4.6 Article

Magnetic polydopamine modified with deep eutectic solvent for the magnetic solid-phase extraction of sulfonylurea herbicides in water samples

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
Volume 1601, Issue -, Pages 53-59

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2019.05.011

Keywords

Magnetic solid-phase extraction; Sulfonylurea herbicides; Deep eutectic solvent; Magnetic polydopamine; Aqueous samples

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFD020030803]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21507032]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A novel magnetic solid-phase extraction (MSPE) technique coupled with ultra performance liquid chromatography (UPLC) has been developed for the determination of four sulfonylurea herbicides (sulfosulfuron, bensulfuron-methyl, pyrazosulfuron-ethyl and halosulfuron-methyl) in aqueous samples. The key point of this method was the application of a novel magnetic nanomaterial (Fe3O4 @ PDA-DES). The functional groups, morphology, and magnetic properties of this magnetic nanomaterial were investigated through fourier transformed infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), vibrating sample magnetometer (VSM), and X-ray diffraction (XRD) respectively. The main factors which could affect the experiment results were optimized. Under the optimum conditions, the linearity of this method ranged from 5.0-200 mu g L-1 for all analytes, with correlation coefficients (r) >= 0.9901. The enrichment factors were between 495 and 630, and the relative standard deviations (RSDs) were less than 3.6%. The limits of detections (LODs) varied from 0.0098 to 0.0110 mu g L-1. In the final experiment, the developed method has been successfully applied to the determination of sulfonylurea herbicides in environment and drinking water samples, and the obtained recoveries were between 61.3% and 108.6%. (C) 2019 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