Abstract

Fizzy extraction (FE) facilitates analysis of volatile solutes by promoting their transfer from the liquid to the gas phase. A carrier gas is dissolved in the sample under moderate pressure (Δp ≈ 150 kPa), followed by an abrupt decompression, what leads to effervescence. The released gaseous analytes are directed to an on-line detector due to a small pressure difference. FE is advantageous in chemical analysis because the volatile species are released in a short time interval, allowing for pulsed injection, and leading to high signal-to-noise ratios. To shed light on the mechanism of FE, we have investigated various factors that could potentially contribute to the extraction efficiency, including: instrument-related factors, method-related factors, sample-related factors, and analyte-related factors. In particular, we have evaluated the properties of volatile solutes, which make them amenable to FE. The results suggest that the organic solutes may diffuse to the bubble lumen, especially in the presence of salt. The high signal intensities in FE coupled with mass spectrometry are partly due to the high sample introduction rate (upon decompression) to a mass-sensitive detector. However, the analytes with different properties (molecular weight, polarity) reveal distinct temporal profiles, pointing to the effect of bubble exposure to the sample matrix. A sufficient extraction time (~12 s) is required to extract less volatile solutes. The results presented in this report can help analysts to predict the occurrence of matrix effects when analyzing real samples. They also provide a basis for increasing extraction efficiency to detect low-abundance analytes.

Highlights

  • Sample preparation—whether performed in manual or automated manner—is frequently an unavoidable step in chemical analysis workflows (Prabhu & Urban, 2017; Alexovič et al, 2018; Poole, 2020; Zheng, 2020)

  • To shed light on the mechanism of fizzy extraction (FE), we have studied the influence of a number of parameters on the extraction process

  • The Enhancement factor (EF) and Signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) increased as the inner diameter increased, especially for ethyl pentanoate (EPE), Ethyl heptanoate (EHP), ethyl nonanoate (EN), and LIM (Fig. 2A)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Sample preparation—whether performed in manual or automated manner—is frequently an unavoidable step in chemical analysis workflows (Prabhu & Urban, 2017; Alexovič et al, 2018; Poole, 2020; Zheng, 2020). It can rely on analyte transfer between different phases in liquid-liquid, solid-liquid, liquid-gas, or solid-gas extraction systems. One of the available approaches is the recently introduced fizzy extraction (FE) approach, which relies on dissolution of a carrier gas in liquid sample under slightly elevated pressure, followed by a sudden decompression of the sample headspace leading to effervescence (Chang & Urban, 2016; Yang, Chang & Urban, 2017). FE may be regarded as a pressure-controlled effervescence-assisted emulsification liquid-gas extraction approach

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call