How has automated sample preparation evolved in 2026?

Automated sample preparation has evolved dramatically since 2020, shifting from semi-manual, solvent-heavy workflows to fully integrated, software-driven systems capable of processing dozens of samples simultaneously with minimal human intervention. The most significant advances center on green chemistry principles, expanded matrix compatibility, and tighter regulatory alignment for contaminants such as PFAS, dioxins, and PCBs. The sections below address the most frequently asked questions about where laboratory automation stands in 2026.

What has changed in automated sample preparation since 2020?

Since 2020, automated sample preparation has moved from niche adoption to mainstream laboratory practice. The most defining shift is the combination of higher throughput, drastically reduced solvent consumption, and cross-contamination control built directly into system design rather than added as an afterthought. Regulatory pressure around persistent organic pollutants and PFAS has accelerated this transition across Europe and North America.

Before 2020, many laboratories still relied on manual or semi-automated cleanup steps that required significant analyst time, large volumes of organic solvents including dichloromethane, and careful attention to contamination risks between samples. Today, fully automated platforms handle extraction, purification, and concentration in a single integrated workflow.

Several specific developments mark this period:

Full automation of multi-step workflows, including extraction, lipid removal, column cleanup, and solvent evaporation, without operator intervention between steps
Compatibility with a broader range of sample matrices, from food and feed to water, soil, and air
Elimination of dichloromethane from standard operating procedures, replaced by greener solvent systems
Tighter integration with EPA and CEN method requirements, allowing laboratories to achieve accreditation more efficiently
Modular platform designs that let laboratories scale capacity without replacing entire systems

The peer-reviewed literature reflects this shift. Research published from 2012 onward, including work by Marchand, Fujita, Traag, and Hayward, validated fully automated purification for dioxins, PCBs, and PBDEs, establishing the scientific foundation that drove wider adoption through the mid-2020s.

How does modern automated sample preparation reduce solvent use?

Modern automated sample preparation reduces solvent use by precisely controlling the volume, flow rate, and recovery of solvents throughout each step of the workflow, eliminating the overuse that characterizes manual methods. Leading systems now process samples using less than 100 mL of organic solvent per sample, and many operate entirely without dichloromethane, which is a significant improvement over traditional Soxhlet or manual SPE procedures.

Several design principles drive this reduction. First, closed-loop solvent recovery systems capture and reuse solvent during the extraction phase rather than discarding it. The SER-158 extraction system, for example, simultaneously concentrates samples during extraction while collecting solvents in a dedicated recovery tank, minimizing residue and reducing the total volume consumed per run.

Second, automated systems apply solvent only where and when it is needed. Unlike manual workflows where analysts often use excess solvent as a safety margin, automated platforms dispense precisely calibrated volumes at each stage. This precision also improves reproducibility, since every sample receives identical treatment.

Third, integrated evaporation systems, including vacuum centrifuges and parallel nitrogen blowdown units, efficiently remove residual solvent after purification, reducing the concentration time and the additional solvent volumes that would otherwise be needed to achieve the correct final volume for injection.

The environmental benefit is substantial. Laboratories running high sample volumes, particularly those analyzing dioxins or PCBs in food and feed matrices, can reduce their annual solvent consumption by a significant margin, lowering both disposal costs and occupational exposure for laboratory staff.

What types of samples can automated preparation systems handle in 2026?

In 2026, automated sample preparation systems handle a wide range of matrices, including food, feed, soil, sewage sludge, water, and air. The same core platform can often be configured for different matrices by adjusting cartridge type, solvent protocol, or rack configuration, making modern systems genuinely versatile rather than application-specific.

The contaminants driving matrix diversity include:

Persistent organic pollutants (POPs): Dioxins (PCDD/F), PCBs, PBDEs, and PCNs in food, feed, soil, and environmental matrices
PFAS: Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in water, soil, food packaging materials, and biological samples
Pesticides: Multi-residue analysis across agricultural products, soil, and water
Hormones and endocrine disruptors: Water and environmental matrices
SVOCs and PAHs: Soil, sediment, and water samples
Mycotoxins: Cereals, fruits, spices, and animal feed

High-volume water sample extraction represents one of the more demanding applications. Systems such as the AutoEmpore address this through multi-channel configurations of 3, 6, 9, or 12 channels operating in parallel or series mode, with automatic online filtration and water removal built in. For solid and semi-solid matrices, extraction systems based on the Randall principle perform boiling solvent extraction followed by hot Soxhlet or Twisselmann steps, achieving high recovery rates across complex matrices.

The practical implication for laboratories is that a single automated platform can serve multiple analytical programs, reducing capital expenditure and simplifying staff training compared to maintaining separate manual workflows for each matrix type.

What is the difference between SPE automation and full sample prep automation?

SPE automation refers specifically to the automated execution of solid phase extraction, the step where target analytes are captured on a sorbent material and selectively eluted. Full sample preparation automation encompasses every step from initial extraction through cleanup, concentration, and final volume adjustment before instrument injection. The distinction matters because SPE automation alone still requires manual steps before and after, while full automation removes the analyst from the entire workflow.

