Advertisement

A simple, fast method for the analysis of 20 contaminants of emerging concern in river water using large-volume direct injection liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

  • Josep Borrull
  • Agustí Colom
  • Josepa Fabregas
  • Eva PocurullEmail author
  • Francesc Borrull
Research Paper
First Online:

Abstract

A fast and sensitive method for the determination of a structurally and physico-chemically diverse group of contaminants of emerging concern (CEC) based on large-volume direct injection liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry was developed. The method can be used to determine 20 CECs belonging to different pollutant families (pharmaceuticals, personal care products, and pesticides) in river water at nanogram per liter. A single analytical run is required and the positive and negative ionization modes can be used simultaneously. Because of the large-volume injections of samples and the high sensitivity of the current mass spectrometers, the method has no need of a preconcentration step. The analytes are quantitated with matrix-matched calibration curves. The estimated limits of detection were in the range 0.1–5 ng L−1. The accuracy of the method was in the range 86–114%, and the precision, expressed as a relative standard deviation (RSD %), was below 18% for all the analytes (n = 5, at 5, 10, and 25 ng L−1). The method was applied to water samples taken from different points along the lower course of the Ebro River, Spain. A total of 12 out of the 20 target analytes were detected, and the ones at higher concentrations were caffeine and the pharmaceuticals paracetamol and ibuprofen (184.8 ng L−1, 63.3 ng L−1, and 23.3 ng L−1, respectively).

Keywords

Direct large-volume injection Multi-residue analysis Surface water Liquid chromatography Tandem mass spectrometry 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors also thank the support of Pla de Doctorats Industrials (DI) of the University and Research Secretary of the Economy and Knowledge Department of the Generalitat de Catalunya.

