New ICP Analysis Mass Spec Test

[Suohhen]

ICP Analysis has a new test available using mass spectrometry. They claim it can measure up to 59 elements at an accuracy up to 1000x higher than traditional icp oes. But every time I have seen mass spec mentioned in the past there was a concern that it would measure elements bound up in organics. However this same concern was raised about icp oes when it first dropped but it seems they overcame the issue through filtration or some other means? As with anything new there are always concerns so please share and @Randy Holmes-Farley do you know how they overcame the organics issue and does that apply to mass spec as well?

https://www.icp-analysis.com/collec...c-test-with-dosing-calculator-rodi-water-test

 

[taricha]

ICP Analysis has a new test available using mass spectrometry. They claim it can measure up to 59 elements at an accuracy up to 1000x higher than traditional icp oes.

They might be the least trusted ICP vendor in the hobby, and now they offer something they say is 1000x better than other ICP for $30. :-(
I'm always skeptical when somebody in the hobby says they can measure something no one else can - because the implication is that it's impossible for anyone else to verify.

 

[Suohhen]

They might be the least trusted ICP vendor in the hobby, and now they offer something they say is 1000x better than other ICP for $30. :-(
I'm always skeptical when somebody in the hobby says they can measure something no one else can - because the implication is that it's impossible for anyone else to verify.

That is fine that you have that opinion but they have always done fine by me and I know they have made mistakes and a slow start which made people mad but there is a difference between mistakes and a lack of effort and quality.
I feel they have made many improvements since they started and are still lacking in plenty of ways but they are $10 cheaper than ATI and 20 from Triton so it is kinda like saying that IO is hated and yet it is the most used salt because it works and is the cheapest by a large margin. To me low cost is a part of trust and to others high cost is trust so everyone can feel however they want about a product.
Specifically for this product I am hesitant because mass spec is unproven and idk why I would need to know 59 elements.
What I like about them in general is that they give fast results and have always been $30 and while fauna comes in at an even lower price they get a lot of negative feedback on response time. What I don't like so much is that they don't provide the best feedback or recommendations but I can figure this stuff out myself. They also have had inconsistencies in the past and I feel like they have turned the corner but I have only used them a few times recently so idk for sure.

 

[Dan_P]

That is fine that you have that opinion but they have always done fine by me and I know they have made mistakes and a slow start which made people mad but there is a difference between mistakes and a lack of effort and quality.
I feel they have made many improvements since they started and are still lacking in plenty of ways but they are $10 cheaper than ATI and 20 from Triton so it is kinda like saying that IO is hated and yet it is the most used salt because it works and is the cheapest by a large margin. To me low cost is a part of trust and to others high cost is trust so everyone can feel however they want about a product.
Specifically for this product I am hesitant because mass spec is unproven and idk why I would need to know 59 elements.
What I like about them in general is that they give fast results and have always been $30 and while fauna comes in at an even lower price they get a lot of negative feedback on response time. What I don't like so much is that they don't provide the best feedback or recommendations but I can figure this stuff out myself. They also have had inconsistencies in the past and I feel like they have turned the corner but I have only used them a few times recently so idk for sure.

To be fair, no vendor guarantees the accuracy of the results they send you. How could you even tell whether a vendor was using a random number generator to create the results they send you? You couldn’t.

 

[Snoopy 67]

I too had problems with ICP.
However,
I did an API test the week after ICP & results were extremely close on a few & spot on with the rest.
So- I now feel confident in their results.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

ICP Analysis has a new test available using mass spectrometry. They claim it can measure up to 59 elements at an accuracy up to 1000x higher than traditional icp oes. But every time I have seen mass spec mentioned in the past there was a concern that it would measure elements bound up in organics. However this same concern was raised about icp oes when it first dropped but it seems they overcame the issue through filtration or some other means? As with anything new there are always concerns so please share and @Randy Holmes-Farley do you know how they overcame the organics issue and does that apply to mass spec as well?

https://www.icp-analysis.com/collec...c-test-with-dosing-calculator-rodi-water-test

FWIW, ICP MS is not new (I reviewed a paper studying artificial seawater samples more than a decade ago), and isn't necessarily better for all elements in a complex mix than is atomic emission ICP because many of the ICP MS peaks overlap. That is especially problematic when one ion (say, chlorine) might be present at thousands to millions of times higher concentration concentration than another.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

here's a scientific paper:


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4522618/
"Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) allows direct detection of trace elements at the sub-μg L−1 level but spectral and non-spectral interferences caused by the seawater matrix elements limits direct determination by ICP-MS. Spectral interferences are caused by the presence of polyatomic species that interfere on the analyte masses e.g., 35Cl16O+ on 51V+ and 40Ar23Na+ on 63Cu+. Non-spectral interferences include signal suppression due to the influence of easily ionized matrix elements on the plasma (Na and K in particular) as well as signal drift caused by accumulation of salts on the cones and lenses of the ICP-MS. Simply diluting the seawater with pure water is a way of reducing the matrix effects but most often it results in inadequate instrument sensitivity, especially for open ocean seawater."

 

[Suohhen]

here's a scientific paper:


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4522618/
"Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) allows direct detection of trace elements at the sub-μg L−1 level but spectral and non-spectral interferences caused by the seawater matrix elements limits direct determination by ICP-MS. Spectral interferences are caused by the presence of polyatomic species that interfere on the analyte masses e.g., 35Cl16O+ on 51V+ and 40Ar23Na+ on 63Cu+. Non-spectral interferences include signal suppression due to the influence of easily ionized matrix elements on the plasma (Na and K in particular) as well as signal drift caused by accumulation of salts on the cones and lenses of the ICP-MS. Simply diluting the seawater with pure water is a way of reducing the matrix effects but most often it results in inadequate instrument sensitivity, especially for open ocean seawater."

Interesting, thx for sharing. I do remember when ICP first dropped in the hobby there were mentions, likely by you, that icp-ms was the standard and oes was less proven.
I mean these competitors are obv full of secrets. ATI tests for nitrate and alk which aren't elements so idk how they measure them with icp. My guess is that they test for these things separately but idk. Coral Vue might very well run these tests through oes and ms to account for the weaknesses of each or perhaps in the last 10 years the technology has progressed enough to overcome these challenges. Or perhaps Dan is right, it is all just RNG.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

. ATI tests for nitrate and alk which aren't elements so idk how they measure them with icp. My guess is that they test for these things separately but idk.

You are correct, they don't use ICP at all for such a test. :)

 

[NewReefer42]

FWIW, ICP MS is not new (I reviewed a paper studying artificial seawater samples more than a decade ago), and isn't necessarily better for all elements in a complex mix than is atomic emission ICP because many of the ICP MS peaks overlap. That is especially problematic when one ion (say, chlorine) might be present at thousands to millions of times higher concentration concentration than another.

FWIW, modern ICPMS have inline auto-dilutors and collision modes (DRC, KED, etc) to eliminate isobaric interferences so a lot of the complications that used to exist don't anymore. They also have isotope dilution methods which are out of reach of OES systems. Because of this I would say that ICPMS is a superior technology, but the quality of the test results themselves depends on the exact method the lab is executing, and the skill of the chemists to know when interferences are occurring and how to calibrate them out or address them. I developed ICPMS methods for minerals in complex matrices at my last job and the automation really made it a breeze.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

FWIW, modern ICPMS have inline auto-dilutors and collision modes (DRC, KED, etc) to eliminate isobaric interferences so a lot of the complications that used to exist don't anymore. They also have isotope dilution methods which are out of reach of OES systems. Because of this I would say that ICPMS is a superior technology, but the quality of the test results themselves depends on the exact method the lab is executing, and the skill of the chemists to know when interferences are occurring and how to calibrate them out or address them. I developed ICPMS methods for minerals in complex matrices at my last job and the automation really made it a breeze.

Great, thanks for the info. :)

 

[TastyScrants]

FWIW, modern ICPMS have inline auto-dilutors and collision modes (DRC, KED, etc) to eliminate isobaric interferences so a lot of the complications that used to exist don't anymore. They also have isotope dilution methods which are out of reach of OES systems. Because of this I would say that ICPMS is a superior technology, but the quality of the test results themselves depends on the exact method the lab is executing, and the skill of the chemists to know when interferences are occurring and how to calibrate them out or address them. I developed ICPMS methods for minerals in complex matrices at my last job and the automation really made it a breeze.

Do you happen to know where I could find accreditation details for the labs performing the analysis? I’ve began reaching out to some companies but have not received any information just yet.

e.g. in the UK many laboratories are assessed regularly against various ISO standards by UKAS, the CLIA of the UK, but you probably know this considering your line of work.

As you say the value of the data relies on the skill of the operator, and in addition the quality of the initial method validation, or if they even use CRMs.

Id be reluctant to pay a company to test my water who are unaccredited, especially when they have a product line for sale to correct any deficiencies highlighted in the data!

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Do you happen to know where I could find accreditation details for the labs performing the analysis? I’ve began reaching out to some companies but have not received any information just yet.

e.g. in the UK many laboratories are assessed regularly against various ISO standards by UKAS, the CLIA of the UK, but you probably know this considering your line of work.

As you say the value of the data relies on the skill of the operator, and in addition the quality of the initial method validation, or if they even use CRMs.

Id be reluctant to pay a company to test my water who are unaccredited, especially when they have a product line for sale to correct any deficiencies highlighted in the data!

I'm not aware of any certifications for these labs, but if that interests you, you'd have to ask them. IMO, its unlikely they have spent the money for that purpose.

 

[TastyScrants]

I'm not aware of any certifications for these labs, but if that interests you, you'd have to ask them. IMO, its unlikely they have spent the money for that purpose.

Thanks, I’ve reached out to ATI and Triton to begin with. I’ll report back when I hear from them.