What SPE automation covers

Automated SPE systems control the loading, washing, and elution phases of solid phase extraction with high precision and reproducibility. They eliminate variability introduced by manual syringe handling and allow multiple samples to be processed simultaneously. The SPE2000 system, for example, processes up to 80 samples per run across 10 consecutive sequences of 8 samples simultaneously, supporting cartridge volumes from 1 mL to 12 mL and sample volumes from 10 mL to 1,000 mL. This level of throughput is simply not achievable manually.

What full sample preparation automation adds

Full sample preparation automation integrates extraction, lipid removal or matrix cleanup, column-based purification, solvent evaporation, and final concentration into a connected workflow. Systems such as the GO-EHT purification platform go beyond SPE to handle the multi-column cleanup required for dioxin and PCB analysis, where co-extracted lipids and matrix interferences must be removed before mass spectrometry measurement. Full automation also means samples do not require manual transfer between steps, which is where contamination and error most commonly occur in hybrid workflows.

For laboratories analyzing complex matrices for regulated contaminants, full sample preparation automation delivers the greatest gains in throughput, data quality, and staff efficiency. SPE automation alone is well suited to simpler applications where extraction is the primary bottleneck.

How does automated sample prep eliminate cross-contamination risk?

Automated sample preparation eliminates cross-contamination risk primarily by ensuring that samples never come into direct contact with the instrument itself. In well-designed automated systems, all sample contact occurs within dedicated, single-use, or thoroughly isolated flow paths, so residue from one sample cannot transfer to the next. This is a fundamental design principle rather than an optional feature.

In manual workflows, cross-contamination occurs through shared glassware, analyst hands, reused syringes, or inadequately cleaned tubing. Each manual transfer step introduces a potential contamination point. Automated systems remove these transfers entirely or control them through sealed, inert pathways.

For PFAS analysis specifically, cross-contamination control is particularly critical because PFAS compounds are ubiquitous in laboratory environments and can appear as false positives if flow paths are not truly inert. Systems designed for PFAS work use fully inert flow paths free of Teflon and other fluoropolymers that can leach or absorb PFAS compounds, ensuring that background contamination does not compromise results.

For dioxin and PCB analysis, where detection limits are in the picogram range, even trace carryover between samples can invalidate results. The closed-system design of modern automated cleanup platforms addresses this by eliminating direct sample-to-system contact entirely, a feature that also simplifies laboratory validation and supports ISO 17025 accreditation requirements.

Which laboratories benefit most from automated sample preparation in 2026?

Laboratories that benefit most from automated sample preparation in 2026 are those running high sample volumes, working under strict regulatory requirements, or analyzing complex matrices for trace-level contaminants. Commercial contract laboratories, food safety testing facilities, environmental monitoring labs, and research institutions focused on persistent organic pollutants or PFAS gain the greatest return from automation investment.

The case for automation is strongest when one or more of the following conditions apply:

Sample throughput exceeds what a small analyst team can handle manually without overtime or backlogs
Regulatory frameworks such as EU food safety legislation or EPA methods require documented, reproducible workflows
Analytes are present at very low concentrations, making contamination control and precision critical
Multiple matrix types are analyzed within the same laboratory, requiring flexible system configurations
Laboratories are seeking ISO 17025 accreditation or need to demonstrate method validation to clients

Smaller laboratories should not assume automation is out of reach. Modular systems that scale from benchtop SPE automation to full integrated workflows allow laboratories to start with the highest-priority bottleneck and expand over time. The reduction in solvent costs, analyst time, and repeat analyses due to contamination errors often makes the investment case straightforward even at moderate sample volumes.

Laboratories working on emerging contaminants, particularly PFAS and new classes of endocrine disruptors, are also strong candidates, since manual methods for these analytes are increasingly difficult to validate to the sensitivity levels regulators now require.

How DSP-Systems supports laboratory automation in 2026

DSP-Systems provides laboratories across Europe and North America with a complete range of automated sample preparation systems designed to address the challenges described throughout this article. Their offering covers every stage of the sample preparation workflow:

GO-EHT systems for fully automated purification of dioxins, PCBs, PBDEs, and PCNs across food, feed, soil, water, and air matrices, using less than 100 mL of solvent per sample and eliminating dichloromethane
SPE2000 for high-throughput solid phase extraction of PFAS, pesticides, hormones, SVOCs, and PAHs, processing up to 80 samples per run
AutoEmpore for large-volume water sample extraction with automatic online filtration, available in multi-channel configurations
SER-158 for efficient extraction of solid and semi-solid samples using the Randall principle, seamlessly compatible with GO-EHT cleanup systems
MultiVap and CentriVap evaporation systems for precise solvent removal and final concentration before instrument injection
Method development, validation support, and turnkey laboratory setup services for laboratories building or upgrading their analytical programs

Whether you are setting up a new dioxin laboratory, scaling PFAS analysis capacity, or looking to reduce solvent use and improve data quality across existing workflows, contact DSP-Systems to discuss which automated solution fits your specific matrix, throughput, and regulatory requirements.

Gerelateerde artikelen

Deze inhoud is gegenereerd met behulp van AI en kan fouten bevatten.