Table 7 Comparison of GC–MS, LC–MS and NMR.
|  | GC–MS | LC–MS | NMR | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Sample preparation | Extraction and chemical derivatisation | Extraction | Generally no sample preparation necessary | [216] |
Sample volume | Split: < 1 µL Splitless: 1 µL | 5–20 µL | Conventional: 5–550 µL Microdroplet: ≤ 5 µL | |
Chromatographic separation | High-resolution separation | Medium-resolution separation | No separation | [216] |
Sensitivity | mM–nM | mM–pM | mM–µM | |
Limit of detection and quantification | ng–pg (10−9–10−12) | pg–fg (10−12–10−15) Low pM | Low µM | |
Dynamic range | >Â 106 | >Â 106 | >Â 103 | [216] |
Quantification accuracy | ± 10% | ± 10% | ± 10% | [216] |
Speed of analysis (per sample) | Slow (approximately 30 min) | Slow (5–9 min) | Fast (1 to 5 min) | [216] |
Main advantages | High resolution High precision EI-MS library available | Soft ionisation Large mass range | No sample preparation Non-destructive Suitable for compounds which are difficult to ionise or require derivatisation | |
Main disadvantages | Significant sample preparation with chemical modification Slow analysis time Harsh ionization Limited number of molecules can be analysed | Slow analysis time | Poor sensitivity and dynamic range Some chemical classes not detected | [216] |