Matches in Ghent University Academic Bibliography for { <https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F> ?p ?o. }
Showing items 1 to 17 of
17
with 100 items per page.
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F classification C3.
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F date "2023".
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F language "eng".
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F type conference.
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F hasPart 01JA5N3V65MR31QCE6X4P24T04.pdf.
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F subject "Chemistry".
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F presentedAt urn:uuid:6e3c1c22-dbc8-48cf-8b4b-603378709c3a.
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F abstract "Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are classified as Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) due to the presence of highly stable C-F bonds. Given the significant environmental concerns associated with these contaminants, there is a need to enhance the quantitative and qualitative analysis of PFAS to better understand the extent of fluoroalkyl compound contamination. High-Performance Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (HPLC-MS) has been the most used technique for PFAS analysis and generally is the preferred method due to its superior selectivity, sensitivity and robustness. On the other hand, the significantly faster but under-used technique, Supercritical Fluid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (SFC-MS), may prove also particularly useful for the enhanced separation of isomeric PFAS compound classes. Alternatively, the low-pressure drop in SFC allows for coupled column approaches operated at higher optimal velocities leading to more efficient hromatography within competitive analysis times. Currently, little information is available with respect to the performance of SFC-MS versus LC-MS under truly comparable conditions. Therefore, a fixed-restrictor approach is developed allowing a more facile comparison between the SFC and the HPLC-based ESI-MS detection. The approach also allows systematic investigation of the potential of ionization-enhancing additives added post-column or to the mobile phase in LC and SFC. This includes the addition of e.g., m-nitrobenzyl alcohol (m-NBA), sulfolane, alcohols, pH modifiers and other adduct-forming agents. The performance of both approaches and of the influence of various known and novel ionization enhance agents will be demonstrated for a number of representative PFAS. Finally, both methods will also be compared in terms of sustainability and application.".
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F author 0b75a38f-85ae-11ea-9a23-9e91712f33aa.
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F author F52D4724-F0ED-11E1-A9DE-61C894A0A6B4.
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F dateCreated "2024-02-26T11:16:36Z".
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F dateModified "2024-11-28T00:17:37Z".
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F name "Comparing HPLC-MS and SFC-MS for PFAS analysis : an ionization efficiency-based effect study".
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F pagination urn:uuid:bf7c3d88-b333-4483-83d7-0b431df307ad.
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F sameAs LU-01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F.
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F sourceOrganization urn:uuid:66b388d0-4d86-4f32-96e9-6c192b7fbf37.
- 01HQJJ322Z6H3MABBVC7282H7F type C3.