1996
DOI: 10.1021/es950637w
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determination of Cu and Cd Content of Groundwater Colloids by Solid Sampling Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry

Abstract: Cu and Cd content of standard reference materials (SRMs), minerals (quartz, calcite, kaolinite, and bentonite), and samples of aquifer colloids, obtained under natural gradient flow conditions, were analyzed by solid sampling graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry (GFAAS). Pyrolytically coated tubes, designed for the analysis of liquid samples, were successfully used. Recovery of analytes by solid sampling was 106-112% of the certified values of SRMs. Cu concentration in clay minerals, obtained by sol… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The standard procedures for Cu 2+ detection are instrument-based analytical methods, such as inductively coupled plasma (ICP) and graphite furnace atomic absorption spectroscopy. 8,9 However, high equipment costs and specialized personnel are required, resulting in the restriction of their application during routine detection. The electrochemical and optical methods were also used for Cu 2+ detection, but a higher sensitivity still needed to be improved.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The standard procedures for Cu 2+ detection are instrument-based analytical methods, such as inductively coupled plasma (ICP) and graphite furnace atomic absorption spectroscopy. 8,9 However, high equipment costs and specialized personnel are required, resulting in the restriction of their application during routine detection. The electrochemical and optical methods were also used for Cu 2+ detection, but a higher sensitivity still needed to be improved.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various technologies have been developed for the detection of Cu 2+ . The standard procedures for Cu 2+ detection are instrument-based analytical methods, such as inductively coupled plasma (ICP) and graphite furnace atomic absorption spectroscopy. , However, high equipment costs and specialized personnel are required, resulting in the restriction of their application during routine detection. The electrochemical and optical methods were also used for Cu 2+ detection, but a higher sensitivity still needed to be improved. With the advent of new detection methods, fluorescence sensors and colorimetric sensors based on fluorescence probes, organic dyes, or nanomaterials as new approaches have attracted more attention. Chen et al reported a colorimetric method for the detection of trace copper ions based on the catalytic leaching of silver-coated gold nanoparticles, and the limit of detection (LOD) reached a low level of 1 nM .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Up until now, available methods for Cu 2+ detection include fluorescent probe based organic dyes, 6,7 semiconductor quantum dots (QDs) sensors, [8][9][10] atomic absorption spectrometry, 11,12 inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy, 13 and voltammetry. 14 Unfortunately, these methods require sophisticated and expensive instrumentation and the procedures used in these methods are time-consuming with partial toxic reagents.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…14 Therefore, there is an urgent need to develop monitoring systems that can perform highly sensitive, selective, cost-competitive, user-friendly, and reliable detection of copper ions in environmental waters. Current benchmark techniques used to detect copper in aqueous solutions include inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectroscopy/mass spectroscopy (ICP-OES/MS), 15 atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS), 16 anodic stripping voltammetry (ASV), 17 UV–visible 18 and fluorescence spectroscopies. 19 Though these methods offer good detection limits and broad linear working ranges, they require significant capital and maintenance investments, laborious sample preparation processes, and highly trained personnel and cannot be miniaturized into portable sensing systems for in situ analysis applications.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%