Matrix effects calibration curve

The ICP-AES and ICP-MS techniques may also suffer from matrix effects, such as spray chamber effects caused by the different viscosity of the samples and the calibration standards. The careful choice of internal standards can reduce this problem. The effects caused by high amounts of easily ionized elements may be solved by internal standardization or by the use of matrix-matched calibration curves. An additional specific problem with ICP-AES is the risk of spectral overlaps. 

Using standard solutions for quantifying concentrations in an unknown sample may give rise to measurement errors due to the influence of food matrix remnants in the injection solution. Ion suppression or enhancement is a typical matrix effect seen in mass spectrometry. Matrix-matched standards are generally used in order to avoid such possible matrix interferences. Standard addition is a valid alternative for dealing with matrix effects. On the other hand, standard addition or matrix based calibration curves require more manipulation, which is time- and money-consuming, whereas a greater risk of manipulation errors ensues. 

Effect of the sample s matrix on a normal calibration curve. 

The usage of the ratio of chai acteristic lines as analytical parameter in the process of formation of the calibration curve provides a significant decrease of the residual error. In Realization of this method simultaneously with the decrease of the matrix effects causes some decrease or even full compensation of the fonu and condition of the measured surface. 

Calibration curves must be made using a series of standards to relate emission intensities to the concentration of each element of interest. Because ICP-OES is relatively insensitive to matrix effects, pure solutions containing the element of interest often are used for calibration. For thin films the amount of sample ablated by spark discharges or laser sources is often a strong function of the sample s composition. Therefore, either standards with a composition similar to the sample s must be used or an internal standard (a known concentration of one element) is needed. 

Figure 5.60 Calibration curves for the diarrhetic shellfish poisons in (i) standard solutions in methanol (O), and (11) standard solutions in poison-free scallop extract solutions ( ) (a) pectenotoxin-6 (b) okadaic acid (c) yessotoxin (d) dinophysistoxin-1. Reprinted from J. Chromatogr., A, 943, Matrix effect and correction by standard addition in quantitative liquid chromatographic-mass spectrometric analysis of diarrhetic shellfish poisoning toxins , Ito, S. and Tsukada, K., 39-46, Copyright (2002), with permission from Elsevier Science.

Although accepted by lUPAC and ACS, the k s /m" definition is hard to implement and does not take either variability in method efficiency or matrix effects into consideration. This would be rectifiable if the calibration curves were prepared from control matrix samples fortified at different concentrations (within one order of magnitude of an estimated LOD). 

Figure 2 An illustration of matrix effects on immunoassay performance. Calibration curves of atrazine were run in buffer ( ), in skim milk (O) and in whole milk (A). Reprinted from M. Franek, V. Kolarand S. A. Evemin,Analyh ca Chimica Acta, 311,349-356, Copyright 1995, with permission from Excerpta Medica Inc...

Two general approaches have been used to overcome matrix effects (1) partial purification of the analyte prior to analysis by immunoassay ( cleanup methods) and (2) the use of a matrix blank when preparing the calibration curve. Both options are widely used, but each has its individual limitations. 

Because of the possibility that the herbicide alachlor could adulterate food if either poultry or livestock consumed contaminated materials, Lehotay and Miller evaluated three commercial immunoassays in milk and urine samples from a cow dosed with alachlor. They found that milk samples needed to be diluted with appropriate solvents (1 2, v/v) to eliminate the matrix effect. One assay kit (selected based on cost) was also evaluated for use with eggs and liver samples from chickens. Egg and liver samples were blended with acetonitrile, filtered, and diluted with water. Linear calibration curves prepared from fortified egg and liver samples were identical... 

A sulfathiazole immunoassay was utilized to determine residues present in raw milk. The LOD was found to be 12 pg kg (based on 80% Bo) however, comparison of the calibration curve from an aqueous solution with a raw milk calibration curve indicated a significant matrix effect. 

For complicated samples where matrix or interelement effects are present, a linear calibration curve may not be valid, and one should consider using an empirical model for concentration correction. This usually requires a large set of standards of similar composition to the unknown, which generally makes analysis rather impractical. Inter-element effects can be calculated from a basic knowledge of physical parameters in combination with the appropriate use of samples of known composition, pure elemental standards or composite standards. 

XRF nowadays provides accurate concentration data at major and low trace levels for nearly all the elements in a wide variety of materials. Hardware and software advances enable on-line application of the fundamental approach in either classical or influence coefficient algorithms for the correction of absorption and enhancement effects. Vendors software packages, such as QuantAS (ARL), SSQ (Siemens), X40, IQ+ and SuperQ (Philips), are precalibrated analytical programs, allowing semiquantitative to quantitative analysis for elements in any type of (unknown) material measured on a specific X-ray spectrometer without standards or specific calibrations. The basis is the fundamental parameter method for calculation of correction coefficients for matrix elements (inter-element influences) from fundamental physical values such as absorption and secondary fluorescence. UniQuant (ODS) calibrates instrumental sensitivity factors (k values) for 79 elements with a set of standards of the pure element. In this approach to inter-element effects, it is not necessary to determine a calibration curve for each element in a matrix. Calibration of k values with pure standards may still lead to systematic errors for unknown polymer samples. UniQuant provides semiquantitative XRF analysis [242]. 

