High-Speed Isothermal Analysis of Atmospheric Isoprene and DMS Using On-Line Two-Dimensional Gas Chromatography

Significance of the topic

Two of the most reactive volatile organic compounds in the troposphere— isoprene and dimethyl sulfide (DMS)—play a key role in atmospheric chemistry, affecting OH and NO3 radical concentrations, cloud condensation nuclei formation, and climate processes. Accurate monitoring at temporal scales matching their lifetimes (minutes) is crucial for understanding their impact. Traditional one-dimensional GC methods suffer from long analysis times, limited sample capacity, and high power consumption, hindering in situ measurements at remote locations.

Objectives and overview of the study

The study presents the development and field evaluation of an on-line two-dimensional gas chromatography (2D-GC) system coupled to a programmed temperature vaporization (PTV) injector. The aim is to achieve rapid, high-resolution, isothermal analysis of atmospheric isoprene and DMS with low power requirements and improved detection limits.

Methodology and instrumentation

• Sample preconcentration: Activated coconut charcoal trap inside a PTV liner, cooled by Peltier or liquid coolant to subambient temperatures.
• Separation system: Two isothermal GC ovens for primary and secondary columns, with carrier pressure programming for speed enhancement.
• Column configuration: Primary column (16 m × 0.32 mm, 5 µm PDMS) for vapor pressure fractionation; secondary column (15 m × 0.53 mm Al2O3/Na2SO4 PLOT) for functional group selectivity.
• Valve scheme: Heart-cut transfer, backflush of primary column, concurrent sample acquisition, and fast desorption transfer stages controlled by pneumatically driven valves.
• Detection: Flame ionization detector at 250 °C, helium as carrier gas, mass flow control for precise flow programming.
• Calibration: Certified ppb-level gas standards and intercomparison with a conventional 1D-GC at Mace Head Observatory.

Key results and discussion

• Analysis cycle time: Approximately 10–12 minutes per sample under isothermal conditions, enabling near real-time monitoring.
• Detection limits: 5 ppt for isoprene, 25 ppt for DMS with 2 L air sample volumes.
• Power consumption: Approximately 400 W, an order of magnitude lower than conventional temperature-programmed GC.
• Resolution: Baseline separation of isoprene from interfering hydrocarbons (2-/3-methylpentane, hexane) demonstrated.
• Field intercomparison: Strong correlation (r > 0.98) between 2D-GC and 1D-GC measurements over a 48-hour period; marginally higher peak readings attributed to shorter sampling intervals and atmospheric variability.
• Water handling: Two-stage drying (ethylene glycol-cooled trap and K2CO3 scrubber) to prevent moisture breakthrough and maintain trap efficiency.

Benefits and practical applications

• High temporal resolution aligned with short atmospheric lifetimes of key reactive species.
• Low power consumption suitable for remote or mobile platforms (e.g., ships, aircraft, field stations).
• Enhanced sample capacity compared to narrow-bore rapid GC columns, facilitating large-volume air sampling.
• Applicability to a wide range of volatile organics and permanent gases with modular secondary columns.

Future trends and potential uses

• Miniaturization and integration with mass spectrometric detection for compound identification and quantitation.
• Expansion to multi-analyte platforms targeting urban air pollutants (e.g., benzene, 1,3-butadiene) via tailored column sets.
• Further power optimization and battery or renewable energy operation for autonomous deployments.
• Coupling with real-time data analytics and atmospheric modeling frameworks for improved air quality forecasting.

Conclusion

The presented on-line isothermal 2D-GC method offers a robust, rapid, and sensitive approach for monitoring atmospheric isoprene and DMS in situ. By combining heart-cut transfer, pressure modulation, and efficient sample preconcentration under isothermal conditions, the system achieves low detection limits, fast cycle times, and reduced power demands. Field validation confirms its suitability for high-resolution atmospheric studies and environmental monitoring.

Reference

1. Davis JM, Giddings JC. Labor Praxis. 1983;10:328.
2. Giddings JC. J High Resol Chromatogr. 1987;10:319-323.
3. Kelly GA, Bartle KD. J High Resol Chromatogr. 1994;17:390-397.
4. Lewis AC, Robinson RE, Bartle KD, Pilling MJ. Environ Sci Technol. 1995;29:1977-1981.
5. Ligon WV, May RJ. J Chromatogr Sci. 1986;24:2-6.
6. Liu Z, Sirimanne SR, Patterson DG, Needham LL. Anal Chem. 1994;66:3086-3092.
7. Casabianca H, Graff JB, Jame P, Perrucchietti C, Chastrette M. J High Resol Chromatogr. 1995;18:279-285.
8. Elder JF Jr, Gordon BM, Uhrig MS. J Chromatogr Sci. 1986;24:26-32.
9. Nishimura O. J High Resol Chromatogr. 1995;18:699-704.
10. Bushby MM, Jorgenson JW. Anal Chem. 1990;62:978-984.
11. Schrimpf W, Muller KP, Johnen FJ, Lienaertz K, Rudolph J. J Atmos Chem. 1995;22:303-317.
12. Liu Z, Phillips JB. J Chromatogr Sci. 1991;29:227-231.
13. Derwent RG, Simmonds PG, Collins WJ. Atmos Environ. 1994;28:2623-2637.
14. Simmonds PG et al. Anal Chem. 1995;67:717-723.
15. Derwent RG et al. Report AEA/CS/18358030/005; AEA Technology Culham, UK; 1994.
16. Atkinson R et al. J Int Chem Kin. 1982;14:507-530.
17. Penkett SA et al. Geophys Res Lett. 1993;98:2865-2885.
18. Davison B, Hewitt CN. J Geophys Res. 1992;97:2475-2484.
19. Lewis AC, Seakins PW, Denha AM, Bartle KD, Pilling MJ. Atmos Environ. 1995;29:1871-1875.
20. Lewis AC, McQuaid JB, Pilling MJ, Bartle KD, Ridgeon PJ. J High Resol Chromatogr. 1996;19:686-690.
21. Lewis AC, Bartle KD. LC–GC Int. 1996;9:297-304.
22. Adam ST. J High Resol Chromatogr. 1988;11:85-89.
23. Penkett SA, Burgess RA. Unpublished results.
24. Lewis AC et al. J Chem Soc Faraday Trans. 1997;93:—.