Abstract:
The present invention provides a method of sample preparation for use in obtaining elemental isotope ratios of a material by accelerator mass spectrometry. The method comprises forming the material into a sample without any substantial chemical alteration of the material. The invention also provides a sample for use in obtaining elemental isotope ratios of a material.

Description:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION  
       [0001]     This invention relates to a method of sample preparation for use in obtaining elemental isotope ratios of a material by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS).  
       BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION  
       [0002]     For short-lived radioisotopes, where the half life is less than a few years, decay measurements are efficient methods of isotope quantification if performed for an appreciable fraction of the mean life or if the sample is large enough to provide a statistically significant number of decays. For isotopes with long mean lives however, these conditions are seldom met; less than 0.012% of a radiocarbon sample with a mean life of 5740 years decays in one year.  
         [0003]     Isotope quantification for stable or long-lived isotopes can be achieved using mass spectrometry (MS) which is used to determine isotope ratios (the concentration of rare isotope to the concentration of total element) as low as 10 −9  in microgram to nanogram samples. Natural abundances of isotopes with mean lives from tens to millions of years are 10 −9  to 10 −9  times elemental abundances and cannot be detected efficiently by ‘conventional’ isotope ratio MS (IRMS). Accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) which is used for the efficient detection of long-lived isotopes at part-per-quadrillion sensitivities must be employed.  
         [0004]     AMS uses the high energy (from 1-30 million volts) of a tandem Van de Graaff electrostatic accelerator to produce positive ions of elements such as carbon, calcium, iodine, chlorine, tritium and aluminium. The system operates initially on negative ions produced from ionisation of a small button of solid sample in a caesium sputter ion source. The tandem accelerator has a collision cell at elevated positive electrical potential in which the accelerated negative ions lose one or more electrons through a collision process and are converted to positive ions. For measurement of the three isotopes of carbon ( 14 C,  13 C and  12 C), AMS separates these by virtue of their different masses, charge and energy, providing data on the isotope ratios to parts per quadrillion sensitivity i.e., attomole to zeptomole levels with high precision.  
         [0005]     The use of AMS in radiocarbon dating is well known The technique also has proven applications in oceanography, the food and agrochemical industries and other diverse research areas. The most important application of AMS to the pharmaceutical or biotechnology industry stems from the requirement of using radio-labelled drugs in various aspects of drug research and development, especially in clinical trials of potential new medicines.  
         [0006]     Present use of radiolabelled drugs for research in human subjects owing to the radiation exposure is strictly regulated, restricting, wasteful on preliminary safety experiments in animals, time-consuming and costly. Use of radiolabelled drugs in some cases, such as dermal, buccal, vaginal, anal, subcutaneous or nasal application or administration by inhalation, is difficult and sometimes impossible. AMS can substitute high dose (microCuries) for low dose (nanoCuries) radioactive human studies and allows for the acquisition of similar data. The overwhelming advantage of AMS is that it can quantify, with relatively short analytical times, levels of radioactivity that are so low that the dose needed to be administered to a human subject fills below the stipulated levels of radioactivity which require regulatory review.  
         [0007]     The ability to obtain human data much earlier in the drug development process is important. Approximately one third of development drugs have to be dropped because of some metabolism problem. Early discovery of these problems will save development time and costs. AMS also offers the advantage that it is possible to obtain measurements in very small samples ranging from micrograms or less of tissue or cells to a few microlitres of blood. The latter has important ethical implications in paediatric studies since only minimal amounts of blood need be drawn. In the case of laboratory rodents this means that instead of using several animals per group, a single animal can be used at each dose level and sequential blood samples removed for analysis.  
         [0008]     The problem with any analysis which involves the use of AMS is the bottleneck at the sample preparation end prior to the analysis. In order to analyse elemental isotopes by AMS, the material to be tested must be converted to a form that can yield negative ions within the instrument&#39;s ion source. Carbon-containing materials are converted to graphite, halides to silver salts, aluminium to the oxide and calcium to a dihalide or dihydride. Preparation of the samples for use in AMS represents a tedious process which typically requires two days labour.  
         [0009]     Current AMS ion sources require samples that are thermally and electrically conductive solids. This material is further constrained by effective chemical isolation of the sample from its matrix. The isolation process must be nonfractionating, efficient and protected from contamination by isobars or unexpected concentrations of the rare isotope in or on laboratory equipment. Uniformity and comparability between samples and standards are ensured by reducing all samples to a homogenous state from which the final target material is prepared. Carbon samples (containing  14 C) are oxidised to C 2  before reduction to graphite, commonly produced by the reduction of the C 2  by hydrogen or zinc over an iron or cobalt catalyst or binder (see Vogel J S (1992) Rapid production of graphite without contamination for biomedical AMS. Radiocarbon, 34, 344-350).  
