首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >A comparison between DART-MS and DSA-MS in the forensic analysis of writing inks
【2h】

A comparison between DART-MS and DSA-MS in the forensic analysis of writing inks

机译:DART-MS与DSA-MS在书写墨水鉴证分析中的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Ambient ionization mass spectrometry is gaining momentum in forensic science laboratories because of its high speed of analysis, minimal sample preparation, and information-rich results. One such application of ambient ionization methodology includes the analysis of writing inks from questioned documents where colorants of interest may not be soluble in common solvents, rendering thin layer chromatography (TLC) and separation–mass spectrometry methods such as LC/MS (-MS) impractical. Ambient ionization mass spectrometry uses a variety of ionization techniques such as penning ionization in Direct Analysis in Real Time (DART), and atmospheric pressure chemical ionization in Direct Sample Analysis (DSA), and electrospray ionization in Desorption Electrospray Ionization (DESI). In this manuscript, two of the commonly used ambient ionization techniques are compared: Perkin Elmer DSA-MS and IonSense DART in conjunction with a JEOL AccuTOF MS. Both technologies were equally successful in analyzing writing inks and produced similar spectra. DSA-MS produced less background signal likely because of its closed source configuration; however, the open source configuration of DART-MS provided more flexibility for sample positioning for optimum sensitivity and thereby allowing smaller piece of paper containing writing ink to be analyzed. Under these conditions, the minimum sample required for DART-MS was 1 mm strokes of ink on paper, whereas DSA-MS required a minimum of 3 mm. Moreover, both techniques showed comparable repeatability. Evaluation of the analytical figures of merit, including sensitivity, linear dynamic range, and repeatability, for DSA-MS and DART-MS analysis is provided. To the forensic context of the technique, DART-MS was applied to the analysis of United States Secret Service ink samples directly on a sampling mesh, and the results were compared with DSA-MS of the same inks on paper. Unlike analysis using separation mass spectrometry, which requires sample preparation, both DART-MS and DSA-MS successfully analyzed writing inks with minimal sample preparation.
机译:环境电离质谱法由于其分析速度快,样品制备最少和信息丰富的结果而在法医学实验室中得到了发展。环境电离方法的一种此类应用包括分析来自有疑问的着色剂可能不溶于常用溶剂的有问题文件的书写墨水,进行薄层色谱(TLC)和分离质谱法(例如LC / MS(-MS))不切实际的。环境电离质谱法使用多种电离技术,例如实时直接分析(DART)中的潘宁离子化,直接样品分析(DSA)中的大气压化学电离以及解吸电喷雾电离(DESI)中的电喷雾电离。在本手稿中,比较了两种常用的环境电离技术:Perkin Elmer DSA-MS和IonSense DART以及JEOL AccuTOF MS。两种技术在分析书写墨水方面均取得了成功,并产生了相似的光谱。 DSA-MS可能由于其闭源配置而产生较少的背景信号。但是,DART-MS的开源配置为样品定位提供了更大的灵活性,以实现最佳灵敏度,从而可以分析包含书写墨水的较小纸张。在这些条件下,DART-MS所需的最小样本为纸上墨水行程1 mm,而DSA-MS所需的最小样本为3 mm。而且,两种技术都显示出可比的重复性。提供了对DSA-MS和DART-MS分析的品质因数的评估,包括灵敏度,线性动态范围和可重复性。对于该技术的法证背景,将DART-MS直接用于在采样网上分析美国特勤局的墨水样品,并将结果与​​相同墨水在纸上的DSA-MS进行比较。与使用分离质谱进行分析需要样品制备的分析方法不同,DART-MS和DSA-MS都能以最少的样品制备方法成功地分析书写墨水。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号