4.5 Article

Development and validation of stir bar sorptive extraction of polar phenols in water followed by HPLC separation in poly(vinylpyrrolididone-divinylbenzene) monolith

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
卷 32, 期 9, 页码 1407-1414

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.200800708

关键词

HPLC/DAD; Monolithic material; Phenols; Poly(vinylpyrrolididone-divinylbenzene); Stir bar sorptive extraction

资金

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [20805039]
  2. Youth Talent Foundation of Fujian Province [2006F3117]
  3. Innovation Foundation of Xiamen University [XDKJCX20063007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An effective and simple method for polar phenols in water matrix was developed by using stir bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) based on a hydrophilic poly(vinylpyrrolididone-divinylbenzene) (VPDB) monolithic material and HPLC analysis. To achieve optimum extraction performance for phenols, several parameters, including extraction and desorption time, desorption solvent, pH value, and ionic strength of sample matrix, were investigated. Under the optimized experimental conditions, eight phenols were directly enriched from water samples and analyzed by HPLC-DAD. The detection limits (S/N = 3) and quantification limits (S/N = 10) of the proposed method for the target compounds were achieved within the range of 0.72-1.37 and 2.40-4.27 ng/mL from spiked water, respectively. