Abstract
For the quantification of trace amounts of pollutants, complex validation protocols for method validation and quality control (QC) are required today in order to provide reliable results suitable for further statistical treatment in national and international surveys and pollutant monitoring programmes. National and international protocols today are in place to ensure the expected data quality in environmental pollutant monitoring and research. Due to these internationally accepted measures, the unequivocal identification of the respective compounds is expected to be confirmed and documented in scientific publications and official reports (Asmund and Cleemann 2000; Viswanathan and Salmon 2000; Asmund et al. 2004; Xu et al. 2013). These QC criteria need also to be documented in comprehensive accreditation protocols and are today a mandatory part of national and international pollutant monitoring programmes. Major QC parameters like instrument response, linear range, relative compound-specific recovery rates, non-linear responses, the limit of detection (LOD), method detection limit (MDL), limit of quantification (upper and lower LOQ) and contamination control (blank values), etc., are an integrated part of the quantification procedure together with the instrument-specific identification parameters (i.e. m/z, retention time windows, etc.). Usually, the methods are associated with compound-specific overall uncertainties which in turn can be used for further statistical assessments and data comparison (Schofield et al. 2001). For more in-depth information on method validation and quality control in environmental analytical chemistry, we refer to the following books (Kateman and Pijpers 1981; de Bievre and Günzler 2005; Majcen and Taylor 2010; Matsuda 2012), a selection of comprehensive reviews (van Zoonen et al. 1998; Indrayanto 2018; Sajnog et al. 2018) and the updated web-page of EuraChem, the European network of organisations, aiming at establishing a system for the international traceability of chemical measurements and the promotion of good quality practices. (retrieved 10.05.2020: https://www.eurachem.org/index.php/publications/mnu-rdlst/130-rdl-validation=).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ahuja S (1997) Chiral separations: applications and technology. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC
Ahuja S (2000) Chiral separations by chromatography. Oxford University Press; American Chemical Society, Oxford, England, Washington, DC
Ali I, Aboul-Enein HY (2004) Chiral pollutants: distribution, toxicity, and analysis by chromatography and capillary electrophoresis. West Sussex, Eng.; J. Wiley, Chichester; Hoboken, NJ
Asmund G, Cleemann M (2000) Analytical methods, quality assurance and quality control used in the Greenland AMAP programme. Sci Total Environ 245(1–3):203–219
Asmund G, Vorkamp K, Backus S, Comba M (2004) An update on analytical methods, quality assurance and quality control used in the Greenland AMAP programme: 1999-2002. Sci Total Environ 331(1–3):233–245
Berthod A (2010) Chiral recognition in separation methods: mechanisms and applications. Springer, Heidelberg; New York
Chan CC (2004) Analytical method validation and instrument performance verification. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ
Chiu CC, Keeling CI, Bohlmann J (2017) Toxicity of pine monoterpenes to mountain pine beetle. Sci Rep 7(1):8858
de Bievre P, Günzler H (2005) Validation in chremical measurement. Springer, Heidelberg
De Geus HJ, Wester P, de Boer J, Brinkmann UAT (2000) Enantiomer fractions instead of enantiomer ratios. Chemosphere 41(5):725–727. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-6535(99)00431-2
Dousa M, Reitmajer J, Lustig P, Stefko M (2016) Effect of chromatographic conditions on Enantioseparation of Bedaquiline using polysaccharide-based chiral stationary phases in RP-HPLC. J Chromatogr Sci 54(9):1501–1507
Ermer J, Vogel M (2000) Applications of hyphenated LC-MS techniques in pharmaceutical analysis. Biomed Chromatogr 14(6):373–383
Gubitz G, Schmid MG (2004) Chiral separation principles: an introduction. Methods Mol Biol 243:1–28
Gübitz G, Schmid MG (2004) Chiral separations: methods and protocols. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ
Harner T, Wiberg K, Norstrom R (2000) Enantiomer fractions are preferred to enantiomer ratios for describing chiral signatures in environmental analysis. Environ Sci Technol 34(1):218–220. https://doi.org/10.1021/es9906958
Harris DC (2010) Quantitative chemical analysis. W.H. Freeman and Co., New York
He Z, Peng Y, Wang L, Luo M, Liu X (2015) Unequivocal enantiomeric identification and analysis of 10 chiral pesticides in fruit and vegetables by QuEChERS method combined with liquid chromatography-quadruple/linear ion trap mass spectrometry determination. Chirality 27(12):958–964
