Anal Chem, 2003, 22: 191–209Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Francesconi K A, Kuehnelt D. Determination of arsenic species: A critical review of methods and applications, 2000–2003. Analyst, 2004, 129: 373–395Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Radke B, Jewell L, Namiesnik J. Analysis of arsenic species in environmental samples. Crit Rev Anal Chem, 2012, 42: 162–183Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Komorowicz I, Baralkiewicz D. Arsenic and its speciation in water samples by high performance liquid chromatography inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry-last decade review. Talanta, 2011, 84: 247–261Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Niegel C, Matysik F M. Analytical methods for the determination of arsenosugars—A review of recent trends and developments. Anal Chim Acta, 2010, 657: 83–99Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Garcia-Salgado S, Raber G, Raml R, et al. Arsenosugar phospholipids and arsenic hydrocarbons in two species of brown macroalgae. Environ Chem, 2012, 9: 63–66Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Taleshi M S, Edmonds J S, Goessler W, et al. Arsenic-containing lipids are natural constituents of sashimi tuna. Environ Sci Technol, 2010, 44: 1478–1483Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rumpler A, Edmonds J S, Katsu M, et al. Arsenic-containing long-chain fatty acids in cod-liver oil: A result of biosynthetic infidelity? Angew Chem Int Ed, 2008, 47: 2665–2667Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Taleshi M S, Jensen K B, Raber G, et al. Arsenic-containing hydrocarbons: Natural compounds in oil from the fish capelin, Mallotus villosus. Chem Commun, 2008, 4706-4707Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Amayo K O, Petursdottir A, Newcombe C, et al. Identification and quantification of arsenolipids using reversed-phase HPLC coupled simultaneously to high-resolution ICPMS and high-resolution electrospray MS without species-specific standards. Anal Chem, 2011, 83: 3589–3595Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hanaoka K, Goessler W, Yoshida K, et al. Arsenocholine- and dimethylated arsenic-containing lipids in starspotted shark Mustelus manazo. Appl Organomet Chem, 1999, 13: 765–770Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schmeisser E, Goessler W, Francesconi K A. Human metabolism of arsenolipids present in cod liver. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2006, 385: 367–376Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Arroyo-Abad U, Mattusch J, Moeder M, et al. Identification of roxarsone metabolites produced in the system: Soil-chlorinated water-light by using HPLC-ICP-MS/ESI-MS, HPLC-ESI-MS/MS and high resolution mass spectrometry (ESI-TOF-MS). J Anal At Spectrom, 2011, 26: 171–177Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jackson B P, Bertsch P M. Determination of arsenic speciation in poultry wastes by IC-ICP-MS. Environ Sci Technol, 2001, 35: 4868–4873Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nachman K E, Raber G, Francesconi K A, et al. Arsenic species in poultry feather meal. Sci Total Environ, 2012, 417: 183–188Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chen Y W, Belzile N. High performance liquid chromatography coupled to atomic fluorescence spectrometry for the speciation of the hydride and chemical vapour-forming elements As, Se, Sb and Hg: A critical review. Anal Chim Acta, 2010, 671: 9–26Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Halko R, Neurocny T, Hutta M. Combination of liquid chromatography and atomic spectrometry for speciation of elements. Chem Listy, 2010, 104: 223–231Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sanchez-Rodas D, Corns W T, Chen B, et al. Atomic fluorescence spectrometry: A suitable detection technique in speciation studies for arsenic, selenium, antimony and mercury. J Anal At Spectrom, 2010, 25: 933–946Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pedrero Z, Madrid Y. Novel approaches for selenium speciation in foodstuffs and biological specimens: A review. Anal Chim Acta, 2009, 634: 135–152Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Morales R, Lopez-Sanchez J F, Rubio R. Selenium speciation by capillary electrophoresis. Trac-Trends Anal Chem, 2008, 27: 183–189Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Anan Y, Ohbo A, Tani Y, et al. Distribution and metabolism of selenite and selenomethionine in the Japanese quail. Metallomics, 2012, 4: 457–462Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Anan Y, Ishiwata K, Suzuki N, et al. Speciation and identification of low molecular weight selenium compounds in the liver of sea turtles. J Anal At Spectrom, 2011, 26: 80–85Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ogra Y, Ishiwata K, Takayama H, et al. Identification of a novel selenium metabolite, se-methyl-n-acetylselenohexosamine, in rat urine by high-performance liquid