         [0010]     Oxidation of carbon samples occurs in a sealed tube which is heated in a furnace at temperatures of up to 900° C. with an oxidant such as copper oxide. This process which can lead to sample losses through explosion of glass tubes at this temperature, together with a cooling period, lasts approximately eight hours. The resulting CO 2  is reduced to graphite in a second step, after cryogenic transfer which can also result in losses, using a reducing agent such as zinc and titanium hydride and cobalt as a catalyst at temperatures of up to about 500° C. This step is particularly time consuming and lasts approximately eighteen hours with cooling. The prepared cobalt/graphite sample is then compressed into tablet form in a cylindrical aluminium cathode before elemental isotopic ratio analysis in the accelerator mass spectrometer.  
         [0011]     U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,209,919 and 5,366,721 disclose conventional methods of sample preparation for AMS analysis. U.S. Pat. No. 5,209,919 combines the reducing abilities of hydrogen and zinc to achieve a more rapid and complete reaction at a lower temperature which produces filamentous graphite with low isotopic fractionation and high ion current output. Although this method is completed in 5 hours instead of the 12-26 hours required when zinc is used alone, this is still a lengthy process when compared with a typical six minute sample analysis time upon the AMS machine.  
         [0012]     AMS is an enabling technology with huge potential for speeding up drug development. There remains however a real need for a method of sample preparation which will alleviate the bottleneck in AMS analysis at the sample preparation end.  
       STATEMENTS OF THE INVENTION  
       [0013]     According to the present invention there is provided a method of sample preparation for use in obtaining elemental isotope ratios of a material by accelerator mass spectrometry comprising forming said material into a sample without any substantial chemical alteration of said material.  
         [0014]     The present invention also provides a method of obtaining elemental isotope ratios of a material by accelerator mass spectrometry comprising preparing a sample comprising the material and carrying out accelerator mass spectrometry on said sample, wherein the material is substantially chemically unaltered.  
         [0015]     Advantageously, the method of the present invention provides a method of sample preparation for accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) analysis that is both quick (i.e., can be performed in a matter of minutes) and cost effective. Furthermore, compared with prior art techniques, the method of the present invention uses minimal amounts of disposable glass- and plasticware.  
         [0016]     Preferably the material for use in sample preparation is carbon ( 14 C) containing, although the invention may be used for the detection of other elemental isotopes analysable by AMS e.g., calcium, plutonium, chlorine and iodine. The material may be essentially biological such as an organ, blood, urine, cells or parts of cells of living hosts, including humans. Alternatively the material for use in sample preparation may be environmental such as soil or soil organisms e.g., worms.  
         [0017]     Preferably the preparation of a sample including the material includes a drying step but does not involve graphitisation  
         [0018]     Preferably the material is homogeneously mixed with a binder. Preferably the binder is electrically conductive and may be any substance which allows the mixture of material and binder to be compressed into tablet form. More preferably the binder is one or a mixture of any of graphite, cobalt, aluminium powder, aluminium oxide and iron or iron oxide.  
         [0019]     Where the isotope to be detected is  14 C, the binder is preferably one or a mixture of graphite, cobalt and aluminium powder. Where the isotope to be detected is plutonium, the binder is preferably one or a mixture of aluminium oxide and iron oxide.  
         [0020]     The present invention also provides a sample for use in obtaining elemental isotope ratios of a material, the sample comprising the material which is substantially chemically unaltered.  
         [0021]     Preferably the sample for use in obtaining elemental isotope ratios of a material is dry and comprises a binder which is electrically conductive. The binder may be any material which allows the mixture of material and binder to be compressed into tablet form. More preferably the binder is one or a mixture of any of graphite, cobalt, aluminium powder, aluminium oxide and iron oxide.  
         [0022]     The method of the present invention relies on the principle of radiocarbon dating. The concentration of  14 C, the longest lived radioisotope of carbon, records the time since the last carbon exchange with the atmosphere, providing information such as the age of an archaeological artefact or the circulation of the world&#39;s oceans. Atmospheric CO 2  is incorporated into plants as  14 C which becomes incorporated into animal matter following ingestion. Subsequent to the death of the ingesting animal, no more  14 C will be incorporated into the animal which will, in time, decay. After 50,000 years the decaying biological substance will be ‘dead’ or ‘inert’, containing no more  14 C. Accordingly, since they were formed more than 50,000 years ago, synthetic graphite, or oil from which it is derived, contains no  14 C. Any  14 C ions which are generated in the accelerator mass spectrometer can therefore be attributed to the sample under test which are detected and quantified.  
         [0023]     Using the method of the present invention for the measurement of elemental isotope ratios of a carbon containing material for example, ions of  14 C are generated in the accelerator mass spectrometer and can be detected. These results are particularly surprising because ionisation of elemental carbon in an organic molecule would not previously have been expected under the conditions which are provided in the invention. It is well known that the sample must be presented to the accelerator mass spectrometer in tablet/pellet form which is both dry and electrically conductive. Mixing the sample to be tested with a binding material such as graphite or aluminium oxide however enables us to satisfy both these requirements whilst bypassing the tedious graphitisation process for ionisation of the test sample.  
         [0024]     Whilst conventional mass spectrometry sample preparation techniques make use of direct sample introduction for analysis by electron impact or chemical ionisation, there is no prior teaching which would lead one of skill in the relevant art to apply this method to the field of Accelerator Mass Spectrometry. Indeed, the teaching of sample preparation in the AMS field has clearly pointed away from direct introduction towards more complicated, tedious methods of sample preparation such as graphitisation.  
     