Funding information

The research leading to these results has received funding from the Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad; the Agencia Estatal de Investigación (AEI); and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) (CTQ2017-84373-R).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Benson R, Conerly OD, Sander W, Batt AL, Boone JS, Furlong ET, et al. Human health screening and public health significance of contaminants of emerging concern detected in public water supplies. Sci Total Environ. 2017;579:1643–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Directive 2013/39/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 August 2013 amending Directives 2000/60/EC and 2008/105/EC as regards priority substances in the field of water policy, Off. J. Eur. Commun. L226/1 (2013) 1-17.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Decision 2015/495 establishing a watch list of substances for Union-wide monitoring in the field of water policy pursuant to Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Off. J. Eur. Commun. L78/40 (2015) 40-42.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    2018/840, Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/840 establishing a watch list of substances for Union-wide monitoring in the field of water policy pursuant to Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Comission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/495, Off. J. Eur. Commun. L141/9 (2018) 9-12.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Richardson SD, Kimura SY. Water analysis: emerging contaminants and current issues. Anal Chem. 2016;88(1):546–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pedrouzo M, Borrull F, Pocurull E, Marcé RM. Presence of pharmaceuticals and hormones in waters from sewage treatment plants. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2011;217:267–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tijani J, Fatoba O, Petrik LF. A review of pharmaceuticals and endocrine-disrupting compounds: sources, effects, removal, and detections. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2013;224:1770–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gurke R, Rößler M, Marx C, Diamond S, Schubert S, Oertel R, et al. Occurrence and removal of frequently prescribed pharmaceuticals and corresponding metabolites in wastewater of a sewage treatment plant. Sci Total Environ. 2015;532:762–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barbosa MO, Moreira NFF, Ribeiro AR, Pereira MFR, Silva AMT. Occurrence and removal of organic micropollutants: an overview of the watch list of EU Decision 2015/495. Water Res. 2016;94:257–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gray JL, Borch T, Furlong ET, Davis JG, Yager TJ, Yang YY, et al. Rainfall-runoff of anthropogenic waste indicators from agricultural fields applied with municipal biosolids. Sci Total Environ. 2017;580:83–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Padhye LP, Yao H, Kung’u FT, Huang CH. Year-long evaluation on the occurrence and fate of pharmaceuticals, personal care products, and endocrine disrupting chemicals in an urban drinking water treatment plant. Water Res. 2014;51:266–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meffe R, Bustamante I. Emerging organic contaminants in surface water and groundwater: a first overview of the situation in Italy. Sci Total Environ. 2014;481:280–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boleda MR, Alechaga É, Moyano E, Galceran MT, Ventura F. Survey of the occurrence of pharmaceuticals in Spanish finished drinking waters. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2014;21:10917–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gaffney VJ, Almeida CMM, Rodrigues A, Ferreira E, Benoliel MJ, Cardoso VV. Occurrence of pharmaceuticals in a water supply system and related human risk assesment. Water Res. 2015;72:199–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Madikizela LM, Tavengwa NT, Chimuka L. Status of pharmaceuticals in African water bodies: occurrence, removal an analytical methods. J Environ Manag. 2017;193:211–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wilkinson J, Hooda PS, Barker J, Barton S, Swinden J. Occurrence, fate and transformation of emerging contaminants in water: an overarching review of the field. Environ Pollut. 2017;231:954–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sousa JCG, Ribeiro AR, Barbosa MO, Pereira MFR, Silva AMT. A review on environmental monitoring of water organic pollutants identified by EU guidelines. J Hazard Mater. 2018;344:146–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pal A, He Y, Jekel M, Reinhard M, Gin KYH. Emerging contaminants of public health significance as water quality indicator compunds in the urban water cycle. Environ Int. 2014;71:46–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gavrilescu M, Demnerová K, Aamand J, Agathos S, Favio F. Emerging contaminants in the environment: present and future challenges in biomonitoring, ecological risks and bioremediation. New Biotech. 2015;32:147–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tijani JO, Fatoba OO, Babajide OO, Petrik LF. Pharmaceuticals, endocrine disruptors, personal care products, nanomaterials and perfluorinated pollutants: a review. Environ Chem Lett. 2016;14:27–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rodil R, Quintana JB, López-Mahía P, Muniategui-Lorenzo S, Prada-Rodríguez D. Multi-residue analytical method for the determination of emerging pollutants in water by solid-phase extraction and liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A. 2009;1216:2958–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Robles-Molina J, Lara-Ortega FJ, Gilbert-López B, García-Reyes JF, Molina-Díaz A. Multi-residue method for the determination of over 400 priority and emerging pollutants in water and wastewater by solid-phase extraction and liquid chromatography-time-of-flight massspectrometry. J Chromatogr A. 2014;1350:30–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gago-Ferrero P, Mastroianni N, Díaz-Cruz MS, Barceló D. Fully automated determination of nine ultraviolet filters and transformation products in natural waters and wastewaters by on-line solid phase extraction-liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A. 2013;1294:106–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    López-Serna R, Pérez S, Ginebreda A, Petrović M, Barceló D. Fully automated determination of 74 pharmaceuticals in environmental and waste waters by online solid phase extraction–liquid chromatography-electrospray–tandem mass spectrometry. Talanta. 2010;83:410–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rubirola A, Boleda MR, Galceran MT. Multiresidue analysis of 24 Water Framework Directive priority substances by on-line solid phase extraction-liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry in environmental waters. J Chromatogr A. 2017;1493:64–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gusmaroli L, Insa S, Petrovic M. Development of an online SPE-UHPLC-MS/MS method for the multiresidue analysis of the 17 compounds from the EU “Watch list”. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2018;410:4165–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Čelić M, Insa S, Škrbić B, Petrović M. Development of a sensitive and robust online dual column liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for the analysis of natural and synthetic estrogens and their conjugates in river water and wastewater. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2017;409:5427–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Berset JD, Brenneisen R, Mathieu C. Analysis of llicit and illicit drugs in waste, surface and lake water samples using large volume direct injection high performance liquid chromatography – electrospray tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC–MS/MS). Chemosphere. 