Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fully automated trace level determination of parent and alkylated PAHs in environmental waters by online SPE-LC-APPI-MS/MS

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

Abstract

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are ubiquitous compounds that enter the environment from natural and anthropogenic sources, often used as markers to determine the extent, fate, and potential effects on natural resources after a crude oil accidental release. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) after liquid–liquid extraction (LLE+GC-MS) has been extensively used to isolate and quantify both parent and alkylated PAHs. However, it requires labor-intensive extraction and cleanup steps and generates large amounts of toxic solvent waste. Therefore, there is a clear need for greener, faster techniques with enough reproducibility and sensitivity to quantify many PAHs in large numbers of water samples in a short period of time. This study combines online solid-phase extraction followed by liquid chromatography (LC) separation with dopant-assisted atmospheric pressure photoionization (APPI) and tandem MS detection, to provide a one-step protocol that detects PAHs at low nanograms per liter with almost no sample preparation and with a significantly lower consumption of toxic halogenated solvents. Water samples were amended with methanol, fortified with isotopically labeled PAHs, and loaded onto an online SPE column, using a large-volume sample loop with an auxiliary LC pump for sample preconcentration and salt removal. The loaded SPE column was connected to an UPLC pump and analytes were backflushed to a Thermo Hypersil Green PAH analytical column where a 20-min gradient separation was performed at a variable flow rate. Detection was performed by a triple-quadrupole MS equipped with a gas-phase dopant delivery system, using 1.50 mL of chlorobenzene dopant per run. In contrast, LLE+GC-MS typically use 150 mL of organic solvents per sample, and methylene chloride is preferred because of its low boiling point. However, this solvent has a higher environmental persistence than chlorobenzene and is considered a carcinogen. The automated system is capable of performing injection, online SPE, inorganic species removal, LC separation, and MS/MS detection in 28 min. Selective reaction monitoring was used to detect 28 parent PAHs and 15 families of alkylated PAHs. The methodology is comparable to traditional GC-MS and was tested with surface seawater, rainwater runoff, and a wastewater treatment plant effluent. Positive detections above reporting limits are described. The virtual absence of sample preparation could be particularly advantageous for real-time monitoring of discharge events that introduce PAHs into environmental compartments, such as accidental releases of petroleum derivates and other human-related events. This work covers optimization of APPI detection and SPE extraction efficiency, a comparison with LLE+GC-MS in terms of sensitivity and chromatographic resolution, and examples of environmental applications.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Manoli E, Samara C (1999) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in natural waters: sources, occurrence and analysis. Trac-Trends Anal Chem 18:417–428

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Wolska L, Mechlinska A, Rogowska J, Namiesnik J (2012) Sources and fate of PAHs and PCBs in the marine environment. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 42:1172–1189

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Wang ZD, Stout SA, Fingas M (2006) Forensic fingerprinting of biomarkers for oil spill characterization and source identification. Environ Forensic 7:105–146

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Boehm PD, Douglas GS, Burns WA, Mankiewicz PJ, Page DS, Bence AE (1997) Application of petroleum hydrocarbon chemical fingerprinting and allocation techniques after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Mar Pollut Bull 34:599–613

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Boehm PD, Neff JM, Page DS (2007) Assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon exposure in the waters of Prince William Sound after the Exxon Valdez oil spill: 1989–2005. Mar Pollut Bull 54:339–356

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) (1995) Toxicological profile for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta

    Google Scholar 

  7. Manzetti S (2012) Ecotoxicity of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, aromatic amines, and nitroarenes through molecular properties. Environ Chem Lett 10:349–361

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lerda D (2011) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) factsheet. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  9. USEPA, U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40. Part 136. Appendix a: methods for organic chemical analysis of municipal and industrial wastewater. Method 610—polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, Office of the Federal Register, Washington, D.C. USA., 2010, pp. 176–187

  10. USEPA (1996) Method 3510C. Separatory funnel liquid-liquid extraction, online test methods for evaluating solid waste, physical/chemical methods (SW-846), Washington, D.C., USA., Revision 3

  11. USEPA (1996) Method 3630C. Silica gel cleanup, online test methods for evaluating solid waste, physical/chemical methods (SW-846), Washington, D.C. USA., Revision 3

