Determination of Carbonyl Compounds in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke. The CORESTA 2010 Collaborative Study and Recommended Method

Open access

Abstract

A recommended method has been developed and published by CORESTA, applicable to the quantification of selected carbonyl compounds (acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, acetone, acrolein, methyl ethyl ketone, crotonaldehyde, propionaldehyde and butyraldehyde) in cigarette mainstream smoke. The method involved smoke collection in impinger traps, derivatisation of carbonyls with 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH), separation of carbonyl hydrazones by reversed phase high performance liquid chromatography and detection by ultra violet or diode array.

At the start of the process it was determined that most laboratories participating in the CORESTA Special Analytes Sub-Group (SASG) used a similar method involving such derivatisation and so this was chosen as the basis of the recommended method. Initial joint experiments, specific experiments by single laboratories and ongoing discussions addressed some methodological aspects that needed to be considered before moving to a recommended method.

As a first step, a joint experiment by 17 laboratories was carried out in 2009-2010 that investigated three features of the methodology on two reference cigarettes (3R4F and CM6) considered most important by SASG members. These were the volume of the impinger solution (25 or 35 mL); the type of mineral acid (perchloric or phosphoric) used to initiate the derivatisation and the time of derivatisation (5 or 30 min) before terminating the reaction with TrizmaTM base. Overall, it was concluded that these studied parameters in the methodology seemed to have little effect on the overall yield data, compared to the underlying variability among laboratories. The 25 mL impinger solutions appeared to give somewhat higher yields, although not with statistically significant differences, than those obtained when using 35 mL solutions.

Some laboratories volunteered to carry out other investigations, for example, to confirm the identity of both the Eand Z-isomeric acetaldehyde hydrazone peaks within the chromatogram of smoke carbonyls and to investigate methodology factors influencing the hydrazoneisomerisation.

The CORESTA recommended method (CRM) was produced through a final collaborative experiment involving 15 laboratories from 11 countries using 7 linear and 8 rotary smoking machines. Some notes are included in the CRM to inform other laboratories that might wish to adopt the method, concerning the main features that need to be well controlled to provide data as robust as possible and to provide similar repeatability and reproducibility data.

Statistical evaluations were made according to ISO 5725 recommendations and are included. As expected from previous work on other smoke components, the levels of reproducibility of carbonyl yields among laboratories are much greater than the levels found for “tar”, nicotine and carbon monoxide and given in the equivalent ISO standards. When expressing the reproducibility (R) value as a percentage of the mean yield among-laboratories and across all of the studied products, values ranged from 67-125% for formaldehyde; from 24-55% for acetaldehyde; from 41-108% for acetone; from 45-73% for acrolein; 31-75% for propionaldehyde; from 63-140% for crotonaldehyde; from 62-90% for 2-butanone and from 42-58% for butyraldehyde. The lowest “tar” yielding product gave the most variable data. These levels are generally in line with those determined for selected volatiles.

1. Intorp, M. and S.W. Purkis: Determination of Selected Volatiles in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke. The CORESTA 2008 Joint Experiment; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 24 (2011) 174–186.

2. Intorp, M., S.W. Purkis, and W. Wagstaff: Determination of Selected Volatiles in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke. The CORESTA 2009 Collaborative Study and Recommended Method; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 24 (2011) 243–251.

3. Manning, D.L., M.P. Maskerinec, R.A. Jenkins, and A.H. Marshall: High Performance Liquid Chromato-graphic Determinations of Selected Gas Phase Carbon-yls in Tobacco Smoke; J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem 66 (1983) 8–12.

4. Borgerding, M.F., R.S. Dunn, F.A. Thome, H.L. Chung, D.S. Moore, T.R. Conner, D.L. Heavner, and P.H. Ayers: An Improved Method for the Determination of Selected Carbonyl Compounds in Smoke. 38th Tobacco Chemists’ Research Conference, Atlanta, GA, Novem-ber 5–8, 1984, Paper 50; Bates-No. 519974689–4712, available at http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xig31d00 (accessed June 2012).

5. Houlgate, P.R., K.S. Dhingra, J.S. Nash, and W.H. Evans: Determination of Formaldehyde and Acetalde-hyde in Mainstream Cigarette Smoke by High-Perfor-mance Liquid Chromatography; Analyst 114 (1989) 355–360.

6. Health Canada: Official Method T-104 – Determination of Selected Carbonyls in Mainstream Tobacco Smoke 1999; available at http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hc-ps/tobac-tabac/legislation/reg/indust/method/_main-principal/ carbonyl-eng.php (accessed June 2012).

7. Dong, J.-Z. and S.C. Moldoveanu: Gas Chromatography - Mass Spectrometry of Carbonyl Compounds in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke After Derivatisation with 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine; J. Chromatogr. A 1027 (2004) 25–35.

8. Intorp, M.: Studies on Alternative Analytical Methods for the Determination of Organic Compounds in the Gas Phase of Mainstream Cigarette Smoke; Presentation Made at the 2002 CORESTA Congress in New Orleans, USA, Smoke Science and Product Technology, ST 29, 2002.

9. Intorp, M., S. Purkis, M. Whittaker, and W. Wright: Determination of “Hoffmann Analytes” in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke. The CORESTA 2006 Joint Experi-ment; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 23 (2009) 161–202.

10. University of Kentucky, College of Agriculture: Refer-ence Cigarette Program; available at http://www.ca.uky. edu/refcig/ (accessed June 2012).

11. CORESTA Recommended Method No. 74: Determination of Selected Carbonyls in Mainstream Cigarette Smoke by High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) August 2011; available at http://www.coresta. org (accessed June 2012).

12. International Organization for Standardization: ISO 3402:1999 - Tobacco and Tobacco Products - Atmo-sphere for Conditioning and Testing; ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, 1999.

13. International Organization for Standardization: ISO 3308:2000 - Routine Analytical Cigarette-smoking Machine - Definitions and Standard Conditions; ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, 2000.

14. Uchiyama, S., M. Ando, and S. Aoyagi: Isomerization of Aldehyde-2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazone Derivatives and Validation of High-performance Liquid Chromato-graphic Analysis; J. Chromatogr. A 996 (2003) 95–102.

15. European Commission, DG SANCO: Method Validation and Quality Control Procedures for Pesticide Residues Analysis in Food and Feed; Sanco Document / 10684 / 2009; available at http://ec.europa.eu/food/ plant/protection/resources/qualcontrol_en.pdf (accessed June 2012).

16. International Organization for Standardization: ISO 5725-1:1994 - Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of Measurement Methods and Results - Part 1: General Principles and Definitions; ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, 1994.

17. International Organization for Standardization: ISO 5725-2:1994 - Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of Measurement Methods and Results - Part 2: Basic Method for the Determination of Repeatability and Reproducibility of a Standard Measurement Method; ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, 1994.

18. International Organization for Standardization: ISO 8243:2006 - Cigarettes - Sampling; ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.

19. CORESTA Recommended Method No. 58: Determination of Benzo[a]pyrene in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke - Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry Method, 2004; available at http://www.coresta.org (accessed June 2012).

20. CORESTA Recommended Method No. 63: Determination of Tobacco Specific Nitrosamines in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke - GC-TEA Method, 2005; available at http://www.coresta.org/ (accessed June 2012).

21. International Organization for Standardization: ISO 4387:2000 - Cigarettes - Determination of Total and Nicotine-free Dry Particulate Matter Using A Routine Analytical Smoking Machine; ISO, Geneva, Switzer-land, 2000.

Journal Information


CiteScore 2017: 0.63

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.309
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.403

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 152 152 23
PDF Downloads 67 67 11