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION  
       [0025]     The present invention will now be described by way of example only and with reference to a series of experiments which were conducted using human blood plasma or urine as well as the international certificated standard Australian National University sucrose as samples to determine if they could be analysed by AMS without being graphitised.  
         [0000]     Sample Preparation  
         [0000]     Direct Sample Addition to Graphite  
         [0026]     Each of the following samples were prepared in triplicate in plastic screw-cap vials. The mixtures were dried in a Speed-Vac and pressed into cathodes for AMS analysis. The term ‘cold plasma’ refers to blood plasma alone whilst ‘hot plasma’ refers to plasma to which a  14 C labelled drug has been added. Each cathode sample was analysed at least three times and the results are the mean of these triplicate analyses. All cathodes were first apalysed for 1000 cycles (100.7 seconds per sample) followed by a second analysis for 3000 cycles (302.1 seconds per sample).  
                         TABLE 1                           Sample preparation details            Sample           condition   Contents               1   A spatula of synthetic graphite:aluminium powder (7:3 v:v)           5-8 mg cobalt           10 μl HPLC grade water       2   A spatula of synthetic graphite:aluminium powder (7:3 v:v)           5-8 mg cobalt           10 μl cold plasma       3   A spatula of synthetic graphite:aluminium powder (7:3 v:v)           5-8 mg cobalt           10 μl hot plasma       4   A spatula of synthetic graphite:aluminium powder (7:3 v:v)           10 μl HPLC grade water       5   A spatula of synthetic graphite:aluminium powder (7:3 v:v)           10 μl cold plasma       6   A spatula of synthetic graphite:aluminium powder (7:3 v:v)           10 μl hot plasma                  
 
 Preparation of Plasma Samples 
 
         [0027]     Each test had two parts; the first involved the preparation of samples using the conventional method and a second part used the shorter procedure of admixing the sample directly with graphite/cobalt mixture (prepared from the conventional graphitisation of multiple aliquots of liquid paraffin).  
         [0028]     A sample of dosed human plasma was diluted using untreated human plasma to give the following concentrations: (dpm/ml refers to disintegrations per minute per millitre of sample)  
                                                   Nominal concentration   Concentration                           Untreated human plasma (blank)   A           0.05 dpm/ml   B            0.1 dpm/ml   C           0.25 dpm/ml   D            0.5 dpm/ml   E            1.0 dpm/ml   F            2.5 dpm/ml   G                      
 
