COMPARISON OF GAS AND LIQUID-CHROMATOGRAPHY FOR ANALYZING POLAR PESTICIDES IN WATER SAMPLES

Citation
I. Liska et J. Slobodnik, COMPARISON OF GAS AND LIQUID-CHROMATOGRAPHY FOR ANALYZING POLAR PESTICIDES IN WATER SAMPLES, Journal of chromatography, 733(1-2), 1996, pp. 235-258
Citations number
249
Categorie Soggetti
Chemistry Analytical","Biochemical Research Methods
Journal title
Volume
733
Issue
1-2
Year of publication
1996
Pages
235 - 258
Database
ISI
SICI code
Abstract
This review describes the applications of gas chromatography (GC) and liquid chromatography (LC) in the analysis of selected groups of pesti cides in water. The attention is focussed on the most popular (in term s of amounts produced and applied) pesticide classes, i.e., carbamates , phenylureas, triazines, phenoxy acetic acid derivatives and chlorina ted phenols. The use of GC and LC for the analysis of these compounds in water samples in the past and at present is reviewed separately for each group. Sample concentration and detection techniques are discuss ed in relation to their influence on the performance of the particular separation technique. Special attention is given to mass spectrometry (MS) because it is the most intensively developed detection technique in environmental analysis. The potential of another novel approach - large volume injections into the GC - is discussed separately. Methods using GC or LC coupled to an appropriate detector and using suitable sample handling procedures provide detection limits typically in the r ange of 0.001-1 ppb. At these levels, target or unknown compounds can be determined/identified by means of their retention and spectral char acteristics. Principally, most of the analytes can be determined by bo th techniques, however, GC methods, when applicable, still have the ad vantages of great separation efficiency, high speed of analysis and th e availability of a wide range of highly sensitive detectors; on the o ther hand, LC is often a method of choice when polar, non-volatile or thermolabile compounds are to be analyzed. Neither of the two separati on techniques reviewed seems to have an overall priority in environmen tal analysis of pesticides. They can be considered as complementary.