4.5 Article

Single-walled carbon nanotubes as an effective adsorbent in solid-phase microextraction of low level methyl tert-butyl ether, ethyl tert-butyl ether and methyl tert-amyl ether from human urine

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2009.04.002

关键词

Fiber coating for SPME; Methyl tert-butyl ether; Ethyl tert-butyl ether; tert-Amyl methyl ether; Single-walled carbon nanotubes; Solid-phase microextraction; GC-MS

资金

  1. Tehran University of Medical Sciences and Health Services [86-03-46-6038]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are a kind of new carbon-based nano-materials which have drawn great attention in many application fields. The potential single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) as solid-phase microextraction (SPME) adsorbents for the preconcentration of environmental pollutants have been investigated in recent years. The goal of this work was to investigate the feasibility of SWCNTs used as adsorbents for solid-phase microextraction of methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE) and tert-amyl methyl ether (TAME) in human urine. SWCNTs were attached onto a stainless steel wire through organic binder. Potential factors affecting the extraction efficiency were optimized, including extraction time, extraction temperature, desorption time, desorption temperature, and salinity. The developed method showed good performance according to the ICH performance criteria for bioanalytical methods. The calibration curves of the ethers were linear (r(2) >= 0.992) in the range from 10 to 5000 ng L-1. The limits of detection at a signal-to-noise (SIN) ratio of 3 were 10 mg L-1 for all the analytes. In addition, compared with the commercial carboxen/polydimethylsiloxane (CAR/PDMS) fiber, the SWCNT fiber showed better thermal stability (over 350 degrees C) and longer life span (over 150 times). The developed method was applied successfully to determine trace level of the ethers in urine of 10 healthy male volunteers. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据