Determination of the Transport Efficiency in spICP-MS Analysis Using Conventional Sample Introduction Systems: An Interlaboratory Comparison Study.
Saved in:
| Title: | Determination of the Transport Efficiency in spICP-MS Analysis Using Conventional Sample Introduction Systems: An Interlaboratory Comparison Study. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Geiss, Otmar1 (AUTHOR) ivana.bianchi@ec.europa.eu, Bianchi, Ivana1 (AUTHOR) josefa.barrero@ec.europa.eu, Bucher, Guillaume2 (AUTHOR) guillaume.bucher@free.fr, Verleysen, Eveline3 (AUTHOR) eveline.verleysen@sciensano.be, Brassinne, Frédéric3 (AUTHOR) frederic.brassinne@sciensano.be, Mast, Jan3 (AUTHOR) jan.mast@sciensano.be, Loeschner, Katrin4 (AUTHOR) kals@food.dtu.dk, Givelet, Lucas4 (AUTHOR) lgiv@food.dtu.dk, Cubadda, Francesco5 (AUTHOR) francesco.cubadda@iss.it, Ferraris, Francesca5 (AUTHOR) francesca.ferraris@iss.it, Raggi, Andrea5 (AUTHOR) andrea.raggi@iss.it, Iacoponi, Francesca5 (AUTHOR) francesca.iacoponi@iss.it, Peters, Ruud6 (AUTHOR) ruudj.peters@wur.nl, Undas, Anna6 (AUTHOR) anna.undas@wur.nl, Müller, Alexandra7 (AUTHOR) alexandra.mueller@mri.bund.de, Meinhardt, Ann-Katrin7 (AUTHOR) ann-katrin.meinhardt@mri.bund.de, Hetzer, Birgit7 (AUTHOR) birgit.hetzer@mri.bund.de, Gräf, Volker7 (AUTHOR) volker.graef@mri.bund.de, Montoro Bustos, Antonio R.8 (AUTHOR) antonio.montorobustos@nist.gov, Barrero-Moreno, Josefa1 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Nanomaterials (2079-4991). Apr2022, Vol. 12 Issue 7, p725-725. 32p. |
| Subjects: | Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, Gold nanoparticles, Sample introduction (Chemistry), Nanoparticles, Teff |
| Abstract: | In single particle inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (spICP-MS), the transport efficiency is fundamental for the correct determination of both particle number concentration and size. In the present study, transport efficiency was systematically determined on three different days with six carefully characterised gold nanoparticle (AuNP) suspensions and in seven European and US expert laboratories using different ICP-MS instruments and spICP-MS software. Both particle size—(TES)—and particle frequency—(TEF)—methods were applied. The resulting transport efficiencies did not deviate much under ideal conditions. The TEF method however systematically resulted in lower transport efficiencies. The extent of this difference (0–300% rel. difference) depended largely on the choice and storage conditions of the nanoparticle suspensions used for the determination. The TES method is recommended when the principal measurement objective is particle size. If the main aim of the measurement is the determination of the particle number concentration, the TEF approach could be preferred as it might better account for particle losses in the sample introduction system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Nanomaterials (2079-4991) is the property of MDPI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | In single particle inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (spICP-MS), the transport efficiency is fundamental for the correct determination of both particle number concentration and size. In the present study, transport efficiency was systematically determined on three different days with six carefully characterised gold nanoparticle (AuNP) suspensions and in seven European and US expert laboratories using different ICP-MS instruments and spICP-MS software. Both particle size—(TES)—and particle frequency—(TEF)—methods were applied. The resulting transport efficiencies did not deviate much under ideal conditions. The TEF method however systematically resulted in lower transport efficiencies. The extent of this difference (0–300% rel. difference) depended largely on the choice and storage conditions of the nanoparticle suspensions used for the determination. The TES method is recommended when the principal measurement objective is particle size. If the main aim of the measurement is the determination of the particle number concentration, the TEF approach could be preferred as it might better account for particle losses in the sample introduction system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 20794991 |
| DOI: | 10.3390/nano12040725 |
