Supplementary material

Development of an analytical methodology based on fabric phase

sorptive extraction followed by gas chromatography-tandem mass

spectrometry to determine UV filters in environmental and

recreational waters

Maria Celeiroa, Ruben Acerbia, Abuzar Kabirb, Kenneth G. Furtonb, Maria Llomparta,*

a CRETUS Institute. Department of Analytical Chemistry, Nutrition and Food Science,

Faculty of Chemistry, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, E-15782, Santiago

de Compostela, Spain.b International Forensic Research Institute, Department of Chemistry and

Biochemistry, Florida International University, Miami, FL-33199, USA.

* Corresponding author: Phone: +34881814225, e-mail address: maria.llompart@usc.es

Figure S1. FPSE experimental procedure under the optimal conditions for the determination of 11 UV filters in water samples.

Figure S2. FT-IR spectra of (a) methyl trimethoxysilane; (b) polydimethylsiloxane; (c) sol-gel PDMS coated FPSE membrane

Figure S3. Scanning electron microscopy image of (a) uncoated cellulose fabric at 100x magnification; (b) uncoated cellulose fabric at 500x magnification; (c) sol-gel PDMS coated FPSE membrane at 100x; (d) sol-gel PDMS coated FPSE membrane at 500x

Figure S4. Scanning electron microscopy images for assessing surface thickness of FPSE membrane (a) uncoated cellulose fabric at 100x magnification; (b) sol-gel PDMS coated FPSE membrane at 100x

Figure S5. Comparison between the obtained response for the immediate desorption, and the desorption after 24 hours.

EHS BSHM

SBP 3

IAM

C4M

BCMA

ETO

2EHM

C

EHPABAOCR

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

Desorption after 24 hours Inmediate desorption

Res

pons

e (a

rea

coun

ts)

Table S1. Studied UV filters. CAS numbers, purity, partition coefficients (log KOW), and suppliers.Acronym Common name CAS Purity Log KOW

EHS Ethylhexyl salicylate 118-60-5 99.01 7.8

×10

÷3

BS Benzyl salicylate 118-58-1 99.01 4.3

HMS Homosalate 118-56-9 99.91 6.2

BP3 Benzophenone-3 131-57-7 99.92 3.6

IAMC Isoamyl methoxycinnamate 71617-10-2 96.02 4.1

4MBC 4-methybenzylidenecamphor 38102-62-4 99.83 4.9

MA Methyl anthranilate 134-20-3 99.91 6.3

ETO Etocrylene 5232-99-5 99.72 4.3

2EHMC 2-ethylhexylmethoxycinnamate 5466-77-3 98.54 5.7

EHPABA1. 2-Ethylhexyl p-

dimethylaminobenzoate21245-02-3 98.01 6.1

OCR Octocrylene 6197-30-4 99.11 7.51 Sigma-Aldrich Chemie GmbH (Steinheim, Germany); 2 Tokyo Chemical Industry (TCI) (Tokyo, Japan); 3 Alfa Aesar (Karlsruhe, Germany); 4 Dr. Ehrenstorfer (Augsburg, Germany).

Table S2. Retention time and MS/MS transitions for the 11 UV filters studied

UV filterRetention time

(min)SRM transitions

(Collision energy, eV)

EHS 6.85138.0 → 120.0 (10)120.0 → 92.0 (10)250.1 → 120.0 (15)

BS 7.21228.1 → 91.0 (10)91.0→ 65.0 (15)

HMS 7.22138.0 → 120.0 (10)120.0 → 92.0 (10)262.2 → 120.0 (15)

BP3 7.63151.0 → 95.0 (10) 227.1→127.9 (35)227.1→184 (20)

IAMC 7.83161.0 → 133.0 (10)178.1 →161.1 (10)248.1 →178.1 (10)

4MBC 7.97254.1 → 239.2 (10)127.9 → 102.0 (20)170.6 → 128.1 (15)

MA 8.16137.0 → 119.0 (10)119.0 → 62.9 (30)199.0 → 91.8 (10)

ETO 8.31276.9 → 248.1 (10)231.9 → 176.5 (20)248.0 → 164.9 (25)

2EHMC 8.65161.0 → 133.1 (10)177.9 → 133.1 (20)290.2 → 178.1 (10)

EHPABA 8.80277.2 → 164.9 (10)148.0 → 104.2 (25)165.1 → 148.6 (25)

OCR 10.2232.0 → 203.0 (20)248.0 → 165.0 (30)360.2 → 276.1 (20)

Underlined SRM transitions correspond to quantification transitions