Dispersion-solidification liquid–liquid microextraction for volatile aromatic hydrocarbons determination: Comparison with liquid phase microextraction based on the solidification of a floating drop
✍ Scribed by Vida Vickackaite; Edita Pusvaskiene
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 2009
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 475 KB
- Volume
- 32
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 1615-9306
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
Abstract
Two microextraction techniques – liquid phase microextraction based on solidification of a floating organic drop (LPME‐SFO) and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with a solidification of a floating organic drop (DLLME‐SFO) – are explored for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and o‐xylene sampling and preconcentration. The investigation covers the effects of extraction solvent type, extraction and disperser solvents' volume, and the extraction time. For both techniques 1‐undecanol containing n‐heptane as internal standard was used as an extracting solvent. For DLLME‐SFO acetone was used as a disperser solvent. The calibration curves for both techniques and for all the analytes were linear up to 10 μg/mL, correlation coefficients were in the range 0.997–0.998, enrichment factors were from 87 for benzene to 290 for o‐xylene, detection limits were from 0.31 and 0.35 μg/L for benzene to 0.15 and 0.10 μg/L for o‐xylene for LPME‐SFO and DLLME‐SFO, respectively. Repeatabilities of the results were acceptable with RSDs up to 12%. Being comparable with LPME‐SFO in the analytical characteristics, DLLME‐SFO is superior to LPME‐SFO in the extraction time. A possibility to apply the proposed techniques for volatile aromatic hydrocarbons determination in tap water and snow was demonstrated.
📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES
## Abstract A simple, rapid and environment‐friendly technique of single‐drop liquid‐phase microextraction has been developed for the determination of sulfonamides in environmental water. Several important parameters including stirring rate, extraction solvent, extraction pH, salinity and extractio
## Abstract In this paper, two methods based on organic solvent dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (OS‐DLLME) and ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (IL‐DLLME) coupled with high‐performance liquid chromatography have been critically compared for analyzing emodin and its met