I think this is not enough, you should assist this with other analyses of NMR. Best wishes
For confirming a known compound it should be OK if you can obtain a strong match vs an EIMS library spectrum e.g. from NIST. If you do not have a library spectrum of this compound then you will need to use additional data, e.g. NMR, to confirm. Finally it depends on how you want to use these results.
Following on from Christof Lenz, the 70 eV EI spectrum is a valid fingerprint, just like IR, provided there are enough peaks in the spectrum. This is old stuff and I don't have a reference for the official criteria that were established. Allowance was made for the different transmission characteristics of quadrupole and magnetic sector instruments, which were the only ones in general use at the time. The degree of match established by software provides an objective criterion, though you may have to decide on the cut-off point at the low mass end.
As with IR (which is still a pharmaceutical identification test), there will be separate procedures for using a published reference spectrum and a spectrum you run yourself on a reference substance. Again, software can provide a yes-no answer for regulatory purposes.
The field became a bit confused when chemical ionisation and liquid-phase detection techniques came in, because the spectra tend to have fewer peaks, and some of the peaks may be matrix-specific adducts that may depend on the instrument and on the day.
If I remember rightly, there are official criteria for the use of MS/MS with soft ionisation techniques, a technique which eliminates many of the instrument-dependent variables.
If you have a reference substance and MS is coupled to a separation method, coincidence of retention time (verified by co-injection) adds to confidence in your conclusion. Much depends on whether you want to be sure of your identification for a research project, or whether a court case depends on your conclusion.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Remote Sensing