chromatography-inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and -electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr B, 2002, 767: 301–312Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lu Y, Pergantis S A. Selenosugar determination in porcine liver using multidimensional HPLC with atomic and molecular mass spectrometry. Metallomics, 2009, 1: 346–352Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gammelgaard B, Madsen K G, Bjerrum J, et al. Separation, purification and identification of the major selenium metabolite from human urine by multi-dimensional HPLC-ICP-MS and APCI-MS. J Anal At Spectrom, 2003, 18: 65–70Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kobayashi Y, Ogra Y, Ishiwata K, et al. Selenosugars are key and urinary metabolites for selenium excretion within the required to low-toxic range. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA, 2002, 99: 15932–15936Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kuehnelt D, Kienzl N, Traar P, et al. Selenium metabolites in human urine after ingestion of selenite, L-selenomethionine, or DL-selenomethionine: A quantitative case study by HPLC/ICPMS. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2005, 383: 235–246Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Suzuki K T. Metabolomics of selenium: Se metabolites based on speciation studies. J Health Sci, 2005, 51: 107–114Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ogra Y, Hatano T, Ohmichi M, et al. Oxidative production of monomethylated selenium from the major urinary selenometabolite, selenosugar. J Anal At Spectrom, 2003, 18: 1252–1255Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Juresa D, Darrouzes J, Kienzl N, et al. An HPLC/ICPMS study of the stability of selenosugars in human urine: Implications for quantification, sample handling, and storage. J Anal At Spectrom, 2006, 21: 684–690Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Aureli F, Ouerdane L, Katarzyna B, et al. Identification of selenosugars and other low-molecular weight selenium metabolites in high-selenium cereal crops. Metallomics, 2012, doi: 10.1039/ C2MT20085FGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Jonsson S, Skyllberg U, Bjorn E. Substantial emission of gaseous monomethylmercury from contaminated water-sediment microcosms. Environ Sci Technol, 2010, 44: 278–283Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sommar J, Feng X B, Lindqvist O. Speciation of volatile mercury species present in digester and deposit gases. Appl Organomet Chem, 1999, 13: 441–445Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lee Y H, Wangberg I, Munthe J. Sampling and analysis of gas-phase methylmercury in ambient air. Sci Total Environ, 2003, 304: 107–113Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Pantsar-Kallio M, Korpela A. Analysis of gaseous arsenic species and stability studies of arsine and trimethylarsine by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Anal Chim Acta, 2000, 410: 65–70Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Diaz-Bone R A, Hollmann M, Wuerfel O, et al. Analysis of volatile arsenic compounds formed by intestinal microorganisms: Rapid identification of new metabolic products by use of simultaneous EI-MS and ICP-MS detection after gas chromatographic separation. J Anal At Spectrom, 2009, 24: 808–814Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Planer-Friedrich B, Lehr C, Matschullat J, et al. Speciation of volatile arsenic at geothermal features in yellowstone national park. Geochim Cosmochim Acta, 2006, 70: 2480–2491Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Yuan C G, Lu X F, Qin J, et al. Volatile arsenic species released from escherichia coli expressing the AsIII S-adenosylmethionine methyltransferase gene. Environ Sci Technol, 2008, 42: 3201–3206Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Yuan C G, Zhang K G, Wang Z H, et al. Rapid analysis of volatile arsenic species released from lake sediment by a packed cotton column coupled with atomic fluorescence spectrometry. J Anal At Spectrom, 2010, 25: 1605–1611Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Mestrot A, Uroic M K, Plantevin T, et al. Quantitative and qualitative trapping of arsines deployed to assess loss of volatile arsenic from paddy soil. Environ Sci Technol, 2009, 43: 8270–8275Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Gabel-Jensen C, Lunoe K, Gammelgaard B. Formation of methylselenol, dimethylselenide and dimethyldiselenide in in vitro metabolism models determined by headspace GC-MS. Metallomics, 2010, 2: 167–173Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Diaz-Bone R A, Van de Wiele T R. Biovolatilization of metal(loid)s by intestinal microorganisms in the simulator of the human intestinal microbial ecosystem. Environ Sci Technol, 2009, 43: 5249–5256Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Pinel-Raffaitin R, Peckheyran C, Amouroux D. New volatile selenium and tellurium species in fermentation gases produced by composting duck manure. Atmos Environ, 2008, 42: 7786–7794Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Kremer D, Ilgen G, Feldmann J. GC-ICP-MS determination of di methylselenide in human breath after ingestion of Se-77-enriched selenite: Monitoring of in-vivo methylation of selenium. