Chinese Journal of Chromatography ›› 2025, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (8): 894-903.DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1123.2024.12002
• Articles • Previous Articles Next Articles
YUAN Guangnian, MA Jiping(
), LI Yuankun, LI Shuang
Received:2024-12-03
Online:2025-08-08
Published:2025-07-28
Supported by:CLC Number:
YUAN Guangnian, MA Jiping, LI Yuankun, LI Shuang. Determination of eight sulfonamide antibiotics in water by magnetic solid-phase extraction-ultra performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry based on covalent organic framework materials[J]. Chinese Journal of Chromatography, 2025, 43(8): 894-903.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.chrom-china.com/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1123.2024.12002
| Analyte | tR /min | Precursor ion(m/z) | Product ions(m/z) | DP/V | CEs/eV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sulfamerazine(SMI) | 2.53 | 265.1 | 156.0*, 171.9 | 74 | 25, 24 |
| Sulfadimidine(SMZ) | 2.80 | 279.1 | 185.9*, 155.9 | 70 | 24, 24 |
| Sulfamethoxypyridazine(SMP) | 2.92 | 280.8 | 156.1*, 126.1 | 70 | 24, 26 |
| Sulfachloropyridazine(SCP) | 3.15 | 285.0 | 156.1*, 126.1 | 70 | 24, 26 |
| Sulfamethoxazole(SMX) | 3.23 | 254.1 | 108.2*, 155.6 | 80 | 23, 38 |
| Sulfamonomethoxine(SMM) | 3.35 | 281.1 | 156.1*, 214.6 | 74 | 23, 23 |
| Sulfisoxazole(SIZ) | 3.42 | 267.8 | 155.9*, 113.0 | 65 | 19, 22 |
| Sulfabenzamide(SB) | 3.68 | 277.0 | 155.9*, 108.0 | 63 | 19, 34 |
Table 1 Retention times and MS parameters of the eight sulfonamide antibiotics(SAs)
| Analyte | tR /min | Precursor ion(m/z) | Product ions(m/z) | DP/V | CEs/eV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sulfamerazine(SMI) | 2.53 | 265.1 | 156.0*, 171.9 | 74 | 25, 24 |
| Sulfadimidine(SMZ) | 2.80 | 279.1 | 185.9*, 155.9 | 70 | 24, 24 |
| Sulfamethoxypyridazine(SMP) | 2.92 | 280.8 | 156.1*, 126.1 | 70 | 24, 26 |
| Sulfachloropyridazine(SCP) | 3.15 | 285.0 | 156.1*, 126.1 | 70 | 24, 26 |
| Sulfamethoxazole(SMX) | 3.23 | 254.1 | 108.2*, 155.6 | 80 | 23, 38 |
| Sulfamonomethoxine(SMM) | 3.35 | 281.1 | 156.1*, 214.6 | 74 | 23, 23 |
| Sulfisoxazole(SIZ) | 3.42 | 267.8 | 155.9*, 113.0 | 65 | 19, 22 |
| Sulfabenzamide(SB) | 3.68 | 277.0 | 155.9*, 108.0 | 63 | 19, 34 |
Fig. 7 Effects of(a) dosage of Fe3O4@TpDT,(b) pH of water sample,(c) adsorption time,(d) elution solvent volume and(e) elution time on the recoveries of the eight SAs(n=3)
| Analyte | MEs/% | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Water treatment plant effluent | Reservoir water | Seawater | |
| SMM | 12.3 | 20.2 | 38.1 |
| SMZ | 18.4 | 26.3 | 44.0 |
| SB | 16.3 | 24.1 | 38.9 |
| SMP | 22.5 | 29.5 | 46.7 |
| SMX | 11.0 | 19.6 | 34.5 |
| SCP | 26.7 | 33.3 | 45.9 |
| SMI | 26.0 | 33.8 | 44.9 |
| SIZ | 16.0 | 24.4 | 39.3 |
Table 2 Matrix effects(MEs) of the eight SAs
| Analyte | MEs/% | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Water treatment plant effluent | Reservoir water | Seawater | |
| SMM | 12.3 | 20.2 | 38.1 |
| SMZ | 18.4 | 26.3 | 44.0 |
| SB | 16.3 | 24.1 | 38.9 |
| SMP | 22.5 | 29.5 | 46.7 |
| SMX | 11.0 | 19.6 | 34.5 |
| SCP | 26.7 | 33.3 | 45.9 |
