Journal
CHROMATOGRAPHIA
Volume 75, Issue 3-4, Pages 131-137Publisher
SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10337-011-2177-1
Keywords
Column liquid chromatography; Organic solvent dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction; Ionic liquid dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction; Coumarins; Radix Angelicae Dahuricae
Funding
- National Nature Science Foundation of China [81041084]
- Nature Science Foundation of Shanxi Province [2011011035-2]
- Program for the Top Science and Technology Innovation Teams of Higher Learning Institutions of Shanxi Province, China
- Innovation Foundation of Shanxi Medical University, China
Ask authors/readers for more resources
In this paper, two methods, organic solvent dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (OS-DLLME) and ionic liquid dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (IL-DLLME), coupled with high-performance liquid chromatography have been critically compared and introduced for the analysis of the eight coumarin compounds (psoralen, isopsoralen, bergapten, isobergapten, oxypeucedanin, imperatorin, osthole, and isoimperatorin) in Radix Angelicae Dahuricae samples. Experimental conditions have been investigated for both OS-DLLME and IL-DLLME. Under optimal conditions, the detection limits of the eight coumarin compounds obtained by OS-DLLME and IL-DLLME ranged between 0.002-0.026 ng mL(-1) and 0.013-0.66 ng mL(-1), respectively. The relative standard deviations (RSDs, n = 9) were lower than 8.7 and 8.4% with enrichment factors in the range of 145-380 and 130-230 folds for OS-DLLME and IL-DLLME, respectively. The results showed that there were no significant deviations between the two DLLME methods for the determination of the eight coumarin compounds. Both methods were simple, fast, efficient, and inexpensive. However, compared with IL-DLLME, the OS-DLLME technique exhibited a higher extraction capacity for the eight target analytes.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available