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2005, 383: 509–515Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Winkel L, Feldmann J, Meharg A A. Quantitative and qualitative trapping of volatile methylated selenium species entrained through nitric acid. Environ Sci Technol, 2010, 44: 382–387Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Jakob R, Roth A, Haas K, et al. Atmospheric stability of arsines and the determination of their oxidative products in atmospheric aerosols (PM10): Evidence of the widespread phenomena of biovolatilization of arsenic. J Environ Monit, 2010, 12: 409–416Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Uroic M K, Krupp E M, Johnson C, et al. Chemotrapping-atomic fluorescence spectrometric method as a field method for volatile arsenic in natural gas. J Environ Monit, 2009, 11: 2222–2230Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Krupp E M, Johnson C, Rechsteiner C, et al. Investigation into the determination of trimethylarsine in natural gas and its partitioning into gas and condensate phases using (cryotrapping)/gas chromatography coupled to inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and liquid/solid sorption techniques. Spectrochim Acta B, 2007, 62: 970–977Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Lindberg S E, Southworth G, Prestbo E M, et al. Gaseous methyl- and inorganic mercury in landfill gas from landfills in Florida, Minnesota, Delaware, and California. Atmos Environ, 2005, 39: 249–258Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Pecheyran C, Quetel C R, Lecuyer F M M, et al. Simultaneous determination of volatile metal (Pb, No, Sn, In, Ga) and nonmetal species (Se, P, As) in different atmospheres by cryofocusing and detection by ICPMS. Anal Chem, 1998, 70: 2639–2645Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Ghasemi E, Sillanpaa M, Najafi N M. Headspace hollow fiber protected liquid-phase microextraction combined with gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy for speciation and determination of volatile organic compounds of selenium in environmental and biological samples. J Chromatogr A, 2011, 1218: 380–386Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Campillo N, Penalver R, Lopez-Garcia I, et al. Headspace solid-phase microextraction for the determination of volatile organic sulphur and selenium compounds in beers, wines and spirits using gas chromatography and atomic emission detection. J Chromatogr A, 2009, 1216: 6735–6740Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Shah M, Meija J, Caruso J A. Relative mass defect filtering of high-resolution mass spectra for exploring minor selenium volatiles in selenium-enriched green onions. Anal Chem, 2007, 79: 846–853Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Landaluze J S, Dietz C, Madrid Y, et al. Volatile organoselenium monitoring in production and gastric digestion processes of selenized yeast by solid-phase microextraction-multicapillary gas chromatography coupled microwave-induced plasma atomic emission spectrometry. Appl Organomet Chem, 2004, 18: 606–613Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Meija J, Bryson J M, Vonderheide A P, et al. Studies of selenium-containing volatiles in roasted coffee. J Agric Food Chem, 2003, 51: 5116–5122Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Meija J, Montes-Bayon M, Le Duc D L, et al. Simultaneous monitoring of volatile selenium and sulfur species from Se accumulating plants (wild type and genetically modified) by GC/MS and GC/ ICPMS using solid-phase microextraction for sample introduction. Anal Chem, 2002, 74: 5837–5844Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Chen L Q, Yang L M, Wang Q Q. In vivo phytochelatins and Hg-phytochelatin complexes in Hg-stressed Brassica chinensis L. Metallomics, 2009, 1: 101–106Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Carrasco-Gil S, Alvarez-Fernandez A, Sobrino-Plata J, et al. Complexation of Hg with phytochelatins is important for plant Hg tolerance. Plant Cell Environ, 2011, 34: 778–791Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Krupp E M, Mestrot A, Wielgus J, et al. The molecular form of mercury in biota: Identification of novel mercury peptide complexes in plants. Chem Commun, 2009, 4257-4259Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Bluemlein K, Raab A, Meharg A A, et al. Can we trust mass spectrometry for determination of arsenic peptides in plants: Comparison of LC-ICP-MS and LC-ES-MS/ICP-MS with XANES/ EXAFS in analysis of Thunbergia alata. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2008, 390: 1739–1751Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Bluemlein K, Raab A, Feldmann J. Stability of arsenic peptides in plant extracts: Off-line versus on-line parallel elemental and molecular mass spectrometric detection for liquid chromatographic separation. