Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 9, 2026

Chemical Analysis of Water-accommodated Fractions of Crude Oil Spills Using TIMS-FT-ICR MS
Published on: March 3, 2017
Direct sampling of chemical weapons in water by photoionization mass spectrometry
Jack A Syage1, Sheng-Suan Cai, Jianwei Li
1Syagen Technology, Inc., 1411 Warner Avenue, Tustin, California 92780, USA. jsyage@syagen.com
Abstract:
The vulnerability of water supplies to toxic contamination calls for fast and effective means for screening water samples for multiple threats. We describe the use of photoionization (PI) mass spectrometry (MS) for high-speed, high-throughput screening and molecular identification of chemical weapons (CW) threats and other hazardous compounds. The screening technology can detect a wide range of compounds at subacute concentrations with no sample preparation and a sampling cycle time of approximately 45 s. The technology was tested with CW agents VX, GA, GB, GD, GF, HD, HN1, and HN3, in addition to riot agents and precursors. All are sensitively detected and give simple PI mass spectra dominated by the parent ion. The target application of the PI MS method is as a routine, real-time early warning system for CW agents and other hazardous compounds in air and in water. In this work, we also present comprehensive measurements for water analysis and report on the system detection limits, linearity, quantitation accuracy, and false positive (FP) and false negative rates for concentrations at subacute levels. The latter data are presented in the form of receiver operating characteristic curves of the form of detection probability P(D) versus FP probability P(FP). These measurements were made using the CW surrogate compounds, DMMP, DEMP, DEEP, and DIMP. Method detection limits (3sigma) obtained using a capillary injection method yielded 1, 6, 3, and 2 ng/mL, respectively. These results were obtained using 1-microL injections of water samples without any preparation, corresponding to mass detection limits of 1, 6, 3, and 2 pg, respectively. The linear range was about 3-4 decades and the dynamic range about 4-5 decades. The relative standard deviations were generally <10% at CW subacute concentrations levels.
More Related Videos
09:04Identifying Per- and Polyfluorinated Chemical Species with a Combined Targeted and Non-Targeted-Screening High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Workflow
Published on: April 18, 2019
10:34Characterization and Application of Passive Samplers for Monitoring of Pesticides in Water
Published on: August 3, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Chemical Ionization (CI) Mass Spectrometry
Gas Chromatography: Types of Detectors-II
Electrospray Ionization (ESI) Mass Spectrometry
ESI utilizes electrical energy to transfer ions from the liquid phase of the sample into the...
High-Performance Liquid Chromatography: Types of Detectors
Tandem Mass Spectrometry
Mass Spectrometry: Complex Analysis
GC–MS is a powerful hyphenated method commonly used in forensics and environmental...