English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Mercury speciation analysis of both inorganic and methyl Hg in ultrapure and natural waters by purge-and-trap gas chromatography pyrolysis atomic florescence spectrometry (PT-GC-Pyr-AFS, MERX-M, Brooks Rand) was performed. This automated analytical setup was also compared with gas chromatography inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (GC-ICPMS, X Serie 2 ThermoFisher). In addition, a reagent cleaning step of the buffer solution and derivatizing reagents (NaBEt4 and NaBPr4) was evaluated to improve the detection limit of the method. PT-GC-Pyr-AFS experiments analyzing Milli-Q and Deionized water (Millipore) using cleaned reagents and quantifying by external calibration led to MeHg+ and Hg2+ concentration values significantly lower than those obtained using uncleaned reagents. The limit of detections (LODs) after cleaning was found significantly low using both NaBEt4 and NaBPr4. However, the lowest LODs were obtained when using cleaned NaBPr4 (range: 1–2 pgL–1 for MeHg+ and 9-10 pgL–1 for Hg2+). Matrix effects have been finally investigated using both PT-GC-Pyr-AFS and GC-ICPMS to characterize and quantify potential interferences in natural water samples with different salinities and organic matter contents, including coastal water reference material (CRM) certified for total mercury concentration (IRMMBCR-579)

e3s web of conferences

Determination of methyl mercury and inorganic mercury in natural waters at the pgL<sup>−1</sup>level: Intercomparison between PT-GC-Pyr-AFS and GC-ICP-MS using Ethylation or Propylation derivatization

Determination of methyl mercury and inorganic mercury in natural waters at the pgL−1level: Intercomparison between PT-GC-Pyr-AFS and GC-ICP-MS using Ethylation or Propylation derivatization

Determination of methyl mercury and inorganic mercury in natural waters at the pgL⁻¹level: Intercomparison between PT-GC-Pyr-AFS and GC-ICP-MS using Ethylation or Propylation derivatization