Dear Anja Knorrscheidt you're very welcome! 👍I was also wondering what is "ONLY" about technical staff. They are normally the real experts in their fields, or do you know a professor who e.g. measures the NMR spectra himself / herself?

Bojidarka B. Ivanova "You have received salary at University to perform literature research of the staff of the Leibniz Society? Interesting work?!" What do you want to tell us with this rather strange remark? 😳

Mrs/Miss Knorrscheidt,

Try to use a direct analysis of the sample by mass spectrometry, without sample pretreatment steps. However, the quantification and the speciation of MeHgEt, should be carried out according to our own-authored (mine and my co-author's theory according to the shown authorship, below) innovative stochastic dynamic method and model formulas for determination of analytes by mass spectrometry developed more recently.

Currently, our method is the best quantitative approach to determine exactly the concentration of analytes in solution mass spectrometrically as well as their speciation.

Its application to mixtuires of analtes at pg.(mL)-1 and ng-(L)-1 concentration levels shows linear correlation between theory and experiment /r/ = 0.99997-1. The metrhod is validated by chromatography, as well.

The method is also applicable to MALDI-MS measurements. Thus, you are able to carry out a solid-state analysis, quantifying the analytes according to the same theory.

Please, consider in this context references [1,2].

[1] Stochastic Dynamic Mass Spectrometric Approach to Quantify Reserpine in Solution; Bojidarka Ivanova, Michael Spiteller

Analytical Chemistry Letters, 10 (2020) 703-721; Received 13 Oct 2020, Accepted 16 Dec 2020, Published online: 28 Jan 2021

Download citation https://doi.org/10.1080/22297928.2020.1865834

[2] Steroids, 164 (2020) 108750

Stochastic dynamic mass spectrometric quantification of steroids in mixture — Part II; Bojidarka Ivanova, Michael Spiteller

The isotope shape of Hg-compound is quantified according the method show in reference [3]. The latter reference uses the same theoretical framework, however applied to metal-organics.

[3] Electrospray ionization mass spectrometric solvate cluster and multiply charged ions: a stochastic dynamic approach to 3D structural analysis

Bojidarka Ivanova, Michael Spiteller

SN Applied Sciences; volume 2, Article number: 731 (2020)

Actually the question is not answered and I would appreciate help which actually helps me with the derivatization and the GC/MS itself.

I cannot change the machine or use a direct analyses.

Dear Anja Knorrscheidt thank your for your interesting question. Please see this potentially useful article entitled

Validation of Methylmercury Determinations in Aquatic Systems by Alkyl Derivatization Methods for GC Analysis Using ICP-IDMS

Article Validation of Methylmercury Determinations in Aquatic System...

Mrs/Miss Knorrscheidt,

There is not needed any change of the analytical instrumentation. By the way, there is used not machine (to learn the analytical therminology is recommendable.) Our method is quantitative method for data-processing.

Of course, If you are only technical staff, then I am apologizing for the latter comment on your answer.

Dear Anja Knorrscheidt I just came across two other valuable articles about this topic which could be helpful in answering your question:

1. Analysis of Methylmercury Concentration in the Blood of Koreans by Using Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence Spectrophotometry

Article Analysis of Methylmercury Concentration in the Blood of Kore...

and

2. Performance Evaluation of an Improved GC-MS Method to Quantify Methylmercury in Fish

Article Performance Evaluation of an Improved GC-MS Method to Quanti...

Both papers are freely available as public full texts on RG.

Mr. Edelmann,

....You have received salary at University to perform literature research of the staff of the Leibniz Society? Interesting work?! The research work does not represent social service, however. Do you know that Leibniz Society has annual budget 2 Mlrd Euro for 20 000 staff and only 4 000 students, therein?

Some Universities at Germany operate with 300 milions euro annual budget for 4 000 people staff and more than 40 000 students.

Therefore, at the Institutes of Leibniz Society the relation staff:student is 5:1, while at the University it is staff:student = 0.1.

Thanks Prof. Frank T. Edelmann for the help!

I found the mistake: MeHgCl has to be solved in 1% HCl to get the reaction running.

Bojidarka B. Ivanova: And I am not ONLY technical stuff. It is unappropriate to leave such disparaging comments here regarding the technical stuff as well as your useless comments about some Leibniz/University calculations.

Dear Anja Knorrscheidt you're very welcome! 👍I was also wondering what is "ONLY" about technical staff. They are normally the real experts in their fields, or do you know a professor who e.g. measures the NMR spectra himself / herself?

Bojidarka B. Ivanova "You have received salary at University to perform literature research of the staff of the Leibniz Society? Interesting work?!" What do you want to tell us with this rather strange remark? 😳

Bojidarka B. Ivanova please refer to the RG Help Center, particularly the entry "Adding a good answer" in the section "Q&A guidelines":

"Adding a good answer

A good answer is a comprehensive and considered response to the original question, and maybe even answers the question outright. Good answers often come from researchers who’ve experienced similar problems and can draw on their own research experience. Consider attaching resources to your answer or a reference to a publication."

As you can see, adding useful references is encouraged by ResearchGate and is certainly more helpful than just giving lengthy but useless comments.

Mr. Edelmann,

There are researchers/academics who contribute crucially to the Science with their nominal laws. For instance, these are Einstein, Boltzmann, Gibbs, et cetera. These people develop the Science and the Higher Educational System. They provide to the Society worldwide the foundations of the Science.

Paradoxically, both the Einstein and Boltzmann have had problems with the academic community of Europe (Perhaps, with people like you during that time.)

In the field of our area of interest (the mass spectrometry) for at about 50 years development of this important method, amongst others, there are few contributors who have been generated novelty and innovations to it such as fundamental laws (I exclude from development of the instrumentation.) These are: R. Cooks, A. Marshall, R. Capriolli (United States,) E. de Pauw (Belgium,) M. Spiteller (Germany, Austria,) and B. Ivanova (Bulgaria,) respectively.

Perhaps, there are another names, so that, I apologize to those people who I did not mention.

It is rather sad for you, that you are able only to underline your h-index as a crucial contribution to the Science, despite, that some of your papers are very interesting and contribute to the development of the inorganic chemistry. (I have focused on few of them.)

I fully understand that when there is massification in Science, then there should have any quantitative criteria, determining the contributions. However, they should not be main goal and motivation for the researcher/academics staff. Because of, the generation of the scientific novelty and innovation is a creative mental process. It does not represent ''conveyor.'' (It is not like digging a ditch in the barracks.)

Please look at the following below links which may help you in your analysis:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d871/0c643c0bfbd827d937afa49d82be7d1c42e5.pdf?_ga=2.2685747.2071343592.1614207460-378292788.1614207460

Thanks