 Conventional Method for Plasma Sample Preparation 
 
         [0029]     Ten microlitres of each concentration of plasma was aliquoted into ten separate glass sample tubes containing baked copper oxide wire and 2.5 μl of liquid paraffin. To serve as standards, 5-7 mg of ANU (Australian National University) sucrose was weighed into six separate glass sample tubes containing baked copper oxide wire. For process controls, 2-3 mg of synthetic gate was weighed into four separate glass sample tubes containing copper oxide wire, while 2.5 μl of liquid paraffin was aliquoted into seven separate glass sample tubes containing baked copper oxide wire. All samples, standards and controls were concentrated to dryness in a Speed-Vac and then sealed under vacuum. All samples standards and controls were oxidised overnight at 900° C. (following the procedure of Vogel J S (1992) Rapid production of graphite without contamination for biomedical AMS. Radiocarbon, 34, 344-350). Samples were then cryogenically transferred and then reduced in a furnace overnight. The resultant graphite was pressed into individual aluminium cathodes ready for AMS analysis. Cathodes were analysed for 2500 cycles at least three times using a 5 million volt National Electrostatics Corporation (NEC) 15SDH-2 tandem Pelletron accelerator mass spectrometer. (Garner R C et al (2000) A validation study comparing accelerator MS and liquid scintillation counting for analysis of  14 C-labelled drugs in plasma, urine and faecal extracts. J. Pharm. and Biomed. Analysis, 24, 197-209).  
         [0000]     Admixing Method for Plasma Sample Preparation  
         [0030]     Plastic screw-cap vials were labelled with sample codes. To each vial approximately 8.5 mg of liquid paraffin graphite/cobalt mixture (produced by the conventional graphitisation of aliquots of liquid paraffin and the graphite pooled together) was weighed. Twenty five microlitres of each concentration of plasma were aliquoted into ten separate plastic screw-cap vials containing liquid paraffin graphite/cobalt mixture as above. To serve as standards, 5-7 mg of ANU sucrose was dissolved in 500 μl of HPLC grade water, twenty five microlitres were then aliquoted into six plastic screw-cap vials containing a weighed amount of liquid paraffin graphite/cobalt mixture. The vials were capped and vortexed to mix the contents before being concentrated to dryness in a Speed-Vac. The admixed liquid paraffin graphite/cobalt mixture was pressed into individual aluminium cathodes for AMS analysis. To serve as controls, seven aliquots of untreated liquid paraffin graphite/cobalt mixture were pressed directly into aluminum cathodes. All cathodes were analysed for 2500 cycles as described above.  
         [0000]     Preparation of Urine Samples  
         [0031]     To remove sediment, which precipitates out of solution when the urine samples are thawed, urine samples were centrifuged and the supernatant decanted.  
         [0032]     Dosed human urine was diluted with untreated human urine to give the following concentrations:  
                                                   Nominal concentration   Concentration                           Untreated human urine (blank)   A           0.05 dpm/ml   B            0.1 dpm/ml   C           0.25 dpm/ml   D            0.5 dpm/ml   E            2.0 dpm/ml   F            2.5 dpm/ml   G                      
 
 Conventional Method for Urine Sample Preparation 
 
         [0033]     This was conducted as per the conventional method for plasma sample preparation described above using urine in place of plasma.  
         [0000]     Admixing Method for Urine Sample Preparation  
         [0034]     This was conducted as per the admixing method for plasma sample preparation as described above using urine in place of plasma. However, in the first of the three urine tests, 25 μl of each urine sample was used. In the remaining two urine tests, 50 μl was used for admixing. The volume of ANU sucrose solution admixed to the graphite was also increased to 50 μl in the second and third admixing tests for the urine samples.  
         [0000]     Preparation of ANU Sucrose Standard  
         [0035]     ANU sucrose is one of the International Standards used in AMS analysis (150.61 percent Modem Carbon (pMC)) and is used primarily to normalise the AMS but is also a useful process standard.  
         [0036]     According to CBAMS Ltd acceptance criteria, the pMC range allowed following conventional graphitisation is 128.61 to 172.61, see Table 8.  
         [0000]     Conventional Method for ANU Sucrose  
         [0037]     ANU sucrose was prepared as a process standard in each of the conventional plasma and urine tests described above.  
         [0000]     Admixing Method for ANU Sucrose  
         [0038]     ANU sucrose was prepared as a process standard in each of the admixing plasma and urine tests as described above.  
         [0000]     Data Analysis and Interpretation  
         [0000]     AMS Data for Direct Sample Addition to Graphite  
         [0039]     Tables 2 and 3 show the AMS results from 1000 and 3000 cycle analyses. The column headed ‘average  14 C counts’ refers to the number of  14 C counts as detected by AMS. The term ‘cold plasma’ refers to blood plasma alone whilst ‘hot plasma’ refers to plasma to which a  14 C labelled drug has been added.  
         [0040]     pMC refers to the percentage modern carbon which is an AMS term of radioactivity and provides a measurement of the carbon content of a sample. pMC=Times modern×100. One times modern= 14 C/ 12 C ratio in the atmosphere in 1952 (i.e., before atmospheric testing of atomic bombs). As shown in Tables 2 and 3, the  13 C/ 12 C ratio remains relatively constant: The  13 C/ 12 C ratios are close to the expected value of 1.1. pMC is a combination of the number of counts and the  13 C / 12 C ratio.  
                                                                               TABLE 2                           AMS data after analysis for 1000 cycles                        Percent                   Modern           Average  14 C     13 C/ 12 C   Carbon           counts   ratio   (pMC)                    Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + HPLC   2   1.137   1.98       water 1       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + HPLC   2   1.095   1.27       water 2       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + HPLC   1   1.158   1.50       water 3       MEAN   1.7   1.130   1.583       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + cold   59   1.061   9.64       plasma 1       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + cold   120   1.043   26.08       plasma 2       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + cold   53   1.071   15.03       plasma 3       MEAN   77.3   1.058   16.917       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + hot   292   1.056   52.36       plasma1       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + hot   196   1.063   42.70       plasma 2       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + hot   280   1.063   43.54       plasma 3       MEAN   256.0   1.061   46.200       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + HPLC water 1   7   1.130   1.74            Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + HPLC water 2   Sample lost            Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + HPLC water 3   4   1.085   0.58       MEAN   5.5   1.108   1.160       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cold plasma 1   103   1.025   13.61       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cold plasma 2   89   1.052   14.68       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cold plasma 3   103   1.028   8.56       MEAN   98.3   1.035   12.283       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + hot plasma 1   345   1.045   39.48       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + hot plasma 2   323   1.026   36.17       Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + hot plasma 3   579   1.044   59.40       MEAN   415.7   1.038   45.017                  
 