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2009, 393: 357–366Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Bluemlein K, Krupp E M, Feldmann J. Advantages and limitations of a desolvation system coupled online to HPLC-ICP-qMS/ES-MS for the quantitative determination of sulfur and arsenic in arseno-peptide complexes. J Anal At Spectrom, 2009, 24: 108–113Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Liu W J, Wood B A, Raab A, et al. Complexation of arsenite with phytochelatins reduces arsenite efflux and translocation from roots to shoots in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol, 2010, 152: 2211–2221Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Montes-Bayon M, Meija J, LeDuc D L, et al. HPLC-ICP-MS and ESI-q-TOF analysis of biomolecules induced in Brassica juncea during arsenic accumulation. J Anal At Spectrom, 2004, 19: 153–158Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Raab A, Feldmann J, Meharg A A. The nature of arsenic-phyto-chelatin complexes in Holcus lanatus and Pteris cretica. Plant Physiol, 2004, 134: 1113–1122Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Chen L W L, Lu X, Le X C. Complementary chromatography separation combined with hydride generation-inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry for arsenic speciation in human urine. Anal Chim Acta, 2010, 675: 71–75Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Nakazato T, Tao H. A high-efficiency photooxidation reactor for speciation of organic arsenicals by liquid chromatography-hydride generation-ICP-MS. Anal Chem, 2006, 78: 1665–1672Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Tian Y, Chen M L, Chen X W, et al. Arsenic speciation with gradient hydride generation interfacing liquid chromatography and atomic absorption spectrometry. J Anal At Spectrom, 2010, 25: 48–54Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Yin Y G, Liu Y, Liu J F, et al. Determination of methylmercury and inorganic mercury by volatile species generation-flameless/flame atomization-atomic fluorescence spectrometry without chromatographic separation. Anal Methods, 2012, 4: 1122–1125Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Qiu J H, Wang Q Q, Ma Y N, et al. On-line pre-reduction of Se(VI) by thiourea for selenium speciation by hydride generation. Spectrochim Acta B, 2006, 61: 803–809Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Wang Q Q, Liang J, Qiu J H, et al. Online pre-reduction of selenium( VI) with a newly designed UV/TiO2 photocatalysis reduction device. J Anal At Spectrom, 2004, 19: 715–716Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Sun Y C, Chang Y C, Su C K. On-line HPLC-UV/nano-TiO2-ICPMS system for the determination of inorganic selenium species. Anal Chem, 2006, 78: 2640–2645Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Li H M, Luo Y C, Li Z X, et al. Nanosemiconductor-based photocatalytic vapor generation systems for subsequent selenium determination and speciation with atomic fluorescence spectrometry and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Anal Chem, 2012, 84: 2974–2981Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Yin Y M, Liang J, Yang L M, et al. Vapour generation at a UV/TiO2 photocatalysis reaction device for determination and speciation of mercury by AFS and HPLC-AFS. J Anal At Spectrom, 2007, 22: 330–334Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Yin Y G, Liu J F, He B, et al. Photo-induced chemical vapour generation with formic acid: Novel interface for high performance liquid chromatography-atomic fluorescence spectrometry hyphenated system and application in speciation of mercury. J Anal At Spectrom, 2007, 22: 822–826Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Chen K J, Hsu I H, Sun Y C. Determination of methylmercury and inorganic mercury by coupling short-column ion chromatographic separation, on-line photocatalyst-assisted vapor generation, and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A, 2009, 1216: 8933–8938Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Yin Y G, Liu J F, He B, et al. Simple interface of high-performance liquid chromatography-atomic fluorescence spectrometry hyphenated system for speciation of mercury based on photo-induced chemical vapour generation with formic acid in mobile phase as reaction reagent. J Chromatogr A, 2008, 1181: 77–82Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Wang Z H, Yin Y G, He B, et al. L-cysteine-induced degradation of organic mercury as a novel interface in the HPLC-CV-AFS hyphenated system for speciation of mercury. J Anal At Spectrom, 2010, 25: 810–814Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Zheng C B, Li Y, He Y H, et al. Photo-induced chemical vapor generation with formic acid for ultrasensitive atomic fluorescence spec trometric determination of mercury: Potential