Total workflow solutions that cater every budget, performance or throughput requirement for confirmatory dioxin analysis were discussed in the Thermo Scientific Lunch Seminar at the Dioxin 2014 conference. D. Hope, CEO & Owner Pacific Rim Laboratoris, presented about the economies of POPs analysis from the point of view of a leading laboratory using the very latest dioxin method kits. C. Cojocariu, Thermo Fisher Scientific, discussed recent changes in EU regulations which bring new opportunities for more labs to participate in dioxin analysis and about validating methods using Gas Chromatography triple quadrupole for PCDD/Fs with reference to the new EU Commission Regulation No. 709/2014.

1. Meeting the challenges of EU regulations with up-to-date confirmatory solutions
Lunch Seminar at the 34th International Symposium on Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants (Dioxin 2014)

2. Validation of a triple quadrupole GC-MS/MS technology for detection, quantification and confirmation of low level dioxins in feed and food samples
Cristian Cojocariu, PhD
ThermoFisher Scientific, Runcorn, UK

3. 3
Overview
•Thermo Scientific™ TSQ 8000™ Evo triple quadrupole GC-MS was used to detect and confirm low level of PCDD/Fs in sample extracts, taking into account the EU Commission Regulation 589/2014 and the new Regulation No. 709/2014
•A thorough validation of the TSQ 8000 Evo GC-MS/MS for dioxin confirmation was performed.
•Instrument sensitivity, linearity, chromatography, LOD/LOQs and precision of measurements were assessed.
•Data acquired using the GC-MS/MS was compared with the GC-HRMS data acquired for the same samples and measurements uncertainties were assessed.

4. 4
EXPERIMENTAL

5. 5
TSQ 8000 Evo GC-MS System
•State of the art triple quadrupole GC-MS system introduced at ASMS 2014
•Fast collision cell instrument with enhanced velocity optics with EvoCell technology to provide high SRM transition speeds, precision and sensitivity
•ExtractaBrite™ ion source is heated throughout ensuring high matrix tolerance
•Ion source fully removable, hot, under vacuum when cleaning is necessary or swapping with a spare; no vent to clean your instrument

6. 6
GC & MS Conditions
Thermo Scientific™ TRACE™ 1310 GC Parameters
Column
TG-5 SIL MS, 60 m x 0.25 x 0.25
Injection Volume (mL):
2
Liner
SSL single taper 4mm ID 78.5mm
Inlet (°C):
260
Inlet Module and Mode:
splitless
Carrier Gas, (mL/min):
He, 1.2
Oven Temperature Program time (min):
33
TSQ 8000 Evo Mass Spectrometer Parameters
Transfer line (°C):
280
Ionization type:
EI
Ion source(°C):
300
Electron energy (eV):
40
Acquisition Mode:
SRM
Q1 Peak Width (AMU):
0.7
Q3 Peak Width (AMU):
0.7
GC
MS

7. 7
Samples
•Wellington Lab standards used in the experiments described below: EPA1613 calibration set
TF-TCDD-MXD
Compound
Concentration (fg/μL)
1368-TCDD
10
1379-TCDD
25
1378-TCDD
100
1478-TCDD
250
1234-TCDD
500
2378-TCDD
1000

8. 8
Samples
•Matrix samples (previously analysed on a GC-HRMS instrument) provided by EU-RL, Freiburg
•Samples chosen were naturally contaminated with low level of PCDD/Fs.
•Used to assess and validate the LOQs in matrix samples as well as to check precision of total dioxin content at low level.
•Extraction and clean-up was carried out in accordance with the existing methods for food and feed either automatically (PowerPrep™ SPE) or partly manual/partly automated (GPC, multi-layer silica, Florisil®, carbon).
Mixed animal fat
Fish meal
Egg fat 11
Egg fat 2
Weighted sample:
10.0 g fat
60.2 g sample (= 10.0 g fat)
0.52 g fat
0.51 g fat
Lipid content [%]:
n/a
16.6
n/a
n/a
Moisture content [%]:
n/a
5.3
n/a
n/a
Final volume:
40 μl
40 μl
10 μl
10 μl
13C Internal standard
13C Internal standard
13C Internal standard
13C Internal standard
2378 TCDF
50
50
10
10
12378 PCDF
50
50
10
10
23478-PCDF
200
200
40
40
123478 HxCDF
100
100
20
20
123678 HxCDF
100
100
20
20
234678 HxCDF
50
50
10
10
123789 HxCDF
50
50
10
10
1234678 HpCDF
100
100
20
20
1234789 HpCDF
50
50
10
10
OCDF
100
100
20
20
2378 TCDD
50
50
10
10
12378 PCDD
100
100
20
20
123478 HxCDD
100
100
20
20
123678 HxCDD
200
200
40
40
123789 HxCDD
50
50
10
10
1234678 HpCDD
200
200
40
40
OCDD
600
600
120
120
13C Recovery standard
13C Recovery standard
13C Recovery standard
13C Recovery standard
1234-TCDD
50
50
10
10

