Table 2 Comparative study of the proposed and reported methods
Parameter | Proposed IPC method | Reported method [10] | Reported method [11] | Reported method [12] | Proposed Spectroscopic methods | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Run time (minute) | 4 | 8 | 10 | 7 | – | |||||
Type of elution | Isocratic | Isocratic | Gradient | Gradient | – | |||||
Stationary phase | Shim-pack cyano column (150 mm × 4.6 mm; 5 μm particle size) | Symmetry C18 column (100 mm × 4.6 mm × 3.5 μm) | Inertsil ODS C18 column (250 × 4.6 mm, 5 µm) | Kinetex 1.7 μm HILIC 100A column (100 × 2.1 mm, 1.7 μm particle size) | – | |||||
Mobile phase | Acetonitrile and acidified water containing 0.025% SDS as ion pair reagent (50: 50% v/v) | Methanol: micellar reagent (191.49 mM) and (10.00 mM) potassium dihydrogen phosphate buffer (22.50: 77.50 v/v), | Methanol: 0.1% glacial acetic acid (40:60, v/v), then methanol: 0.1% glacial acetic acid (85:15, v/v) | Methanol: 0.1% formic acid in water (20:80, v/v), then methanol: 0.1% formic acid in water (80:20, v/v) | – | |||||
Wavelength | 259 nm | 210 nm | 233 nm | 220 nm | – | |||||
Linearity range (μg/mL) | MOM | IND | MOM | IND | MOM | IND | MOM | IND | MOM | IND |
0.1–10 | 0.1–10 | 10–100 | 10–100 | 50–300 | 50–300 | 1–150 | 0.5–100 | 1.1–32 | 1–30 | |
LOD (μg/mL) | MOM | IND | MOM | IND | MOM | IND | MOM | IND | MOM | IND |
0.026 | 0.031 | 2.39 | 2.67 | 4.32 | 7.29 | 0.1 | 0.03 | 0.202 | 0.227 | |
Complex GAPI tool |
|
|
|
|
| |||||
AGREE tool |
|
|
|
|
| |||||
Carbon footprint (kg CO2 eq /sample) |
|
|
|
|
| |||||
BAGI tool |
|
|
|
|
| |||||
RGB 12 algorithm |
|
|
|
|
| |||||