application to mercury speciation in water. J Anal At Spectrom, 2005, 20: 746–750Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Gil S, Lavilla I, Bendicho C. Ultrasound-promoted cold vapor generation in the presence of formic acid for determination of mercury by atomic absorption spectrometry. Anal Chem, 2006, 78: 6260–6264Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Zhu Z L, Chan G C Y, Ray S J, et al. Use of a solution cathode glow discharge for cold vapor generation of mercury with determination by ICP-atomic emission spectrometry. Anal Chem, 2008, 80: 7043–7050Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    He Q, Zhu Z L, Hu S H, et al. Solution cathode glow discharge induced vapor generation of mercury and its application to mercury speciation by high performance liquid chromatography-atomic fluorescence spectrometry. J Chromatogr A, 2011, 1218: 4462–4467Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Yang L, Ding J, Maxwell P, et al. Determination of arsenobetaine in fish tissue by species specific isotope dilution LC-LTQ-orbitrap-MS and standard addition LC-ICP-MS. Anal Chem, 2011, 83: 3371–3378Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    McSheehy S, Yang L, Sturgeon R, et al. Determination of methionine and selenomethionine in selenium-enriched yeast by species-specific isotope dilution with liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry detection. Anal Chem, 2005, 77: 344–349Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Mester Z, Willie S, Yang L, et al. Certification of a new selenized yeast reference material (Selm-1) for methionine, selenomethinone and total selenium content and its use in an intercomparison exercise for quantifying these analytes. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2006, 385: 168–180Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Larsson T, Bjorn E, Frech W. Species specific isotope dilution with on line derivatisation for determination of gaseous mercury species. J Anal At Spectrom, 2005, 20: 1232–1239Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Qvarnstrom J, Frech W. Mercury species transformations during sample pre-treatment of biological tissues studied by HPLC-ICP-MS. J Anal At Spectrom, 2002, 17: 1486–1491Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Shi J W, Feng W Y, Wang M, et al. Investigation of mercury-containing proteins by enriched stable isotopic tracer and size-exclusion chromatography hyphenated to inductively coupled plasma-isotope dilution mass spectrometry. Anal Chim Acta, 2007, 583: 84–91Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Reyes L H, Marchante-Gayon J M, Alonso J I G, et al. Quantitative speciation of selenium in human serum by affinity chromatography coupled to post-column isotope dilution analysis ICP-MS. J Anal At Spectrom, 2003, 18: 1210–1216Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Giusti P, Schaumloffel D, Encinar J R, et al. Interfacing reversed-phase nanoHPLC with ICP-MS and on-line isotope dilution analysis for the accurate quantification of selenium-containing peptides in protein tryptic digests. J Anal At Spectrom, 2005, 20: 1101–1107Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Huerta V D, Sanchez M L F, Sanz-Medel A. Qualitative and quantitative speciation analysis of water soluble selenium in three edible wild mushrooms species by liquid chromatography using post-column isotope dilution ICP-MS. Anal Chim Acta, 2005, 538: 99–105Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Xu M, Yang L M, Wang Q Q. Quantification of selenium-tagged proteins in human plasma using species-unspecific isotope dilution ICP-DRC-qMS coupled on-line with anion exchange chromatography. J Anal At Spectrom, 2008, 23: 1545–1549Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Kirby J K, Lyons G H, Karkkainen M P. Selenium speciation and bioavailability in biofortified products using species-unspecific isotope dilution and reverse phase ion pairing-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. J Agric Food Chem, 2008, 56: 1772–1779Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Laura Reyes H, Garcia-Ruiz S, Tonietto B G, et al. Quantification of selenium species in petroleum refinery wastewaters using ion chromatography coupled to post-column isotope dilution analysis ICP-MS. J Braz Chem Soc, 2009, 20: 1878–1886Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Li Y F, Hu L, Li B, et al. Full quantification of selenium species by RP and AF-ICP-qMS with on-line isotope dilution in serum samples from mercury-exposed people supplemented with selenium-enriched yeast. J Anal At Spectrom, 2011, 26: 224–229Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Matsukawa T, Hasegawa H, Shinohara Y, et al. Simultaneous determination of selenomethionine enantiomers in biological fluids by stable isotope dilution gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr B, 2011, 879: 3253–3258Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Yang L, Sturgeon