2010;81:859–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Díaz L, Llorca-Pórcel J, Valor I. Ultra trace determination of 31 pesticides in water samples by direct injection–rapid resolution liquid chromatography-electrospray tandem mass spectrometry. Anal Chim Acta. 2008;624:90–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Greulich K, Alder L. Fast multiresidue screening of 300 pesticides in water for human consumption by LC-MS/MS. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2008;391:183–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Reemtsma T, Alder L, Banasiak U. A multimethod for the determination of 150 pesticide metabolites in surface water and groundwater using direct injection liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A. 2013;1271:95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Boix C, Ibáñez M, Sancho JV, Rambla J, Aranda JL, Ballester S, et al. Fast determination of 40 drugs in water using large volume direct injection liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Talanta. 2015;131:719–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Panditi VR, Batchu SR, Gardinali PR. Online solid-phase extraction-liquid chromatography electrospray-tandem mass spectrometry determination of multiple classes of antibiotics in environmental and treated waters. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2013;405:5953–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rossman J, Schubert S, Gurke R, Oertel R, Kirch W. Simultaneous determination of most prescribed antibiotics in multiple urban wastewater by SPE-LC-MS/MS. J Chromatogr B. 2014;969:162–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bayen S, Yi X, Segovia E, Zhou Z, Kelly BC. Analysis of selected antibiotics in surface freshwater and seawater using direct injection in liquid chromatography electrosparay ionization tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A. 2014;1338:38–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Senta I, Krizman-Matasic I, Terzic S, Ahel M. Comprehensive determination of macrolide antibiotics, their syntesis intermediates in transformation products in wastewater effluents and ambient waters by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A. 2017;1509:60–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pedrouzo M, Borrull F, Marcé RM, Pocurull E. Ultra-high performance liquid-chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for determining the presence of eleven personal care products in surface and wastewaters. J Chromatogr A. 2009;1216:6994–7000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Martínez Bueno MJ, Uclés S, Hernando MD, Fernández-Alba AR. Development of a solvent-free method for the simultaneous idientification/quantification of drugs of abuse and their metabolites in environmental water by LC-MS/MS. Talanta. 2011;85:157–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dasenaki ME, Thomaidis NS. Multianalyte method for the determination of pharmaceuticals in wastewater samples using solid-phase extraction and liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2015;407:4229–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Buerge IJ, Poiger T, Müller MD, Buser HR. Caffeine, an anthropogenic marker, for wastewater contamination of surface waters. Environ Sci Technol. 2003;37:691–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Buerge IJ, Poiger T, Müller MD, Buser HR. Combined sewer overflows to surface waters detected by the anthropogenic marker caffeine. Environ Sci Technol. 2006;40:4096–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Decision 2002/657/EC implementing Council Directive 96/25/EC concerning the performance of analytical methods and the interpretation of results, Off. J. Eur. Commun. L221/8 (2002) 8-36.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    González-Mariño I, Quintana JB, Rodríguez I, Cela R. Simultaneous determination of parabens, triclosan and triclocarban in water by liquid chromatography/electrospray ionisation tandem mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom. 2009;23:1756–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Negreira N, Rodríguez I, Ramil M, Rubí E, Cela R. Solid-phase extraction followed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for the determination of hydroxylated benzophenone UV absorbers in environmental water samples. Anal Chem Acta. 2009;654:162–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kruve A, Kaupmees K. Adduct formation in ESI/MS by mobile phase additives. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2017;28:887–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Busetti F, Backe WJ, Bendixen N, Maier U, Place B, Giger W, et al. Trace analysis of environmental matrices by large-volume injection and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2012;402:175–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Meierjohann A, Kortesmäki E, Brozinski JM, Kronberg L. An online SPE LC-MS/MS method for the analysis of antibiotics in environmental waters. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2017;24:8692–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Chiaia AC, Banta-Green C, Field J. Eliminating solid phase extraction with large-volume injection LC/MS/MS: analysis of illicit drugs legal drugs and human urine indicators in US wastewaters. Envrion Sci Technol. 2008;42:8841–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Niessen WMA, Manini P, Andreoli R. Matrix effects in quantitative pesticide analysis using liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry. Mass Spect Rev. 2006;25:881–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zhou JL, Kang Y. Matrix effect in high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry analysis of antibiotics in environmental water samples. J Sep Sci. 2013;36:564–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Valcárcel Y, Alonso SG, Rodríguez-Gil JL, Castaño A, Montero JC, Criado-Alvarez JJ, et al. Seasonal variation of pharmaceutically active compounds in surface (Tagus River) and tap water (Central Spain). Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2013;20:1396–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Moreno-González R, Rodríguez-Mozaz S, Gros M, Pérez-Cánovas E, Barceló D, León VM. Input of pharmaceuticals through coastal surface watercourses into a Mediterranean lagoon (Mar Menor, SE Spain): sources and seasonal variations. Sci Total Environ. 2014;490:59–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Da Silva BF, Jelic A, López-Serna R, Mozeto AA, Petrović M, Barceló D. Occurrence and distribuition of pharmaceuticals in surface water, suspended solids and sediments of the Ebro river basin, Spain. Chemosphere. 2011;85:1331–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Gros M, Petrović M, Barceló D. Wastewater treatment plants as a pathway for aquatic contamination by pharmaceuticals in the Ebro River Basin (Northeast Spain). Environ Chem. 2007;26:1553–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    López-Serna R, Petrović M, Barceló D. Occurrence and distribuiton of multi-class pharmaceuticals and their active metabolites and transformation products in the Ebro River basin (NE Spain). Sci Total Environ. 2012;440:280–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Ccanccapa A, Masiá A, Navarro-Ortega A, Picó Y, Barceló D. Pesticides in the Ebro River basin: occurrence and risk assessment. Environ Pollut. 2016;211:414–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Decision 2016/110 not approving triclosan as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products for product type 1, Off. J. Eur. Commun. L21/86 (2016).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Josep Borrull
    • 1
    • 2
  • Agustí Colom
    • 1
  • Josepa Fabregas
    • 1
  • Eva Pocurull
    • 2
    Email author
  • Francesc Borrull
    • 2
  1. 1.Consorci d’Aigües de TarragonaL’AmpollaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Analytical Chemistry and Organic ChemistryUniversitat Rovira i VirgiliTarragonaSpain

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options