| Literature DB >> 33553892 |
Abstract
Complete separation of chemicals in a complex mixture is far from being achieved even with the current high-performance separation technology, such as gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Several deconvolution techniques based on multivariate curve resolution (MCR), or model peak methods, which are represented by AMDIS, have been developed to address the above-mentioned issue. The model peak methods have been developed to provide easy-to-use tools, including AMDIS, but are limited for MCR with approximation methods. The objective of this study was to provide an easy-to-use deconvolution tool based on the MCR approach for GC-MS data. The spectral deconvolution tool based on non-negative matrix factorization (NMF), which calculates outputs using an approximation method, was implemented as a free web platform, namely, GC Mixture Touch, clarifying the effects of the parameters required for the deconvolution. The GC Mixture Touch was applied to the actual mixture sample of road dust spiked with chemical standards. The recommended parameter settings for smoothing of the chromatogram, the number of ranks, and the NMF algorithm for the deconvolution were clarified through the study. The performance with the suggested parameters was evaluated with respect to compound identification for the actual sample. All of the test compounds in the sample were correctly identified with the GC Mixture Touch, outperforming AMDIS with respect to the identification. The GC Mixture Touch is easy to use on the web even for users without programming skills. This is expected to enhance the application of the NMF-based deconvolution, and it should prove helpful in finding the compounds hidden in complex mixtures that are difficult to find using conventional approaches.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33553892 PMCID: PMC7860082 DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.0c04982
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Omega ISSN: 2470-1343
Figure 1Chromatogram of the road dust sample (upper) and the sample with chemical standards (lower). The spiked chemicals evaluated in this study are shown in the lower chromatogram with red letters. The concentrations in the sample were 15.8, 12.8, 15.2, 12.8, and 16.4 μg mL–1 for n-nonanol, 2,6-dimethylphenol, 2-ethylhexanoic acid, 2,6-dimethylaniline, and methyl dodecanoate, respectively.
Intensities of Chromatographic Peaks for Chemicals Spiked in the Road Dust Samplea
| 2,6-dimethylphenol | 2-ethylhexanoic acid | 2,6-dimethylaniline | methyl dodecanoate | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| retention time (min) | 4.24 | 4.77 | 4.91 | 5.55 | 12.13 |
| concentration in the chemical-spiked road dust sample (μg mL–1) | 15.8 | 12.8 | 15.2 | 12.8 | 16.4 |
| I. Peak height
in the road
dust sample | 7.1 × 106 | 1.7 × 107 | 2.4 × 106 | 3.7 × 106 | 5.6 × 106 |
| II. Peak height in the chemical-spiked road dust sample | 6.4 × 106 | 2.3 × 107 | 9.6 × 106 | 1.1 × 107 | 3.8 × 107 |
| ratio (II/I) | 0.90 | 1.32 | 4.04 | 3.06 | 6.80 |
| remarks | with overlapped peak | with overlapped peak | no remarkable overlapped peak | no remarkable overlapped peak | no remarkable overlapped peak |
The intensities of the chromatographic peaks were calculated based on the total ion chromatogram (Figure ).
Peaks eluted at the same positions as the respective chemicals were alternatively used for the intensity calculation.
Figure 2Result of NMF-based deconvolution (number of rank: 5, algorithm: Frobenius, and initialization: NNDSVD) of the chromatographic peaks including 2,6-dimethylphenol (12.8 μg mL–1). (a) Total ion chromatogram. (b) Deconvoluted chromatogram. (c) Original spectrum. (d) Deconvoluted spectrum of rank 1: The component of the spectrum is originated from the road dust sample. It is assumed to be 2-tridecanol from the match factor and 2-decanol from the match factor with the retention index. (e) Deconvoluted spectrum of rank 2: The component of the spectrum is the spiked compound 2,6-dimethylphenol. It is successfully assigned through a library search.
Comparison of Deconvolution Performances between GC Mixture Touch and AMDISa
| test compound | 2,6-dimethylphenol | 2-ethylhexanoic acid | 2,6-dimethylaniline | methyl dodecanoate | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GC Mixture Touch | hit compound by library search | 2,6-dimethylphenol | 2-ethylhexanoic acid | 2,6-dimethylaniline | methyl dodecanoate | |
| correct match | yes | yes | yes | yes | yes | |
| match factor | 902 | 960 | 928 | 961 | 982 | |
| second peak information from the deconvolution | available | available | available | available | available | |
| AMDIS | hit compound by library search | 2-decene | 2,3-dimethylphenol | 2-ethylhexanoic acid | 3-ethyl-4-methylpyridine | methyl dodecanoate |
| correct match | no | no | yes | no | yes | |
| match factor | 827 | 936 | 930 | 963 | 985 | |
| second peak information from the deconvolution | no | no (major deconvoluted spectrum by slightly arranged model was available) | no | no | no |
The smoothing of the chromatogram was set to 0 in the GC Mixture Touch to make the conditions of measurement data equal in AMDIS. Default parameters were used for deconvolution in AMDIS.