Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
What is in the fish? Collaborative trial in suspect and non-target screening of organic micropollutants using LC- and GC-HRMS
Department of Aquatic Sciences and Assessment, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Box 7050, Uppsala, Sweden.
Department of Aquatic Sciences and Assessment, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Box 7050, Uppsala, Sweden.
Department of Aquatic Sciences and Assessment, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Box 7050, Uppsala, Sweden.
Department of Chemistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Show others and affiliations
2023 (English)In: Environment International, ISSN 0160-4120, E-ISSN 1873-6750, Vol. 181, article id 108288Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

A collaborative trial involving 16 participants from nine European countries was conducted within the NORMAN network in efforts to harmonise suspect and non-target screening of environmental contaminants in whole fish samples of bream (Abramis brama). Participants were provided with freeze-dried, homogenised fish samples from a contaminated and a reference site, extracts (spiked and non-spiked) and reference sample preparation protocols for liquid chromatography (LC) and gas chromatography (GC) coupled to high resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS). Participants extracted fish samples using their in-house sample preparation method and/or the protocol provided. Participants correctly identified 9–69 % of spiked compounds using LC-HRMS and 20–60 % of spiked compounds using GC-HRMS. From the contaminated site, suspect screening with participants’ own suspect lists led to putative identification of on average ∼145 and ∼20 unique features per participant using LC-HRMS and GC-HRMS, respectively, while non-target screening identified on average ∼42 and ∼56 unique features per participant using LC-HRMS and GC-HRMS, respectively. Within the same sub-group of sample preparation method, only a few features were identified by at least two participants in suspect screening (16 features using LC-HRMS, 0 features using GC-HRMS) and non-target screening (0 features using LC-HRMS, 2 features using GC-HRMS). The compounds identified had log octanol/water partition coefficient (KOW) values from −9.9 to 16 and mass-to-charge ratios (m/z) of 68 to 761 (LC-HRMS and GC-HRMS). A significant linear trend was found between log KOW and m/z for the GC-HRMS data. Overall, these findings indicate that differences in screening results are mainly due to the data analysis workflows used by different participants. Further work is needed to harmonise the results obtained when applying suspect and non-target screening approaches to environmental biota samples.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2023. Vol. 181, article id 108288
Keywords [en]
Biota, Collaborative trial, Exposome, GC-HRMS, LC-HRMS, Suspect and non-target analysis
National Category
Analytical Chemistry Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-216197DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.108288Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85175353112OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-216197DiVA, id: diva2:1810437
Available from: 2023-11-08 Created: 2023-11-08 Last updated: 2023-11-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(3666 kB)46 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 3666 kBChecksum SHA-512
5cde4b15de51781ea5f59861a041933a4dccd1f310b10e3479e67da72cf39d96529e00b4d3c97902e9d9354c364294327dd2fae03ff80f554a4eba166d679fd4
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Haglund, Peter

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Haglund, Peter
By organisation
Department of Chemistry
In the same journal
Environment International
Analytical ChemistryEnvironmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 46 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 242 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf