Dispersive solid-phase extraction based on oleic acid-coated magnetic nanoparticles followed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry for UV-filter determination in water samples

Román, Iván P.; Chisvert, Alberto; Canals, Antonio

doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2011.02.047

Cited by 168 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 44 publications

(49 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the difference was expected, since the dilution factor is much higher at sea, the reported concentrations are in lower concentration levels than in other studies (Román et al, 2011;Tarazona et al, 2010).…”

Section: Sea Watercontrasting

confidence: 46%

“…The UV-filter ES was found in high concentrations in Alicante, Spain, ranging 792-1222 ng/L (Román et al, 2011), while in Majorca (Spain) concentrations were 440 -880 ng/L (Benedé et al, 2014). This compound, although relatively weak UV absorber has an excellent safety record, is easily incorporated into cosmetic formulations due to its aesthetics, stability, emollience and non-watersolubility, so it is widely used in many sunscreen products (Lowe et al, 1996).…”

Section: Sea Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It's worth mention that EMC is allowed in Japan at a concentration limit in sunscreens of 20% (only 10% allowed in EU) (Jansen et al, 2013). In Spain, Román et al (2011) found the higher concentrations for IMC, EDP and HMS, whereas in Germany Wick et al, 2010 found higher concentrations for PBSA. In the µg/L range were found 4-MBC and OC in river samples from China (Liu et al, 2010).…”

Section: River Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, the interference of endogenous materials is prevented by increasing the retention times during the reversed-phase chromatographic run (Ho and Ding, 2012). Several reagents have been steadily developed for this purpose, such as N-methyl-N-(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide (MSTFA) (Jeon et al, 2006;Negreira et al, 2009;Zhang and Lee, 2012a), N,O-bis(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide (BSTFA) (Román et al, 2011;Tarazona et al, 2010) and N-methyl-N-(tert-butyldimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide (MTB-STFA) (Negreira et al, 2008). These studies were conducted under high temperatures (60 o C) and for at least 30 min of reaction time.…”

Section: Chromatographic Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other less conventional methodologies were also applied to water samples in order to extract the organic compounds, like ionic liquid based ultrasound-assisted emulsification microextraction (IL-USAEME) (Ge and Lee, 2012) with around 100% recovery, ionic liquid-based single-drop microextraction (IL-SDME) (Vidal et al, 2010) with average recovery of 100%, non-porous membrane-assisted liquid-liquid extraction (MALLE) (Rodil et al, 2009b) yielding 60 to 100% recovery, magnetic nanoparticles dispersive solid-phase extraction (MNPs-based dSPE) (Román et al, 2011) with about 70-125% recovery, microextraction by packed sorbent (MEPS) (Moeder et al, 2010) with 60 to 115% and micelle mediated extraction (MME) (Giokas et al, 2005) with average recoveries of 100%. These techniques are relatively new and their applicability to extract UV-filters from water samples has been poorly investigated.…”

Section: Dllme Is a Liquid-liquid Extraction (Lle) Based On The Relamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Advances in analytical methods and occurrence of organic UV-filters in the environment — A review

Ramos

Homem

Alves

et al. 2015

Science of The Total Environment

263

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

UV-filters are a group of compounds designed mainly to protect skin against UVA and UVB radiation, but they are also included in plastics, furniture, etc., to protect products from light damage. Their massive use in sunscreens for skin protection has been increasing due to the awareness of the chronic and acute effects of UV radiation. Some organic UV-filters have raised significant concerns in the past few years for their continuous usage, persistent input and potential threat to ecological environment and human health. UV-filters end up is wastewater and because wastewater treatment plants are not efficient in removing them, lipophilic compounds tend to sorb onto sludge and hydrophilics end up in river water, contaminating the existing biota. To better understand the risk associated with UV-filters in the environment a thorough review regarding their physicochemical properties, toxicity and environmental degradation, analytical methods and their occurrence was conducted.Higher UV-filter concentrations were found in rivers, reaching 0.3 mg/L for the most studied family, the benzophenone derivatives. Concentrations in the ng to µg/L range were also detected for the paminobenzoic acid, cinnamate, crylene and benzoyl methane derivatives in lake and sea water.Although at lower levels (few ng/L), UV-filters were also found in tap and groundwater. Swimming pool water is also a sink for UV-filters and its chlorine by-products, at the µg/L range, highlighting the benzophenone and benzimidazole derivatives. Soils and sediments are not frequently studied, but concentrations in the µg/L range have already been found especially for the benzophenone and crylene derivatives. Aquatic biota is frequently studied and UV-filters are found in the ng/g-dw range with higher values for fish and mussels. It has been concluded that more information regarding UVfilter degradation studies both in water and sediments is necessary and environmental occurrences should be monitored more frequently and deeply. SEHSDT -sequential extraction with high-speed dispersion tool; SLE -solid-liquid extraction; SPEsolid-phase extraction; SPF -sun protection factor; SPLE -selective pressurized liquid extraction;SPMDs -semipermeable membrane devices; SPME -solid phase microextraction; TD -thermal desorption; TCE -tetrachloroethylene; THF -tetrahydrofuran; Tl -toluene; UPLC -ultraperformance liquid chromatography; USE -ultrasound extraction; UV -ultraviolet; WTP -water treatment plant; WWTP -wastewater treatment plant 4

show abstract

Section: Sea Watercontrasting

confidence: 46%

Section: Sea Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: River Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Chromatographic Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Dllme Is a Liquid-liquid Extraction (Lle) Based On The Relamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Advances in analytical methods and occurrence of organic UV-filters in the environment — A review

Ramos

Homem

Alves

et al. 2015

Science of The Total Environment

263

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Dispersive Solid‐Phase Extraction

Socas‐Rodríguez

Herrera‐Herrera

Asensio‐Ramos

et al. 2015

Analytical Separation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dispersive solid‐phase extraction ( dSPE ) is a sorbent‐based technique widely applied in sample preparation for both sample clean up or analite preconcentration. It shows considerable benefits over conventional SPE , especially in terms of the simplicity of the procedure. This chapter aims at providing a general overview of dSPE , its different extraction approaches ( dSPE , µ‐ dSPE and magnetic‐ dSPE ), and the principal factors which influence the extraction process (including the sorbents most frequently used) as well as its most common applications.

show abstract

Extraction Methods Facilitated by the use of Magnetic Nanoparticles

Rocío‐Bautista

Pino

2015

Analytical Separation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) are a group of nanoparticles (NPs) that present superparamagnetic properties. MNPs are composed of a magnetic solid phase that is responsible for the magnetic properties. The characterization of MNPs is usually accomplished using techniques such as X‐ray diffraction (XRD), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), or scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Several review articles have been recently devoted to MNPs in analytical chemistry and particularly to sample preparation. This chapter presents extraction methods facilitated by the use of MNPs, with particular emphasis on MNP types and extraction applications. The relatively simple tuneability of MNPs, by easily anchoring task‐specific sorbents of quite different nature (silica based, carbon and derivatives based, polymeric based, and so on), opens a number of possible combinations and enormously extends its future applications

show abstract

Dispersive solid-phase extraction based on oleic acid-coated magnetic nanoparticles followed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry for UV-filter determination in water samples

Cited by 168 publications

References 44 publications

Advances in analytical methods and occurrence of organic UV-filters in the environment — A review

Advances in analytical methods and occurrence of organic UV-filters in the environment — A review

Dispersive Solid‐Phase Extraction

Extraction Methods Facilitated by the use of Magnetic Nanoparticles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About