Identification and quantification of 10 indole/indazole carboxamide synthetic cannabinoids in 36 herbal blends by gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy

• Published in: Journal of forensic sciences 2021-11, Vol.66 (6), p.2156-2166
• Main Authors: Liu, Cui‐Mei, Jia, Wei, Meng, Xin, Hua, Zhen‐Dong
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Chromatography; Gas chromatography; gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry; herbal blend; Marijuana; Mass spectrometry; Mixtures; new psychoactive substance; Nicotine; NMR; NMR spectroscopy; Nuclear magnetic resonance; nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy; Psychotropic drugs; qualitative analysis; Quantitative analysis; Reference materials; Scientific imaging; synthetic cannabinoid
• ISSN: 0022-1198; 1556-4029
• DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.14873

Herbal blends containing synthetic cannabinoids have become popular alternatives to marijuana. The number of synthetic cannabinoids and speed of their emergence enable this group of compounds particularly challenging in terms of detection, monitoring, and responding. In this work, both gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR) methods were developed for the identification and quantification of synthetic cannabinoids in herbal blends. Ten types of indole/indazole carboxamide synthetic cannabinoids, which showed different types of substitutions connected to nitrogen of the indole/indazole carboxamide, were detected in 36 herbal blends. The GC‐MS fragmentation routes of indole/indazole carboxamide synthetic cannabinoids were discussed in detail for structure identification purpose. The concentration range of synthetic cannabinoid in 36 herbal blends was 1.9–50.6 mg/g using GC‐MS method, while 1.5–49.0 mg/g by NMR method. Nicotine in herbal blends was quantified by NMR method without using reference material, and showed a variation of 5.3–44.7 mg/g. For quantitative analysis, NMR method showed great advantage in the absence of reference material, while GC‐MS method showed great merit for multiple‐compound analysis when reference material was available. Therefore, for the quantitative analysis of new emerged synthetic cannabinoid in herbal blends, different methods could be chosen by considering whether reference material is available, as well as the number and types of synthetic cannabinoids detected in a single sample.