9. 9
Data Acquisition and Data Processing
•Data were acquired using timed-Selected Reaction Monitoring (timed-SRM).
•A minimum of 12 points/chromatographic peak were acquired.
•Data processing was performed with Thermo Scientific™ TargetQuan 3.1 software.

10. 10
Linearity of Response
•Linearity assessed by determining the average RF %RSD values from a six point calibration curve measured at the beginning and at the end of the sample batch.
•Values represent duplicate measurements of each calibration point, measured at the beginning and end of a batch.
Compound
Concentration range (pg/μL)
Average RF
stdev
RF %RSD
2378-TCDF
0.1 - 40
1.0
0.04
3.7
2378-TCDD
0.1 - 40
1.4
0.02
1.4
12378-PeCDF
0.5 - 200
1.0
0.01
0.9
23478-PeCDF
0.5 - 200
1.0
0.02
1.8
12378-PeCDD
0.5 - 200
1.2
0.03
2.5
123478-HxCDF
0.5 - 200
1.0
0.01
0.8
123678-HxCDF
0.5 - 200
1.0
0.01
1.3
234678-HxCDF
0.5 - 200
1.0
0.01
1.3
123478-HxCDD
0.5 - 200
0.9
0.01
0.7
123678-HxCDD
0.5 - 200
1.1
0.01
1.3
123789-HxCDD
0.5 - 200
1.0
0.01
0.7
123789-HxCDF
0.5 - 200
1.0
0.05
4.5
1234678-HpCDF
0.5 - 200
1.1
0.01
0.9
1234678-HpCDD
0.5 - 200
1.1
0.01
1.0
1234789-HpCDF
0.5 - 200
1.1
0.02
1.4
OCDD
1.0 - 400
1.5
0.02
1.6
OCDF
1.0 - 400
1.1
0.02
1.4

11. 11 Determination of Limit of Quantification
•LOQ calculated from CSL x5 and CSL x10 dilution and taking into account the ion ratio, response factors and precision limits.
•LOQ for each native compound was calculated taking into account the student’s-t critical values for the corresponding degrees of freedom (99% confidence).
Compound
pg/μL
2378-TCDF
0.01
2378-TCDD
0.01
12378-PeCDF
0.02
23478-PeCDF
0.02
12378-PeCDD
0.02
123478-HxCDF
0.04
123678-HxCDF
0.04
234678-HxCDF
0.03
123478-HxCDD
0.06
123678-HxCDD
0.03
123789-HxCDD
0.04
123789-HxCDF
0.04
1234678-HpCDF
0.02
1234678-HpCDD
0.05
1234789-HpCDF
0.02
OCDD
0.05
OCDF
0.03

12. 12
Sensitivity test: stepped standard
• Overlayed SRM chromatograms (quan ion) of six TCDD congeners in the stepped
standard.
• Concentrations represents ‘on column’ amount.
RT: 13.37 - 14.94 SM: 3B
13.4 13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 13.9 14.0 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.9
Time (min)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
14.78
14.57
14.30
14.15
13.65
13.52 14.86 13.53 13.76 14.38 14.41 14.67
14.56
NL: 8.47E4
TIC F: + c EI SRM ms2
321.890@cid20.00
[258.925-258.935] MS
19May2014_11
NL: 8.33E4
TIC F: + c EI SRM ms2
321.890@cid20.00
[258.925-258.935] MS
19May2014_03
NL: 8.49E4
TIC F: + c EI SRM ms2
321.890@cid20.00
[258.925-258.935] MS
19May2014_05
NL: 8.25E4
TIC F: + c EI SRM ms2
321.890@cid20.00
[258.925-258.935] MS
19May2014_06
NL: 8.35E4
TIC F: + c EI SRM ms2
321.890@cid20.00
[258.925-258.935] MS
19May2014_07
NL: 8.38E4
TIC F: + c EI SRM ms2
321.890@cid20.00
[258.925-258.935] MS
19May2014_08
NL: 8.53E4
TIC F: + c EI SRM ms2
321.890@cid20.00
[258.925-258.935] MS
19May2014_09
NL: 8.48E4
TIC F: + c EI SRM ms2
321.890@cid20.00
[258.925-258.935] MS
19May2014_10
1368-TCDD
10 fg
IR % = 9
1379-TCDD
25 fg
IR % = 6
1378-TCDD
100 fg
IR % = 7
1478-TCDD
250 fg
IR % = 6
2378-TCDD
1000 fg
IR % = 4
1234-TCDD
500 fg
IR % = 11
Inj. No. Concentration
10 fg 25 fg 100 fg 250 fg 500 fg 1000 fg
1 3129 7011 25940 60219 87635 239216
2 3045 6209 25998 59108 85789 240162
3 3047 7055 27425 58262 87578 237274
4 2637 7440 25734 59335 87079 233655
5 2678 6376 27805 58583 83897 234470
6 2964 6513 27097 58902 85373 238554
7 2828 6931 26347 59936 86844 242740
8 2699 6579 25033 55519 79471 232038
mean 2878.4 6764.3 26422.4 58733.0 85458.3 237263.6
STDEV 192.5 411.7 940.7 1452.1 2730.3 3625.3
% RSD 6.7 6.1 3.6 2.5 3.2 1.5

13. 13
DETERMINATION OF DIOXINS IN SAMPLE EXTRACTS

14. 14 Quantification of Dioxins in the Sample Extracts
•The egg, animal fat and fish meal samples were analyzed for their dioxin content.
•The calculated concentration of each individual dioxin congener (pg TEQ/g fat or ng/kg %dw) was compared with the values obtained from the GC-HRMS.

15. 15
Chromatography & Selectivity 2378-TCDD in Sample Extracts
95 fg 28 fg
98 fg fish meal
mixed animal fat egg

16. 16
Egg Samples - Comparison with GC-HRMS
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
WHO pg TEQ/g fat
GC-HRMS
GC-MS/MS egg 0.52g
GC-MS/MS egg 0.51 g

17. 17 Fish Meal - Comparison with GC-HRMS

18. 18
Ion Ratio Stability: IR Egg Sample vs. Theoretical IR

19. 19 Ion Ratio Stability: IR Egg Sample vs. IR CS3

20. 20
Precision of Measurements: Sample Extracts
•Obtaining valid estimates of PCDD/Fs concentration in sample extracts is critical.
•Precision measurement of the total dioxin content (as WHO TEQ pg/g or ng/kg) for a sequence of n=13 repeat injections of the mixed animal fat and the fish meal samples

21. 21 Fish Meal: Precision of Total Dioxin Content (n=13)

22. 22
Mixed Animal Fat: Precision of Total Dioxin Content (n=13)

23. 23
Comparison with GC-HRMS
Total dioxin content of sample extracts
•Average values of replicate injections (n) with corresponding standard deviations (in brackets) are given.
Sample type
WHO-PCDD/F-TEQ-ub
GC-HRMS
GC-MS/MS
Deviation %
egg (n=2)
3.39 pg/g
3.27 (0.03)
-3.5
fish meal (n=13)
0.26 ng/kg % dw
0.25 (0.01)
-2.2
mixed animal fat (n=13)
0.83 pg/g
0.85 (0.04)
2.8

24. 24
Conclusions
•Excellent selectivity and sensitivity was achieved (ex: 28 fg 2378-TCDD absolute amount on column)
•Precision measurements of the total dioxin content (WHO-PCDD/F-TEQ-ub) were obtained for two low level contaminated samples (fish meal and mixed animal fat) with %RSD values <6% (n=13).
•Deviation of the total dioxin content (WHO-PCDD/F-TEQ-ub) from the GC-HRMS data was analyzed within the ±20% for all the samples.
•The data shows excellent agreement between the results obtained using the TSQ 8000 Evo GC-MS/MS and those obtained using GC-HRMS.
•TSQ 8000 Evo triple quadrupole system is a sensitive and robust system suitable for the quantification and confirmation of low level dioxins and furans in food and feed matrices.