  12. Denoux GJ, Gardinali P, Wade TL (1998) Quantitative determination of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS)-selected ion monitoring (SIM) mode. In: Lauenstein GG, Cantillo AY (eds) Sampling and analytical methods of the National Status and Trends Program Mussel Watch Project: 1993–1996 update. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, pp 129–139

    Google Scholar 

  13. Filipkowska A, Lubecki L, Kowalewska G (2005) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon analysis in different matrices of the marine environment. Anal Chim Acta 547:243–254

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Rawa-Adkonis M, Wolska L, Namiesnik J (2006) Analytical procedures for PAH and PCB determination in water samples—error sources. Crit Rev Anal Chem 36:63–72

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Smith RM (2003) Before the injection—modern methods of sample preparation for separation techniques. J Chromatogr A, 1000(1-2):3-27

    Google Scholar 

  16. USEPA (2011) Toxicological review of dichloromethane (methylene chloride). Washington, D.C. USA

  17. ATSDR (2000) Toxicological profile for methylene chloride. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta

    Google Scholar 

  18. Poster DL, Schantz MM, Sander LC, Wise SA (2006) Analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in environmental samples: a critical review of gas chromatographic (GC) methods. Anal Bioanal Chem 386:859–881

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Marce RM, Borrull F (2000) Solid-phase extraction of polycyclic aromatic compounds. J Chromatogr A 885:273–290

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Renner T, Baumgarten D, Unger KK (1997) Analysis of organic pollutants in water at trace levels using fully automated solid-phase extraction coupled to high-performance liquid chromatography. Chromatographia 45:199–205

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Li Y, Yoshida S, Chondo Y, Nassar H, Tang N, Araki Y, Toriba A, Kameda T, Hayakawa K (2012) On-line concentration and fluorescence determination HPLC for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in seawater samples and its application to Japan Sea. Chem Pharm Bull 60:531–535

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Gimeno RA, Altelaar AFM, Marce RM, Borrull F (2002) Determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and polycylic aromatic sulfur heterocycles by high-performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence and atmospheric pressure chemical ionization mass spectrometry detection in seawater and sediment samples. J Chromatogr A 958:141–148

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Robb DB, Covey TR, Bruins AP (2000) Atmospheric pressure photoionisation: an ionization method for liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Anal Chem 72:3653–3659

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Syage JA, Evans MD, Hanold KA (2000) Photoionization mass spectrometry. Am Lab 32:24

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Robb DB, Blades MW (2008) State-of-the-art in atmospheric pressure photoionization for LC/MS. Anal Chim Acta 627:34–49

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Cai SS, Syage JA, Hanold KA, Balogh MP (2009) Ultra performance liquid chromatography-atmospheric pressure photoionization-tandem mass spectrometry for high-sensitivity and high-throughput analysis of US environmental protection agency 16 priority pollutants polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. Anal Chem 81:2123–2128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Mahler BJ, Van Metre PC, Crane JL, Watts AW, Scoggins M, Williams ES (2012) Coal-tar-based pavement sealcoat and pahs: implications for the environment, human health, and stormwater management. Environ Sci Technol 46:3039–3045

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Garcia-Ac A, Segura PA, Viglino L, Furtos A, Gagnon C, Prevost M, Sauve S (2009) On-line solid-phase extraction of large-volume injections coupled to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for the quantitation and confirmation of 14 selected trace organic contaminants in drinking and surface water. J Chromatogr A 1216:8518–8527

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Wang CT, Gardinali PR (2012) Comparison of multiple API techniques for the simultaneous detection of microconstituents in water by on-line SPE-LC-MS/MS. J Mass Spectrom 47:1255–1268

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Busetti F, Backe WJ, Bendixen N, Maier U, Place B, Giger W, Field JA (2012) Trace analysis of environmental matrices by large-volume injection and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem 402:175–186

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Marchi I, Rudaz S, Veuthey JL (2009) Atmospheric pressure photoionization for coupling liquid-chromatography to mass spectrometry: a review. Talanta 78:1–18

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Short LC, Cai SS, Syage JA (2007) APPI-MS: effects of mobile phases and VUV lamps on the detection of PAH compounds. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 18:589–599

