Preparation of mesoporous silica nanoparticles molecularly imprinted polymer for efficient separation and enrichment of perfluorooctane sulfonate

Abstract

As a persistent organic pollutant, perfluorooctane sulfonate has drawn a worldwide attention. In this contribution, a novel molecularly imprinted polymer based on mesoporous silica nanoparticles was prepared for efficient separation and enrichment of perfluorooctane sulfonate in water samples. The polymer was characterized by transmission electron microscopy, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, X‐ray diffraction, and N2 adsorption/desorption experiments. The static adsorption experiments and the adsorption kinetic tests were conducted. The results showed that the adsorbents had high adsorption capacity (21.10 mg/g) and short adsorption equilibration time (25 min). Meanwhile, the effect of mesoporous silica nanoparticles on the adsorption capacity was investigated. The results indicated that the mesoporous structure helped to increase the adsorption capacity of adsorbent to adsorbate. Besides, the adsorbents show good specificity and good reusability with the adsorption capacity of adsorbent toward perfluorooctane sulfonate decreasing <5% after five adsorption–desorption cycles. The mesoporous silica nanoparticles molecularly imprinted polymer has been used successfully for the removal of perfluorooctane sulfonate in environmental water samples with relative standard deviation ≤4.64%.

How to develop molecularly imprinted mesoporous silica for selective recognition of analytes in pharmaceutical, environmental, and food samples

“…The grafting method has many advantages: the mesoporous silica has a high surface area and uniform pore size, the sites are more accessible, there is faster mass transfer, there is easier elution template, and there is faster binding kinetics 33 . The disadvantages are the complicated chemical procedures, low grafting densities (which decreases the molecular imprinting reproducibility), and the possibility of sacrificing the size and shape of the cavity that reduced the specific binding site and adsorption capacity 30,32 …”

“…Several methods to synthesize MIP‐MS have been developed, such as grafting, 32 direct incorporation, 33 mesoporous core‐solid shell, 34 solid core‐mesoporous shell, 35,36 hollow imprinted mesoporous silica, 37 and dummy molecular imprinting 31 . The application of imprinted mesoporous silica has been developed in a variety of areas.…”

Sample Preparation Using Molecularly Imprinted Polymers

“…Another application field is the monitoring of toxins or natural hormones in waters, 94 food 117,168,182 and biological fluids. 181 At last, recent works reported the use of dSPE-MIP for the extraction of pesticides from waters, 160,167 soil, 167 and food extracts, 144,162,185 and of industrial pollutants from waters, 31,33,37,47,158,166,179,183,186 food, 34,68,96,98,180,183 or samples collected in an industrial bioreactor. 53 Another objective of sample purification using MIP is the removal of a class of compounds that interfere with the analysis of the target analytes.…”

Determination of perfluorinated and polyfluorinated alkyl substances in drinking water samples using automated solid phase extraction and liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry

“…Higher recoveries of short chain PFAS were obtained with WAX than those using RP sorbent. Novel SPE sorbents such as hexadecyldimethyl amine functionalized magnetic nanoparticles and magnetic molecularly imprinted polymer-based templates have been successfully applied in the real water sample PFAS preconcentration and determination [11][12][13][14]. Most separation methods from various reports were based on LC-ESI-MS or LC-ESI-MS/MS.…”

“…Most separation methods from various reports were based on LC-ESI-MS or LC-ESI-MS/MS. The limit of quantitation for the target PFAS in environmental water was reported in the range of 0.005-8 ng/L for target analytes [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22]. Direct LC-MS/MS determination of PFAS with minimal sample preparation were also reported; however, those methods did not offer sufficient analytical sensitivity to the target PFAS analytes [20,23].…”