Identifying tephras by alpha counting

1982 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 662-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. B. Cormie ◽  
D. J. Huntley ◽  
D. E. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Sample Preparation ◽  
Field Technique ◽  
Minimal Sample

Alpha counting, as used for determination of uranium and thorium concentrations, was found useful for identifying some tephras found in northwest North America. The method has the advantage of requiring only minimal sample preparation and the potential of providing a field technique for identifying tephras.

A universal method for the determination of polysorbate 80 in monoclonal antibodies and novel protein therapeutic formulations

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 1296-1304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veerendra Koppolu ◽  
Bhargavi Vemulapalli ◽  
Jason Thomas ◽  
Sheau-Chiann Wang ◽  
Jon Borman
Keyword(s):  
Monoclonal Antibodies ◽  
Sample Preparation ◽  
Protein Solutions ◽  
Polysorbate 80 ◽  
Universal Method ◽  
Minimal Sample ◽  
Protein Therapeutic ◽  
Novel Protein

A universal and simple assay requiring minimal sample preparation has been developed to quantitate PS80 and other excipients in protein solutions.

Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay of Ochratoxin A in Barley

1983 ◽  
Vol 66 (6) ◽  
pp. 1481-1484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R A Morgan ◽  
Ruth Mcnerney ◽  
Henry W-S Chan
Keyword(s):  
Sample Preparation ◽  
Ochratoxin A ◽  
Immunosorbent Assay ◽  
Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay ◽  
High Dilution ◽  
Assay Sensitivity ◽  
Double Antibody ◽  
Minimal Sample ◽  
Ochratoxin Α

Abstract A noncompetitive, double antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for ochratoxin A using microtitration plates has been developed and applied to samples of barley. The anti-ochratoxin A antiserum, which is used at high dilution, does not cross-react significantly with ochratoxin B or ochratoxin α, Assay sensitivity for determination of the toxin in barley samples is 60 ng/kg. Minimal sample preparation is required before assay.

Recent Trends in the Development of Green Microextraction Techniques for the Determination of Hazardous Organic Compounds in Wine

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (7) ◽  
pp. 788-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natasa P. Kalogiouri ◽  
Victoria F. Samanidou
Keyword(s):  
Sample Preparation ◽  
Solid Phase Extraction ◽  
Organic Compounds ◽  
Method Development ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Stir Bar Sorptive Extraction ◽  
Phase Extraction ◽  
Microextraction Techniques ◽  
Hazardous Organic Compounds

Background:The sample preparation is the most crucial step in the analytical method development. Taking this into account, it is easily understood why the domain of sample preparation prior to detection is rapidly developing. Following the modern trends towards the automation, miniaturization, simplification and minimization of organic solvents and sample volumes, green microextraction techniques witness rapid growth in the field of food quality and safety. In a globalized market, it is essential to face the consumers need and develop analytical methods that guarantee the quality of food products and beverages. The strive for the accurate determination of organic hazards in a famous and appreciated alcoholic beverage like wine has necessitated the development of microextraction techniques.Objective:The objective of this review is to summarize all the recent microextraction methodologies, including solid phase extraction (SPE), solid phase microextraction (SPME), liquid-phase microextraction (LPME), dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME), stir bar sorptive extraction (SBSE), matrix solid-phase dispersion (MSPD), single-drop microextraction (SDME) and dispersive solid phase extraction (DSPE) that were developed for the determination of hazardous organic compounds (pesticides, mycotoxins, colorants, biogenic amines, off-flavors) in wine. The analytical performance of the techniques is evaluated and their advantages and limitations are discussed.Conclusion:An extensive investigation of these techniques remains vital through the development of novel strategies and the implication of new materials that could upgrade the selectivity for the extraction of target analytes.

scholarly journals A Toolbox for the Determination of Nitroaromatic Explosives in Marine Water, Sediment, and Biota Samples on Femtogram Levels by GC-MS/MS

Toxics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 60
Author(s):  
Tobias Hartwig Bünning ◽  
Jennifer Susanne Strehse ◽  
Ann Christin Hollmann ◽  
Tom Bötticher ◽  
Edmund Maser
Keyword(s):  
Sample Preparation ◽  
Freeze Drying ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Phase Extraction ◽  
Direct Extraction ◽  
Time Saving ◽  
Marine Samples ◽  
Volume Method ◽  
Biota Samples

To determine the amount of the explosives 1,3-dinitrobenzene, 2,4-dinitrotoluene, 2,4,6-trinitrotoluene, and its metabolites in marine samples, a toolbox of methods was developed to enhance sample preparation and analysis of various types of marine samples, such as water, sediment, and different kinds of biota. To achieve this, established methods were adapted, improved, and combined. As a result, if explosive concentrations in sediment or mussel samples are greater than 10 ng per g, direct extraction allows for time-saving sample preparation; if concentrations are below 10 ng per g, techniques such as freeze-drying, ultrasonic, and solid-phase extraction can help to detect even picogram amounts. Two different GC-MS/MS methods were developed to enable the detection of these explosives in femtogram per microliter. With a splitless injector, limits of detection (LODs) between 77 and 333 fg/µL could be achieved in only 6.25 min. With the 5 µL programmable temperature vaporization—large volume method (PTV-LVI), LODs between 8 and 47 fg/µL could be achieved in less than 7 min. The detection limits achieved by these methods are among the lowest published to date. Their reliability has been tested and confirmed by measuring large and diverse sample sets.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document