EE-SPME-GC-MS/MS method validation for chlorophenols
CuPc-MCOF-coated stainless steel fibre · Electrode
Optimised EE-SPME combined with GC-MS/MS; LOD defined as S/N >= 3; reproducibility tested with 500.0 ng L-1 CP standards.
| Property | Reported value | Normalised value | Uncertainty | Origin and quality | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Batch-to-batch RSD upper bound | 3.0-8.9% | — | range upper bound | Text Range | p.7 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Batch-to-batch RSD lower bound | 3.0-8.9% | — | range lower bound | Text Range | p.7 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Enrichment factor for 2,4,5,6-TCPMarked as a best value within this paper | 988 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Enrichment factor for 2,4,5-TCP | 615 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Enrichment factor for 2,4,6-TCP | 577 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Enrichment factor for 2,4-DCP | 339 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Enrichment factor for 2,6-DCP | 299 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Inter-day RSD maximum | less than 6.5% | — | less than | Text Approximate | p.7 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Intra-day RSD upper bound | 0.6-4.7% | — | range upper bound | Text Range | p.7 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Intra-day RSD lower bound | 0.6-4.7% | — | range lower bound | Text Range | p.7 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Linear-range upper bound | 1000.0 ng L-1 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Lowest linear-range lower bound across analytesMarked as a best value within this paper | 2.0-1000.0 ng L-1 | — | range lower bound | Table Range | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| LOD for 2,4,5,6-TCPMarked as a best value within this paper | 0.8 ng L-1 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| LOD for 2,4,5-TCP | 1.0 ng L-1 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| LOD for 2,4,6-TCP | 2.0 ng L-1 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| LOD for 2,4-DCP | 5.0 ng L-1 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| LOD for 2,6-DCP | 2.0 ng L-1 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| LOQ for 2,4,5,6-TCP | 2.0 ng L-1 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| LOQ for 2,4,5-TCP | 2.0 ng L-1 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| LOQ for 2,4,6-TCP | 5.0 ng L-1 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| LOQ for 2,4-DCP | 8.0 ng L-1 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| LOQ for 2,6-DCP | 5.0 ng L-1 | — | — | Table Exact Reported | p.8 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Maximum linear correlation coefficient across analytesMarked as a best value within this paper | 0.9989-0.9998 | — | range upper bound | Text Range | p.7 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |
| Minimum linear correlation coefficient across analytes | 0.9989-0.9998 | — | range lower bound | Text Range | p.7 · 3.5. Method validation · Table 2 |