         [0041]    
       
         
               
             
               
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
               
             
               
               
             
               
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 3 
               
             
             
               
                   
               
               
                   
               
               
                 AMS data after analysis for 3000 cycles 
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                   
                   
                 Percent 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 Modern 
               
               
                   
                 Average  14 C 
                   13 C/ 12 C 
                 Carbon 
               
               
                   
                 counts 
                 ratio 
                 (pMC) 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + HPLC 
                 4 
                 1.179 
                 2.29 
               
               
                 water 1 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + HPLC 
                 5 
                 1.144 
                 1.95 
               
               
                 water 2 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + HPLC 
                 5 
                 1.190 
                 3.93 
               
               
                 water 3 
               
               
                 MEAN 
                 4.7 
                 1.171 
                 2.723 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + cold 
                 153 
                 1.061 
                 9.29 
               
               
                 plasma 1 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + cold 
                 255 
                 1.047 
                 24.02 
               
               
                 plasma 2 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + cold 
                 228 
                 1.038 
                 14.33 
               
               
                 plasma 3 
               
               
                 MEAN 
                 212.0 
                 1.049 
                 15.880 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + hot 
                 786 
                 1.061 
                 45.92 
               
               
                 plasma1 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + hot 
                 513 
                 1.069 
                 40.42 
               
               
                 plasma 2 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cobalt + hot 
                 1017 
                 1.060 
                 38.18 
               
               
                 plasma 3 
               
               
                 MEAN 
                 772.0 
                 1.063 
                 41.507 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + HPLC water 1 
                 9 
                 1.155 
                 1.01 
               
             
          
           
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + HPLC water 2 
                 Sample lost 
               
             
          
           
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + HPLC water 3 
                 7 
                 1.106 
                 0.09 
               
               
                 MEAN 
                 8.0 
                 1.131 
                 0.550 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cold plasma 1 
                 523 
                 1.012 
                 17.21 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cold plasma 2 
                 382 
                 1.059 
                 17.97 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + cold plasma 3 
                 425 
                 1.022 
                 9.92 
               
               
                 MEAN 
                 443.3 
                 1.031 
                 15.033 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + hot plasma 1 
                 1187 
                 1.050 
                 44.31 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + hot plasma 2 
                 1175 
                 1.016 
                 38.53 
               
               
                 Synthetic graphite:aluminium powder + hot plasma 3 
                 2110 
                 1.038 
                 70.49 
               
