Supplementary Material: SUSPECT SCREENING AND QUANTIFICATION OF TRACE ORGANIC EXPLOSIVES IN WASTEWATER USING SOLID PHASE EXTRACTION AND LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY-HIGH RESOLUTION ACCURATE MASS SPECTROMETRY Helena Rapp-Wrightaǂ, Gillian McEneffaǂ, Bronagh Murphya, Sally Gambleb, Ruth Morganb, Matthew Beardahc and Leon Barrona a Analytical & Environmental Sciences Division, King’s College London, Franklin-Wilkins Building, 150 Stamford Street, London SE1 9NH, UK b UCL Department of Security and Crime Science, 35 Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9EZ, UK c Forensic Explosives Laboratory, Dstl Fort Halstead, TN14 7BP, UK Both contributed equally as first author. ǂ Table of contents: S1.0 Glassware treatment procedure S3 List of tables: Table S1. A list of all solid phase extraction (SPE) sorbents tested, their chemical and physical properties and their respective extraction method protocols as recommended by the manufacturer S4 Table S2. Optimised atmospheric pressure chemical ionisation (APCI) and mass spectrometric conditions for the selected explosive analytes S6 Table S3. Analyte recoveries (n=3) determined using solid-phase extraction (SPE) with HPLC-UV for 16 analytes and HPLC-HRMS for two peroxide compounds only S7 Table S4. Comparison of analyte recoveries with the selected sorbents using extraction methods with and without a post-elution evaporation step S9 S5. Recoveries for the three selected sorbents using the optimised method (n=3) S10 List of figures: Figure S1. Analyte elution profiles for (a) Oasis HLB, (b) Isolute ENV+ and (c) Bond Elut ENV methanol as the eluting solvent (n=2) S11 Figure S2. Analyte recoveries for (a) Oasis HLB, (b) Isolute ENV+ and (c) Bond Elut ENV methanol, acetonitrile and ethyl acetate as eluting solvents (n=3) S12 Figure S3. Comparison of analyte recoveries achieved for Milli-Q water samples
Supplementary Material: SUSPECT SCREENING AND QUANTIFICATION OF TRACE ORGANIC EXPLOSIVES IN WASTEWATER USING SOLID PHASE EXTRACTION AND LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY-HIGH RESOLUTION ACCURATE MASS SPECTROMETRY Helena Rapp-Wrightaǂ, Gillian McEneffaǂ, Bronagh Murphya, Sally Gambleb, Ruth Morganb, Matthew Beardahc and Leon Barrona a Analytical & Environmental Sciences Division, King’s College London, Franklin-Wilkins Building, 150 Stamford Street, London SE1 9NH, UK b UCL Department of Security and Crime Science, 35 Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9EZ, UK c Forensic Explosives Laboratory, Dstl Fort Halstead, TN14 7BP, UK ǂ Both contributed equally as first author. Table of contents: S1.0 Glassware treatment procedure S3 List of tables: Table S1. A list of all solid phase extraction (SPE) sorbents tested, their chemical and physical properties and their respective extraction method protocols as recommended by the manufacturer S4 Table S2. Optimised atmospheric pressure chemical ionisation (APCI) and mass spectrometric conditions for the selected explosive analytes S6 Table S3. Analyte recoveries (n=3) determined using solid-phase extraction (SPE) with HPLC-UV for 16 analytes and HPLC-HRMS for two peroxide compounds only S7 Table S4. Comparison of analyte recoveries with the selected sorbents using extraction methods with and without a post-elution evaporation step S9 S5. Recoveries for the three selected sorbents using the optimised method (n=3) S10 List of figures: Figure S1. Analyte elution profiles for (a) Oasis HLB, (b) Isolute ENV+ and (c) Bond Elut ENV methanol as the eluting solvent (n=2) S11 Figure S2. Analyte recoveries for (a) Oasis HLB, (b) Isolute ENV+ and (c) Bond Elut ENV methanol, acetonitrile and ethyl acetate as eluting solvents (n=3) S12 Figure S3. Comparison of analyte recoveries achieved for Milli-Q water samples
1-s2.0-S0304389417300109-mmc1.docx