| SMI | 26.0 | 33.8 | 44.9 |
| SIZ | 16.0 | 24.4 | 39.3 |
| Analyte | Linear range/(ng/L) | Linear equation | r2 | LOD/(ng/L) | LOQ/(ng/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SMM | 4‒1000 | y=52.05x‒365.80 | 0.9973 | 0.80 | 2.66 |
| SMZ | 4‒1000 | y=93.70x‒1259.30 | 0.9926 | 0.89 | 2.97 |
| SB | 4‒1000 | y=135.74x‒2434.20 | 0.9932 | 1.11 | 3.71 |
| SMP | 4‒1000 | y=75.41x‒533.62 | 0.9972 | 1.15 | 3.82 |
| SMX | 10‒1000 | y=31.90x‒255.08 | 0.9933 | 1.60 | 5.34 |
| SCP | 10‒1000 | y=70.46x‒728.71 | 0.9967 | 1.65 | 5.49 |
| SMI | 10‒1000 | y=43.77x‒742.15 | 0.9926 | 2.68 | 8.95 |
| SIZ | 20‒1000 | y=69.10x‒1057.20 | 0.9946 | 3.44 | 11.47 |
Table 3 Linear ranges, linear equations, correlation coefficients(r2), LODs and LOQs of the eight SAs*
| Analyte | Linear range/(ng/L) | Linear equation | r2 | LOD/(ng/L) | LOQ/(ng/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SMM | 4‒1000 | y=52.05x‒365.80 | 0.9973 | 0.80 | 2.66 |
| SMZ | 4‒1000 | y=93.70x‒1259.30 | 0.9926 | 0.89 | 2.97 |
| SB | 4‒1000 | y=135.74x‒2434.20 | 0.9932 | 1.11 | 3.71 |
| SMP | 4‒1000 | y=75.41x‒533.62 | 0.9972 | 1.15 | 3.82 |
| SMX | 10‒1000 | y=31.90x‒255.08 | 0.9933 | 1.60 | 5.34 |
| SCP | 10‒1000 | y=70.46x‒728.71 | 0.9967 | 1.65 | 5.49 |
| SMI | 10‒1000 | y=43.77x‒742.15 | 0.9926 | 2.68 | 8.95 |
| SIZ | 20‒1000 | y=69.10x‒1057.20 | 0.9946 | 3.44 | 11.47 |
| Analyte | Spiked level/(ng/L) | Recovery/% | Intra-day RSD/% | Inter-day RSD/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SMM | 50 | 87.1 | 4.6 | 8.7 |
| 500 | 85.8 | 7.7 | 9.9 | |
| 800 | 90.5 | 8.6 | 11.3 | |
| SMZ | 50 | 86.6 | 9.0 | 10.3 |
| 500 | 78.1 | 9.1 | 17.8 | |
| 800 | 73.0 | 8.9 | 15.4 | |
| SB | 50 | 79.3 | 6.0 | 8.9 |
| 500 | 103.5 | 8.2 | 9.4 | |
| 800 | 112.9 | 7.9 | 8.7 | |
| SMP | 50 | 80.3 | 10.4 | 13.9 |
| 500 | 84.9 | 6.9 | 15.9 | |
| 800 | 82.0 | 12.5 | 17.0 | |
| SMX | 50 | 80.3 | 8.7 | 12.5 |
| 500 | 85.0 | 11.7 | 9.8 | |
| 800 | 88.6 | 5.6 | 17.4 | |
| SCP | 50 | 86.0 | 7.6 | 13.2 |
| 500 | 95.7 | 8.1 | 17.2 | |
| 800 | 95.6 | 6.7 | 13.9 | |
| SMI | 50 | 76.0 | 6.5 | 11.2 |
| 500 | 74.8 | 8.6 | 9.8 | |
| 800 | 75.1 | 4.4 | 8.7 | |
| SIZ | 50 | 93.9 | 9.4 | 11.2 |
| 500 | 82.0 | 8.5 | 12.3 | |
| 800 | 87.7 | 8.8 | 19.2 |
Table 4 Spiked recoveries, intra- and inter-day precisions of the eight SAs(n=6)
| Analyte | Spiked level/(ng/L) | Recovery/% | Intra-day RSD/% | Inter-day RSD/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SMM | 50 | 87.1 | 4.6 | 8.7 |
| 500 | 85.8 | 7.7 | 9.9 | |
| 800 | 90.5 | 8.6 | 11.3 | |
| SMZ | 50 | 86.6 | 9.0 | 10.3 |
| 500 | 78.1 | 9.1 | 17.8 | |
| 800 | 73.0 | 8.9 | 15.4 | |
| SB | 50 | 79.3 | 6.0 | 8.9 |
| 500 | 103.5 | 8.2 | 9.4 | |
| 800 | 112.9 | 7.9 | 8.7 | |
| SMP | 50 | 80.3 | 10.4 | 13.9 |
| 500 | 84.9 | 6.9 | 15.9 | |
| 800 | 82.0 | 12.5 | 17.0 | |
| SMX | 50 | 80.3 | 8.7 | 12.5 |
| 500 | 85.0 | 11.7 | 9.8 | |
| 800 | 88.6 | 5.6 | 17.4 | |
| SCP | 50 | 86.0 | 7.6 | 13.2 |
| 500 | 95.7 | 8.1 | 17.2 | |
| 800 | 95.6 | 6.7 | 13.9 | |
| SMI | 50 | 76.0 | 6.5 | 11.2 |
| 500 | 74.8 | 8.6 | 9.8 | |
| 800 | 75.1 | 4.4 | 8.7 | |
| SIZ | 50 | 93.9 | 9.4 | 11.2 |
| 500 | 82.0 | 8.5 | 12.3 | |
| 800 | 87.7 | 8.8 | 19.2 |
| Analyte | Water treatment plant effluent/(ng/L) | Reservoir water/(ng/L) | Seawater/(ng/L) |
|---|---|---|---|
| SMM | ND | 8.5 | ND |
| SMZ | ND | ND | ND |
| SB | ND | ND | ND |
| SMP | ND | ND | ND |
| SMX | ND | 15.9 | 11.8 |
| SCP | ND | ND | ND |
| SMI | ND | 21.3 | ND |
| SIZ | ND | ND | ND |
Table 5 Determination results of the eight SAs in real water samples(n=3)
| Analyte | Water treatment plant effluent/(ng/L) | Reservoir water/(ng/L) | Seawater/(ng/L) |
|---|---|---|---|
| SMM | ND | 8.5 | ND |
| SMZ | ND | ND | ND |
| SB | ND | ND | ND |
| SMP | ND | ND | ND |
| SMX | ND | 15.9 | 11.8 |
| SCP | ND | ND | ND |
| SMI | ND | 21.3 | ND |
| SIZ | ND | ND | ND |
| Material | Analyte | Adsorption time/min | Elution time/min | Recovery/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
HLB SPE column | SMI | 18 | 12 | 69.4 |
| SMX | 18 | 12 | 84.5 | |
| SMZ | 18 | 12 | 83.3 | |
| SCP | 18 | 12 | 78.4 | |
| Fe3O4@TpDT | SMI | 6 | 2 | 74.3 |
| SMX | 6 | 2 | 86.2 | |
| SMZ | 6 | 2 | 77.4 | |
| SCP | 6 | 2 | 88.5 |
Table 6 Extraction effects of Fe3O4@TpDT adsorption material and HLB SPE column
| Material | Analyte | Adsorption time/min | Elution time/min | Recovery/% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
HLB SPE column | SMI | 18 | 12 | 69.4 |
| SMX | 18 | 12 | 84.5 | |
| SMZ | 18 | 12 | 83.3 | |
| SCP | 18 | 12 | 78.4 | |
| Fe3O4@TpDT | SMI | 6 | 2 | 74.3 |
| SMX | 6 | 2 | 86.2 | |
| SMZ | 6 | 2 | 77.4 | |
| SCP | 6 | 2 | 88.5 |
| Material | Detection method | Matrices | Extraction time/min | LODs | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DMIPs | DSPE-HPLC-UV | lake water and seawater | 35 | 0.27‒0.64 μg/L | [ |
| ILs@Zr-MOFs | DSPE-HPLC-DAD | environmental water | 10 | 0.01‒0.03 μg/L | [ |
| TPB-DMTP-COFs | SPE-HPLC-MS/MS | spring water and pond water | >30 | 0.5‒1.0 ng/L | [ |
| Fe3O4@ZIF-8 | MSPE-HPLC-MS/MS | drinking water and river water | 15 | 0.06‒0.71 μg/L | [ |
| HLB | SPE-HPLC-MS/MS | environmental water | >160 | 0.1‒0.5 μg/L | [ |
| MIPs | MSPE-HPLC-MS/MS | environmental water | 10 | 1.4‒2.8 ng/L | [ |
| IL@MGO | MSPE-UPLC-MS/MS | environmental water | 12 | 0.75‒1.47 ng/L | [ |
| Fe3O4@TpDT | MSPE-UPLC-MS/MS | water treatment plant effluent, reservoir water and seawater | 6 | 0.8‒3.4 ng/L | this work |
Table 7 Comparison of this method with literature methods
| Material | Detection method | Matrices | Extraction time/min | LODs | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DMIPs | DSPE-HPLC-UV | lake water and seawater | 35 | 0.27‒0.64 μg/L | [ |
| ILs@Zr-MOFs | DSPE-HPLC-DAD | environmental water | 10 | 0.01‒0.03 μg/L | [ |
| TPB-DMTP-COFs | SPE-HPLC-MS/MS | spring water and pond water | >30 | 0.5‒1.0 ng/L | [ |
| Fe3O4@ZIF-8 | MSPE-HPLC-MS/MS | drinking water and river water | 15 | 0.06‒0.71 μg/L | [ |
| HLB | SPE-HPLC-MS/MS | environmental water | >160 | 0.1‒0.5 μg/L | [ |
| MIPs | MSPE-HPLC-MS/MS | environmental water | 10 | 1.4‒2.8 ng/L | [ |
| IL@MGO | MSPE-UPLC-MS/MS | environmental water | 12 | 0.75‒1.47 ng/L | [ |
| Fe3O4@TpDT | MSPE-UPLC-MS/MS | water treatment plant effluent, reservoir water and seawater | 6 | 0.8‒3.4 ng/L | this work |
|
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||