Comparing Different Means of Signal Treatment for Improving the Detection Power in HPLC-UV-HG-AFS

Abstract:

The purpose of detecting trace concentrations of analytes often is hindered by occurring noise in the signal curves of analytical methods. This is also a problem when different arsenic species (organic arsenic species such as arsanilic acid, nitarsone and roxarsone) are to be determined in animal meat by HPLC-UV-HG-AFS, which is the basis of this work. In order to improve the detection power, methods of signal treatment may be applied. We show a comparison of convolution with Gaussian distribution curves, Fourier transform, and wavelet transform. It is illustrated how to estimate decisive parameters for these techniques. All methods result in improved limits of detection. Furthermore, applying baselines and evaluating peaks thoroughly is facilitated. However, there are differences. Fourier transform may be applied, but convolution with Gaussian distribution curves shows better results of improvement. The best of the three is wavelet transform, whereby the detection power is improved by factors of about 2.4.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 239-240)
• Pages: 1045-1051
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.239-240.1045
• Online since: December 2012
• Authors: Jian Cui, Yan Wang, Xue Hong Zhao, Li Dai
• Keywords: AFS, Limit of Detection, Wavelet

References

[1] D.W. Rutherford, A.J. Bednar, J.R. Garbarrino, R. Needham, K.W. Staver, Andr.L. Wershaw Environ. Sci. Technol. 37 (1992) 1515-1520.

[2] D.S. Lindsay, B.L. Blagburn, in: H.R. Adams (Ed. ), Seventh ed., Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA, USA (1995) 955–983.

[3] J.L. MorrisonDistribution of arsenic from reused poultry litter in broiler chickens, soil, and crops J. Agric. Food Chem. 17 (1969) 1288–1290.

DOI: 10.1021/jf60166a018

[4] Reyes Sierra-Alvarez, Journal of Hazardous Materials. 175 (2010) 352–358.

[5] F.G. Proudfoot, E.D. Jackson, H.W. Hulan, C.D.C. Salisbury, Can. J. Anim. Sci. 71 (1991) 221-227.

[6] M.H. Akhtar, J.R. Patterson, C.D.C. Salisbury, S.K. Ho, P.Y. Jui, K.E. Hartin, Can. J. Anim. Sci. 72 (1992) 389-395.

[7] J.R. Garbarino, A.J. Bednar, D.W. Rutherford, R.S. Beyer, R.L. Wershaw, Environ. Sci. Technol. 37 (2003) 1509-1514.

DOI: 10.1021/es026219q

[8] D.W. Rutherford, A.J. Bednar, J.R. Garbarino, R. Needham, K.W. Staver, R.L. Wershaw, Environ. Sci. Technol. 37 (2003) 1515-1520.

DOI: 10.1021/es026222+

[9] Hieftje GM, Anal Chem. 44 (1972) 69A-78A.

[10] Hieftje GM, Bystroff RI, Lim R, Anal Chem. 45 (1973) 253–258.

[11] Betty KR, Horlick G, Anal Chem. 48 (1976) 1899-(1904).

[12] Lee Ch-Y, Anal Chem. 81 (2009) 584-594.

[13] O'Mullane AP, Anal Chem. 80 (2008) 4614-4626.

[14] Pan GW, Wavelet in electromagnetics and device modelling. Wiley, (2003).

[15] Walczak B, Massart DL, Chemom Intel Lab Syst. 36 (1997) 81-94.

[16] Foca G, Ferrari C, Sinelli N, Mariotti M, Lucisano M, CaramanicoR, Ulrici A, Anal Bioanal Chem. 399 (2011) 1965-(1973).

DOI: 10.1007/s00216-010-4431-z

[17] Depczynski U, Jetter K, Molt K, Niemöller A, Chemom Intel Lab Syst. 49 (1999) 151-161.

[18] Nie L, Anal Chim Acta. 450 (2001) 185-192.

[19] Boumans PWJM, Spectroc Acta Part B. 46B (1991) 431-455.

[20] Luckow V, Fresenius Z, Anal Chem. 303 (1980) 23-25.

[21] Lam RB, Sparks DT, Isenhour TL, Anal Chem. 54 (1982) 1927-(1931).