Premium
Analysis of hydroxamate siderophores in soil solution using liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry and tandem mass spectrometry with on‐line sample preconcentration
Author(s) -
Olofsson Madelen A.,
Bylund Dan
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
journal of separation science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.72
H-Index - 102
eISSN - 1615-9314
pISSN - 1615-9306
DOI - 10.1002/jssc.201500509
Subject(s) - chromatography , mass spectrometry , chemistry , liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry , tandem mass spectrometry , sample preparation in mass spectrometry , thermospray , sample preparation , analytical chemistry (journal) , siderophore , sample (material) , selected reaction monitoring , electrospray ionization , biochemistry , gene
A liquid chromatography with electrospray ionization mass spectrometry method was developed to quantitatively and qualitatively analyze 13 hydroxamate siderophores (ferrichrome, ferrirubin, ferrirhodin, ferrichrysin, ferricrocin, ferrioxamine B, D 1 , E and G, neocoprogen I and II, coprogen and triacetylfusarinine C). Samples were preconcentrated on‐line by a switch‐valve setup prior to analyte separation on a Kinetex C 18 column. Gradient elution was performed using a mixture of an ammonium formate buffer and acetonitrile. Total analysis time including column conditioning was 20.5 min. Analytes were fragmented by applying collision‐induced dissociation, enabling structural identification by tandem mass spectrometry. Limit of detection values for the selected ion monitoring method ranged from 71 pM to 1.5 nM with corresponding values of two to nine times higher for the multiple reaction monitoring method. The liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry method resulted in a robust and sensitive quantification of hydroxamate siderophores as indicated by retention time stability, linearity, sensitivity, precision and recovery. The analytical error of the methods, assessed through random‐order, duplicate analysis of soil samples extracted with a mixture of 10 mM phosphate buffer and methanol, appears negligible in relation to between‐sample variations.