Jump to main content
Jump to site search
Access to RSC content Close the message box

Continue to access RSC content when you are not at your institution. Follow our step-by-step guide.



Calculating limits of detection and defining working ranges for multi-signal calibration methods

Author affiliations

Abstract

Multi-signal calibration methods, such as multi-energy calibration (MEC) and multi-isotope calibration (MICal), have increasingly been used to improve the efficiency of spectrochemical instrumental analyses. As MEC and MICal are adopted by an increasing number of laboratories, questions on their working ranges, the most appropriate calibration standard concentration (Cstd) to be used, and the best approach to calculate limits of detection (LOD) and quantification (LOQ) have been raised. In this study, we evaluate the effects of working with different combinations of Cstd and analyte concentration in the sample (Csam) on the accuracy of MEC and MICal. Chromium, Cu and Mo are used as models for MEC determinations by microwave-induced plasma optical emission spectrometry (MIP OES) and inductively coupled plasma OES (ICP OES), and MICal determinations by ICP mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), respectively. We use the error propagation approach to determine LODs and LOQs, evaluate the effect of employing different values of Cstd in these calculations, and compare the results with those from external standard calibration (EC) using the IUPAC approach. Finally, we apply MEC and MICal to analyze certified reference materials and compare the results with those from the traditional standard additions (SA) method. Although presenting usually higher LODs and LOQs compared to EC, MEC and MICal generally provide trueness similar to, and sometimes better than, SA. LOD and LOQ calculations based on the error propagation approach provide robust results, and trueness and precision depend on the calibration slope and the analyte level in the sample. The best results for MEC and MICal are found when working within the 0.1 < calibration slope < 0.9 range. A simple pre-analysis test comparing the analytical signal recorded for the sample (Isam) and a calibration standard (Istd) may ensure such conditions if 0.11 < Isam/Istd < 9.00. MEC and MICal are simple and efficient alternatives to EC and SA. They are particularly effective for minimizing matrix effects and analyzing complex-matrix samples.

Graphical abstract: Calculating limits of detection and defining working ranges for multi-signal calibration methods

Back to tab navigation

Article information


Submitted
05 May 2020
Accepted
22 Jun 2020
First published
22 Jun 2020

J. Anal. At. Spectrom., 2020, Advance Article
Article type
Paper

Calculating limits of detection and defining working ranges for multi-signal calibration methods

A. Virgilio, A. B. S. Silva, A. R. A. Nogueira, J. A. Nóbrega and G. L. Donati, J. Anal. At. Spectrom., 2020, Advance Article , DOI: 10.1039/D0JA00212G

Social activity

Search articles by author

Spotlight

Advertisements