               
                 MEAN 
                 1490.7 
                 1.035 
                 51.110 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
         [0042]     It should be understood that Tables 2 and 3 illustrate AMS results for the same samples and are the means of at least three analyses per cathode sample, the only difference between them being that the samples in Table 3 were run for three times as long (i.e., 3000 cycles in Table 3 as compared with 1000 cycles in Table 2). The term ‘cycle’ refers to the AMS counting time.  
         [0043]     As shown in the tables, the average number of counts for the mixture of synthetic graphite, aluminium powder, cobalt and water mixture results is low. Addition of the sample plasma results in an increased number of counts with approximately three times as many counts recorded for hot plasma as compared with cold plasma.  
         [0000]     AMS Data for Conventional and Admixed Plasma Samples  
         [0044]     Tables 4 and 5 show the dpm/ml of plasma obtained by AMS using the conventional and admixing methods respectively. The test was repeated twice more, and similar data was obtained to that shown in Tables 4 and 5.  
                                                                                             TABLE 4                           AMS data for the conventional preparation of plasma samples                Concentration                A   B   C   D   E   F   G                        dpm/ml of   Sample lost   Sample lost   0.7442   0.8207   1.0945   1.7553   3.6039       ten   0.5397   0.6799   0.6730   0.8969   1.3297   1.8721   3.1556       replicates   0.5353   0.5971   0.6923   0.8754   1.0895   1.6377   Sample lost       per concentration   0.6250   0.6493   0.8052   0.9046   1.1842   1.6422   3.1172           0.5731   0.6609   0.7809   1.0015   1.2196   1.8243   3.4794           0.5698   0.6239   0.8431   0.9018   1.3109   2.0468   3.3491           0.5703   0.6112   0.7376   1.1155   1.0907   1.7694   3.1498           0.7420   0.6341   0.9168   0.9148   1.2651   1.7007   3.6497           0.5510   0.7086   0.7876   0.9187   1.1713   2.0590   3.4924           0.6352   0.7183   0.7285   0.8364   1.4437   1.7175   2.9958       Mean   0.5935   0.6537   0.7709   0.9186   1.2199   1.8025   3.3325       SD   0.0656   0.0422   0.0726   0.0849   0.1181   0.1508   0.2361       CV (%)   11.05%   6.45%   9.41%   9.24%   9.68%   8.36%   7.09%       Mean   0.0000   0.0602   0.1774   0.3251   0.6264   1.2090   2.7391       minus blank                  
 
         [0045]                                                                                                  TABLE 5                           AMS data for the admixing preparation of plasma samples                Concentration                A   B   C   D   E   F   G                        dpm/ml of   0.4950   0.4897   0.8079   0.7341   1.4923   2.0375   2.9351       ten   0.4740   0.5299   0.4899   1.0175   1.3144   1.6083   3.0308       replicates   0.5189   0.4550   0.6944   0.9645   1.3188   2.1936   4.3896       per concentration   0.5019   0.5628   0.5158   0.7089   0.8537   1.8988   3.7038           0.4129   0.4694   0.6545   0.8713   1.1245   1.6983   2.7460           0.3749   0.4578   0.6497   0.8410   1.2209   1.5362   2.8547           0.4653   0.5671   0.6367   0.9355   1.4140   1.8840   3.1663           0.3184   0.6287   0.6359   0.8217   1.1529   1.7560   2.9769           0.4327   0.4721   0.6631   0.7371   0.9804   2.0348   3.5834           0.3506   0.5094   0.6500   0.8683   0.9856   1.3643   3.2140       Mean   0.4345   0.5142   0.6398   0.8500   1.1857   1.8012   3.2601       SD   0.0686   0.0574   0.0882   0.1034   0.2052   0.2564   0.5006       CV (%)   15.79%   11.16%   13.79%   12.17%   17.30%   14.24%   15.35%       Mean   0.0000   0.0797   0.2053   0.4155   0.7513   1.3667   2.8256       minus blank                    
 AMS Data for Conventional and Admixed Urine Samples 
 
         [0046]     Tables 6 and 7 show the dpm/ml of urine obtained by AMS using the conventional and admixing methods respectively. Concentrations A-G refer to different levels of radioactivity.  
         [0047]     The test was repeated twice more, and similar data was obtained to that shown in Tables 6 and 7.  
                                                                                             TABLE 6                           AMS data for the conventional preparation of urine samples                Concentration                A   B   C   D   E   F   G                        dpm/ml of   0.0652   0.1279   0.1682   0.2800   0.5582   1.1395   3.5234       ten   0.0876   0.1101   0.1729   0.3210   0.5265   1.1121   2.3830       Replicates   0.0783   0.1387   0.1642   0.3329   0.6321   1.2407   3.1311       per concentration   0.0830   0.1123   0.1563   0.2937   0.6736   1.2851   3.1162           0.0803   0.1358   0.1793   0.3002   0.7500   1.1691   3.1374           0.0731   0.1292   0.1691   0.3032   0.6547   1.1612   2.9206           0.0794   0.1380   0.1743   0.3363   0.6042   1.1857   2.7134           0.0860   0.1159   0.1687   0.4016   0.6589   1.1691   2.9274           0.0718   0.1211   0.2063   0.2975   0.5999   1.1821   3.2210           0.0763   0.1369   0.1716   0.3144   Sample lost   1.2254   2.9091       Mean   0.0781   0.1266   0.1731   0.3181   0.6287   1.1870   2.9983       SD   0.0068   0.0110   0.0132   0.0343   0.0663   0.0508   0.3082       CV (%)   8.70%   8.71%   7.62%   10.77%   10.55%   4.28%   10.28%       Mean   0.0000   0.0485   0.0950   0.2400   0.5506   1.1089   2.9201       minus blank                  
 