Electrothermal atomic absorption spectrophotometry with Zeeman background correction was used by Zhang et al. [141] for the determination of cadmium in seawater. Citric acid was used as an organic matrix modifier and was found to be more effective than EDTA or ascorbic acid. The organic matrix modifier reduced the interferences from salts and other trace metals and gave a linear calibration curve for cadmium at concentrations < 1.6 pg/1. The method has a limit of detection of 0.019 pg/1 of cadmium and recoveries of 95-105% at the 0.2 pg of cadmium level. 

Matrix effect — To demonstrate that the assay performance was independent from the sample matrix, QC samples were prepared using two different lots of matrix. The QC samples were evaluated using the same calibration curve. With regard to analytical recovery, no significant difference was observed for the QCs prepared in two lots of plasma. 

It is important that a linear curve is repeatable from day to day. However, linear ranges may be different for different matrices. The reason for this is a possible effect of interferences inherent to the matrix. A test for general matrix effects can be performed by means of standard additions or the method of analyte additions. For a set of samples, obtained by adding different concentrations of analyte to a certain matrix, the slope of the calibration curve is compared with the slope of the usual calibration function. A lack of significance (curves are parallel) means that there is no matrix effect [21,75]. 

Another calibration technique - standard addition - minimizes matrix effects because analytes with well defined increasing concentrations are added to a set of sample solutions to be analyzed. The measured calibration curve in the standard addition mode plots the measured ion intensities of analytes versus the concentration added to the sample solution. The concentration of analytes in the undoped sample is then determined by extrapolation of the calibration curve with the x-axis. Matrix matching is subsequently performed and the matrix effects (signal depression or interference problems) are considered. An example of the standard addition technique is described in Section 6.2.6 using solution based calibration in LA-ICP-MS. 

The main limitation of this model [6,14] is that it assumes that the measured response at a given sensor is due entirely to the constituents considered in the calibration step, whose spectra are included in the matrix of sensitivities, S. Hence, in the prediction step, the response of the unknown sample is decomposed only in the contributions that are found in S. If the response of the unknown contains some contributions from constituents that have not been included in S (in addition to background problems and baseline effects), biased predicted concentrations may be obtained, since the system will try to assign this signal to the components in S. For this reason, this model can only be used for systems of known qualitative composition (e.g. gas-phase spectroscopy, some process monitoring or pharmaceutical samples), in which the signal of all the pure constituents giving rise to a response can be known. For the same reason, CLS is not useful for mixtures where interaction between constituents or deviations from the Lambert-Beer law (nonlinear calibration curves) occur. 

Figure 5-3 shows a strong matrix effect in the analysis of perchlorate (CIO4 ) by mass spectrometry. Perchlorate at a level above 18 p,g/L in drinking water is of concern because it can reduce thyroid hormone production. Standard solutions of C104 in pure water gave the upper calibration curve in Figure 5-3. The response to standard solutions with the same concentrations of CIO4 in groundwater was 15 times less, as shown in the lower curve. Reduction of the ClOj" signal is a matrix effect attributed to other anions present in the groundwater.

Copper, Chromium, Manganese, and Nickel. The analytical method for determining copper, chromium, manganese, and nickel involves digesting the coal with nitric and perchloric acids, fusing the residue with lithium metaborate, and determining the combined digestion and leach solutions by atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Since there is no standard material to analyze for the construction of calibration curves, the standard additions method is used for the assay. While this method increases the time required for analysis, it helps to eliminate the effect of the matrix. 

As a summary of observations on sample preparation of all types, some generalizations can be reiterated. Whenever possible, blank samples spiked with standards should be employed and recovery studies should include assays of each extract, to monitor possible drug-substrate interaction. One technique effective in this regard, is to examine the aqueous phase by TLC after all the "free" drug has been extracted. Standard calibration curves should be compared to similar plots in the presence of sample matrix constituents whenever possible. GC should never be employed as the sole criterion in any analytical evaluation. 

As with any analytical technique, generation of a reproducible standard curve with minimal error is critical. An assay calibration consists of several steps during which the value of the primary standard is transferred to the calibrators used in the final assay [22]. Immunoassay optimization is usually difficult due to protein heterogeneity and matrix effects and these factors, heterogeneity and matrix effects, will also affect MIP based assays [22]. 

---