4.6 Article

Selective extraction of emerging contaminants from water samples by dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction using functionalized ionic liquids

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
Volume 1218, Issue 12, Pages 1556-1566

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2011.01.035

Keywords

Functionalized ionic liquid; Dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction; Emerging contaminants; High performance liquid chromatography; Tris(pentafluoroethyl)trifluorophosphate anion

Funding

  1. Division of Chemistry, National Science Foundation [CHE-0748612]
  2. Chemical, Environmental, Bioengineering, and Transport Systems Division from the National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Functionalized ionic liquids containing the tris(pentafluoroethyl)trifluorophosphate (FAP) anion were used as extraction solvents in dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME) for the extraction of 14 emerging contaminants from water samples. The extraction efficiencies and selectivities were compared to those of an in situ IL DLLME method which uses an in situ metathesis reaction to exchange 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium chloride (BMIM-Cl) to 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium bis[(trifiuoromethyl)sulfonyl]imide (BMIM-NTf2). Compounds containing tertiary amine functionality were extracted with high selectivity and sensitivity by the 1-(6-amino-hexyl)-1-methylpyrrolidinium tris(pentafluoroethyl)trifluorophosphate (HNH2MPL-FAP) IL compared to other FAP-based ILs and the BMIM-NTf2 IL On the other hand, polar or acidic compounds without amine groups exhibited higher enrichment factors using the BMIM-NTf2 IL The detection limits for the studied analytes varied from 0.1 to 55.1 mu g/L using the traditional IL DLLME method with the HNH2MPL-FAP IL as extraction solvent, and from 0.1 to 55.8 mu g/L using in situ IL DLLME method with BMIM-CI + LiNTf2 as extraction solvent. A 93-fold decrease in the detection limit of caffeine was observed when using the HNH2MPL-FAP IL compared to that obtained using in situ IL DLLME method. Real water samples including tap water and creek water were analyzed with both IL DLLME methods and yielded recoveries ranging from 91% to 110%. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available