4.5 Article

Preparation, characterization and application of a new stir bar sorptive extraction based on poly(vinylphthalimide-co-N,N'-methylenebisacrylamide) monolith

Journal

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
Volume 34, Issue 23, Pages 3418-3425

Publisher

WILEY PERIODICALS, INC
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.201100682

Keywords

HPLC; DAD; Mebendazole; Monolithic material; Oxfendazole; Poly(vinylphthalimide-co-N; N'-methylenebisacrylamide); Stir bar sorptive extraction

Funding

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [21077085]
  2. Nature Science Foundation of Fujian Province of China [2010J01047]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [CXB2011037]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, a new stir bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) coating based on poly(vinylphthalimide-co-N,N'-methylenebisacrylamide) monolith (SBSE-VPMB) was prepared. The influences of the contents of monomer in polymerization mixture and the percentage of porogen solvent on the extraction performance were investigated thoroughly. Several characteristic techniques, such as elemental analysis, scanning electron microscopy, mercury intrusion porosimetry and infrared spectroscopy, were used to characterize the monolithic material. The analysis of oxfendazole (OFZ) and mebendazole (MBZ) in milk and honey samples by the combination of SBSE with HPLC with diode array detection was selected as paradigms for the practical evaluation of the new coating. Under the optimized extraction conditions, the limits of detection (S/N=3) for OFZ and MBZ were 0.230.60 mu g/L in milk and 0.241.08 mu g/L in honey, respectively. The method also showed good linearity, repeatability, high feasibility and acceptable recoveries for real samples. At the same time, the extraction performance and the distribution coefficients (KVPMB/W) of OFZ and MBZ on SBSE-VPMB were compared with other SBSEs based on porous monoliths and commercial SBSE.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available