Comparison of solid-phase extraction and supercritical fluid extraction for extraction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from drinking water

✍ Scribed by Silvia R. Sargenti; Harold M. McNair

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 1998
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 100 KB
• Volume: 10
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 1040-7685
• DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1520-667x(1998)10:1<125::aid-mcs16>3.0.co;2-2

✦ Synopsis

This work compares four different extraction techniques solid-phase Ž . Ž . extraction SPE , supercritical fluid extraction SFE , solid-phase extraction fol-Ž . lowed by supercritical fluid extraction SPErSFE , and liquid᎐liquid extraction Ž .x Ž .

LLE for the extraction of 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons PAHs from both fortified and drinking water. For SPE, the analytes were trapped on three different Ž . solid phases octadecyl, cyanopropyl, and phenyl and eluted with methylene chloride or acetonitrile. The SFE parameters were optimized by introducing the spiked water directly into the extraction cell and extracting with CO modified with 2 methylene chloride. These studies showed that for SPE, the octadecyl phase had the best recoveries for volatile PAHs, and methylene chloride was the better solvent. SPErSFE had good recoveries for all compounds; SFE had less steps, less exposure to solvents, and less extraction time when placing the matrix directly into the extraction cell; however, recovery was less than SPErSFE. LLE had the worst reproducibility and recovery.