25. 25
Acknowledgements

26. 26 Thank You for Your Attention! Stay connected with us Twitter @ChromSolutions Chromatography Solutions Blog http://chromblog.thermoscientific.com/blog YouTube http://www.youtube.com/ChromSolutions Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ChromatographySolutions Pinterest http://pinterest.com/chromsolutions/

27. Economic POPs
Dave Hope, Patrick Pond, Wasana Mudalige, Jose del Pozo, Matt Wright
Pacific Rim Laboratories Inc.
Presented at Thermo Scientific Vendor Seminar
Madrid, Spain September 2,2014

28. Outline
•
Cost of Analysis
•
Saving time on extraction - Accelerated Solvent Extraction (ASE)
•
Saving time and money on clean-up - Cape Technologies Clean-up Kits
•
Is GC-MS/MS technology ready for POPs – Thermo Scientific™ TSQ™ 8000 system

29. Economic Costs – POPs Lab
•
Laboratory
–
$1-3M or higher if budget allows
•
Instrument
–
$150-400k up to $250-600k depending on options
•
Staffing (2-10)
–
$20-50 per hour ($40-100k per annum)
•
Soft costs
–
Chemicals 7-10% revenue
–
Consumables 5-10% revenue
–
Service contracts/R&M 5-7% revenue or 5-10% instrument cost
–
Staff Training 6 weeks to 6 months or $5-35k

30. Cost of Analysis
•
Sample Extraction (batch of 10 samples)
–
Water: liquid/liquid sep funnel 6-8 h
–
Soil/tissue: soxhlet 6-8 h
–
Tissue: acid digestion 12 h
–
@ $20 per hour with 10 sample batch $16-24
–
@ $20 per hour with 6 sample batch $25-40
–
@ $20 per hour with 2 sample batch $50-75

31. Sample clean-up
•
Clean-up steps (4-8 h each)
–
Acid or base washes
–
Acid/base silica gel
–
Basic Alumina
–
Florisil (separate dioxins and PCBs)
–
Carbon
•
Soft costs
–
Preparing reagents
–
Cleaning reusable glassware – 2 h per day
–
Re-analyzing cross contaminated samples

32. Simplified Clean-up for Food and Environmental Sample
•
Cape Technologies tandem acid silica gel / carbon columns
–
Originally designed as clean-up kit for EPA Method 4025 (Screening for PCDD/F by Immunoassay)
–
quick and cheap – 4-6 h to complete 12 samples, <$20/sample disposable columns, $500 hardware
–
Columns are disposable, therefore reduces PCB carryover from improper washing of reusable columns (not to mention the labor savings)
–
Separates dioxins from PCBs
–
Separates dl PCBs from interfering PCBs with high LOC
–
Yang et al (MOE Ontario) developed method to separate PCB, PBDE and PCDD/F (Dioxin 2010)

33. Cape Technologies Clean-up Kit
•
Glass column, 15 mm x 27 cm, loaded with 5 g acid (30%) silica gel (63-200 μm)
•
25 mm column available with 14 or 28 g acid (50%) silica (32-63 μm)
•
Each column individually sealed, wrapped in boxes of 12
•
Carbon soxhlet extracted with Toluene prior to packing in Teflon column (one end flat and the other end bevelled for easy identification of flow direction)
•
150 mg of 2% carbon in FEP Teflon

34. Columning Procedure
•
Pre-rinse carbon column
–
10 mL toluene
–
10 mL DCM
–
30 mL hexane
•
Attached carbon column to acid silica gel – bevelled side down
•
Load sample in 1-2 mL hexane
•
Elute 30 mL hexane (F1) – pressurize to 10 psi (1-2 mL/min)
•
Remove carbon and attach to empty glass column
•
Elute 6 mL 1:1 toluene/hexane (F2)
•
Reverse carbon column flow
•
Elute 30 mL toluene (F3)