         [0048]                                                                                                  TABLE 7                           AMS data for the admixing preparation of urine samples                Concentration                A   B   C   D   E   F   G                        dpm/ml of   0.0530   0.0979   0.2491   0.4177   0.5615   1.1352   4.6255       ten   0.0753   0.1615   0.1652   0.3600   1.0042   1.5127   4.0590       Replicates   0.0550   0.1222   0.2250   0.3281   0.6225   1.0576   2.2525       per conc-   0.0600   0.1061   0.1661   0.3248   0.6571   1.1326   4.1390       Entration   0.0351   0.1106   0.1199   0.3400   0.8908   1.7144   3.9320           0.0365   0.1892   0.1050   0.3716   0.4952   1.1820   3.0484           0.0549   0.1968   0.1554   0.3480   0.6369   1.0317   3.1878           0.0458   0.2400   0.1157   0.4451   0.7012   1.5538   2.6703           0.0641   0.1463   0.1671   0.5357   0.8502   0.9055   2.9642           0.0915   0.1662   0.1914   0.4266   0.5048   1.2337   2.1058       Mean   0.0571   0.1537   0.1660   0.3898   0.6925   1.2459   3.2984       SD   0.0171   0.0460   0.0466   0.0666   0.1706   0.2608   0.8528       CV (%)   29.95%   29.95%   28.06%   17.09%   24.64%   20.93%   25.85%       Mean minus blank   0.0000   0.0966   0.1089   0.3326   0.6353   1.1888   3.2413                    
 AMS Data for Conventional and Admixed ANU Sucrose Standard 
 
         [0049]     The data obtained from the admixng analyses of the ANU sucrose has been collated from all tests. ANU sucrose is the National Standard, being 150.61 pMC.  
         [0050]     The dpm/g of ANU sucrose was calculated using pMC values obtained following conventional processing, as follows:  
                                       150.61   The expected standard value of ANU sucrose       128.61   The lowest pMC allowed in CBAMS Ltd acceptance           criteria       172.61   The highest pMC allowed in CBAMS Ltd acceptance           criteria                  
 
         [0051]    
       
         
               
             
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 8 
               
             
             
               
                   
               
               
                   
               
               
                 Conversion of ANU sucrose pMC limits to dpm/g devised 
               
               
                 from the acceptance criteria range as stated above 
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                   
                   
                   
                 Total 
                   
                   
                   
                   
                   
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                   
                 carbon in 
                   
                   
                 Mass of 
                   
                 dpm 
               
               
                   
                 Percent 
                 Times 
                   
                 ANU 
                   
                   
                 ANU 
                 dpm 
                 per 
               
               
                   
                 Modern 
                 Modern 
                 Atto- 
                 sucrose 
                 Total 
                   
                 sucrose 
                 per mg 
                 gram of 
               
               
                 CBAMS 
                 Carbon 
                 (pMC/ 
                 moles 
                 graphite 
                 atto- 
                   
                 used 
                 of ANU 
                 ANU 
               
               
                 ID 
                 (pMC) 
                 100) 
                   14 C/mg C 
                 (mg) 
                 moles  14 C 
                 dpm 
                 (mg) 
                 sucrose 
                 sucrose 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                 ANU 
                 150.61 
                 1.5061 
                 147.5978 
                 2.52 
                 371.9465 
                 0.0515 
                 6.00 
                 0.0086 
                 8.5775 
               
               
                 sucrose 
               
               
                 ANU 
                 128.61 
                 1.2861 
                 126.0378 
                 2.11 
                 265.3726 
                 0.0367 
                 5.00 
                 0.0073 
                 7.3438 
               
               
                 sucrose 
               
               
                 ANU 
                 172.61 
                 1.7261 
                 169.1578 
                 2.95 
                 498.6264 
                 0.0690 
                 7.00 
                 0.0099 
                 9.8562 
               
