2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0039-9140(01)00556-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A new method of microvolume back-extraction procedure for enrichment of Pb and Cd and determination by flame atomic absorption spectrometry

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
27
0
3

Year Published

2002
2002
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 72 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
27
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…A comparison of the current method with the other reported methods [16][17][18][19] is shown in Table 3. The results showed that, the enrichment factor and the detection limit obtained by the proposed method are comparable to methods reported in the literature.…”
Section: Comparison Of Ll-dllme Procedures With the Other Reported Metmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A comparison of the current method with the other reported methods [16][17][18][19] is shown in Table 3. The results showed that, the enrichment factor and the detection limit obtained by the proposed method are comparable to methods reported in the literature.…”
Section: Comparison Of Ll-dllme Procedures With the Other Reported Metmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To assure the homogeneity and statistical validity of the method, a paired t-test was applied to the group of results; the determined "t" value was 0.187, which is below the reference t-value for a 95% confidence interval (t = 2.78). Table 6 indicates the limit of detection (LOD), the relative standard deviation, the sample preparation time and the sample volume in the LLE-microvolume back-extraction [31], co-precipitation [32], off-line SPE (Solid Phase Extraction) [33], on-line SPE [34] CPE and (Cloud Point Extraction) [35] for the extraction and determination of lead in water samples. The comparison of the results exhibits that LOD and the enrichment factor (or enhancement factor) in the present method were better than those of the other methods.…”
Section: Applicationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the development of modern analytical instruments provides a great enhancement in analysis, in many cases the available analytical instrumentation does not demonstrate enough sensitivity for the analysis of natural samples. 15 Nevertheless, the detection of metal trace elements in aqueous samples is difficult due to various factors, particularly their low concentration and the matrix effects. 16 Several methods have been reported for the separation and preconcentration of metal ions, such as coprecipitation, 17,18 liquid-liquid extraction (LLE), 19,20 solid-phase extraction (SPE), [21][22][23] and cloud point extraction (CPE).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%