Hunter Adams, Sam Reeder, Katie Kohoutek, Christiane Hoppe-Jones, Susheera Pochiraju, Mark Southard, Keisuke Ikehata, Carlos A. Espindola Jr, Andrea M. Dietrich, Gary A. Burlingame, Daniel K. Nix, Ruth Marfil-Vega, Terry Jeffers, I. H. (Mel) Suffet, Michelle Ashman, Kandé Duncan, Eduardo Morales, William C. Lipps
{"title":"用固相微萃取-气相色谱-质谱法测定19种味觉和气味化合物的方法发展、实验室间比较和发生研究","authors":"Hunter Adams, Sam Reeder, Katie Kohoutek, Christiane Hoppe-Jones, Susheera Pochiraju, Mark Southard, Keisuke Ikehata, Carlos A. Espindola Jr, Andrea M. Dietrich, Gary A. Burlingame, Daniel K. Nix, Ruth Marfil-Vega, Terry Jeffers, I. H. (Mel) Suffet, Michelle Ashman, Kandé Duncan, Eduardo Morales, William C. Lipps","doi":"10.1002/aws2.70013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Public water systems (PWSs) need robust taste and odor (T&O) methods for a diverse range of compounds to proactively monitor their systems from source to tap and make informed treatment decisions. In this study, Standard Method 6040D T&O compounds by solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography–mass spectrometry was revised to include 19 T&O compounds with various odor descriptors including earthy, musty, grassy, woody, fishy, septic, fruity, and sweet. An interlaboratory comparison was performed to determine method accuracy, precision, reproducibility, and ruggedness. Three laboratories achieved passing quality control (QC) acceptance criteria for all 19 compounds, and one laboratory achieved passing QC acceptance criteria for 14 compounds. In this article, occurrence data and method applications are also discussed, which will allow PWSs to monitor diverse classes of T&O compounds and make informed, proactive treatment decisions to maintain high aesthetic quality for their customers.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":101301,"journal":{"name":"AWWA water science","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Method Development, Interlaboratory Comparison, and Occurrence Study for 19 Taste and Odor Compounds by Solid-Phase Microextraction Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry\",\"authors\":\"Hunter Adams, Sam Reeder, Katie Kohoutek, Christiane Hoppe-Jones, Susheera Pochiraju, Mark Southard, Keisuke Ikehata, Carlos A. Espindola Jr, Andrea M. Dietrich, Gary A. Burlingame, Daniel K. Nix, Ruth Marfil-Vega, Terry Jeffers, I. H. (Mel) Suffet, Michelle Ashman, Kandé Duncan, Eduardo Morales, William C. Lipps\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/aws2.70013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Public water systems (PWSs) need robust taste and odor (T&O) methods for a diverse range of compounds to proactively monitor their systems from source to tap and make informed treatment decisions. In this study, Standard Method 6040D T&O compounds by solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography–mass spectrometry was revised to include 19 T&O compounds with various odor descriptors including earthy, musty, grassy, woody, fishy, septic, fruity, and sweet. An interlaboratory comparison was performed to determine method accuracy, precision, reproducibility, and ruggedness. Three laboratories achieved passing quality control (QC) acceptance criteria for all 19 compounds, and one laboratory achieved passing QC acceptance criteria for 14 compounds. In this article, occurrence data and method applications are also discussed, which will allow PWSs to monitor diverse classes of T&O compounds and make informed, proactive treatment decisions to maintain high aesthetic quality for their customers.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101301,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AWWA water science\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AWWA water science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aws2.70013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AWWA water science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aws2.70013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Method Development, Interlaboratory Comparison, and Occurrence Study for 19 Taste and Odor Compounds by Solid-Phase Microextraction Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry
Public water systems (PWSs) need robust taste and odor (T&O) methods for a diverse range of compounds to proactively monitor their systems from source to tap and make informed treatment decisions. In this study, Standard Method 6040D T&O compounds by solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography–mass spectrometry was revised to include 19 T&O compounds with various odor descriptors including earthy, musty, grassy, woody, fishy, septic, fruity, and sweet. An interlaboratory comparison was performed to determine method accuracy, precision, reproducibility, and ruggedness. Three laboratories achieved passing quality control (QC) acceptance criteria for all 19 compounds, and one laboratory achieved passing QC acceptance criteria for 14 compounds. In this article, occurrence data and method applications are also discussed, which will allow PWSs to monitor diverse classes of T&O compounds and make informed, proactive treatment decisions to maintain high aesthetic quality for their customers.