2011
DOI: 10.1271/bbb.100668
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Selective Solid-Phase Extraction Using Molecularly Imprinted Polymer for Analysis of Methamidophos in Water and Soil Samples

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The limit of detection was 3.8 ng/g. The recovery of methamidophos extracted from 100 mL tap and river water at 1 ng/mL spike level was 96.1% and 95.8%, and the limits of detection were 10 and 13 ng/L respectively Shen et al, 2011).…”
Section: Determination Of Acephate and Methamidophos In Soils And Watersmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…The limit of detection was 3.8 ng/g. The recovery of methamidophos extracted from 100 mL tap and river water at 1 ng/mL spike level was 96.1% and 95.8%, and the limits of detection were 10 and 13 ng/L respectively Shen et al, 2011).…”
Section: Determination Of Acephate and Methamidophos In Soils And Watersmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…As mentioned by some authors, the selection of the monomer(s) and the template/monomer(s) ratio can be carried out by studying the changes in UV spectra of the template when adding increasing concentration of the monomer in the solvent selected for the synthesis [67,69,77]. Other spectroscopic methods were used such as NMR to highlight the presence of hydrogen bonds between the template and MAA [39,67,69,72,73] and FT-IR to highlight the interactions between OPP and OH-group of MAA [39,46,55,61,70,76,80,91,97,98,102]. This method was also used to control the template removal by comparing MIP spectrum before and after its washing [64,93,99], this control being most of the time ensured by analyzing the template amount in the washing solution by UV detection or by chromatographic analysis.…”
Section: Synthesis Of Mipsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In these cases, the solvent used is very close or similar to the solvent used for the synthesis of the polymers to favor the same interactions as those developed during the polymerization step to create the cavities. The adsorption isotherm resulting from these binding experiments also allows, by using different models (Langmuir, Freundlich, Langmuir-Freundlich), the number of binding sites and their affinity towards the template molecules [80,93] and, in some cases, towards structural analogs to being defined [55,60,64,69,70,76,79,82,86,90,99]. Binding experiments were also carried out in a pure solvent, very similar to the nature of the sample matrix, such as aqueous buffer or pure water or acetonitrile for the further analysis of OPPs in aqueous or acetonitrile vegetable extracts, respectively [50,51,76,80,93,99].…”
Section: Mip Characterizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The development of MIPs for the extraction of OPs has been largely reported these last years. MIPs were prepared as particles to be used in cartridges between two frits as SPE sorbent [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] or as dispersive sorbent for dSPE [27][28][29][30][31] and for matrix solid-phase dispersion (MSPD) [32][33][34] or as a thin film in solid-phase microextraction (SPME) [35][36][37] or in stir bar sorption extraction (SBSE) [38]. They were applied to the selective extraction of OPs from vegetable extracts (cucumber, lettuce, apple, pear…) and environmental samples such as waters and soil extracts.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%