000203444 001__ 203444
000203444 005__ 20180317092838.0
000203444 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1016/j.chroma.2014.11.049
000203444 022__ $$a0021-9673
000203444 02470 $$2ISI$$a000347861800016
000203444 037__ $$aARTICLE
000203444 245__ $$aAnalyte quantification with Comprehensive Two-Dimensional Gas Chromatography: Assessment of methods for baseline correction, peak delineation, and matrix effect elimination for real samples
000203444 260__ $$aAmsterdam$$bElsevier$$c2015
000203444 269__ $$a2015
000203444 300__ $$a17
000203444 336__ $$aJournal Articles
000203444 520__ $$aComprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC x GC) is used widely to separate and measure organic chemicals in complex mixtures. However, approaches to quantify analytes in real, complex samples have not been critically assessed. We quantified 7 PAHs in a certified diesel fuel using GC x GC coupled to flame ionization detector (FID), and we quantified 11 target chlorinated hydrocarbons in a lake water extract using GC x GC with electron capture detector (mu ECD), further confirmed qualitatively by GC x GC with electron capture negative chemical ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometer (ENCI-TOFMS). Target analyte peak volumes were determined using several existing baseline correction algorithms and peak delineation algorithms. Analyte quantifications were conducted using external standards and also using standard additions, enabling us to diagnose matrix effects. We then applied several chemometric tests to these data. We find that the choice of baseline correction algorithm and peak delineation algorithm strongly influence the reproducibility of analyte signal, error of the calibration offset, proportionality of integrated signal response, and accuracy of quantifications. Additionally, the choice of baseline correction and the peak delineation algorithm are essential for correctly discriminating analyte signal from unresolved complex mixture signal, and this is the chief consideration for controlling matrix effects during quantification. The diagnostic approaches presented here provide guidance for analyte quantification using GC x GC. (C) 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
000203444 6531_ $$aBaseline correction
000203444 6531_ $$aGC x GC
000203444 6531_ $$aPeak delineation
000203444 6531_ $$aQuantification
000203444 6531_ $$aCalibration
000203444 6531_ $$aChemometric
000203444 700__ $$0245093$$aSamanipour, Saer$$g203365
000203444 700__ $$0242213$$aDimitriou-Christidis, Petros$$g201240
000203444 700__ $$0245327$$aGros, Jonas$$g170795
000203444 700__ $$aGrange, Aureline
000203444 700__ $$0240042$$aArey, J. Samuel$$g169370
000203444 773__ $$j1375$$q123-139$$tJournal of Chromatography A
000203444 909CO $$ooai:infoscience.tind.io:203444$$particle
000203444 909C0 $$0252024$$pLMCE$$xU11955
000203444 917Z8 $$x169370
000203444 917Z8 $$x169370
000203444 937__ $$aEPFL-ARTICLE-203444
000203444 973__ $$aEPFL$$rREVIEWED$$sPUBLISHED
000203444 980__ $$aARTICLE