Hegeman WJ, Laane RW (2002) Enantiomeric enrichment of chiral pesticides in the environment. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 173:85–116
Hühnerfuss H (2000) Chromatographic enantiomer separation of chiral xenobiotics and their metabolites--a versatile tool for process studies in marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Chemosphere 40(9–11):913–919
Hühnerfuss H, Shah MA (2009) Enantioselective chromatograph – a powerful tool for the discrimination of biotic and abiotic processes of chiral environmental pollutants. J. Chromatogr. A 1216/3:481–502
Indrayanto G (2018) Validation of chromatographic methods of analysis: application for drugs that derived from herbs. Profiles Drug Subst Excip Relat Methodol 43:359–392
Jaus A, Oehme M (2001) Consequences of variable purity of heptakis(2,3,6-tri-O-methyl)-beta-cyclodextrin determined by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry on the enantioselective separation of polychlorinated compounds. J Chromatogr A 905(1–2):59–67
Kateman G, Pijpers FW (1981) Quality control in analytical chemistry. Wiley, New York
Krstulović AM (1989) Chiral separations by HPLC. E. Horwood; Halsted Press, Chichester; New York
Majcen N, Taylor P (2010) Practical examples on traceability, measurement uncertainty and validation in chemistry. Bruxelles, JRC European Commission
Matsuda R (2012) Quality assurance of the chemical analysis measurements of foods. Kokuritsu Iyakuhin Shokuhin Eisei Kenkyusho Hokoku (130):21–30
Meyer VR (1989) Chromatographic enantiomer separation. The phenomenon of chirality. Pharm Unserer Zeit 18(5):140–145
Miller DR, Crowe CM, Asaro C, Debarr GL (2003) Dose and enantiospecific responses of white pine cone beetles, Conophthorus coniperda, to alpha-Pinene in an eastern white pine seed orchard. J Chem Ecol 29(2):437–451
Nageswara Rao R, Narasa Raju A, Nagaraju D (2006) Development and validation of a liquid chromatographic method for determination of enantiomeric purity of citalopram in bulk drugs and pharmaceuticals. J Pharm Biomed Anal 41(1):280–285
Sajnog A, Hanc A, Baralkiewicz D (2018) Metrological approach to quantitative analysis of clinical samples by LA-ICP-MS: a critical review of recent studies. Talanta 182:92–110
Sanganyado E, Lu Z, Fu Q, Schlenk D, Gan J (2017) Chiral pharmaceuticals: a review on their environmental occurrence and fate processes. Water Res 124:527–542
Schofield JA, Miller K, Blume L (2001) Quantifying uncertainty: calculating interval estimates using quality control results. Qual Assur 9(3–4):229–237
Schurig V (1984) Gas chromatographic separation of enantiomers on optically active metal-complex-free stationary phases. New analytical methods. Angewandte Chemie-International Edition in English 23(10):747–765
Szepesi G, Gazdag M (1988) Enantiomeric separations and their application in pharmaceutical analysis using chiral eluents. J Pharm Biomed Anal 6(6–8):623–639
Trukhin A, Kruchkov F, Hansen LK, Kallenborn R, Kiprianova A, Nikiforov V (2007) Toxaphene chemistry: separation and characterisation of selected enantiomers of the Polychloropinene mixtures. Chemosphere 67(9):1695–1700
Tuzimski T, Sherma J (2015) High performance liquid chromatography in pesticide residue analysis. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL
Ulrich EM, Helsel DR, Foreman WT (2003) Complications with using ratios for environmental data: comparing enantiomeric ratios (ERs) and enantiomer fractions (EFs). Chemosphere 53(5):531–538
van Zoonen P, van’t Klooster HA, Hoogebrugge R, Gort SM, van de Wiel HJ (1998) Validation of analytical methods and laboratory procedures for chemical measurements. Arh Hig Toksikol 49:355–370
Vetter W, Schurig V (1997) Enantioselective determination of chiral organochlorine compounds in biota by gas chromatography on modified cyclodextrins. J Chromatogr A 774(1–2):143–175
Viswanathan HN, Salmon JW (2000) Accrediting organizations and quality improvement. Am J Manag Care 6(10):1117–1130
Ward TJ (2000) Chiral separations. Anal Chem 72(18):4521–4528
Xu W, Wang X, Cai Z (2013) Analytical chemistry of the persistent organic pollutants identified in the Stockholm convention: a review. Anal Chim Acta 790:1–13
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kallenborn, R., Hühnerfuss, H., Aboul-Enein, H.Y., Ali, I. (2021). Quality Control and Evaluation Criteria for Enantiomer-Selective Separation Methods in Environmental Sciences. In: Chiral Environmental Pollutants. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62456-9_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62456-9_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-62455-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-62456-9
eBook Packages: Chemistry and Materials ScienceChemistry and Material Science (R0)