Ranking and similarity of conventional, microwave and ultrasound element sequential extraction methods

Abstract

This study aims to compare three extraction techniques of four sequential element extraction steps from soil and sediment samples that were taken from the location of the Pančevo petrochemical industry (Serbia). Elements were extracted using three different techniques: conventional, microwave and ultrasound extraction. A novel procedure - sum of the ranking differences (SRD) - was able to rank the techniques and elements, to see whether this method is a suitable tool to reveal the similarities and dissimilarities in element extraction techniques, provided that a proper ranking reference is available. The concentrations of the following elements Al, Ba, Ca, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Ni, Pb, Si, Sn, Sr, V and Zn were determined through ICP OES. The different efficiencies and recovery values of element concentrations using each of the three extraction techniques were examined by the CRM BCR-701. By using SRD, we obtained a better separation between the different extraction techniques and steps when we rank their differences among the samples while lower separation was obtained according to analysed elements. Appling this method for ordering the elements could be useful for three purposes: (i) to find possible associations among the elements; (ii) to find possible elements that have outlier concentrations or (iii) detect differences in geochemical origin or behaviour of elements. Cross-validation of the SRD values in combination with cluster and principal component analysis revealed the same groups of extraction steps and techniques.

A Comparison of Conventional and Ultrasound-Assisted BCR Sequential Extraction Methods for the Fractionation of Heavy Metals in Sewage Sludge of Different Characteristics

“…However, taking into account the number of scientific papers referencing the use of ultrasound waves in the process of the sequential extraction of heavy metals from soils or sediments [ 19 , 23 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ], there are still only a few studies that concern sewage sludge [ 5 , 18 , 24 , 25 , 26 ]. Therefore, we decided to undertake research in this direction.…”