Automated headspace solid-phase dynamic extraction for the determination of cannabinoids in hair samples

This article describes a fully automated procedure for detecting cannabinoids in human hair samples. The procedure uses alkaline hydrolysis and headspace solid-phase dynamic extraction (HS-SPDE), followed by on-coating derivatization and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). SPDE is a further development of solid-phase microextraction (SPME), based on an inside needle capillary absorption trap. It uses a hollow needle with an internal coating of polydimethylsiloxane as extraction and pre-concentration medium.Ten mg of hair were washed with deionised water, petroleum ether and dichloromethane. After adding deuterated internal standards, the sample was hydrolyzed with sodium hydroxide and directly submitted to HS-SPDE. After absorption of analytes for an on-coating derivatization procedure, the SPDE-needle was directly placed into the headspace of a second vial containing N-methyl-N-trimethylsilyl-trifluoroacetamide before GC-MS analysis. The limit of detection was 0.14 ng/mg for Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol, 0.09 ng/mg for cannabidiol, and 0.12ng/mg for cannabinol. Absolute recoveries were in the range of 0.6 to 8.4%. Linearity was verified over a range from 0.2 to 20 ng/mg, with coefficients of correlation between 0.998 and 0.999. Intra- and inter-day precision were determined at two different concentrations and resulted in ranges between 2.3 and 6.0% (intra-day) and 3.3 and 7.6% (inter-day). Compared with conventional methods of hair analysis, this automated HS-SPDE-GC-MS procedure is substantially faster. It is easy to perform without using solvents and with minimal sample quantities, and it yields the same sensitivity and reproducibility. Compared to SPME, we found a higher extraction rate, coupled with a faster automated operation and greater stability of the device.     

“We really don’t want to move,but...”: identity and strategy in the internationalisation of industrial R&;D

In Norway, as in many other high-cost OECD countries in a geographical and cultural periphery, policy-makers seem to have given up attempts at attracting large numbers of foreign R&D investments. Instead, a major focus of innovation policies is to help companies internationalise yet with an aim to maintain or even increase their level of R&D and other innovation activities nationally. Based on case studies of eight Norwegian companies and their motives for and experiences with internationalisation of R&D, this article questions this policy. From the perspective of the companies, many factors explain how, why and where they carry out their R&D activities.