ESSLAB Industry News
Making Sense of Internal Standards — Precision, Accuracy, and Traceability in ICP-OES & ICP-MS
Why Internal Standards Matter
At the recent ESSLAB ICP Academy, two discussions sparked genuine debate — Internal Standards (IS) and Trace Metal Impurities in CRMs. Despite incredible advances in ICP-OES and ICP-MS technology, everyone agreed: internal standards remain the backbone of reliable trace-metal analysis.
Why? Because no matter how sophisticated your instrument, it’s still subject to change. Plasma conditions shift, nebulizers age, detectors drift — and when you’re measuring at parts-per-billion, even small instabilities can create large errors.
Internal standards provide that essential real-time correction, allowing analysts to separate instrument variation from true sample differences. In short, they transform data from “good enough” to defensible — maintaining accuracy, precision, and traceability across clean-water monitoring and complex environmental matrices like soils and sludges.
Q1. What’s the actual purpose of an internal standard?
Think of the internal standard as your analytical co-pilot. It’s a known element added to every sample, blank, and calibration standard at a constant concentration. It follows your analytes through the same sample introduction, plasma, and detection steps.
When instrument or plasma conditions fluctuate, both the analyte and the internal standard signals change — but their ratio remains stable. This ratio-based correction cancels out drift, giving consistent, reproducible data.
Without internal standards, those subtle variations in signal intensity could be mistaken for changes in concentration — which, for regulatory or environmental reporting, is unacceptable.
Q2. How does this apply in practice — for clean water vs complex matrices?
The role of the internal standard shifts depending on the sample type:
Clean Waters
In clean or low-ionic-strength samples (like drinking water), precision relies mainly on the purity of reagents and standards. At µg/L or ng/L levels, even trace contamination in the IS solution can bias results.
Best practice includes:
-
Using ultra-pure, single-element or certified multi-element internal standard mixes.
-
Screening IS solutions periodically for contamination.
-
Keeping IS concentration constant and well within the detector’s linear range.
-
Tracking IS response trends to flag drift before it affects data.
For simple matrices, one well-chosen IS or a balanced multi-element mix often provides stable correction across the analyte range.
Soils, Sludges, and Sediments
Here the challenge isn’t purity — it’s matrix complexity. High dissolved solids, silicates, and acids can alter aerosol transport, plasma energy, or ionization efficiency. Analyte and IS signals may behave differently under such stress.
Best practice includes:
-
Using multiple IS elements to represent light, mid, and heavy mass ranges.
-
Choosing IS elements that mirror analyte chemistry (especially for oxide-forming or easily ionized metals).
-
Running spike-recovery or matrix-matched calibrations to confirm that correction remains valid.
-
Watching for suppression, enhancement, or memory effects.
In short: the more complex the matrix, the more strategic your IS selection must be.
Q3. Should we consider atomic and ionic behavior when choosing an IS?
Absolutely. Internal standard selection isn’t just a checkbox — it’s rooted in the physics and chemistry of the measurement technique.
-
For ICP-OES:
Match emission lines close in wavelength and excitation energy to the analyte. This ensures both respond similarly to plasma temperature and optical changes.
-
For ICP-MS:
Choose elements with similar mass and first ionization potential to the analyte — ideally within ±10–20 amu. This keeps ionization efficiency and space-charge effects consistent.
Essentially, your IS should behave as your analyte would — under all conditions — without being present in the actual sample.
Q4. What about Certified Reference Materials (CRMs)? How do they fit in?
CRMs are the cornerstone of traceable calibration — they define your analytical truth. But here’s the catch: at ultra-trace levels, even CRMs aren’t perfect.
A few micrograms per litre of unintended impurity can distort your calibration curve. That’s why the best labs now go beyond just trusting the “Certified” label — they check the trace impurity profile on every Certificate of Analysis (COA).
Modern CRMs provide lot-specific impurity data, often at sub-µg/L levels, showing exactly which elements are present and at what concentrations.
This transparency supports internal standardization in three key ways:
-
Selection Confidence – You know your IS won’t overlap with any impurity in the calibration mix.
-
Bias Prevention – You can correct for minor cross-contamination that could otherwise elevate apparent analyte readings.
-
Traceability – You meet ISO 17025 and GLP expectations for full chemical characterisation and uncertainty disclosure.
In short, a CRM isn’t just “certified” anymore — it’s chemically transparent, giving analysts complete control over bias and uncertainty.
Q5. How exactly does an internal standard correct data?
Imagine your instrument signal drifting slightly over a 4-hour run. Instead of assuming every analyte’s concentration is changing, you measure the response of your internal standard at the same time.