R E, Wolf W R, et al. Determination of selenomethionine in yeast using CNBr derivatization and species specific isotope dilution GC-ICP-MS and GC-MS. J Anal At Spectrom, 2004, 19: 1448–1453Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Reyes L H, Sanz F M, Espilez P H, et al. Biosynthesis of isotopically enriched selenomethionine: Application to its accurate determination in selenium-enriched yeast by isotope dilution analysis-HPLC-ICP-MS. J Anal At Spectrom, 2004, 19: 1230–1235Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Encinar J R, Schaumloffel D, Ogra Y, et al. Determination of selenomethionine and selenocysteine in human serum using speciated isotope dilution-capillary HPLC-inductively coupled plasma collision cell mass spectrometry. Anal Chem, 2004, 76: 6635–6642Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Pedrero Z, Encinar J R, Madrid Y, et al. Application of species-specific isotope dilution analysis to the correction for selenomethionine oxidation in Se-enriched yeast sample extracts during storage. J Anal At Spectrom, 2007, 22: 1061–1066Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Infante H G, Ovejero Bendito M d C, Camara C, et al. Isotope dilution quantification of ultratrace gamma-glutamyl-semethylselenocysteine species using HPLC with enhanced ICP-MS detection by ultrasonic nebulisation or carbon-loaded plasma. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2008, 390: 2099–2106Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Ohta Y, Suzuki N, Kobayashi Y, et al. Rapid speciation and quantification of selenium compounds by HPLC-ICP-MS using multiple standards labelled with different isotopes. Isot Environ Health Stud, 2011, 47: 330–340Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Barshick C M, Barshick S A, Walsh E B, et al. Application of isotope dilution to ion trap gas chromatography mass spectrometry. Anal Chem, 1999, 71: 483–488Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Yang L, Colombini V, Maxwell P, et al. Application of isotope dilution to the determination of methylmercury in fish tissue by solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A, 2003, 1011: 135–142Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Martin-Doimeadios R C R, Krupp E, Amouroux D, et al. Application of isotopically labeled methylmercury for isotope dilution analysis of biological samples using gas chromatography/ ICPMS. Anal Chem, 2002, 74: 2505–2512Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Centineo G, Gonzalez E B, Alonso J I G, et al. Isotope dilution SPME GC/MS for the determination of methylmercury in tuna fish samples. J Mass Spectrom, 2006, 41: 77–83Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Rahman G M M, Kingston H M. Application of speciated isotope dilution mass spectrometry to evaluate extraction methods for determining mercury speciation in soils and sediments. Anal Chem, 2004, 76: 3548–3555Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Inagaki K, Kuroiwa T, Narukawa T, et al. Certification of methylmercury in cod fish tissue certified reference material by species-specific isotope dilution mass spectrometric analysis. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2008, 391: 2047–2054Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Perna L, LaCroix-Fralish A, Sturup S. Determination of inorganic mercury and methylmercury in zooplankton and fish samples by speciated isotopic dilution GC-ICP-MS after alkaline digestion. J Anal At Spectrom, 2005, 20: 236–238Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Qvarnstrom J, Lambertsson L, Havarinasab S, et al. Determination of methylmercury, ethylmercury, and inorganic mercury in mouse tissues, following administration of thimerosal, by species-specific isotope dilution GC-inductively coupled plasma-MS. Anal Chem, 2003, 75: 4120–4124Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Sannac S, Fisicaro P, Labarraque G, et al. Development of a reference measurement procedure for the determination of methylmercury in fish products. Accredit Qual Assur, 2009, 14: 263–267Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Gelaude I, Dams R, Resano M, et al. Direct determination of methylmercury and inorganic mercury in biological materials by solid sampling-electrothermal vaporization-inductively coupled plasma-isotope dilution-mass spectrometry. Anal Chem, 2002, 74: 3833–3842Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Monperrus M, Gonzalez P R, Amouroux D, et al. Evaluating the potential and limitations of double-spiking species-specific isotope dilution analysis for the accurate quantification of mercury species in different environmental matrices. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2008, 390: 655–666Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Hintelmann H, Nguyen H. Extraction of methylmercury from tissue and plant samples by acid leaching. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2005, 381: 360–365Google Scholar
  128. 128.
