Extraction and cleanup

T. Cairns and J. Sherma, eds.. Emerging Strategiesfor Pesticide Analysis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla., 1992, 368 pp. From the series Modem Methods of Pesticide Analysis, presents survey of improvements in extraction and cleanup, detailed descriptions of alternative analytical methods, latest appHcations, and up-to-date references. 

An on-line concentration, isolation, and Hquid chromatographic separation method for the analysis of trace organics in natural waters has been described (63). Concentration and isolation are accompHshed with two precolumns connected in series the first acts as a filter for removal of interferences the second actually concentrates target solutes. The technique is appHcable even if no selective sorbent is available for the specific analyte of interest. Detection limits of less than 0.1 ppb were achieved for polar herbicides (qv) in the chlorotriazine and phenylurea classes. A novel method for deterrnination of tetracyclines in animal tissues and fluids was developed with sample extraction and cleanup based on tendency of tetracyclines to chelate with divalent metal ions (64). The metal chelate affinity precolumn was connected on-line to reversed-phase hplc column, and detection limits for several different tetracyclines in a variety of matrices were in the 10—50 ppb range. 

The predominant method of analyzing environmental samples for methyl parathion is by GC. The detection methods most used are FID, FPD, ECD, and mass spectroscopy (MS). HPLC coupled with ultraviolet spectroscopy (UV) or MS has also been used successfiilly. Sample extraction and cleanup varies widely depending on the sample matrix and method of detection. Several analytical methods used to analyze environmental samples for methyl parathion are summarized in Table 7-2. 

Food (butter fat) Extract and cleanup on semipreparative HPLC column elute with methylene chloride-hexane GC/ECD No data No data Gillespie and Walters 1986... 

Analysis of methyl parathion in sediments, soils, foods, and plant and animal tissues poses problems with extraction from the sample matrix, cleanup of samples, and selective detection. Sediments and soils have been analyzed primarily by GC/ECD or GC/FPD. Food, plant, and animal tissues have been analyzed primarily by GC/thermionic detector or GC/FPD, the recommended methods of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC). Various extraction and cleanup methods (AOAC 1984 Belisle and Swineford 1988 Capriel et al. 1986 Kadoum 1968) and separation and detection techniques (Alak and Vo-Dinh 1987 Betowski and Jones 1988 Clark et al. 1985 Gillespie and Walters 1986 Koen and Huber 1970 Stan 1989 Stan and Mrowetz 1983 Udaya and Nanda 1981) have been used in an attempt to simplify sample preparation and improve sensitivity, reliability, and selectivity. A detection limit in the low-ppb range and recoveries of 100% were achieved in soil and plant and animal tissue by Kadoum (1968). GC/ECD analysis following extraction, cleanup, and partitioning with a hexane-acetonitrile system was used. 

Using established extraction and cleanup methods, followed by GC/FPD and GC/thermionic detection, Carey et al. (1979) obtained detection limits in the ppb range and recoveries of 80-110% in soil and 70-100% in plant tissue. Good sensitivity and recovery were maintained in a simplified extraction procedure of sediments followed by GC/FPD analysis (Belisle and Swineford 1988). Bound methyl parathion residues that were not extracted with the usual methods were extracted using supercritical methanol by Capriel et al. (1986). They were able to remove 38% of the methyl parathion residues bound to soil, but 34% remained unextractable, and 28% could not be accounted for. 

Another complicating characteristic of materials from the environment is that the size and nature of the residue to be analyzed in the mass spectrometer will change from sample to sample. To determine if this might have an effect on the observed TCDD signal, we analyzed identical samples of TCDD with differing amounts of squalane, a saturated hydrocarbon selected as a model for residues obtained from standard extraction and cleanup procedures. As is indicated in Table I (Part A), there was... 

A further extension of the DFG S19 method was achieved when polar analytes and those unsuitable for GC were determined by LC/MS or more preferably by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). Triple-quadrupole MS/MS and ion trap MS" have become more affordable and acceptable in the recent past. These techniques provide multiple analyte methods by employing modes such as time segments, scan events or multiple injections. By improving the selectivity and sensitivity of detection after HPLC separation, the DFG S19 extraction and cleanup scheme can be applied to polar or high molecular weight analytes, and cleanup steps such as Si02 fractionation or even GPC become unnecessary. 

Both multi-residue methods are presented in several parts, which separate general considerations from procedures for extraction, cleanup and determination/ confirmation. Whereas in EN 12393 several extraction and cleanup steps cannot be combined arbitrarily, the modular concept is utilized to a greater extent in EN 1528. In the latter standard, there is no limitation to the combination of several extraction procedures, mostly designed for different commodities, e.g., milk, butter, cheese, meat or fish, with different cleanup steps. Both standards, EN 1528 and EN 12393, do not specify fixed GC conditions for the determination and confirmation. All types of GC instruments and columns, temperature programs and detectors can be used, if suitable. 

Extraction and cleanup of diphenyl ether herbicide metabolites in plants... 

Third, the bulk of the items in Table 1 address method performance. These requirements must be satisfied on a substrate-by-substrate basis to address substrate-specific interferences. As discussed above, interferences are best dealt with by application of conventional sample preparation techniques use of blank substrate to account for background interferences is not permitted. The analyst must establish a limit of detection (LOD), the lowest standard concentration that yields a signal that can be differentiated from background, and an LOQ (the reader is referred to Brady for a discussion of different techniques used to determine the LOD for immunoassays). For example, analysis of a variety of corn fractions requires the generation of LOD and LOQ data for each fraction. Procedural recoveries must accompany each analytical set and be based on fresh fortification of substrate prior to extraction. Recovery samples serve to confirm that the extraction and cleanup procedures were conducted correctly for all samples in each set of analyses. Carrying control substrate through the analytical procedure is good practice if practicable. 

The following methods serve as typical examples of immunoassay-based analytical methods applied to biomonitoring, environmental, and crop tissue analyses. Each method utilized a commercially available immunoassay kit that was combined with sample extraction and cleanup steps as part of an overall residue method. These methods can serve as models for resolution of similar problems. 

Sample preparation consists of homogenization, extraction, and cleanup steps. In the case of multiresidue pesticide analysis, different approaches can have substantially different sample preparation procedures but may employ the same determinative steps. For example, in the case of soil analysis, the imidazolinone herbicides require extraction of the soil in 0.5 M NaQH solution, whereas for the sulfonylurea herbicides, 0.5M NaOH solution would completely decompose the compounds. However, these two classes of compounds have the same determinative procedure. Some detection methods may permit fewer sample preparation steps, but in some cases the quality of the results or ruggedness of the method suffers when short cuts are attempted. For example, when MS is used, one pitfall is that one may automatically assume that all matrix effects are eliminated because of the specificity and selectivity of MS. 

Extraction and cleanup techniques for soil and water samples are described in other articles, and only comments specific to sediments are included here. 

Muir DCG, Grift NP, Solomon J. 1981. Extraction and cleanup of fish, sediment, and water for determination of triaryl phosphates by gas-liquid chromatography. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 64 79-84. 

Column Mobile phase Detection Analyte(s) and sample Extraction and cleanup Detection limit (DL), quantitation limit (QL) and recovery (Rec) Reference... 

Yurawecz MP, Puma BJ. 1986. Gas chromatographic determination of electron capture sensitive volatile industrial chemical residues in foods, using AOAC pesticide multiresidue extraction and cleanup procedures. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 69 80-86. 

Ambrus A, Lantos J, Visi E, et al. 1981. General method for determination of pesticide residues in samples of plant origin, soil and water I. Extraction and cleanup. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 64 733-742. 

Albro PW. 1979. Problems in analytic methodology Sample handling extraction and cleanup. In Nicholson WJ, Moore JA, eds. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Health Effects of Halogenated Aromatic Hydrocarbons International Symposium, New York, NY, USA, June 24-27, 1978. New York, NY New York Academy of Sciences, 320 19-27. 

In the laboratory, each soil sample (40 g) was transferred to a centrifuge bottle. Since the original purpose of the soil collection was to monitor specific organic compounds in the sludge-amended garden soils, a set of surrogate compounds was added to the soil prior to extraction to assess the extraction and cleanup recovery. 

Sample Extraction and Cleanup. The sample extraction method has been described previously (27, 28). Prior to extraction, 100 pL of a dio-fluoranthene surrogate standard solution (0.82 ng/pL) was added to each sample. The XAD-2 resin was extracted for 24 h in a Soxhlet apparatus with -350 mL hexane/acetone (50/50 v/v). The extract volume was then reduced to -100 pL using rotary evaporation followed by evaporation... 

A fourth example (P17) is from the Introduction section of the article that examines PCBs in full-fat milk. For background information, the authors outline the general four-step procedure used to determine PCBs in full-fat milk. Conventional methods used to accomplish two of these steps, extraction and cleanup, are also described. In a new paragraph, the authors introduce solid-phase microextraction (SPME), a technique that greatly simplifies this four-step process. But SPME is not recommended for complex matrixes hence, the authors motivate the topic of their current paper, headspace mode SPME (HSSPME). 

The interlaboratory results obtained from the analysis of defined standard solutions, but also from the analysis of sediment extracts prepared either by the coordinator of the study or by the participants themselves, also provide a measure of the variation between laboratories. The results show that the interlaboratory reproducibility ranges from 6.5% for the defined dioxin sample to 27.9% for the sediment sample extracted by the participants themselves. As was mentioned before, the reproducibility for this last sample is relatively high and most presumably due to the introduction of extra handlings (extraction and cleanup) to the total procedure. In addition, the fact that not all the participants had prior experience with the extraction protocol to be used could have added to the increase in variability of the process. Furthermore, the dilution factor was not dictated. This also introduces a certain degree of variation. For the reproducibility of the DR CALUX bioassay itself and not caused by differences in operating extraction conditions, the maximum variation between laboratories was observed to be 18.0%. The results for the sediment extract samples can also be used to estimate the method variability for extracts, that is, based on samples of unknown composition. Again, given the intra-as well as the interlaboratory variations observed in this study, it appears justified to conclude that the standard deviation of the means provides a reasonable estimate of the method variability, based on the overall aver-... 

The in vitro bioassay for dioxins with cleaned sediment extracts (DR-CALUX) proved to comply with the QA/QC criteria needed to guarantee the reliability of data in an inter- and intralaboratory study (Besselink et al., 2004). The chemical stability of dioxins makes it possible to apply destructive clean-up procedures which remove all matrix factors. Sample extraction and cleanup for other in vitro bioassays for specific mechanisms of toxicity require further development to make sure that the chemicals of interest are not lost or unwanted chemicals included in the sediment extract to be tested. Table 4 summarizes possible bioassays that could be performed in addition to chemical analyses with the dredged sediment in a licensing system. 

---