- PII
- 10.31857/S0044453723090169-1
- DOI
- 10.31857/S0044453723090169
- Publication type
- Status
- Published
- Authors
- Volume/ Edition
- Volume 97 / Issue number 9
- Pages
- 1336-1342
- Abstract
- The results of quantitative analysis of widely used surface samples are shown. Corrosion damage to copper and steel surfaces can be analyzed quantitatively using cobalt chloride as the internal standard. The study also demonstrates the feasibility of comparative quantitative analysis of blue ink using methylene blue homologues as standards. When conducting quantitative analysis on surfaces with inhomogeneous morphology, it has been observed that direct analysis is not possible because of uneven ionization of the sample. It has been found that when analyzing such surfaces, it is necessary to exclude points with a low signal-to-noise ratio from consideration. The work highlights the extensive possibilities of utilizing quantitative analysis in mass spectrometric visualization of the surface. The work is aimed at demonstrating the capabilities of the laser desorption mass spectrometric method for analyzing the surfaces of various materials, which will make this method universal for searching for a wide range of contaminants on the surface of materials of various nature.
- Keywords
- лазерная десорбция масс-спектрометрия сажа ПМ-75 хлорид кобальта коррозия
- Date of publication
- 12.09.2025
- Year of publication
- 2025
- Number of purchasers
- 0
- Views
- 11
References
- 1. Picó Y. // Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. 2020. T. 18. № 1. C. 47.
- 2. Feider C.L., Krieger A., DeHoog R.J., Eberlin L.S. // Anal. chem. 2019. T. 91. № 7. C. 4266.
- 3. Ural N. Open Geosci. 2021. T. 13. № 4. C. 197.
- 4. Khan H., Yerramilli A.S., D’Oliveira A. et al. // Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2020. T. 98. № 6. C. 1255.
- 5. Wójtowicz A., Wietecha-Posłuszny R. // Appl. Phys. A. 2019. T. 125. № 1. C. 1.
- 6. Hong Y., Birse N., Quinn B. et al. // J. Food Sci. 2022. T. 6. № 9. C. 14.
- 7. Hou T.Y., Chiang-Ni C., Teng S.H.J. // Food Drug Anal. 2019. T. 27. № 2. C. 404.
- 8. Welker M., Van Belkum A., Girard V. et al. // Expert Rev. Proteomics. 2019. T. 16. № 9. C. 695.
- 9. Pytskii I.S., Minenkova I.V., Kuznetsova E.S. et al. // Pure Appl. Chem. 2020. T. 92. № 3. C. 1227.
- 10. Pytskii I.S., Kuznetsova E.S., Buryak A.K. // Russ. J. Phys. Chem. A. 2021. T. 95. № 11. C. 2319.
- 11. Pytskii I.S., Kuznetsova E.S., Buryak A.K. // Ibid. 2022. T. 96. № 10. C. 2215.
- 12. Minenkova I.V., Pytskii I.S., Buryak A.K. // Prot. Met. Phys. Chem. Surf. 2022. T. 58. № 6. C. 605.
- 13. Schulz S., Becker M., Groseclose M.R. et al. // Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2019. T. 55. № 2. C. 51.
- 14. Hendel K.K., Bagger C., Olesen U.H. et al. // Drug deliv. 2019. T. 26. № 1. C. 244.
- 15. Morosi L., Matteo C., Meroni M. et al. // Talanta. 2022. T. 237. № 1. C. 122918.
- 16. Iartsev S.D., Pytskii I.S., Zenkevich I.G., Buryak A.K. // J. Anal. Chem. 2017. T. 72. № 6. C. 624.
- 17. Ibrahim S., Froehlich B.C., Aguilar-Mahecha A. et al. // Anal. Chem. 2020. T. 92. № 18. C. 12407.
- 18. Rzagalinski I., Volmer D.A. et al. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Proteins Proteom. 2017. T. 1865. № 11. C. 726.
