Headspace GC method

A wide variety of methods have been developed for the detection of residual monomers in polymeric materials. Volatile monomers, for example, acrylonitrile, butadiene, vinyl chloride, etc., are normally determined using headspace GC methods. 

A headspace GC method has been used, the method being based on NDP after liberation of HCN and employs acetonitrile as the internal standard. 

LC, in particular HPLC, offers the possibility of avoiding the time-consuming step of derivatization, minimizing the number of processes involved in the determination, which makes the procedure less prone to contamination or loss of analyte, except for the SPME Headspace-GC method. Several methods have been published following this approach (see Ref. 148). 

When a comparative analysis of the headspace volatiles of living and picked osmanthus flowers was performed by the dynamic headspace trapping method using Tenax GC, even more dramatic differences were observed, shown in Table 20 (60). 

For the GC method, the generated carbon disulfide is analysed using a flame photomeric detector in the sulfur mode. The acid decomposition is carried out in a sealed glass container at 80 °C, and an aliquot of the headspace is injected into a gas chromatograph. " ... 

Diffusive sampler Membrane extraction (MESI) Liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) Solid-phase extraction (SPE) SPE-PTV-GC Solid-phase microextraction (SPME) Headspace GC (SHS, DHS) Large-volume injection (LVI) Coupled HPLC-GC Membrane extraction (MESI) Difficult matrix introduction (DMI) Conventional solvent extraction methods 1 Pressurised solvent extraction methods Headspace GC (SHS, DHS) Thermal desorption (TD, DTD) Pyrolysis (Py) Photolysis Photon extraction (LD) Difficult matrix introduction (DMI)... 

Various ancillary GC techniques are headspace GC (Section 4.2.2), thermal desorption GC, pyrolysis GC, hyphenated methods (Chapter 7), multidimensional techniques (Section 7.4.1) and process GC. 

HS-GC methods have equally been used for chromatographic analysis of residual volatile substances in PS [219]. In particular, various methods have been described for the determination of styrene monomer in PS by solution headspace analysis [204,220]. Residual styrene monomer in PS granules can be determined in about 100 min in DMF solution using n-butylbenzene as an internal standard for this monomer solid headspace sampling is considerably less suitable as over 20 h are required to reach equilibrium [204]. Shanks [221] has determined residual styrene and butadiene in polymers with an analytical sensitivity of 0.05 to 5 ppm by SHS analysis of polymer solutions. The method development for determination of residual styrene monomer in PS samples and of residual solvent (toluene) in a printed laminated plastic film by HS-GC was illustrated [207], Less volatile monomers such as styrene (b.p. 145 °C) and 2-ethylhexyl acrylate (b.p. 214 °C) may not be determined using headspace techniques with the same sensitivities realised for more volatile monomers. Steichen [216] has reported a 600-fold increase in headspace sensitivity for the analysis of residual 2-ethylhexyl acrylate by adding water to the solution in dimethylacetamide. 

Some methods are available for determining -hexane in urine and tissues. A modified dynamic headspace extraction method for urine, mother s milk, and adipose tissue has been reported (Michael et al. 1980). Volatiles swept from the sample are analyzed by capillary GC/FID. Acceptable recovery was reported for model compounds detection limits were not reported (Michael et al. 1980). A solvent extraction procedure utilizing isotope dilution followed by GC/MS analysis has been reported for tissues (White et al. 1979). Recovery was good (104%) and detection limits are approximately 100 ng/mL (White etal. 1979). 

Bosset, J.O. and Gauch, R. (1993) Comparison of the volatile flavour compounds of six European AOC cheeses by using a new dynamic headspace GC-MS method. Int. Dairy J., 3, 359-77. 

The extent of oxidative deterioration will determine the acceptability of a food product. Because of this, methods for determining the degree of oxidation are very useful to the food industry. There are many possible methods that can be utilized (see Commentary) however, due to the stability of some of the end products, and their direct relationship with rancidity, headspace GC provides a fast and reliable method for oxidation measurement. Headspace techniques include static, dynamic, and solid-phase microextraction (SPME) methods. 

Rancidity measurements are taken by determining the concentration of either the intermediate compounds, or the more stable end products. Peroxide values (PV), thiobarbituric acid (TBA) test, fatty acid analysis, GC volatile analysis, active oxygen method (AOM), and sensory analysis are just some of the methods currently used for this purpose. Peroxide values and TBA tests are two very common rancidity tests however, the actual point of rancidity is discretionary. Determinations based on intermediate compounds (PV) are limited because the same value can represent two different points on the rancidity curve, thus making interpretations difficult. For example, a low PV can represent a sample just starting to become rancid, as well as a sample that has developed an extreme rancid characteristic. The TBA test has similar limitations, in that TBA values are typically quadratic with increasing oxidation. Due to the stability of some of the end-products, headspace GC is a fast and reliable method for oxidation measurement. Headspace techniques include static, dynamic and solid-phase microextraction (SPME) methods. Hexanal, which is the end-product formed from the oxidation of Q-6 unsaturated fatty acids (linoleate), is often found to be a major compound in the volatile profile of food products, and is often chosen as an indicator of oxidation in meals, especially during the early oxidative changes (Shahidi, 1994). 

Traces of explosives are commonly present in very low levels in samples that are analysed, so it is important to take sensitivity into account when designing detectors for explosive detection. As a rough rule of thumb , Nambayah and Quickenden [38] reported that a method suitable for direct explosive vapour detection should be able to detect explosive concentrations at less than 1 ng/L. They made an exhaustive study of the lowest experimental detection limits achieved with various analytical techniques reported in the literature on traces of explosive, and they informed that headspace GC-electron capture detector (ECD) followed by immunosensor techniques achieves the lowest detection limits (from 0.07 to 20 ng/L). 

Headspace GC-MS is the preferred method for the analysis of very volatile migrants. Practically the same GC conditions can be used as for GC-MS. Due to the coupling to MS, identification is also relatively easy. The heating time and temperature are the main experimental variables. The major drawback of headspace GC-MS is quantification. As a result of the principle of headspace GC-MS, i.e., partitioning of compounds between gas phase and liquid phase, the chemical properties will have a significant influence on the partition of each molecule between gas phase and liquid phase. Therefore, quantification is almost solely possible by using external standards of the same compound (Grob and Barry 2004). 

---