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Smith DR, Robb DB, Blades MW (2009) Comparison of dopants for charge exchange ionization of nonpolar polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons with reversed-phase LC-APPI-MS. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 20:73–79

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Ehrenhauser FS, Wornat MJ, Valsaraj KT, Rodriguez P (2010) Design and evaluation of a dopant-delivery system for an orthogonal atmospheric-pressure photoionization source and its performance in the analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 24:1351–1357

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) (1990) Toxicological profile for chlorobenzene. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sander LC, Pursch M, Wise SA (1999) Shape selectivity for constrained solutes in reversed-phase liquid chromatography. Anal Chem 71:4821–4830

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Rimmer C, Sander L, Wise S (2005) Selectivity of long chain stationary phases in reversed phase liquid chromatography. Anal Bioanal Chem 382:698–707

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Horak J, Maier NM, Lindner W (2004) Investigations on the chromatographic behavior of hybrid reversed-phase materials containing electron donor-acceptor systems II. Contribution of pi-pi aromatic interactions. J Chromatogr A 1045:43–58

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Horak J, Lindner W (2008) Contribution of sulfonyl-aromatic and sulfonic acid-aromatic interactions in novel sulfonyl/sulfonic acid-embedded reversed phase materials. J Chromatogr A 1191:141–156

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Wang ZD, Fingas M, Page DS (1999) Oil spill identification. J Chromatogr A 843:369–411

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Cai SS, Stevens J, Syage JA (2012) Ultra high performance liquid chromatography-atmospheric pressure photoionization-mass spectrometry for high-sensitivity analysis of US Environmental Protection Agency sixteen priority pollutant polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons in oysters. J Chromatogr A 1227:138–144

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. USEPA (2010) Definition and procedures for the determination of the method detection limit. Guidelines establishing test procedures for the analysis of pollutants. Appendix B, part 136. Definition and procedures for the determination of the method detection limit. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40. Revision 1.11

  43. Kelly CA, Ayoko GA, Brown RJ, Swaroop CR (2005) Underwater emissions from a two-stroke outboard engine: a comparison between an EAL and an equivalent mineral lubricant. Materials & Design 26:609–617

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Chiang H-L, Lai Y-M, Chang S-Y (2012) Pollutant constituents of exhaust emitted from light-duty diesel vehicles. Atmos Environ 47:399–406

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Watts AW, Ballestero TP, Roseen RM, Houle JP (2010) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in stormwater runoff from sealcoated pavements. Environmental Science & Technology 44:8849–8854

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Mahler BJ, Van Metre PC, Bashara TJ, Wilson JT, Johns DA (2005) Parking lot sealcoat: an unrecognized source of urban polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Environ Sci Technol 39:5560–5566

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Vogelsang C, Grung M, Jantsch TG, Tollefsen KE, Liltved H (2006) Occurrence and removal of selected organic micropollutants at mechanical, chemical and advanced wastewater treatment plants in Norway. Water Res 40:3559–3570

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Bergqvist PA, Augulyte L, Jurjoniene V (2006) PAH and PCB removal efficiencies in Umea (Sweden) and Siauliai (Lithuania) municipal wastewater treatment plants. Water Air Soil Pollut 175:291–303

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The Environmental Analysis Research Laboratory acknowledges the support from the Thermo Scientific Corporation in the development of this work. This is contribution number 644 from the Southeast Environmental Research Center at Florida International University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Florida International University, 3000 NE 151st ST, FIU Biscayne Bay Campus, MSB-350, North Miami Beach, FL, 33181, USA

    Cesar E. Ramirez, Chengtao Wang & Piero R. Gardinali

  2. Southeast Environmental Research Center, Florida International University, 3000 NE 151st ST, FIU Biscayne Bay Campus, MSB-350, North Miami Beach, FL, 33181, USA

    Cesar E. Ramirez, Chengtao Wang & Piero R. Gardinali

Authors
  1. Cesar E. Ramirez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chengtao Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Piero R. Gardinali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Piero R. Gardinali.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Table S1

(PDF 69 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ramirez, C.E., Wang, C. & Gardinali, P.R. Fully automated trace level determination of parent and alkylated PAHs in environmental waters by online SPE-LC-APPI-MS/MS. Anal Bioanal Chem 406, 329–344 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-013-7436-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-013-7436-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation