<p><strong>Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) is one of the most highly selective sample preparation methods, meaning that the targeted analytes and their matrices must be considered when choosing the correct SPE sorbent and format. Drying down the sorbent before elution is an important step.</strong></p><ul><li>Wash solvents are used to flush out unwanted compounds (i.e., contaminants). If the wash solvent is not completely removed, then residual wash solvent could contaminate the final elution.</li><li>If you do not dry the SPE sufficiently, it could make the final solution less concentrated and result in a reduction in sensitivity.</li><li>Drying helps physically break down the interactions between the sorbent and analyte for a more concentrated extract.</li></ul><p>After the wash solvent has been passed through the cartridge, continue to apply negative pressure (vacuum) or positive pressure. Use this pressure to dry the cartridge for 2 to 5 minutes (or until dry). Turn off the pressure and wipe the tips of the manifold needles to remove any residual solvent.</p><h5><strong>Notes</strong></h5><ol><li><strong>Reproducibility:</strong> Drying removes traces of residual sample/matrix and wash solvent from the sorbent. This produces a more concentrated final extract with a consistent volume and composition and yields better reproducibility and higher recoveries.</li><li><strong>Immiscibility:</strong> Drying is especially critical when using elution solvents that are immiscible with water (e.g. hexane, ethyl acetate, and methylene chloride). Residual water in the sorbent bed may prevent dissolution of the analyte in the elution solvent, resulting in low recoveries and irreproducibility.</li><li><strong>Over-drying: </strong>Avoid over-drying the sorbent, since in some cases, analyte recovery may decrease with excessive vacuum or drying times above 5 minutes. Dry cartridges look distinctly different from moist ones. Make a note of the cartridge appearance before and after conditioning. Also, you could touch the cartridge while it is drying; wet cartridges feel colder than dry cartridges.&nbsp;</li></ol>

Why Is It Necessary to Dry the SPE Sorbent Before Elution?

<p><strong>🎤 Presenter:</strong> Sarah C. Foster (William &amp; Mary)</p><p>💾 <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.youtube.com/redirect?event=video_description&amp;redir_token=QUFFLUhqbFk5RFV6cGdVaThIVjRSQ0N3OVFkdzE5d2Y0QXxBQ3Jtc0trUHhzWGtLeTNKcFVhelU3X1E3U3A4Z1ZHUDBkME02MDl1ajk1QnpFc25ka3ZKUlhKOFVOdDZocnAwTEZZOTZEUE84cWJTUEVUVjgyY0FvT2xBcmpkenVYOVJTd3d0a1pQNVJkSENfZXFsVmF0dF9rMA&amp;q=https%3A%2F%2Fgcms.labrulez.com%2Flabrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3%2FO_2_Foster_04b38f9b88.pdf&amp;v=e5w4zwhBzRY"><strong>PDF presentation</strong></a></p><h3><strong>Abstract</strong></h3><p><strong>Fermentation is a byproduct of microbial metabolism. When beverages become fermented, the microorganisms involved produce volatile organic compounds (VOCs). It is important to examine the VOC profile of fermented beverages to understand their consumer perception and health considerations. Traditionally, VOCs are detected by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). However, more complex matrices, like fermented products, benefit from the enhanced separation of comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC). This study aimed to develop an understanding of the VOCs related to different fermented beverages through a nontargeted lens via comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography with dual detection using flame ionization detection and time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GC×GC-FID/TOFMS).&nbsp;</strong></p><p>Data analysis focused on developing a complete VOC profile of fermented products. Moreover, analysis aimed to identify differentiating VOCs to understand differences between products and distinguish the drink matrix from the microbial matrix. Results indicate that it is possible to attribute VOCs to one component of a complex sample, creating a microbial VOC profile and a base VOC profile. It was possible to discern products from one another, including contaminated products from non-contaminated products. Data visualization consisted of Principal Component Analysis (PCA) scores and loadings plots, bar chats, Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA), and Partial Least Squares Discriminant Analysis (PLS-DA). Data analysis software was capable of processing and aligning samples with high levels of biological variation, making GC×GC a promising analytical tool for market research and regulation. Future studies will aim to correlate VOCs detected via GC×GC-FID/TOFMS to the microbial genetics of fermented products.</p><h3><strong>Video Transcription</strong></h3><h4><strong>1. Introduction</strong></h4><p>Sarah Foster introduces research focused on the application of comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC) for analyzing fermented beverages.</p><p>The laboratory primarily uses <strong>GC×GC</strong> for:</p><ul><li>Separation and identification of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)</li><li>Applications in forensic sciences and food sciences</li></ul><h5><strong>Forensic Applications</strong></h5><ul><li>Fingerprint residue</li><li>Gunshot residue</li><li>Pepper spray</li><li>Other trace evidence</li></ul><h5><strong>Food Science Applications</strong></h5><ul><li>Fermented beverages</li><li>Foods claiming health benefits</li></ul><p>An additional focus of the lab is transitioning GC×GC from proof-of-concept research toward real-world field applications, including improved data interpretation and presentation.</p><h4><strong>2. Challenges in Non-Targeted GC×GC Data</strong></h4><p>Working with complex, non-targeted datasets presents several challenges:</p><ul><li>Resolution of complex coelutions</li><li>Increased number of detectable features</li><li>Expansion of compound classes</li><li>Detection of low-level analytes previously masked by abundant compounds</li><li>Difficulty in longitudinal tracking due to increased data complexity</li></ul><p>While GC×GC reveals more chemical information, interpreting this data becomes more demanding.</p><h4><strong>3. Data Processing and Statistical Tools</strong></h4><h5><strong>Software Used</strong></h5><ul><li><strong>ChromaTOF</strong> – for single chromatogram peak detection and deconvolution</li><li><strong>ChromaTOF Sync 2D</strong> – alignment software for entire datasets</li><li><strong>R statistical software</strong> – for multivariate visualization<ul><li>vegan package</li><li>ComplexHeatmap package</li></ul></li></ul><h5><strong>Advantages of Sync 2D</strong></h5><ul><li>Performs peak detection and deconvolution across all chromatograms simultaneously</li><li>Generates a unified peak table for entire datasets</li><li>Facilitates trend analysis</li></ul><h5><strong>Dimensionality Reduction Techniques Used</strong></h5><ul><li>Principal Component Analysis (PCA)</li><li>Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA)</li><li>Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA)</li></ul><p>Each data point includes:</p><ul><li>Primary retention time</li><li>Secondary retention time</li><li>Signal intensity</li></ul><h4><strong>4. Statistical Approaches Explained</strong></h4><h5><strong>PCA (Principal Component Analysis)</strong></h5><ul><li>Uses Euclidean distance</li><li>Assumes linear variance structure</li><li>Clustering based on shared analytes</li><li>Identifies key analytes driving variance</li><li>Loadings plots explain separation patterns</li></ul><h5><strong>PCoA (Principal Coordinate Analysis)</strong></h5><ul><li>Uses non-Euclidean dissimilarity (e.g., Bray–Curtis)</li><li>Emphasizes compositional differences</li><li>Better for non-linear variance structures</li></ul><h5><strong>HCA (Hierarchical Cluster Analysis)</strong></h5><ul><li>Uses Euclidean dissimilarity (in this study)</li><li>Clustering based on:<ul><li>Presence/absence</li><li>Relative abundance</li></ul></li><li>Output: dendrogram<ul><li>Short branches = more similar</li><li>Long branches = more dissimilar</li></ul></li></ul><h4><strong>5. Research Goals</strong></h4><ul><li>Apply GC×GC-TOFMS for volatile analysis and aroma profiling of mead</li><li>Investigate impact of:<ul><li>Yeast strain</li><li>Honey concentration</li></ul></li><li>Use a non-targeted analytical approach</li><li>Extract and compare chemical features across samples</li></ul><h4><strong>6. Mead Production Overview</strong></h4><p>Mead is produced by fermenting honey with filtered water. Fruits or spices may be added. It may also be barrel-aged.</p><h5><strong>Experimental Design (Silverhand Meadery Collaboration)</strong></h5><ul><li>1-gallon batches</li><li>5 yeast strains</li><li>3 honey concentrations:<ul><li>1.5 lb/gal (low alcohol, expected dry finish)</li><li>3 lb/gal (standard)</li><li>5 lb/gal (high alcohol, expected sweet finish)</li></ul></li></ul><h5><strong>Yeast Strains Tested</strong></h5><ul><li><strong>Kveik Voss</strong> – neutral with citrus notes</li><li><strong>Munich</strong> – banana, clove (esters &amp; phenols)</li><li><strong>EC1118</strong> – neutral (sparkling wine yeast)</li><li><strong>D47</strong> – tropical/white floral</li><li><strong>Abbaye</strong> – temperature-dependent:<ul><li>Low temp: banana, tropical, spicy</li><li>High temp: raisin, fig</li></ul></li></ul><p>Fermentation lasted 9 months. Stabilizers were added post-fermentation.</p><h4><strong>7. Sample Preparation</strong></h4><h5><strong>Mead Samples</strong></h5><ul><li>3 mL in 20 mL headspace vial</li><li>0.5 g salt</li><li>5 µL (500 ppm) 1-decanol internal standard</li></ul><h5><strong>Honey Samples</strong></h5><ul><li>1.5 g honey + 1.5 mL water</li><li>Salt + internal standard</li></ul><h5><strong>Water Controls</strong></h5><ul><li>3 mL water + salt + internal standard</li></ul><p>All samples were vortexed and analyzed by GC×GC-TOFMS.</p><h4><strong>8. Instrumentation</strong></h4><p>Instrument: <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/library?mainauthorItems=24&amp;search=Pegasus+BTX+4D"><strong>LECO Pegasus BTX 4D GC×GC-TOFMS</strong></a></p><p>Features:</p><ul><li>Dual TOFMS and FID detection</li><li>Reverse fill/flush modulator</li><li>Flow splitter</li></ul><p>The modulator:</p><ul><li>Fills loop in forward direction</li><li>Flushes to secondary column</li><li>High secondary flow split between TOFMS and FID</li></ul><h4><strong>9. Initial Observations</strong></h4><p>Key compounds identified:</p><ul><li>Furfurol (heated honey marker)</li><li>2-ethylhexanol (water)</li><li>3-methylbutanol (fermentation product)</li><li>Benzaldehyde (fermentation product)</li></ul><p>Total detected: <strong>96 volatile organic compounds</strong></p><h4><strong>10. Multivariate Results</strong></h4><h5><strong>PCA Findings</strong></h5><ul><li>Four groupings largely dictated by honey concentration</li><li>1.5 lb/gal group clustered together</li><li>3 lb/gal group tightly clustered</li><li>5 lb/gal showed pattern similar to 1.5 lb/gal</li><li>Abbey yeast formed a distinct cluster</li></ul><h5><strong>PCoA Findings</strong></h5><ul><li>Similar overall patterns</li><li>Abbey yeast more distinctly separated</li><li>Likely due to Bray–Curtis dissimilarity emphasizing compositional differences</li></ul><h5><strong>HCA + Heatmap Findings</strong></h5><ul><li>Clustering aligned with PCA/PCoA trends</li><li>Abbey yeast again formed distinct grouping</li><li>Appeared to contain similar compounds but in lower relative abundances</li></ul><p>Two major overall clusters:</p><ul><li>1.5 lb/gal group</li><li>All other meads</li></ul><h4><strong>11. Compound Trends vs Honey Concentration</strong></h4><p>Observed correlations:</p><ul><li><strong>Ethyl lactate</strong>: increased with honey concentration</li><li><strong>Furfurol</strong>: increased with honey concentration</li><li><strong>3-methylbutanol</strong>:<ul><li>Decreased with honey concentration (except Abbey strain)</li></ul></li><li><strong>Ethyl octanoate</strong>:<ul><li>Highest at 3 lb/gal</li><li>Lowest at 1.5 lb/gal</li><li>Intermediate at 5 lb/gal</li></ul></li></ul><p>Abbey strain showed unique behavior, possibly explaining its distinct clustering.</p><h4><strong>12. Conclusions</strong></h4><ul><li>GC×GC-TOFMS is highly effective for aroma profiling of mead</li><li>Dimensionality reduction techniques successfully highlighted relationships between samples</li><li>Honey concentration strongly influences volatile profile</li><li>Yeast strain (especially Abbey) significantly impacts composition</li></ul><h4><strong>13. Future Work</strong></h4><ul><li>Investigate microbial environment effects on VOC production</li><li>Link microbial kinetics data to volatile profiles</li><li>Explore compound-class-specific trends</li></ul><blockquote><p><strong>This text has been automatically transcribed from a video presentation using AI technology. It may contain inaccuracies and is not guaranteed to be 100% correct.</strong></p></blockquote>

Application of GC×GC for the investigation of fermented beverages (Sarah C. Foster, MDCW 2026)

<p><strong>Our Library never stops expanding. What are the most recent contributions to LabRulezGCMS Library in the week of 16th February 2026? Check out new documents from the field of the gas phase, especially GC and GC/MS techniques!</strong></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size:20px;">👉 </span><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/library"><span style="font-size:20px;"><strong>SEARCH THE LARGEST REPOSITORY OF DOCUMENTS ABOUT GCMS AND RELATED TECHNIQUES</strong></span></a></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><strong>👉 Need info about different analytical techniques?</strong> Peek into <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://lcms.labrulez.com/library"><strong>LabRulezLCMS</strong></a> or <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://icpms.labrulez.com/library"><strong>LabRulezICPMS</strong></a> libraries.</p></blockquote><p>This week we bring you technical note by <strong>Agilent Technologies, </strong>presentation by<strong> MDCW / C³AL </strong>and<strong> </strong>application notes by<strong> BaySpec </strong>and<strong> Shimadzu!</strong></p><h3><strong>1. Agilent Technologies: Why Do Loss of Resolution and Retention Time Shift Occur After Installing a New GC Column?</strong></h3><ul><li>Technical note</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/te_loss_resolution_retention_time_shifts_gc_column_5994_8773en_agilent_e5e79a5f5e.pdf"><strong>Full PDF for download</strong></a></li></ul><p>When a new column is installed on an instrument that has been running an application for a long time, and all the instrument parameters are set to the same values as before, the resolution between a pair of critical analytes can drop unacceptably, creating concern that the column is defective.&nbsp;</p><p>The chromatograms that accompany columns like these will show that the retention times of the poorly resolved peaks on the new column have shifted. This difference indicates a change in linear velocity of the carrier gas, since the run conditions were the same.&nbsp;</p><p>Why did the retention times of those compounds shift under seemingly identical run&nbsp;conditions? The answer is that the run conditions are not identical because the columns are not truly identical. In any manufacturing process, products are built to tolerances. In the case of a GC capillary column, these tolerances include diameter and length. Even small differences in diameter and length will affect the actual velocity and flow rate through a column at a given head pressure.</p><h3><strong>2. BaySpec: Illicit Drug Detection &amp; Identification Using the Continuity™ Field Portable Mass Spectrometer</strong></h3><ul><li>Application note</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Bay_Spec_App_Note_C101_Illicit_Drug_Detection_1_5bd32f3fe9.pdf"><strong>Full PDF for download</strong></a></li></ul><p>The trafficking and abuse of illicit drugs inflict tremendous harm upon individuals, families, and communities throughout the United States and the world. Based on the report of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, nearly 296 million people worldwide used drugs in 2022, with an estimated 64 million suffering from drug use disorders. The opioid epidemic alone has claimed over 160,000 lives in the United States over the past two years, highlighting the urgent need for effective measures to combat this scourge.</p><p>Traditional methods of drug detection, such as laboratory-based analysis, are often time-consuming, costly, and require specialized personnel. These limitations make it challenging to address the rapid and widespread nature of drug trafficking and abuse. Moreover, the constant evolution of synthetic drugs and new psychoactive substances poses a significant challenge for law enforcement and public health officials, as these substances often evade detection using conventional methods.&nbsp;</p><p>In recent years, portable mass spectrometry has emerged as a promising solution for the rapid detection and identification of illicit drugs. Unlike traditional laboratory instruments, portable mass spectrometers offer the advantage of on-site analysis, enabling law enforcement officers and first responders to quickly identify substances in real-time. This technology can be deployed in various settings, including border checkpoints, public events, and field investigations, providing a versatile and efficient tool for combating drug-related crimes. As the opioid crisis and the rise of synthetic drugs continue to pose significant challenges, the integration of portable mass spectrometry into drug detection strategies represents a critical step towards a safer and healthier society.</p><h4><strong>Instrumentation&nbsp;</strong></h4><p><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/products/2218"><strong>BaySpec Continuity™ Portable Mass Spectrometer</strong></a> was used equipped with a Swab-APCI source, specifically designed for TSA-approved swabs. The samples on swabs were converted into vapors via the Swab vaporizer unit, which then were drawn into the ionization chamber by the built-in sampling pump.</p><h4><strong>Conclusions&nbsp;</strong></h4><p>In this study, we demonstrated the use of the Continuity™ Field Portable Mass Spectrometer equipped with a SwabAPCI ionization source for the detection and identification of various drugs. The capabilities of the instrument were assessed through the creation of calibration curves and surface sampling experiments using ten drug standards and four selected analytes: fentanyl, cocaine, methamphetamine, and MDMA. By serial diluting these standards in methanol, we established calibration curves and determined the instrument’s Limits of Detection (LODs) in MS2 mode. These experiments highlighted the instrument’s ability to detect trace amounts of drugs with high sensitivity and specificity.&nbsp;</p><p>The performance of the Continuity™ field portable mass spectrometer in both controlled and real-world scenarios underscores its potential as a rapid, on-site analytical tool. The results obtained from triplicate measurements reinforce the reliability of this method, making it a valuable asset for law enforcement and public health agencies in their efforts to combat drug-related issues. This study confirms that the portable MS system can quickly and effectively identify illicit substances, offering a practical solution for field investigations and real-time decision-making. As the landscape of illicit drug use continues to evolve, such advancements in portable analytical technology will be crucial in providing timely and accurate information for intervention and prevention strategies.</p><h3><strong>3. MDCW / C³AL: COUNTING DOUBLE BONDS: GC×GC–FID FOR PLASTIC PYROLYSIS OILS</strong></h3><ul><li>Presentation</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/O_26_Petr_Vozka_04ef50f601.pdf"><strong>Full PDF for download</strong></a></li></ul><p>The presentation focuses on the analytical challenge of accurately quantifying olefins (double bonds) in plastic pyrolysis oils and alternative fuels derived from plastic waste. As chemical recycling processes such as pyrolysis and hydrothermal processing gain importance, detailed compositional analysis becomes essential. Pyrolysis oils are highly complex mixtures containing paraffins, iso-paraffins, olefins, cycloalkanes, aromatics, and multi-ring structures. Because olefin content strongly affects fuel stability and upgrading requirements, reliable quantification is critical.</p><p>Traditional bulk methods such as bromine number, bromine index, iodine value, FTIR, Raman, and NMR provide only total unsaturation and often suffer from interferences or limited selectivity. To achieve detailed group-type and compound-level analysis, the authors apply comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography with flame ionization detection (GC×GC–FID). This technique delivers high resolution, reduces co-elution, and enables classification of linear, branched, cyclic, and aromatic olefins across wide boiling ranges.</p><p>To further improve quantitative accuracy, a selective adsorption approach using silver-modified silica (Ag–SiO₂) solid-phase extraction is introduced. Olefins are selectively retained, and comparison of GC×GC–FID chromatograms before and after adsorption allows precise determination of olefin content. This method is shown to be cost-effective and reliable for samples containing more than 5 wt% olefins.</p><p>Additionally, the presentation explores chemical derivatization of olefins using dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) and other disulfides to improve structural identification and quantification. While effective for lighter gasoline-range samples, challenges remain for heavier fuels such as jet and diesel fractions. Ongoing work focuses on testing heavier disulfides, optimizing reaction conditions, and validating results using ¹H NMR spectroscopy and future TOFMS analysis.</p><h3><strong>4. Shimadzu: Analysis of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Tattoo Inks Using GC-MS</strong></h3><ul><li>Application note</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/an_09_ssk_023_en_ff47795f55.pdf"><strong>Full PDF for download</strong></a></li></ul><h5><strong>User Benefits</strong></h5><ul><li>&nbsp;GCMS-QP2020 NX supports effective analysis of PAHs in Tattoo inks.</li><li>It provides an MFDS-based GC-MS method for PAHs in tattoo inks, enabling compliance with Korean regulations.</li></ul><p>Tattoo inks have been utilized for diverse purposes throughout history, serving as cultural identifiers and means of personal expression. In contemporary society, tattooing extends beyond aesthetics and self-expression to include medical applications such as camouflage of scars and post-operative rehabilitation. Because these inks are injected directly into the dermal layer, rigorous safety and hygienic control are essential to ensure human health protection.&nbsp;</p><p>Among the regulated constituents in tattoo inks, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are of particular concern. PAHs comprise over a hundred structurally related compounds, commonly generated through incomplete combustion processes, vehicle exhaust, and tobacco smoke. Several PAHs have been classified as carcinogenic, and chronic exposure may lead to bioaccumulation and subsequent adverse health effects.&nbsp;</p><p>In January 2022, the European Union implemented stringent restrictions through updated REACH regulations, limiting the presence of approximately 4,000 hazardous substances in tattoo and permanent make-up inks, including PAHs. 1) These regulations prohibit the use of carcinogenic, mutagenic, and sensitizing substances previously detected in such products. Since the enforcement date, only compliant inks are permitted for distribution and use within the EU.&nbsp;</p><p>In South Korea, tattoo inks were regulated as consumer chemical products under the Ministry of Environment until June 2025. Due to increasing safety concerns, they have since been reclassified as sanitary products under the authority of the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS), resulting in the implementation of more stringent safety requirements. 2)&nbsp;</p><p>This application news introduces the analytical methodology for quantification of PAHs in tattoo inks based on the MFDS regulatory standards (Notice 2025-36). Samples were prepared in accordance with the prescribed protocol, and PAH concentrations were determined using gas chromatography– mass spectrometry (GC-MS) in selected ion monitoring (SIM) mode.</p><h4><strong>Analytical Conditions&nbsp;</strong></h4><p>For the determination of PAHs in tattoo inks, a <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://gcms.labrulez.com/library?mainauthorItems=1&amp;search=GCMS-QP2020+NX"><strong>GCMS-QP2020 NX</strong></a> system was employed, as shown in Figure 1. The instrumental parameters and selected ion monitoring (SIM) conditions used for PAH analysis are summarized in Table 1.</p><h4><strong>Conclusions</strong></h4><p>Quantitative analysis of PAHs in tattoo inks was performed using the GCMS-QP2020 NX. Sample preparation followed the procedure outlined in the MFDS ‘Standards and Specifications for Sanitary Products.’ All eight PAH analytes showed excellent linearity, with correlation coefficients (R²) exceeding 0.999. Recovery tests showed values between 81.6% and 115.1%, with relative standard deviations (%RSD) ranging from 0.11% to 3.13%, demonstrating good accuracy and precision. These results confirm that the GCMS-QP2020 NX is a suitable instrument for PAH analysis in tattoo inks.</p>

News from LabRulezGCMS Library - Week 08, 2026

Article

Application

Academy

Video

Presentation

The Multidimensional Chromatography (MDC) Workshop draws experts in this exciting field to share and discuss their research.

The Multidimensional Chromatography Workshop

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

Phenomenex is a global technology leader committed to developing novel analytical chemistry solutions that solve the separation and purification challenges of researchers in industrial, government and academic laboratories.

Phenomenex

Agilent / Pfeiffer Dry Pump, MVP Dry Pump, G3870-80051 (Tested)

Oil-free Agilent/Pfeiffer MVP Dry Pump G3870-80051 provides clean, stable vacuum for GC/MS 5973/5975/5977A-C. Ideal for routine EI/PCI use; not recommended for ammonia CI.

Agilent MVP Dry Pump G3870-80051 ensures clean, reliable foreline vacuum for GC/MS 5973/5975/5977A-C. Perfect for EI/PCI use; not suitable for ammonia CI workflows.

Agilent/Pfeiffer MVP Dry Pump G3870-80051 delivers clean, oil-free pumping for GC/MS 5973/5975/5977A-C. Reliable, low-maintenance, and ideal for EI/PCI—excluding ammonia CI.

Agilent SQ Turbo Power Supply Assembly , G7077-60620 (New)

Agilent SQ Turbo Power Supply G7077-60620 provides stable, high-reliability power for turbo pumps in Agilent SQ MS systems, ensuring fast pump-down and dependable long-term vacuum performance.

Agilent 7200 Series GC/Q-TOF System (Refurbished)

The Agilent 7200 Series Quadrupole Time-of-Flight (Q-TOF) Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometer (GC/MS) system is designed for high-performance analytical applications. It combines the separation capabilities of gas chromatography with the precise mass analysis of Q-TOF, making it ideal for complex sample analysis

Agilent Lifter tray assembly, for G1888A, 410105003 (New)

Agilent Lifter Tray Assembly (410105003) for G1888A sampler delivers precise vial lifting and smooth automation, ensuring reliable sample introduction in GC workflows.

Agilent S/SL-EPC Inlet, 0–100 PSIG, G3452-60800 (New)

The Agilent S/SL-EPC Inlet (G3452-60800) is a genuine OEM split/splitless (S/SL) inlet with electronic pressure control (EPC) designed for Agilent 7890 Gas Chromatographs.

Bazaar products from Agilent Technologies - page 32

Related content

News from LabRulezGCMS Library - Week 08, 2026

Application of GC×GC for the investigation of fermented beverages (Sarah C. Foster, MDCW 2026)

Why Is It Necessary to Dry the SPE Sorbent Before Elution?