Overall then, this response translates into a formal selectivity of sulfur over carbon in the SS mFPD of about 4 orders of magni-tude. This value correlates well with that obtained from the quartz tube mFPD, most conventional FPD devices,and the AED . Conversely, it is lower than that of the SCD and the pulsed flame photometric detector (pFPD). Practi-cally, however, this SS mFPD selectivity still corresponds to fairly large hydrocarbon quantities being required for a measurable sig-nal. For example, no hydrocarbon response could be observed here for amounts below 1 g of compound introduced to the analytical flame. Therefore, major hydrocarbon interference should not normally be anticipated during sulfur monitoring in the SS mFPD. This is examined more closely below