A comparison between mobile and stationary gas chromatography–mass spectrometry devices for analysis of complex volatile profiles

On-site analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) with miniaturized gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS) systems is a very rapidly developing field of application. While, on the one hand, major technological advances are improving the availability of these systems on the market, on the other hand, systematic studies to assess the performance of such instruments are still lacking. To fill this gap, we compared three portable GC–MS devices to a state-of-the-art benchtop (stationary) system for analysis of a standard mixture of 18 VOCs. We systematically compared analytical parameters such as the sensitivity and similarity of the signal response pattern and the quality of the obtained mass spectra. We found that the investigated mobile instruments (i) showed different response profiles with a generally lower number of identified analytes. Also, (ii) mass spectral reproducibility (% relative standard deviation (RSD) of the relative abundance of selective fragments) was generally worse in the mobile devices (mean RSD for all targeted fragments ~9.7% vs. ~3.5% in the stationary system). Furthermore, mobile devices (iii) showed a poorer mass spectral similarity to commercial reference library spectra (>20% deviation of fragment ion relative intensity vs. ~10% in the stationary GC–MS), suggesting a less reliable identification of analytes by library search. Indeed, (iv) the performance was better with higher-mass and/or more abundant fragments, which should be considered to improve the results of library searches for substance identification. Finally, (v) the estimation of the signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) in mobile instruments as a measure of sensitivity revealed a significantly lower performance compared to the benchtop lab equipment (with a ratio among medians of ~8 times lower). Overall, our study reveals not only a poor signal-to-noise ratio and poor reproducibility of the data obtained from mobile instruments, but also unfavorable results with respect to a reliable identification of substances when they are applied for complex mixtures of volatiles. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00216-022-04391-y.