35. F3 – PCDD/F
•
All 17 congeners found in F3
•
Spike recoveries for TeCDD/F- HpCDD/F were 93-107% with RSD<12%
•
Recovery of OCDD was 85% and OCDF 49%
•
There may be some loss of non-2,3,7,8 congeners (especially TeCDD/F)
•
Cut point between F2/F3 tight for TeCDD/F (F2 max volume 6 mL of 50:50 toluene/hexane)

36. Accelerated Solvent Extraction (ASE)
•
Has been widely used for soils and tissues in conventional analyses (ppm/ppb)
•
Cells and lines subject to trace contamination and carry over at ultra-trace levels
•
Recently given an Thermo Scientific™ Dionex™ ASE™ 350 Accelerated Solvent Extractor to play with complete with 100 mL Thermo Scientific™ Dionium™ cells
•
Thermo Fisher Scientific has application notes for tissue samples using max 1 g lipid
•
PRL methodology requires 5-10 g lipid for lowest DLs
•
Initial problems with packing cells – critical not to
–
over pack them – SOLVENT LEAKAGE WARNING
–
under pack them – VAPOUR PRESSURE WARNING
•
Instrument lines and cells required thorough cleaning after installation

37. ASE 350 System
Extraction Conditions
Extraction Solvent: Hexane/Acetone 3:1
Temperature: 100 °C
Pressure: 1600 psi
Heat Time: 5 min
Static Time: 5 min
Flush Volume: 70%
Purge Time: 120 s
Static Cycles: 3
Total Prep Time: 15 min per sample
Total Extraction Time: 25 min per sample

38. Butter (n=5)
Units: ng/kg (pg/g)
Control
Average
Spike
Recovery
RSD
2378-TCDD
<0.03
<0.03
20
91%
15%
12378-PeCDD
<0.033
<0.033
100
94%
5%
123478-HxCDD
0.15
0.20
100
82%
14%
123678-HxCDD
0.56
0.60
100
87%
8%
123789-HxCDD
0.18
0.25
100
90%
3%
1234678-HpCDD
1.21
1.69
100
96%
7%
OCDD
0.88
1.83
200
95%
2%
2378-TCDF
<0.03
<0.03
100
94%
11%
12378-PeCDF
<0.039
0.07
100
92%
5%
23478-PeCDF
<0.039
<0.039
100
90%
8%
123478-HxCDF
0.16
0.24
100
82%
14%
123678-HxCDF
0.12
0.12
100
86%
9%
123789-HxCDF
<0.056
<0.056
100
93%
5%
234678-HxCDF
0.11
0.20
100
80%
16%
1234678-HpCDF
<0.052
<0.052
100
88%
12%
1234789-HpCDF
<0.085
<0.085
100
87%
9%
OCDF
<0.13
0.20
200
66%
6%
Use 6.25 g of butter (80% lipid) mixed with 10 g diatomaceous earth
Add internal standards
Pack 100 mL Dionium cell with
•
30 mm cellulose filter
•
10 g Dionex ASE Prep CR Na+ form (sulphonated divinyl benzene/styrene copolymer)
•
Add sample mix
•
Top with diatomaceous earth to 10 mm from top of cell
Cape Technologies column clean-up

39. Butter PCB data
ng/kg
Control
Average (n=3)
Spike Recovery
PCB 28
<2
12.8
73%
PCB 52
5.1
19.1
92%
PCB 101
<2
<2
116%
PCB 153
61.7
58.4
112%
PCB 138
39.6
48.7
109%
PCB 180
25.6
22.0
99%
PCB 81
<1
<1
103%
PCB 77
<1
<1
97%
PCB 123
<1
<1
88%
PCB 118
51.1
41.7
86%
PCB 114
<1
<1
103%
PCB 105
<1
<1
99%
PCB 126
<1
<1
96%
PCB 167
<1
<1
103%
PCB 156
5.8
4.1
110%
PCB 157
<1
<1
105%
PCB 169
<1
<1
95%
PCB 189
<1
<1
82%

