Skip to main content
Log in

Establishing a chromium-reactor design for measuring δ2H values of solid polyhalogenated compounds using direct elemental analysis and stable isotope ratio mass spectrometry

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

2H/1H isotope ratios of polyhalogenated compounds were determined by elemental analysis and isotope ratio mass spectrometry (EA-IRMS). Initial measurements with standard EA-IRMS equipment, which used high-temperature pyrolysis to convert the organic compounds into hydrogen, did not achieve significant signals for polychlorinated pesticides and related compounds, presumably due to the formation of HCl instead of hydrogen. To reverse this problematic reaction, a chromium reactor was incorporated into the element analyzer system, which scavenged Cl, forming chromium chloride and releasing hydrogen again in the form of H2. The optimized system therefore allowed the δ2H values of polyhalogenated compounds to be determined. A quality assurance program was developed based on several parameters. (i) Each compound was analyzed using a sequence of five injections, where the first measurement was discarded. (ii) Recovery of H (when calculated relative to acetanilide) had to be >90% for all replicates in a sequence. (iii) All δ-values within a sequence had to vary by less than 10‰. (iv) Results had to be reproducible on another day with a different sample scheme. Once this reproducibility had been established, variabilities in the δ2H values of organohalogen standards were investigated using the technique. The highest δ2H value of +75‰ was found for o,p´-DDD, whereas the strongest depletion in deuterium was found for Melipax (–181‰). The most important results for comparable compounds were as follows. DDT-related compounds gave δ2H values of between +59 and +75‰ (technical DDT, o,p´- and p,p´-DDD) or in the range of approximately −1‰, indicative of the different sources/methods of producing this compound. Four HCH isomers from the same supplier showed relatively similar hydrogen isotope distributions, whereas two lindane (γ–HCH) standards from other sources had 39‰ less deuterium. This difference is likely due to different purification steps during the isolation of pure lindane from the technical HCH mixture. An even greater difference was observed between the δ2H values of Toxaphene (US product dating from 1978) and Melipax (product from the former East Germany, dating from 1979), which gave δ2H values of –101‰ and –181‰, respectively, meaning that both products were easily distinguished via δ2H-IRMS. Fractioning of hydrogen isotopes in the atmospheric water cycle was suggested as one reason for the different values. In this theory, the water (which had different δ2H values depending on where it was taken from) was incorporated during the biosynthesis of camphene, which is the natural product used to produce both products. These results indicate that hydrogen isotope-specific analysis can be a valuable tool for tracing the origins of a compound in certain cases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schmidt TC, Zwank L, Elsner M, Berg M, Meckenstock RU, Haderlein SB (2004) Anal Bioanal Chem 378:283–300

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Mancini SA, Ulrich AC, Lacrampe-Couloume G, Sleep B, Edwards EA, Sherwood Lollar B (2003) Appl Environ Microbiol 69:191–198

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sewenig S, Bullinger D, Hener U, Mosandl A (2005) J Agric Food Chem 53:838–844

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Aguilar-Cisneros BO, Lopez MG, Richling E, Heckel F, Schreier P (2002) J Agric Food Chem 50:7520–7523

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Rossmann A (2001) Food Rev Int 17:347–381

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hunkeler D, Aravena R (2000) Appl Environ Microbiol 66:4870–4876

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Chu HK, Mahendra S, Song DL, Conrad ME, Alvarez-Cohen L (2004) Environ Sci Technol 38:3126–3130

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hunkeler D, Andersen N, Aravena R, Bernasconi SM, Butler BJ (2001) Environ Sci Technol 35:3462–3467

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Vetter W, Gleixner G, Armbruster W, Ruppe S, Stern G, Braekevelt E (2005) Chemosphere 58:235–241

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Jarman WA, Hilkert A, Bacon C, Collister JW, Ballschmiter K, Riseborough RW (1998) Environ Sci Technol 32:833–836

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Horii Y, Kannan K, Petrick G, Gamo T, Falandysz J, Yamashita N (2005) Environ Sci Technol 39:4206–4212

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Midwood AJ, McGaw BA (1999) Anal Commun 36:291–294

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Koziet J (1997) J Mass Spectrom 32:103–108

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Begley IS, Scrimgeour CM (1997) Anal Chem 69:1530–1535

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kelly SD, Parker LG, Sharman M, Denis MJ (1998) J Mass Spectrom 33:735–738

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Vetter W, Gleixner G, Armbruster W (2004) Organohalogen Compd 66:354–357

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kelly SD, Heaton KD, Brereton P (2001) Rapid Comm Mass Spectrom 15:1283–1286

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gehre M, Hoefling R, Kowski P, Strauch G (1996) Anal Chem 68:4414–4417

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Morrison J, Brockwell T, Merren T, Fourel F, Phillips AM (2001) Anal Chem 73:3570–3575

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. WHO (ed) (1989) DDT and its derivatives - environmental aspects (Environ Health Crit 83). WHO, Geneva, ISBN 92–4–154283–7

  21. Breivik K, Pacyna JM, Münch J (1999) Sci Total Environ 239:151–163

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. C.I.E.L.-Redaktion (ed) (1983) Lindan - Informationen über einen Wirkstoff. Centre International D’etudes du Lindane (Lindan Workshop Hannover), Freiburg

  23. Voldner EC, Li Y-F (1995) Sci Total Environ 160/161:201–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Vetter W, Oehme M (2001) Toxaphene. Analysis and environmental fate of congeners. In: Paasivirta J (ed) The handbook of environmental chemistry, vol 3, part K: New types of persistent halogenated compounds. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 237–287

    Google Scholar 

  25. Korytár P, van Stee LLP, Leonards PEG, de Boer J, Brinkman UATh (2003) J Chromatogr A 994:179–189

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Mook WG (ed) (2001) Environmental isotopes in the hydrological cycle: Principles and applications. Vol I: Introduction: theory, methods, review. IAEA, Vienna

  27. Mullin MD, Pochini CM, McCrindle S, Romkes M, Safe SH, Safe LM (1984) Environ Sci Technol 18:468–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Vetter W, Luckas B, Haubold W (1991) Chemosphere 23:193–198

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Werner RA, Brand WA (2001) Rapid Comm Mass Spectrom 15:501–519

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Walter Vetter.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Armbruster, W., Lehnert, K. & Vetter, W. Establishing a chromium-reactor design for measuring δ2H values of solid polyhalogenated compounds using direct elemental analysis and stable isotope ratio mass spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem 384, 237–243 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-005-0160-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-005-0160-0

Keywords

Navigation