               
                 sucrose 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
         [0052]     Using this information, the calculated dpm/g values of the admixed ANU sucrose solutions should be in the range 7.3438-9.8562 dpm/g.  
         [0053]     pMC values obtained from admixed standards were converted to dpm/g of ANU sucrose to compare with the dpm/g value of ANU sucrose when graphitised by conventional means. Table 9 shows some representative data for admixed ANU sucrose solution.  
                                                                                                                                                           TABLE 9                           Conversion of admixed ANU sucrose pMC values to dpm/g                    Mass of       Volume                                   graphite/   Percent   of ANU                   Co-       CBAMS       Co   modern   sucrose                   efficient       Sample   CBAMS   used   carbon   solution   dpm       Mean   Standard   of       code   ID   (mg)   (pMC)   used (ul)   per ml   dpm/g   dpm/g   deviation   variation %                    Experiment 1   ANU   9.4   7.55   25.00   0.0919   6.7562   7.6047   0.62   8.10%           sucrose   5.6   14.41   25.00   0.1096   8.0606           solution   6.5   11.81   25.00   0.1026   7.5432           admixed   10.6   7.98   25.00   0.1096   8.0587       Experiment 2   ANU   6.6   12.02   25.00   0.1064   7.8257   7.9742   3.25   40.71%           sucrose   8.3   14.99   25.00   0.1660   12.2088           solution   6.4   6.96   25.00   0.0585   4.3019           admixed   10.2   7.73   25.00   0.1028   7.5604       Experiment 3   ANU   6.8   21.95   50.00   0.1061   10.0098   7.6190   1.61   21.08%           sucrose   8.5   12.89   50.00   0.0753   7.1028           solution   6.4   15.54   50.00   0.0704   6.6456           admixed   5.9   16.85   50.00   0.0712   6.7179       Experiment 4   ANU   5.9   21.42   50.00   0.0926   7.8517   8.9640   1.97   22.00%                sucrose   7.0   Sample lost                    solution   5.7   21.91   50.00   0.0920   7.7990               admixed   6.4   28.39   50.00   0.1326   11.2412                      
 
         [0054]     The term ‘sample lost’ refers to the situation where no reading was obtained. This might be because there is no current for example.  
         [0000]     Conclusions  
         [0055]     Surprisingly,  14 C was detected using the method of sample preparation as provided by the present invention.  
         [0056]     In the direct sample addition to graphite work, the addition of cobalt to the sample and graphite:aluminium powder mixture seemed to cause the number of counts to be reduced by approximately half. The pMC of the same samples with and without cobalt however, remain similar.  
         [0057]     One of the parameters used as CBAMS acceptance criteria to determine whether a data point is valid or not, is the  13 C/ 12 C ratio. To be acceptable the  13 C/ 12 C ratio of a sample should be within the limits 0.935-1.265 (ie. 1.1±15%). The  13 C/ 12 C ratio of all samples from these analyses are within this range.  
         [0058]     As expected, when the samples were counted for 3000 cycles instead of 1000, the number of counts increased at least approximately threefold. This is expected because a longer cycle allows for the production of a greater number of ions. For the HPLC grade water approximately two times more counts are detected at 3000 cycles.  
         [0059]     Conventional preparation of plasma samples produces dpm/ml values that are highly reproducible and reveal dpm/ml figures close to the expected when the untreated (blank) plasma dpm/ml figure is subtracted. The same observations can be made of the admixed plasma data. This indicates a successful and accurate admixing process.  
         [0060]     Data for the urine samples tended to be slightly more variable than the plasma data. Following untreated (blank) urine dpm/ml subtraction however, the resultant dpm/ml values were close to the nominal values.  
         [0061]     The admixed ANU sucrose solution data obtained for each test was converted to dpm/g of sucrose. In the test data shown, the mean dpm/g values were within the theoretical dpm/g range as calculated using pMC values obtained following conventional processing as described above. Since the admixing data for the National Standard has been calculated to fall within the expected range, the tests conducted have provided sound evidence that the admixing method can produce reliable and accurate data, while at the same time reducing sample preparation time.  
         [0062]     The reported data supports the use of direct sample introduction into the AMS ion source rather than going through a lengthy graphitisation process. Similar methodology could be used for other elemental isotopes analysable by AMS eg.  41 Ca,  129 I,  36 Cl etc. The applications of the method of the present invention are wide. The method of the invention may for example have potential value in monitoring the exposure of certain worker categories to plutonium where it could be successfully used for rapid and direct assessment of urine samples by AMS.  
         [0063]     It should also be understood that the method of the present invention is similarly not limited to those binding materials which are specifically exemplified above. A range of binders may be suitable and are covered by the present invention. The specific choice of binder will depend upon the particular isotope to be tested. In the case of plutonium for example, a binding material of aluminium oxide and iron oxide is necessary to achieve a signal using AMS.