Definition of the limit of quantification in the presence of instrumental and non-instrumental errors. Comparison among various definitions applied to the calibration of zinc by inductively coupled plasma–mass spectrometry

•Quantification limit was obtained considering a two-component variance regression.•Calibration data may be affected by instrumental and operational errors.•Calibration model was applied to calibrate zinc by ICP-MS.•Various limits of quantification were critically compared.

The limit of quantification (LOQ) in the presence of instrumental and non-instrumental errors was proposed. It was theoretically defined combining the two-component variance regression and LOQ schemas already present in the literature and applied to the calibration of zinc by the ICP-MS technique. At low concentration levels, the two-component variance LOQ definition should be always used above all when a clean room is not available. Three LOQ definitions were accounted for. One of them in the concentration and two in the signal domain. The LOQ computed in the concentration domain, proposed by Currie, was completed by adding the third order terms in the Taylor expansion because they are of the same order of magnitude of the second ones so that they cannot be neglected. In this context, the error propagation was simplified by eliminating the correlation contributions by using independent random variables. Among the signal domain definitions, a particular attention was devoted to the recently proposed approach based on at least one significant digit in the measurement. The relative LOQ values resulted very large in preventing the quantitative analysis. It was found that the Currie schemas in the signal and concentration domains gave similar LOQ values but the former formulation is to be preferred as more easily computable.