4.7 Article

Application of dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction for the analysis of triazophos and carbaryl pesticides in water and fruit juice samples

Journal

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
Volume 632, Issue 2, Pages 289-295

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2008.11.020

Keywords

Dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction; Organophosphate; Carbamate; Fruit juice; Water analysis

Funding

  1. Initial Foundation of Wenzhou Medical College [QTJ08002]
  2. Analyzing and Testing Foundation of Zhejiang Province [2008F70062]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this work, a simple, rapid and sensitive sample pretreatment technique, dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME) coupled with high performance liquid chromatography-fluorescence detection (HPLC-FLD). has been developed to determine carbamate (carbaryl) and organophosphorus (triazophos) pesticide residues in water and fruit juice samples. Parameters, affecting the DLLME performance such as the kind and volume of extraction and dispersive solvents, extraction time and salt concentration, were studied and optimized. Under the Optimum extraction conditions (extraction solvent: tetrachloroethane, 15.0 mu L; dispersive solvent: acetonitrile, 1.0mL: no addition of salt and extraction time below 5s), the performance of the proposed method was evaluated. The enrichment factors for the carbaryl and triazophos were 87.3 and 275.6, respectively. The linearity was obtained in the concentration range of 0.1-1000 ng mL(-1) with correlation coefficients from 0.9991 to 0.9999. The limits of detection (LODs), based on signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) of 3, ranged from 12.3 to 16.0 pg mL(-1). The relative standard deviations (RSDs, for 10 ng mL(-1) of carbaryl and 20 ng mL(-1) of triazophos) varied from 1.38% to 2.74% (n=6). The environmental water(at the fortified level of 1.0 ng mL(-1))and fruit juice samples (at the fortified level of 1.0 and 5.0 ng mL-1) were successfully analyzed by the proposed method, and the relative recoveries of them were in the range of 80.4-114.2%, 89.8-117.9% and 86.3-105.3%, respectively. (C) 2008 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available