If the IS signal drops by 10%, you can safely infer the analyte signals likely dropped by 10% due to the same cause — maybe nebulizer wear, plasma cooling, or a slight sample flow change.
By dividing analyte intensity by IS intensity, you normalise the data and remove that variation.
That’s what gives internal standards their power: dynamic correction rather than static calibration.
Q6. How do surrogates differ from internal standards?
They’re partners in crime, but they serve different roles.
-
Internal Standards (IS) correct for instrumental and signal variation — drift, matrix effects, sensitivity.
-
Surrogates correct for sample preparation efficiency — extraction, digestion, or cleanup steps.
Use both, and you have a complete accountability loop:
-
The surrogate tells you whether the sample prep worked.
-
The internal standard tells you whether the instrument performed correctly.
Together, they ensure that every result — from raw sample to final concentration — is traceable, reproducible, and defensible.
Q7. How do you keep IS performance consistent across batches and matrices?
Consistency starts with where and how you add the internal standard. Always add it before nebulization, so it follows the analyte through the entire sample path.
Other essentials:
-
Match matrix composition in standards and samples (especially acid strength).
-
Keep signals in the instrument’s linear range.
-
Chart IS recoveries over time; treat them as a live QC metric.
-
Flag any drift or suppression early.
Rule of thumb:
If your internal standard signal looks suspicious — your results probably are too.
Q8. What are the most common mistakes analysts make?
Even experienced analysts fall into a few traps:
-
Choosing an IS that’s already present in the sample.
-
Ignoring trace impurities in the IS stock.
-
Adding IS post-nebulizer (so it doesn’t track real sample behaviour).
-
Neglecting long-term trend data — missing early signs of drift.
Academy advice:
Treat internal standard data like your lab’s pulse rate. It’s not just a procedural checkbox — it’s your first warning system.
Q9. How do internal standards help with quality assurance and accreditation?
Internal standards deliver quantitative evidence that your measurements are stable and traceable. They link your calibration directly to your result through a verified correction mechanism.
For ISO 17025, MCERTS, or EPA accreditation, consistent IS recovery demonstrates:
-
Calibration integrity across runs.
-
Real-time drift correction.
-
Documented control of uncertainty.
Paired with CRMs and surrogates, internal standards provide a complete framework for traceable, validated measurement — from sample prep to reporting.
Q10. What’s the current “best practice” approach?
Modern labs are moving toward a holistic internal standard strategy — integrating chemistry, instrumentation, and QA documentation.
Here’s the distilled checklist from recent ICP Academy sessions:
-
Match properties wisely: Mass, wavelength, and ionization potential must align with analytes.
-
Verify purity: Confirm trace-metal impurities in IS and CRMs before use.
-
Add early and consistently: The IS must experience the same journey as the sample.
-
Monitor continuously: Track IS recovery and trend drift across runs.
-
Revalidate regularly: Recheck IS behaviour after hardware or method changes.
-
Use surrogates strategically: Especially in high-matrix or digested samples.
-
Document everything: Corrections, recoveries, and revalidations form your traceability record.
Following these steps ensures that improvements in extraction efficiency or detection sensitivity reduce uncertainty instead of increasing it.
Closing Thoughts: Internal Standards as the Quiet Guardians of Data Integrity
Internal standards don’t make the headlines in analytical chemistry — but they quietly protect the integrity of every dataset. They let analysts push the boundaries of detection without losing reliability, enabling confident, reproducible results even at sub-ppb levels.
As instrumentation evolves, internal standardisation must evolve with it — supported by transparent CRMs, validated surrogates, and robust documentation. Together, they uphold the three pillars every analytical lab depends on:
Accuracy. Precision. Traceability.
As Professor Robert Thomas a leading authority on ICP technologies neatly put it:
“The internal standard is the silent witness to every sample’s analytical journey — trustworthy only if we truly know its nature.”
Resources for Further Learning:
-
ESSLAB Technical Centre – Inorganic Ventures Reference Hub
-
EPA 200.7 / 6020B / ISO 17294-2 – Official method frameworks for internal standardisation
-
ISO 33401:2024: Reference materials — Contents of certificates, labels and accompanying documentation
-
Inorganic Ventures Trace Metals Guides – ICP-OES and ICP-MS best practice resources
-
Robert Thomas, Practical Guide to ICP-MS (CRC Press) – Core principles of trace element analysis
-
Dr Paul Gaines , Inorganic Ventures, Trace Metals Guide, ICP-OES Measurement
-
Dr Paul Gaines , Inorganic Ventures, Trace Metals Guide, ICP-MS Measurement
-
Element Properties – Periodic Table (Link)
Leave a comment