微ftir成像光谱与热解-气相色谱/质谱相结合的微塑料定量方法。应用于河流沉积物†

IF 2.6 3区 化学 Q2 CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL
Nadia Bouzid, Bruno Tassin, Johnny Gasperi and Rachid Dris
{"title":"微ftir成像光谱与热解-气相色谱/质谱相结合的微塑料定量方法。应用于河流沉积物†","authors":"Nadia Bouzid, Bruno Tassin, Johnny Gasperi and Rachid Dris","doi":"10.1039/D5AY00237K","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Several studies have focused on quantifying microplastics (MP) in the environment using μ-FTIR and Py-GC/MS, the most common analytical methods. However, their application to complex matrices like sediments is affected by interferences specific to each method. In this study, we developed a protocol combining μ-FTIR and Py-GC/MS for sequential analysis of MP (10–500 μm) in 16 river sediment samples, targeting PE, PP, and PS polymers. Mass concentrations were estimated from the particle volume in μ-FTIR and measured directly by Py-GC/MS using internal calibration. Results show consistency between the two methods across different sites, with variability of two orders of magnitude in concentration ranges from 0.3 to 50 items g<small><sup>−1</sup></small> and 0.2 to 17 μg g<small><sup>−1</sup></small> for μ-FTIR, and 0.8 to 21 μg g<small><sup>−1</sup></small> for Py-GC/MS. Replicate analyses (2 to 6 per site) revealed that intra-site variability was mainly influenced by sample preparation and, to a lesser extent, by the measurement technique. While estimated and measured concentrations were similar, discrepancies were observed in polymer proportions: PP predominated in μ-FTIR, while PS was more prevalent in Py-GC/MS. These differences are explained by the specific limitations of each method, especially the limited detection of synthetic fibres and tyre or road abrasion particles by μ-FTIR, which are detected as MP by Py-GC/MS. This comparative study provides recommendations for evaluating compatibility between studies using either technique and offers guidelines for selecting the most appropriate method based on research interests.</p>","PeriodicalId":64,"journal":{"name":"Analytical Methods","volume":" 18","pages":" 3781-3792"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sequential combination of micro-FTIR imaging spectroscopy and pyrolysis-GC/MS for microplastic quantification. Application to river sediments†\",\"authors\":\"Nadia Bouzid, Bruno Tassin, Johnny Gasperi and Rachid Dris\",\"doi\":\"10.1039/D5AY00237K\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p >Several studies have focused on quantifying microplastics (MP) in the environment using μ-FTIR and Py-GC/MS, the most common analytical methods. However, their application to complex matrices like sediments is affected by interferences specific to each method. In this study, we developed a protocol combining μ-FTIR and Py-GC/MS for sequential analysis of MP (10–500 μm) in 16 river sediment samples, targeting PE, PP, and PS polymers. Mass concentrations were estimated from the particle volume in μ-FTIR and measured directly by Py-GC/MS using internal calibration. Results show consistency between the two methods across different sites, with variability of two orders of magnitude in concentration ranges from 0.3 to 50 items g<small><sup>−1</sup></small> and 0.2 to 17 μg g<small><sup>−1</sup></small> for μ-FTIR, and 0.8 to 21 μg g<small><sup>−1</sup></small> for Py-GC/MS. Replicate analyses (2 to 6 per site) revealed that intra-site variability was mainly influenced by sample preparation and, to a lesser extent, by the measurement technique. While estimated and measured concentrations were similar, discrepancies were observed in polymer proportions: PP predominated in μ-FTIR, while PS was more prevalent in Py-GC/MS. These differences are explained by the specific limitations of each method, especially the limited detection of synthetic fibres and tyre or road abrasion particles by μ-FTIR, which are detected as MP by Py-GC/MS. This comparative study provides recommendations for evaluating compatibility between studies using either technique and offers guidelines for selecting the most appropriate method based on research interests.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":64,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Analytical Methods\",\"volume\":\" 18\",\"pages\":\" 3781-3792\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Analytical Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2025/ay/d5ay00237k\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytical Methods","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2025/ay/d5ay00237k","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

一些研究集中在使用μ-FTIR和Py-GC/MS这两种最常用的分析方法定量环境中的微塑料(MP)。然而,它们在沉积物等复杂基质中的应用受到每种方法特有的干扰的影响。本研究采用μ-FTIR和Py-GC/MS相结合的方法,对16个河流沉积物样品中PE、PP和PS聚合物(10-500 μm)进行了序列分析。质量浓度由μ-FTIR中的颗粒体积估算,并通过内标的Py-GC/MS直接测量。结果表明,两种方法在不同地点具有一致性,μ-FTIR和Py-GC/MS在0.3 ~ 50 μg−1和0.2 ~ 17 μg−1的浓度范围内存在两个数量级的差异,而Py-GC/MS的浓度范围为0.8 ~ 21 μg−1。重复分析(每个位点2至6个)表明,位点内变异主要受样品制备的影响,在较小程度上受测量技术的影响。虽然估计和测量的浓度相似,但在聚合物比例上存在差异:μ-FTIR中PP占优势,而Py-GC/MS中PS更普遍。这些差异是由每种方法的特定局限性所解释的,特别是μ-FTIR对合成纤维和轮胎或道路磨损颗粒的检测有限,而Py-GC/MS检测为MP。这项比较研究为评估两种技术之间的兼容性提供了建议,并为根据研究兴趣选择最合适的方法提供了指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Sequential combination of micro-FTIR imaging spectroscopy and pyrolysis-GC/MS for microplastic quantification. Application to river sediments†

Sequential combination of micro-FTIR imaging spectroscopy and pyrolysis-GC/MS for microplastic quantification. Application to river sediments†

Several studies have focused on quantifying microplastics (MP) in the environment using μ-FTIR and Py-GC/MS, the most common analytical methods. However, their application to complex matrices like sediments is affected by interferences specific to each method. In this study, we developed a protocol combining μ-FTIR and Py-GC/MS for sequential analysis of MP (10–500 μm) in 16 river sediment samples, targeting PE, PP, and PS polymers. Mass concentrations were estimated from the particle volume in μ-FTIR and measured directly by Py-GC/MS using internal calibration. Results show consistency between the two methods across different sites, with variability of two orders of magnitude in concentration ranges from 0.3 to 50 items g−1 and 0.2 to 17 μg g−1 for μ-FTIR, and 0.8 to 21 μg g−1 for Py-GC/MS. Replicate analyses (2 to 6 per site) revealed that intra-site variability was mainly influenced by sample preparation and, to a lesser extent, by the measurement technique. While estimated and measured concentrations were similar, discrepancies were observed in polymer proportions: PP predominated in μ-FTIR, while PS was more prevalent in Py-GC/MS. These differences are explained by the specific limitations of each method, especially the limited detection of synthetic fibres and tyre or road abrasion particles by μ-FTIR, which are detected as MP by Py-GC/MS. This comparative study provides recommendations for evaluating compatibility between studies using either technique and offers guidelines for selecting the most appropriate method based on research interests.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Analytical Methods
Analytical Methods CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL-FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.20%
发文量
569
审稿时长
1.8 months
期刊介绍: Early applied demonstrations of new analytical methods with clear societal impact
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信