    Moreno M J, Pacheco-Arjona J, Rodriguez-Gonzalez P, et al. Simultaneous determination of monomethylmercury, monobutyltin, dibutyltin and tributyltin in environmental samples by multi-elemental-species-specific isotope dilution analysis using electron ionisation GC-MS. J Mass Spectrom, 2006, 41: 1491–1497Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    Snell J P, Stewart, II, Sturgeon R E, et al. Species specific isotope dilution calibration for determination of mercury species by gas chromatography coupled to inductively coupled plasma-or furnace atomisation plasma ionisation-mass spectrometry. J Anal At Spectrom, 2000, 15: 1540–1545Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Jackson B, Taylor V, Baker R A, et al. Low-level mercury speciation in freshwaters by isotope dilution GC-ICP-MS. Environ Sci Technol, 2009, 43: 2463–2469Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Taylor V F, Jackson B P, Chen C Y. Mercury speciation and total trace element determination of low-biomass biological samples. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2008, 392: 1283–1290Google Scholar
  132. 132.
    Baxter D C, Rodushkin I, Engstrom E, et al. Methylmercury measurement in whole blood by isotope-dilution GC-ICPMS with 2 sample preparation methods. Clin Chem, 2007, 53: 111–116Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    Monperrus M, Tessier E, Veschambre S, et al. Simultaneous speciation of mercury and butyltin compounds in natural waters and snow by propylation and species-specific isotope dilution mass spectrometry analysis. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2005, 381: 854–862Google Scholar
  134. 134.
    Larsson T, Frech W. Species-specific isotope dilution with permeation tubes for determination of gaseous mercury species. Anal Chem, 2003, 75: 5584–5591Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    Clough R, Belt S T, Fairman B, et al. Uncertainty contributions to single and double isotope dilution mass spectrometry with HPLC-CV-MC-ICP-MS for the determination of methylmercury in fish tissue. J Anal At Spectrom, 2005, 20: 1072–1075Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Lambertsson L, Bjorn E. Validation of a simplified field-adapted procedure for routine determinations of methyl mercury at trace levels in natural water samples using species-specific isotope dilution mass spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem, 2004, 380: 871–875Google Scholar
  137. 137.
    Bergquist R A, Blum J D. The odds and evens of mercury isotopes: Applications of mass-dependent and mass-independent isotope fractionation. Elements, 2009, 5: 353–357Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Bergquist B A, Blum J D. Mass-dependent and -independent fractionation of Hg isotopes by photoreduction in aquatic systems. Science, 2007, 318: 417–420Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Perrot V, Pastukhov M V, Epov V N, et al. Higher mass-independent isotope fractionation of methylmercury in the pelagic food web of lake Baikal (Russia). Environ Sci Technol, 2012, 46: 5902–5911Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    Malinovsky D, Vanhaecke F. Mercury isotope fractionation during abiotic transmethylation reactions. Int J Mass spectrom, 2011, 307: 214–224Google Scholar
  141. 141.
    Point D, Sonke J E, Day R D, et al. Methylmercury photodegradation influenced by sea-ice cover in arctic marine ecosystems. Nat Geosci, 2011, 4: 188–194Google Scholar
  142. 142.
    Malinovsky D, Latruwe K, Moens L, et al. Experimental study of mass-independence of Hg isotope fractionation during photodecomposition of dissolved methylmercury. J Anal At Spectrom, 2010, 25: 950–956Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    Epov V N, Rodriguez-Gonzalez P, Sonke J E, et al. Simultaneous determination of species-specific isotopic composition of Hg by gas chromatography coupled to multicollector ICPMS. Anal Chem, 2008, 80: 3530–3538Google Scholar
  144. 144.
    Dzurko M, Foucher D, Hintelmann H. Determination of compound-specific Hg isotope ratios from transient signals using gas chromatography coupled to multicollector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (MC-ICP/MS). Anal Bioanal Chem, 2009, 393: 345–355Google Scholar
  145. 145.
    Epov V N, Berail S, Jimenez-Moreno M, et al. Approach to measure isotopic ratios in species using multicollector-ICPMS coupled with chromatography. Anal Chem, 2010, 82: 5652–5662Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Elwaer N, Hintelmann H. Selective separation of selenium (IV) by thiol cellulose powder and subsequent selenium isotope ratio determination using multicollector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. J Anal At Spectrom, 2008, 23: 733–743Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental SciencesChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations