This study develops a volatile fingerprinting approach for authenticating traditional sesame oil using HS-SPME-GC-MS with GC×GC-MS-assisted compound identification. Conventional GC-MS fingerprints were evaluated by similarity analysis, while GC×GC-MS improved identification of volatile markers in authentic and adulterated samples.The method detected maize oil dilution at levels as low as 5% and sesame oil essence adulteration from 0.2%. Principal component analysis and sensory evaluation supported the fingerprint-based classification, demonstrating a reproducible strategy for detecting different types of sesame oil adulteration.<blockquote><h4>The original article</h4><h4><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#sec0010">Volatile compound fingerprinting for traditional sesame oil authentication using GC-MS with GC×GC-MS-assisted identification&nbsp;</a></h4>Ruibing Jin, Fuyun Kuang, Qi Meng, Lijin Wang, Huanlu Song, Xueping Feng, Mingshan ZouJournal of Food Composition and Analysis, 2026, 155:109277<div><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2026.109277">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2026.109277</a></div><h6>licensed under <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC-BY 4.0</a></h6></blockquote>Selected sections from the article follow. Formats and hyperlinks were adapted from the original.<div><div><div><div><div>Sesame is cultivated worldwide for its nutritional value and flavor, especially in India, China, Myanmar, and Tanzania (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib23">Yin et al., 2021</a>). Sesame oil (SO) is an edible oil made from sesame seeds roasted at high temperatures to produce the distinct aroma and then processed using pressing, leaching, or other methods (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib5">Huang et al., 2024</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib11">Ma et al., 2022</a>). This traditional Chinese characteristic edible oil is extremely popular among consumers because of its high nutritional value and unique flavor. The unique aroma is an important indicator of quality and the main feature that distinguishes SO from other vegetable oils. SO contains fatty acids, vitamin E, and phytosterols that support cardiovascular health and anticarcinogenic processes (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib21">Xu et al., 2025</a>), along with sesamin and other lignans that impart strong antioxidant and anti-corticosteroid properties (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib24">Yin et al., 2024</a>). Owing to its nutritional and sensory values, the high retail price of SO has motivated adulteration with cheaper edible oils or SO essences (SOE). Therefore, the development of SO adulteration detection technologies such as fingerprinting is essential.Fingerprinting technology typically involves using analytical detection and data processing methods to generate chromatograms/spectra of the separate sample components simultaneously. In China, fingerprinting is primarily used in the fields of traditional Chinese medicine, biology, and food production. To ensure the quality of traditional Chinese medicines, the Chinese Pharmacopoeia Commission developed the “Chinese Medicine Chromatographic Fingerprint Spectra Similarity Evaluation System” (Fingerprint Similarity System). After importing sample chromatograms, the software generates a reference fingerprint spectrum based on the retention times and peak heights, from which the similarity between the individual samples and reference spectrum is calculated. Samples with similarities &gt; 0.900 are considered highly compatible with the reference fingerprint (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib13">National Medical Products Administration, 2000</a>). Chromatographic fingerprinting is particularly valuable for traditional SOs and reveals how variations in raw material origin or production processes influence the overall similarity of the volatile component profiles across samples. This enables more effective adulteration detection, origin discrimination, varietal differentiation, and characteristic substance analysis (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib3">Fu et al., 2023</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib14">Shi et al., 2025</a>; <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib15">Sun et al., 2023</a>).Volatile compound fingerprinting has been employed to characterize the volatile profiles of food products, enabling product discrimination and quality assessment (including identification and grading). <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib16">Sun et al. (2020)</a> analyzed volatile flavor compounds in SO and SO adulterated with soybean oil and identified characteristic compounds that can serve as indicators for adulteration. <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib18">Wang et al. (2024a)</a> used UV spectral fingerprints in combination with chemometric analytical methods to assess the quality of pressed SO with different levels of adulteration with refined SO. <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib1">Aghili et al. (2023)</a> analyzed the fatty acid compositions of diluted SO samples using an electronic nose (e-nose) and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), revealing differences in the volatile profiles between the original and adulterated SO samples, which could aid in distinguishing adulterations. <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib20">Xing et al. (2019)</a> established fatty acid fingerprints capable of identifying sesame oil adulterated with rapeseed oil at levels as low as 5%. However, the sensitivity decreased for adulteration with corn oil, where only levels above 10% were detectable. Although <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib26">Zhang et al. (2016)</a> established a simple and rapid ion mobility spectrometry method to identify sesame oil adulterated with flavoring substances, its detection capability is limited to adulteration levels above 10%. However, few studies have assessed the performance of GC-MS-based fingerprinting in the concurrent detection of SO dilution and essence adulteration from volatile profiles.Although the chromatographic fingerprint similarity evaluation system was originally developed for traditional Chinese medicines, it has recently been successfully applied to edible oils. For example, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib7">Li et al. (2025)</a> established volatile fingerprints for fried pepper oils using the "Chinese Medicine Chromatographic Fingerprint Similarity Evaluation System" and adopted a similarity threshold of 0.900 for quality discrimination. Therefore, we characterized the volatile fingerprint of authentic traditional SO using headspace solid-phase microextraction (HS-SPME) coupled with two-dimensional GC (GC×GC)-MS; co-elution issues were resolved by parallel GC×GC-MS analysis, while fingerprint similarity was evaluated using the "Chinese Medicine Chromatographic Fingerprint Similarity Evaluation System" based on GC-MS data. By comparing this fingerprint with those of diluted SO by maize oil (MO) and sesame essence-adulterated oil, we investigated the accuracy of the fingerprint model. This study provides a scientific basis for quality control and authentication of traditional SO.<h4>2. Materials and methods</h4><h5>2.4. GC×GC-MS</h5>GC-MS (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://labrulez.com/en-us/gcms/library?mainauthorItems=10&amp;search=8890">8890</a>–<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://labrulez.com/en-us/gcms/library?mainauthorItems=10&amp;search=5977B">5977B</a>, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) with a solid-state modulator (SSM) 1800 (J&amp;X Technologies, Shanghai, China) was used to qualitatively analyze the volatile compounds of SO (B. <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib17">Wang et al., 2023</a>).Volatile compounds were detected as previously described (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib2">Duan et al., 2025</a>), with some modifications. Mass spectra were acquired over the range of 40–450 m/z. Ultra-purity helium (99.999% purity) served as the carrier gas, flowing at a rate of 1.2 mL/min. A splitless injection mode was used. The oven temperature program was set to 40 °C and held this temperature for 2 min, slowly increased to 230 °C at 4 °C per min, and held at 230 °C for 5 min. The detector temperature was set to 250 °C. The quadrupole temperature and transfer line temperature were 150 °C and 250 °C, respectively. An electron impact ion source with an electron energy of 70 eV was used. The ion source temperature was set to 230 °C. A full scan mode was applied for acquisition. Two columns were used inside the GC oven: the first was a polar column, DB-wax (30 m × 0.25 mm × 0.25 μm; Agilent Technologies); the second was a mid-polar column, DB−17 (mid-polar, 1.85 m × 0.18 mm × 0.18 μm; J&amp;X Technologies). SSM1800 was placed between them for the heating and cooling stages. The SSM modulation period was 4 s. GC×GC-MS was used solely for qualitative confirmation of compounds that co-eluted in GC-MS.<h5>2.5. GC-MS</h5>Volatile compounds were analyzed semi-quantitatively by GC-MS (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://labrulez.com/en-us/gcms/library?mainauthorItems=10&amp;search=7890A">7890A</a>−<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://labrulez.com/en-us/gcms/library?mainauthorItems=10&amp;search=7000B">7000B</a>; Agilent Technologies), and 2-methyl−3-heptanone was used as an internal standard. GC-MS analysis was performed using a DB-wax column (polar, 30 m × 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm; Agilent Technologies, Folsom, CA, USA) to distinguish the volatile compounds. The carrier gas (ultra-pure helium, 99.999%) was delivered at a flow rate of 1.2 mL/min. The method, heating, and mass spectrometry conditions are consistent with those described in Section 2.4. All quantitative and fingerprint similarity analyses were based on the GC-MS data obtained from this section.<h4>3. Results and discussion</h4><h5>3.2. Analysis of volatile compounds</h5>The GC×GC-MS result of JH and the GC-MS results of JH, MSO 5 (50% MO), and MSE 3 (0.6% SOE) are shown in <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#fig0005">Fig. 1</a>. A total of 85 volatile compounds were identified in the SO, MSO, and MSE samples, and 33 common peaks were identified, including ketone (1), acid (1), nitrogen-containing compounds (16), sulfur-containing compounds (7), furans (3), aldehyde (1), and phenolic compounds (4, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#tbl0015">Table 3</a>).<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Journal_of_Food_Composition_and_Analysis_2026_155_109277_Fig_1_A_and_B_respectively_represent_the_three_dimensional_chromatogram_and_two_dimensional_chromatogram_336c1e9b86.jpg" alt="Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 2026, 155:109277: Fig. 1. (A) and (B) respectively represent the three-dimensional chromatogram and two-dimensional chromatogram of volatile compounds within the JH−1 sesame oil sample; (C)-(E) respectively represent the GC-MS results of volatile compounds within the JH−1, MSO 6 (50% MO), and MSE 3 (0.6% MSE)." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Journal_of_Food_Composition_and_Analysis_2026_155_109277_Fig_1_A_and_B_respectively_represent_the_three_dimensional_chromatogram_and_two_dimensional_chromatogram_336c1e9b86.jpg 119w," sizes="100vw" width="1600" height="2107"><h5>3.3. Establishment of GC-MS fingerprints and similarity analysis of volatile substances</h5>The GC-MS volatile compound data from the test SO samples were imported into the Fingerprint Similarity System to generate chromatographic fingerprints. The reference fingerprint profile was constructed as the arithmetic mean of all profiles (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#fig0015">Fig. 3</a>). Similarity values between the sample fingerprints and reference were calculated to evaluate compositional consistency. The SO samples showed a reference fingerprint similarity of 0.910–0.993 (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#tbl0020">Table 4</a>), surpassing the 0.900 benchmark (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib10">Ma et al., 2024</a>). This demonstrates a consistent composition of key volatile components across samples with minimal quality variation, satisfying the fundamental fingerprinting and quality assessment requirements for traditional SO.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Journal_of_Food_Composition_and_Analysis_2026_155_109277_Fig_3_Reference_fingerprint_of_volatile_compounds_b17f79ad1a.jpg" alt="Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 2026, 155:109277: Fig. 3. Reference fingerprint of volatile compounds in traditional SO established by GC-MS. Different numbers are represented the different compounds in Table 2." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Journal_of_Food_Composition_and_Analysis_2026_155_109277_Fig_3_Reference_fingerprint_of_volatile_compounds_b17f79ad1a.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1600" height="584"><h4>4. Conclusion</h4>This study established a volatile compound fingerprinting method using HS‑SPME‑GC‑MS with GC×GC‑MS‑assisted identification for the authentication of traditional sesame oil. A total of 33 common volatile peaks were identified, with pyrazines and guaiacol as major contributors. OPLS‑DA models (R²Y &gt; 0.98, Q² &gt; 0.97) demonstrated robust discrimination between authentic and adulterated oils, as well as between the two adulteration types. Compounds with VIP &gt; 1 and p &lt; 0.05 were identified as potential key markers. Selected key markers were then subjected to external standard quantification, and the obtained absolute concentrations were used to perform PCA. All calibration curves showed excellent linearity (R² &gt; 0.997), and the external standard PCA clearly separated sesame oil essence from all other samples. Fingerprint similarity analysis, validated by ROC (AUC = 1.000, optimal cutoff 0.8935), showed that adulterated samples had similarity values below 0.9, clearly distinguishing them from authentic oils. The method successfully detected maize oil dilution adulteration as low as 5% and sesame oil essence adulteration as low as 0.2%.Compared with previous methods (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib1">Aghili et al., 2023</a>; <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib18">Wang et al., 2024a</a>; <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib20">Xing et al., 2019</a>; <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889157526004205#bib26">Zhang et al., 2016</a>), our approach uniquely detects both dilution and essence adulteration in a single workflow, achieves lower detection limits (5% for MO, 0.2% for SOE), and provides an intuitive 0.900 similarity threshold without complex chemometric modeling. While non‑destructive methods (e‑nose, IMS) are more suitable for rapid screening, our approach offers higher chemical specificity, the ability to distinguish between dilution and essence adulteration, and an intuitive similarity threshold. Current limitations include testing only maize oil and one essence type, and validation on laboratory‑prepared samples. Future work will expand to other adulterants (soybean, rapeseed oil) and blind commercial samples. Overall, this method provides a reproducible, empirically validated tool for traditional sesame oil authentication. Furthermore, external standard quantification in the present study was performed only for a selected set of key volatile markers (VIP&nbsp;&gt;&nbsp;1 and p&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;0.05). The same approach can be extended to other compounds in future studies, enabling odor activity value (OAV) calculations for deeper insights into sensory contributions, more precise adulteration level prediction, and improved model robustness across different production batches.</div></div></div></div></div>

Volatile compound fingerprinting for traditional sesame oil authentication using GC-MS with GC×GC-MS-assisted identification

Comprehensive investigation of matrix effect evaluation approaches for reliable quantification in bioanalysis using UHPLC-MS/MS

This study compares loss-on-ignition, acid decarbonation, and combustion elemental analysis for measuring organic carbon in sediments using certified reference materials and real samples. Loss-on-ignition conversions were inaccurate, while acid washing before elemental analysis caused significant organic carbon loss and poor precision.Combustion pretreatment followed by elemental analysis provided accurate and precise organic and inorganic carbon measurements, confirmed by temperature-dependent combustion. Across more than 150 intertidal sediment samples, acid decarbonation underestimated organic carbon by 37% ± 8%, supporting combustion-based elemental analysis as the preferred approach for reliable sediment carbon determination.<blockquote><h4>The original article</h4><h4><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#s0055">Comparing loss-on-ignition, acid decarbonation and combustion elemental analysis for measuring organic carbon concentrations – recommendations for best practice</a></h4>Robert B. Sparkes, Stuart A. Rae, Lucy McMahon, Hannah L. Mossman, David McKendry, Clare E. Dean, Graham Tinsley, Frances Fowden, Connor J. Grisdale, Hafiza Begum, Holly Hope, Charlotte McEnhill, Samuel O’Boyle, Nawal Sohail, Marvyn Wachira, Rachel M. DunkOrganic Geochemistry, Volume 218, 2026, 105215<div><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orggeochem.2026.105215">10.1016/j.orggeochem.2026.105215</a></div><h6>licensed under <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC-BY 4.0</a></h6></blockquote>Selected sections from the article follow. Formats and hyperlinks were adapted from the original.<div><div><div><div><div>Environmental and Earth scientists frequently require measurements of carbon contents, including both the total carbon concentration (TC) and the fractions contributed by carbon from organic matter (organic carbon; OC) and carbonate minerals (inorganic carbon; IC; <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0025">Bendle et al., 2009</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0220">Radabaugh et al., 2018</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0230">Saderne et al., 2019</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0240">Scheingross et al., 2019</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0260">Smeaton et al., 2021</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0295">Vonk et al., 2012</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0315">Wood et al., 2021</a>).Accurate, precise, and affordable carbon concentration measurements are critical to the drive towards net-zero emissions, which requires monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon burial and release from an array of global environments (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0210">Post et al., 2001</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0265">Smith, 2004</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0270">Smith et al., 2020</a>). Carbon concentration measurements also underpin further analyses (e.g. normalising the concentration of individual biomarker compounds against the total organic carbon concentration, calculating elemental carbon to nitrogen ratios (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0290">van Dongen et al., 2008</a>), determining the correct sample load for isotope ratio measurements). Despite carbon concentration measurements being ubiquitous throughout multiple disciplines there is no standard approach for making these, especially determining the organic component of the sedimentary carbon (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0080">Fest et al., 2022</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0320">Young et al., 2018</a>). Different disciplines have often generated their own consensus approach, which may not align with studies from another field, even those working on similar samples and asking similar questions (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0070">Farmer et al., 2014</a>). Use of an agreed standard measurement protocol for carbon concentrations, or understanding the agreement/variability between protocols, is vital for regulatory monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV), such as the ongoing development of carbon offsetting standards that, if implemented robustly, could provide real-world benefits to climate mitigation (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0035">Bonn et al., 2014</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0045">Burden et al., 2023</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0105">Guizar-Coutiño et al., 2022</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0190">Needelman et al., 2018</a>, <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0205">Pan et al., 2022</a>). Determining a standardised, verified approach to carbon measurement is important for those performing MRV, who may not have access to advanced and/or expensive analytical instrumentation.This study compares three common methods for quantifying the total and organic carbon concentrations in sedimentary samples: i) loss-on-ignition, ii) elemental analysis combined with acid decarbonation, and iii) elemental analysis combined with organic matter combustion. The comparison focuses on assessing the accuracy, precision, and repeatability of each method, identifying their respective strengths and weaknesses, and independently confirming findings via a fourth method (temperature dependent combustion and infrared CO2 measurement) to provide recommendations for best practice. A summary review of these methods is provided below.<h4>2. Materials and methods</h4><h5>2.3. Independent testing of reference materials via TDC</h5>Standards were analysed by the supplier (Elemental Microanalysis Ltd, UK) as part of the certification process: 15/30 elemental analysis measurements gave expected values of TC, OC and IC and the uncertainty for TC, following ISO/IEC17025. These values were independently checked using an <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://labrulez.com/en-us/icpms/library?mainauthorItems=16&amp;search=Soli+TOC">Elementar SoliTOC cube</a> instrument at the instrument manufacturer’s headquarters (Elementar Analysensysteme, Hanau, Germany), which used the TDC method. Two combustion ramps were applied, first a two-step OC and IC determination at 500 °C and 900 °C, and then a three-step programme at 400 °C and 600 °C for easily-combustible and residual OC fractions and 900 °C for IC, with three repeat measurements of each. The SoliTOC cube instrument also analysed the agricultural soil sample, again making three repeat measurements of both the two-step and three-step temperature dependent combustion protocols (see Supplementary Table 3).<h5>2.5. Elemental analysis</h5>Total carbon concentrations were measured following the protocol described in <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0180">Mossman et al. (2022)</a>. 20&nbsp;mg of either untreated or pre-treated sample was weighed into tin capsules (Elemental Microanalysis Ltd.) and analysed for carbon concentrations using a Vario EL cube elemental analyser (Elementar Ltd.). Before each analytical run, the instrument was cleaned using three blanks without oxygen and seven blanks with oxygen, and calibrated using five analyses of up to 14&nbsp;mg ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) standard (Elemental Microanalysis Ltd.) and three analyses of an independent Soil Standard (Clay) CRM, acquired separately to the Soil Standard (Clay) CRM used to create analytical samples for this study (Elemental Microanalysis Ltd.). Three analyses of the EDTA calibration standard were repeated after every twenty samples. Long-term drift was monitored by repeated measurements of an internal laboratory standard sample, which has been analysed since 2015. Over the course of 65 measurements across 10 instrument runs for this study the laboratory standard showed no systematic drift.<h4>3. Results and discussion</h4><h5>3.1. Testing of certified reference materials (CRMs) using temperature dependent combustion (TDC)</h5>Both two-step and three-step TDC protocols consistently measured carbon contents close to but slightly below the supplier-certified values (see <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#f0005">Fig. 1</a>). For Soil Standard (Clay), the TDC instrument under-estimated OC by 0.10&nbsp;wt% (two-step) and 0.14&nbsp;wt% (three-step) and IC by 0.15&nbsp;wt% (two-step) and 0.087&nbsp;wt% (three-step). For Soil Standard (Peaty) the TDC instrument underestimated OC by 0.26&nbsp;wt% (two-step) and 0.34&nbsp;wt% (three-step), and IC by 0.021&nbsp;wt% (two-step) and 0.090&nbsp;wt% (three-step). Relative differences for OC are small, 5.1 – 7.0% for Clay and just 1.7 – 2.2% for Peaty, but higher for IC due to the small amount of IC present in the standards (25 – 44% for Clay, 7.0 – 30% for Peaty).<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Organic_Geochemistry_Volume_218_2026_105215_Fig_1_Comparison_of_organic_carbon_and_inorganic_carbon_measurements_on_two_certified_reference_materials_using_four_methods_31537717b3.jpg" alt="Organic Geochemistry, Volume 218, 2026, 105215: Fig. 1. Comparison of organic carbon and inorganic carbon measurements on two certified reference materials using four methods. Upper panel is Soil Standard (Clay) and lower panel Soil Standard (Peaty). Yellow diamonds show the certified value (Elemental Microanalysis Ltd) with manufacturer stated uncertainty in total carbon used as error bars for OC and IC (n = 30). White and grey symbols represent Loss-on-Ignition results using four different organic matter to organic carbon conversion equations (grey sqaures use the “van Bemmelen” scaling factor (Pribyl, 2010), grey circles the Craft et al. (1991) factor, white diamonds the Ouyang and Lee (2020) equation and white circles the Smeaton et al. (2022) equation. IC values for all LoI results use the C/CO2 mass fraction (Wang et al., 2011). Blue circles show the acid decarbonation and elemental analysis protocol, orange circles the combustion and elemental analysis protocol. Green and purple circles show mean results from temperature dependent combustion method (2-step and 3-step protocols respectively). Error bars represent one standard deviation after multiple measurements (n = 2 to n = 4). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)" srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Organic_Geochemistry_Volume_218_2026_105215_Fig_1_Comparison_of_organic_carbon_and_inorganic_carbon_measurements_on_two_certified_reference_materials_using_four_methods_31537717b3.jpg 116w," sizes="100vw" width="2756" height="3698"><h5>3.4. Reproducibility tests</h5>Having shown that combustion coupled with elemental analysis was the most robust method for measuring OC in pure and diluted standards, the next experiment tested the reproducibility of these protocols over multiple implementations. A dried, ground agricultural soil sample was repeatedly analysed using each method (separate aliquots were measured using LoI at 500 °C and 800 °C, separate untreated aliquots were analysed via EA, separate aliquots were combusted at 500 °C and analysed via EA, and separate acid decarbonations were carried out prior to EA measurements). This required a large amount of starting material, more than was available in the CRMs. Independent external measurement of the soil sample using temperature dependent combustion (Elementar, Germany) gave mean OC&nbsp;=&nbsp;2.50&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.002&nbsp;wt% and IC&nbsp;=&nbsp;1.29&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.008&nbsp;wt% for combustion to 500 °C (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;3), whereas combustion to 600 °C gave OC&nbsp;=&nbsp;2.52&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.075 and IC&nbsp;=&nbsp;1.12&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.010&nbsp;wt% (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;3).<div>LoI showed differences in mean OC depending on the equation chosen (<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#f0010">Fig. 2</a>). The conversions of <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0050">Craft et al. (1991)</a> and <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0200">Ouyang and Lee (2020)</a> were similar to the independent measurements (2.90&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.05&nbsp;wt% and 2.60&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.07&nbsp;wt% respectively; n&nbsp;=&nbsp;9 for each), but the equations of <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#b0255">Smeaton et al. (2022)</a> and van Bemmelen over-estimated OC (4.19&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.05 and 4.21&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.08&nbsp;wt% respectively; n&nbsp;=&nbsp;9 for each). IC estimates using the C/CO2 mass fraction conversion were higher than the expected value (1.91&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.06&nbsp;wt%, n&nbsp;=&nbsp;9). Note that the relative standard deviation for OCLoI was&nbsp;∼&nbsp;1.8%, and 3.2% for ICLoI, showing acceptable run-to-run precision.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Organic_Geochemistry_Volume_218_2026_105215_Fig_2_Organic_and_inorganic_carbon_measurements_following_repeated_analysis_of_a_homogenised_soil_sample_via_multiple_methods_c5d62ece0b.jpg" alt="Organic Geochemistry, Volume 218, 2026, 105215: Fig. 2. Organic and inorganic carbon measurements following repeated analysis of a homogenised soil sample via multiple methods. Markers for each method are shown in the legend and are the same as Fig. 1. Small black circles and error bars show the mean and one standard deviation after multiple repetitions of each protocol (n = 9 for LoI, C-EA and AD-EA, n = 3 for TDC)." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Organic_Geochemistry_Volume_218_2026_105215_Fig_2_Organic_and_inorganic_carbon_measurements_following_repeated_analysis_of_a_homogenised_soil_sample_via_multiple_methods_c5d62ece0b.jpg 204w," sizes="100vw" width="2363" height="1815">Since OCC-EA and ICAD-EA were calculated by subtraction from mean TCEA, all data from the C-EA and AD-EA methods plotted on a straight line in <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638026000902#f0010">Fig. 2</a>, representing OC&nbsp;+&nbsp;IC&nbsp;=&nbsp;TC. However, position and scatter along that line varied between the two pre-treatment techniques. OCC-EA clustered just higher than the independent measurements using TDC (2.60&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.03&nbsp;wt%, n&nbsp;=&nbsp;9). Propagating the errors in TC and IC gave a combined error estimate of&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.1&nbsp;wt% for the repeated OCC-EA measurements. ICC-EA was also close to but slightly higher than the TCD results, 1.35&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.03&nbsp;wt%. AD-EA, however, gave mean OC values of 2.00&nbsp;±&nbsp;0.12&nbsp;wt% (n&nbsp;=&nbsp;9) which was more variable run-to-run than the other methods and gave a significantly (p&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;0.0001) lower mean OC value than the TCD results. Once again, acid decarbonation results suggested that a large amount of organic matter was lost during the acid treatment, tested further in the next section.</div><h4>4.3. Conclusions</h4>An accurate, precise, efficient, and standardised method for measuring total, organic and inorganic carbon contents of sediment samples is critical for both scientific research and environmental monitoring and reporting and verification. We rigorously tested three methods for measuring carbon contents in soils and intertidal sediments, using certified reference materials and&nbsp;&gt;&nbsp;150 sediment samples. Loss-on-ignition (LoI) is cheap and easy but showed moderate run-to-run variability and, without careful calibration, it is not accurate.Elemental analysis (EA) is an accurate and precise method for total carbon (TC) analysis. Measuring organic and inorganic carbon via EA requires pre-treatment of the sample, and this study tested both acid decarbonation and combustion preparation techniques. Acid decarbonation led to significant and variable organic carbon loss, meaning that true organic carbon concentrations are likely higher than those measured following acidification. Combustion pre-treatment was shown to efficiently remove organic matter, leading to accurate and precise results, and we would recommend making organic carbon measurements in this way.</div></div></div></div></div>

Comparing loss-on-ignition, acid decarbonation and combustion elemental analysis for measuring organic carbon concentrations – recommendations for best practice

Scientific article

Science and research

Everything from the world of analytical chemistry in one place. We connect people in solving their problems. At Labrulez you will find all the necessary information easily, quickly and clearly. Stop searching and start finding.

LabRulez

Thermo Scientific Vanquish Tandem LC Systems

The Thermo Scientific Vanquish Tandem LC Systems increase throughput and maximize detector output by using a second pump and intelligent column switching to eliminate the time required for column equilibration in a gradient elution. 

<h3>Optimize your productivity</h3>In today’s challenging research and production environments, you are being asked to be more productive without increasing spending or compromising quality.&nbsp;At the same time, advancements and innovations are needed to improve operational efficiency and performance. How do you accomplish this? It’s easy with the Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ High-throughput LC systems built for enhanced productivity. Vanquish High-throughput LC systems combine individual Vanquish components and software wizards to deliver increased throughput or detector utilization.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_8_2befa2ab8e.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Tandem LC Systems." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_8_2befa2ab8e.jpg 191w," sizes="100vw" width="1325" height="1086"><h3>Two flow paths for maximized productivity</h3>Your laboratory may be facing increased pressure to improve working efficiency and deal with limiting resources, such as budget, space, or manpower. Vanquish High-throughput LC systems are designed to overcome these limitations by providing multiple flow paths for parallelization of specific stages of the LC run.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_2_06370d93f8.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Tandem LC Systems." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_2_06370d93f8.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="955" height="591"><h4>Unique dual technology</h4>The Vanquish platform contains two unique dual modules. Vanquish dual pumps merge two individual, low pressure mixing pumps in one housing enabling separate eluents and gradients for each pump.Vanquish dual split samplers possess two independently controlled injection units including separate injection valves and injection needles. Used in Dual LC and LC-MS workflows only, this enables high throughput and extensive sample characterization workflows.<h3>Two configurations to best serve your needs</h3>Vanquish High-throughput workflows are configured with Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ Core system, Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ Flex system or Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ Horizon system modules. Both workflows make use of two pumps to increase instrument productivity.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_3_77acff4bea.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Tandem LC Systems: Two configurations to best serve your needs." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_3_77acff4bea.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1682" height="735"><h4>Vanquish Duo UHPLC Systems</h4><ul><li>Supported systems:<ul><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/744">Vanquish Horizon</a></li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/743">Vanquish Flex</a></li></ul></li><li>Sampler: Dual split sampler</li><li>Detector: Two out of the complete detector portfolio</li><li>Software control:<ul><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/76">Thermo Scientific™ Chromeleon™ Chromatography Data System (CDS)</a></li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/1838">Thermo Scientific™ Standard Instrument Integration (SII)</a> for <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/627">Waters™ Empower™ 3 CDS</a></li></ul></li></ul><h4>Vanquish Tandem LC Systems</h4><ul><li>Supported systems:<ul><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/744">Vanquish Horizon</a></li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/743">Vanquish Flex</a></li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/397">Vanquish Core</a></li></ul></li><li>Sampler: Split sampler</li><li>Detector: One out of the complete detector portfolio and/or one mass spectrometer</li><li>Software control:<ul><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/76">Chromeleon CDS</a></li><li>Standard System Integration for <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/1758">Thermo Scientific™ Xcalibur™ software</a></li></ul></li></ul><h3>Vanquish Tandem LC systems</h3><div><div><div><div>Gradient separations are commonly used in LC or LC-MS. Column reconditioning, such as washing and re-equilibration, takes time and reduces your overall sample throughput. The Vanquish Tandem LC systems eliminate these limitations and improve productivity by:<ul><li>Increasing sample throughput without modifying a validated method</li><li>Improving return on investment by maximizing mass spectrometer utilization</li><li>Reducing column carry over through extended column washing without sacrificing throughput</li><li>Simplifying method setup with automatic method conversion from your original gradient method</li></ul></div></div></div></div><div>&nbsp;</div><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Tandem_LC_Systems_4_a031ad3221.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Tandem LC Systems." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Tandem_LC_Systems_4_a031ad3221.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1749" height="530"><h4>Throughput increase using Tandem LC</h4><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Tandem_LC_Systems_3_6bc55942ed.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Tandem LC Systems: Throughput increase by Tandem LC is between 10–80% for most common conditions." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Tandem_LC_Systems_3_6bc55942ed.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="894" height="434">The Vanquish Tandem LC system splits the analysis between two pumps and two columns. One pump delivers the analytical gradient while the second pump runs the reconditioning gradient. This configuration allows you to use two identical columns to run your sequence faster without compromising data quality.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Tandem_LC_Systems_5_d818007fe4.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Tandem LC Systems: Reproducible results for the Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ Horizon Tandem UHPLC system—Thermo Scientific™ Q Exactive™ HF hybrid quadrupole-Orbitrap™ mass spectrometer showing an overlay of five total ion current chromatograms. The sample shown is digested Infliximab using the Thermo Scientific™ SMART ™ Digest Kit." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Tandem_LC_Systems_5_d818007fe4.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1123" height="499"><h4>Simply upgrade your method</h4>Implementing Tandem LC-MS into your workflow is easy with compliance-ready Chromeleon software for LC or LC-MS users and Thermo Scientific Standard Instrument Integration (SII) for Thermo Scientific Xcalibur software for LC-MS users.A simple dedicated instrument method wizard enables you to create new methods without the need for additional training.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Tandem_LC_Systems_0c7f310b1e.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Tandem LC Systems." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Tandem_LC_Systems_0c7f310b1e.jpg 193w," sizes="100vw" width="353" height="285"><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Tandem_LC_Systems_2_47128950b2.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Tandem LC Systems: Chromeleon CDS and SII for Xcalibur guides users through the implementation of a Tandem LC or LC-MS method with automatic system volume considerations and gradient formation of the reconditioning pump." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Tandem_LC_Systems_2_47128950b2.jpg 160w," sizes="100vw" width="361" height="353"><h3>Thermo Scientific LC portfolio overview</h3><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_LC_portfolio_overview_2db5044366.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific LC portfolio overview." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_LC_portfolio_overview_2db5044366.jpg 188w," sizes="100vw" width="795" height="660">

Thermo Scientific Transcend Multichannel UHPLC Systems

Thermo Scientific Transcend Multichannel UHPLC Systems are advanced LC-MS systems with a multichannel UHPLC architecture that increase analytical productivity and maximize mass spectrometer utilization without compromising data quality.

Thermo Scientific™ Transcend™ Multichannel UHPLC Systems are advanced LC-MS platforms designed for laboratories that demand higher throughput, improved efficiency, and stronger return on investment. Their multichannel UHPLC architecture connects up to four fully independent LC channels to a single mass spectrometer, dramatically increasing system utilization without compromising data quality.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_8_5f824e5e08.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific™ Transcend™ Multichannel UHPLC Systems: The Transcend LX systems feature either 2 or 4 (shown) completely independent LC channels." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_8_5f824e5e08.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="955" height="404"><h3>Key benefits</h3><ul><li>Significantly increased LC-MS throughput</li><li>Maximized mass spectrometer utilization</li><li>Maintained sensitivity, selectivity, and robustness</li><li>Reduced operating costs and analysis time</li><li>Scalable configurations tailored to laboratory needs</li></ul><h3>Multichannel UHPLC architecture</h3>Conventional single-channel LC-MS systems process samples sequentially, leaving the mass spectrometer idle during injection, column washing, and equilibration. Transcend systems overcome this limitation by intelligently interleaving injections from multiple LC channels, delivering data to the mass spectrometer only during relevant retention time windows and enabling substantial productivity gains.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_5_ab4093366d.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific™ Transcend™ Multichannel UHPLC Systems: Injections are interleaved to maximize throughput and mass spectrometer use." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_5_ab4093366d.jpg 169w," sizes="100vw" width="831" height="764"><h3>Vanquish UHPLC platform</h3>Thermo Scientific™ Transcend™ Multichannel UHPLC Systems are built on proven <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products?category=40&amp;manufacturerItems=3&amp;search=vanquish">Thermo Scientific Vanquish UHPLC</a> technology. The Transcend multichannel architecture integrates up to four independent Vanquish-based UHPLC channels into a single LC-MS platform.The Vanquish UHPLC platform provides:<ul><li>high mechanical and operational robustness</li><li>reproducible long-term performance</li><li>precise gradient formation and stable flow control suitable for multichannel operation</li><li>flexible pump configurations (binary or quaternary) tailored to application requirements</li></ul>By combining the Transcend multichannel concept with Vanquish UHPLC technology, laboratories can achieve high throughput without compromising chromatographic performance, sensitivity, or system reliability.<h3>System configurations</h3><ul><li>Transcend LX and VLX Designed for high-throughput LC-MS workflows without on-line sample cleanup<ul><li>2- and 4-channel configurations</li><li>Fully independent LC channels</li></ul></li></ul><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_1567f69a93.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific™ Transcend™ Multichannel UHPLC Systems: Transcend LX UHPLC Systems" srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_1567f69a93.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="968" height="500"><ul><li>Transcend TLX Designed for workflows requiring automated on-line sample cleanup<ul><li>1-, 2-, and 4-channel configurations</li><li>Integrated TurboFlow™ technology</li></ul></li></ul><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_2_8ac2e32016.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific™ Transcend™ Multichannel UHPLC Systems: Transcend TLX UHPLC Systems" srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_2_8ac2e32016.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1674" height="523">Each LC channel operates independently, allowing identical methods to run in parallel or multiple methods to be combined within a single system.<h3>On-line sample cleanup with TurboFlow™ technology (TLX)</h3>TurboFlow™ technology enables rapid on-line removal of matrix interferences directly within the LC-MS system, resulting in:<ul><li>Reduced or eliminated manual sample preparation</li><li>Direct injection of complex biological and environmental samples</li><li>Improved sensitivity and reproducibility</li><li>Increased method robustness and simplified workflows</li></ul><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_3_efccaa3928.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific™ Transcend™ Multichannel UHPLC Systems: On-line sample cleanup with TurboFlow™ technology (TLX)." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_3_efccaa3928.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1105" height="556"><h3>System control and software</h3>All system functions are managed by Thermo Scientific™ Aria™ MX software, providing:<ul><li>Control of pumps, valves, gradients, and injection scheduling</li><li>Intuitive multichannel method setup</li><li>Parallel execution of up to four methods</li><li>A user-friendly graphical interface for complex LC-MS workflows</li></ul>Aria MX software is fully compatible with <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/1758">Thermo Scientific™ Xcalibur™</a> and <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/77">Thermo Scientific™ TraceFinder™</a> software.<h3>Mass spectrometer compatibility</h3>Transcend systems are designed as a flexible LC-MS platform compatible with a broad range of Thermo Fisher Scientific mass spectrometers, including:<ul><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products?category=20&amp;manufacturerItems=3&amp;search=tsq">TSQ triple quadrupole systems</a></li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products?category=134&amp;manufacturerItems=3&amp;search=orbitrap">High-resolution Orbitrap instruments</a></li></ul><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_4_fc2c09672b.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific™ Transcend™ Multichannel UHPLC Systems: Transcend TLX-2 system with a TSQ Altis Plus triple quadrupole mass spectrometer." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_4_fc2c09672b.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1178" height="646"><h3>Typical application areas</h3><ul><li>Clinical research and bioanalysis</li><li>Pharmaceutical development and quality control</li><li>Toxicology</li><li>Environmental analysis</li><li>High-throughput screening workflows</li></ul><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_6_db70763211.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific™ Transcend™ Multichannel UHPLC Systems: Retention time (A) and peak area (B) reproducibility of a high-throughput targeted proteomics assay for quantifying SARS-CoV-2 peptides in clinical research samples across five days. The Transcend TLX-4 UHPLC system was used for on-line sample clean-up and analysis of 500 respiratory tract swab samples per day. (Cardozo, K.H.M., Lebkuchen, A., Okai, G.G. et al. Establishing a mass spectrometry-based system for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 in large clinical sample cohorts. Nat Commun 11, 6201 (2020))" srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Transcend_Multichannel_UHPLC_Systems_6_db70763211.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1489" height="862">

Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ Neo UHPLC System

Take advantage of outstanding performance and productivity for all LC-MS workflows with nano-, capillary, and microflow using the Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ Neo UHPLC system.

Thermo Scientific Vanquish Duo UHPLC Systems

A Vanquish Duo UHPLC system enables you to run two methods simultaneously on one instrument, doubling your throughput or deepening your sample knowledge while maximizing your productivity and performance.

<h3>Optimize your productivity</h3>In today’s challenging research and production environments, you are being asked to be more productive without increasing spending or compromising quality.&nbsp;At the same time, advancements and innovations are needed to improve operational efficiency and performance. How do you accomplish this? It’s easy with the Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ High-throughput LC systems built for enhanced productivity. Vanquish High-throughput LC systems combine individual Vanquish components and software wizards to deliver increased throughput or detector utilization.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_8_2befa2ab8e.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Duo UHPLC Systems." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_8_2befa2ab8e.jpg 191w," sizes="100vw" width="1325" height="1086"><h3>Two flow paths for maximized productivity</h3>Your laboratory may be facing increased pressure to improve working efficiency and deal with limiting resources, such as budget, space, or manpower. Vanquish High-throughput LC systems are designed to overcome these limitations by providing multiple flow paths for parallelization of specific stages of the LC run.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_2_06370d93f8.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Duo UHPLC Systems." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_2_06370d93f8.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="955" height="591"><h4>Unique dual technology</h4>The Vanquish platform contains two unique dual modules. Vanquish dual pumps merge two individual, low pressure mixing pumps in one housing enabling separate eluents and gradients for each pump.Vanquish dual split samplers possess two independently controlled injection units including separate injection valves and injection needles. Used in Dual LC and LC-MS workflows only, this enables high throughput and extensive sample characterization workflows.<h3>Two configurations to best serve your needs</h3>Vanquish High-throughput workflows are configured with Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ Core system, Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ Flex system or Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ Horizon system modules. Both workflows make use of two pumps to increase instrument productivity.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_3_77acff4bea.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Duo UHPLC Systems: Two configurations to best serve your needs." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_3_77acff4bea.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1682" height="735"><h4>Vanquish Duo UHPLC Systems</h4><ul><li>Supported systems:<ul><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/744">Vanquish Horizon</a></li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/743">Vanquish Flex</a></li></ul></li><li>Sampler: Dual split sampler</li><li>Detector: Two out of the complete detector portfolio</li><li>Software control:<ul><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/76">Thermo Scientific™ Chromeleon™ Chromatography Data System (CDS)</a></li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/1838">Thermo Scientific™ Standard Instrument Integration (SII)</a> for <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/627">Waters™ Empower™ 3 CDS</a></li></ul></li></ul><h4>Vanquish Tandem LC Systems</h4><ul><li>Supported systems:<ul><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/744">Vanquish Horizon</a></li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/743">Vanquish Flex</a></li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/397">Vanquish Core</a></li></ul></li><li>Sampler: Split sampler</li><li>Detector: One out of the complete detector portfolio and/or one mass spectrometer</li><li>Software control:<ul><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/76">Chromeleon CDS</a></li><li>Standard System Integration for <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/1758">Thermo Scientific™ Xcalibur™ software</a></li></ul></li></ul><h3>Vanquish Duo UHPLC systems</h3>A Vanquish Duo UHPLC system enables you to run two methods simultaneously on one instrument, doubling your throughput or deepening your sample knowledge while maximizing your productivity and performance. The unique Vanquish Duo UHPLC system will:<ul><li>Improve return on investment by reducing cost per sample</li><li>Increase sample throughput without changing validated methods</li><li>Increase capacity without sacrificing bench space</li><li>Accelerate your method development process</li><li>Analyze the same set of samples with multiple methods, reducing sample preparation time and maximizing sample knowledge</li></ul><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_4_4cb62100fd.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Duo UHPLC Systems." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_4_4cb62100fd.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1678" height="512"><h4>What can you do with a Vanquish Duo UHPLC system?</h4><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_5_84912c40d4.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Duo UHPLC Systems: What can you do with a Vanquish Duo UHPLC system?" srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_5_84912c40d4.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1604" height="658"><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_6_f8939b888a.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Duo UHPLC Systems: Two independent assays run simultaneously from a single sample on one LC instrument to deepen your sample knowledge." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_6_f8939b888a.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1372" height="385"><h4>Complete control with just a few clicks</h4><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/products/76">Chromeleon CDS</a> delivers industry-leading ease-of-use for the Vanquish Duo system. Independently control the two channels of the Vanquish Duo system from a single interface with full traceability of all actions that is 21 CFR Part 11 compliant.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_c2d9ed2c2c.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Duo UHPLC Systems: Easy-to-use and intuitive system control of the Dual LC workflow within Chromeleon CDS." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_c2d9ed2c2c.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1190" height="632"><h3>See the Vanquish Duo UHPLC system</h3>The Vanquish Duo UHPLC system has been built to utilize a wide range of analytical detectors, including mass spectrometry (MS), diode array detection (DAD), charged aerosol detection (CAD), variable wavelength detection (VWD), and fluorescence detection (FLD).<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_7_c288dc2658.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific Vanquish Duo UHPLC Systems: See the Vanquish Duo UHPLC system." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_Vanquish_Duo_UHPLC_Systems_7_c288dc2658.jpg 174w," sizes="100vw" width="939" height="841"><h5>1. Vanquish Solvent Monitor</h5>Use the Vanquish Solvent Monitor to increase your regulatory compliance, productivity, and safety of your laboratory. That device guarantees that your HPLC systems will never run dry and the waste will not spill over during your analysis, reducing loss of valuable measurement time and sample material.<h5>2. Vanquish User Interface</h5>With the Vanquish User Interface, you are the master of your LC instrument. The display always shows you the key parameters of your instrument such as flow and pressure and guides you in a visual step-by-step video tutorial through key maintenance tasks.<h5>3. Versatile detection capabilities</h5>Differing molecular characteristics of your analyte, from small molecules to complex biomolecules, necessitate multiple detector methodologies. Vanquish Duo UHPLC systems can be used with any two detectors out of the broad detector portfolio including MS, DAD, VWD, FLD and CAD.<h5>4. Compatible with your software infrastructure</h5>A Vanquish Duo UHPLC system can be operated in various software environments including the latest Chromeleon software feature release, Chromeleon CDS long-term, and extended support version and Waters Empower.<h5>5. Versatile column management</h5>Greater column capacity (two 30 cm columns or a greater number of shorter columns per compartment), plus class-leading temperature range and temperature stability.<h5>6. Delivering powerful separations</h5>Run samples with two similar or different columns to increase throughput or maximize output. Setup with optional second compartment for independent column temperatures.<h5>7. Easier operation</h5>Patented tool-free Thermo Scientific™ Viper™ Fingertight Fittings with near-zero dead volume operation and ergonomic design.<h5>8. Unique Thermo Scientific™ SmartInject technology</h5>Superior retention time precision and enhanced column protection with intelligent SmartInject technology on both flow paths.<h5>9. Two proprietary injection valves</h5>Two separate injection valves with no shared fluidics allowing full application flexibility, including individual eluents, wash liquids and loop sizes.<h5>10. Easier sample handling</h5>Automated barcode reader to eliminate tedious rack configuration.<h5>11. Higher sample capacity</h5>High sample capacity is standard (four plates versus two plates on industry average). Increase capacity further with the optional Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ Charger module.<h5>12. Accurate flow for more data confidence</h5>The flow is delivered by a dual pump offering two truly individual devices in a single housing with ternary gradient proportioning.<h5>13. Simple maintenance</h5>Module maintenance is reduced to a minimum and can be worked on without instrument de-stacking, plus smart light bars on the front of the system provide instant system status update.<h5>14. Keep the lab tidy</h5>The built-in drawer stores accessories, related documents, or any other useful material for the system.<h3>Thermo Scientific LC portfolio overview</h3><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Thermo_Scientific_LC_portfolio_overview_2db5044366.jpg" alt="Thermo Scientific LC portfolio overview." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Thermo_Scientific_LC_portfolio_overview_2db5044366.jpg 188w," sizes="100vw" width="795" height="660">

Thermo Scientific Vanquish FLEX UHPLC System

Whether you are analyzing innovative biotherapeutics or novel chemical medicines, method development with Thermo Scientific™ Vanquish™ Flex™ UHPLC system has never been easier.

Thermo Scientific Vanquish Horizon UHPLC System

Designed with innovative technology and fine detail, the Vanquish Horizon UHPLC delivers outstanding precision, sensitivity, and simplicity for unmatched performance and robustness.

Products from category UHPLC from Thermo Fisher Scientific - page 1

Related content

Comparing loss-on-ignition, acid decarbonation and combustion elemental analysis for measuring organic carbon concentrations – recommendations for best practice

Comprehensive investigation of matrix effect evaluation approaches for reliable quantification in bioanalysis using UHPLC-MS/MS

Volatile compound fingerprinting for traditional sesame oil authentication using GC-MS with GC×GC-MS-assisted identification