Determination of organic compounds in water using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction

Rezaee, Mohammad; Assadi, Yaghoub; Hosseini, Mohammad-Reza Milani; Aghaee, Elham; Ahmadi, Fardin; Berijani, Sana

doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2006.03.007

Cited by 3,165 publications

(1,606 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,469

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Liquid-phase microextraction (LPME) offers simplicity, ease of handling, minimal sample and solvent consumptions, and an important reduction in residues generated, in contrast with traditional liquidliquid extraction techniques. Since its appearance in the nineties, several LPME techniques have been developed and the most commonly used are single drop microextraction, hollow-fiber liquid-phase microextraction and dispersive liquidliquid microextraction (DLLME) [3]. Although classical organic solvents have traditionally been used as extractants in LPME techniques, the use of ionic liquids (ILs) has recently attracted interest as a promising alternative [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tungsten coil atomic emission spectrometry combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction: A synergistic association for chromium determination in water samples

Vidal

Silva

Canals

et al. 2016

Talanta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A novel and environmentally friendly analytical method is reported for total chromium determination and chromium speciation in water samples, whereby tungsten coil atomic emission spectrometry (WCAES) is combined with in situ ionic liquid formation dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (in situ IL-DLLME).A two stage multivariate optimization approach has been developed employing a Plackett-Burman design for screening and selection of the significant factor involved in the in situ IL-DLLME procedure, which was later optimized by means were 3 and 10 µg L -1 , respectively. This is a 233-fold improvement when 2 compared with chromium determination by WCAES without using preconcentration. The repeatability of the proposed method was evaluated at two different spiking levels (10 and 50 µg L -1 ) obtaining coefficients of variation of 11.4 and 3.6% (n=3), respectively. A certified reference material (SRM-1643e NIST) was analysed in order to determine the accuracy of the method for total chromium determination and 112.3% and 2.5 µg L -1 were the recovery (trueness) and standard deviation values, respectively. Tap, bottled mineral and natural mineral waters were analysed at 60 µg L -1 spiking level of total Cr content at two Cr(VI)/Cr(III) ratios, and relative recovery values were ranged between 88 and 112% showing that the matrix has a negligible effect. To our knowledge, this is the first time that combines in situ IL-DLLME and WCAES.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tungsten coil atomic emission spectrometry combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction: A synergistic association for chromium determination in water samples

Vidal

Silva

Canals

et al. 2016

Talanta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are four main methods used in solvent microextraction: liquid-liquid microextraction (LLME), single-drop microextraction (SDME), hollow-fiber-protected microextraction (HFME) and dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME) [20,21]. DLLME was introduced in 2006 and has attracted great attention due to its wide range of applications [21][22][23][24][25][26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fast, sensitive and reliable multi-residue method for routine determination of 34 pesticides from various chemical groups in water samples by using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Tankiewicz

Biziuk

2017

Anal Bioanal Chem

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A simple and efficient dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction technique (DLLME) was developed by using a mixture of two solvents: 40 μL of tetrachlorethylene (extraction solvent) and 1.0 mL of methanol (disperser solvent), which was rapidly injected with a syringe into 10 mL of water sample. Some important parameters affecting the extraction efficiency, such as type and volume of solvents, water sample volume, extraction time, temperature, pH adjustment and salt addition effect were investigated. Simultaneous determination of 34 commonly used pesticides was performed by using gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC-MS). The procedure has been validated in order to obtain the highest efficiency at the lowest concentration levels of analytes to fulfill the requirements of regulations on maximum residue limits. Under the optimum conditions, the linearity range was within 0.0096-100 μg L −1 . The limits of detection (LODs) of the developed DLLME-GC-MS methodology for all investigated pesticides were in the range of 0.0032 (endrin)-0.0174 (diazinon) μg L −1 and limits of quantification (LOQs) from 0.0096 to 0.052 μg L −1 . At lower concentration of 1 μg L −1 for each pesticide, recoveries ranged between 84% (tebufenpyrad) and 108% (deltamethrin) with relative standard deviations (RSDs) (n = 7) from 1.1% (metconazole) to 11% (parathion-mehtyl). This methodology was successfully applied to check contamination of environmental samples. The procedure has proved to be selective, sensitive and precise for the simultaneous determination of various pesticides. The optimized analytical method is very simple and rapid (less than 5 min).

show abstract

“…Liquid-phase microextraction (LPME) has grown increasingly popular due to its simplicity, low cost, adaptability to a wide variety of sample types and analytes, as well as, for all major analytical instrumentation [2]. The most frequently used LPME modes are: single-drop microextraction [3,4], hollow-fiber liquid-phase microextraction [5e7], dispersive liquideliquid microextraction [8], solidified floating organic drop microextraction [9]. All these modes are well described in numerous reviews where the main benefits and drawbacks are presented [1,6,10e13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A fully automated effervescence-assisted switchable solvent-based liquid phase microextraction procedure: Liquid chromatographic determination of ofloxacin in human urine samples

Vakh

Pochivalov

Andruch

et al. 2016

Analytica Chimica Acta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Determination of organic compounds in water using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction

Cited by 3,165 publications

References 26 publications

Tungsten coil atomic emission spectrometry combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction: A synergistic association for chromium determination in water samples

Tungsten coil atomic emission spectrometry combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction: A synergistic association for chromium determination in water samples

Fast, sensitive and reliable multi-residue method for routine determination of 34 pesticides from various chemical groups in water samples by using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

A fully automated effervescence-assisted switchable solvent-based liquid phase microextraction procedure: Liquid chromatographic determination of ofloxacin in human urine samples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About