40. Horse Meat
Control (n=1)
Average (n=5)
RSD
2,3,7,8-TCDD
0.27
0.18
21%
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD
1.0
0.94
22%
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD
1.8
1.7
22%
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD
3.8
4.2
9%
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD
0.57
0.42
31%
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
33
30
4%
OCDD
58
54
8%
2,3,7,8-TCDF
0.075
0.11
65%
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF
0.087
0.093
90%
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF
0.36
0.32
38%
1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF
0.29
0.27
25%
1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF
0.46
0.49
20%
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF
0.091
0.085
133%
2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF
0.20
0.24
53%
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF
1.97
1.92
9%
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF
0.076
0.11
69%
OCDF
0.39
0.30
55%
TEQ
2.47
2.29
PCB 81
<0.5
<0.5
PCB 77
<0.5
<0.5
PCB 123
21
8.8
22%
PCB 118
714
401
5%
PCB 114
21
11
30%
PCB 105_127
265
150
3%
PCB 126
16
9.2
30%
PCB 167
61
55
3%
PCB 156
91
97
3%
PCB 157
24
22
11%
PCB 169
<0.5
<0.5
PCB 189
14
21
12%
Total TEQ
4.15
3.24
5 g fat processed through ASE and Cape Technologies clean-up and analyzed on Thermo Scientific™ DFS™ High Resolution GC/MS System.
Control sample processed through our standard 3N HCl digestion

41. Can economy model TSQ 8000 GC/MS run PCDD/F
•
Benchtop instrument
•
More affordable
•
Increased uptime
•
Easier maintenance
•
Lower electrical usage

42. So easy anyone can learn???
•
It helps if you know how to type!
•
Monitor M-COCl
–
No chlorinated diphenylether interference
•
EPA 1613b calibration, with CS- Lo and 0.2 x CS-Lo

43. TSQ 8000 GC/MS Calibration 20 fg – 200 pg

44. 20 fg/uL to 200 pg/uL TCDD

45. Data Comparison ASE – Cape Tech – TSQ 8000 MS
•
Ten vials of CARP-2 (ground whole carp reference material) from NRC Canada
•
Reference concentrations for PCDD/F and select PCBs (several congeners in excess of 100 ug/kg)
•
Entire contents of vial (approx 10 g) extracted using ASE 350
•
Cape Technologies tandem acid silica gel / carbon clean-up
•
Analysis by DFS HRMS System
•
Analysis by TSQ 8000 Triple Quadrupole GC-MS

46. CARP-2 results
DFS (n=10)
TSQ 8000 (n=7)
Reference Values
Average
RSD
Average
RSD
ng/kg
ng/kg
ng/kg
2378-TCDD
6.7-8.1
7.74
5%
8.18
6%
12378-PeCDD
4.0-6.6
4.65
13%
5.09
14%
123478-HxCDD
1.3-1.9
1.56
12%
1.56
11%
123678-HxCDD
5.0-6.6
5.66
10%
5.23
13%
123789-HxCDD
0.66-0.90
0.71
32%
0.60
13%
1234678-HpCDD
5.5-7.3
6.77
7%
5.75
14%
OCDD
7.7-11.1
8.71
10%
8.80
9%
2378-TCDF
16.6-19.8
18.5
6%
18.3
8%
12378-PeCDF
5.3-5.9
5.97
14%
6.13
8%
23478-PeCDF
15.2
8%
15.4
14%
123478-HxCDF
4.04
17%
3.88
18%
123678-HxCDF
2.56
19%
2.48
15%
234678-HxCDF
1.27
32%
1.37
34%
123789-HxCDF
0.27
38%
0.22
69%
1234678-HpCDF
4.42
11%
3.96
17%
1234789-HpCDF
<1
0.74
17%
OCDF
<1
1.29
17%

47. 7.7
11.1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
ng/kg
CARP-2 Comparison – TSQ 8000 GC-MS vs DFS HRMS

48. Conclusions
•
Cape Technologies provides a simple, inexpensive clean-up for dioxins and PCBs
•
ASE can be made clean and effective for food samples at ppq levels
•
TSQ 8000 GC-MS system has the sensitivity and specificity to analyze PCDD/F from food extracts.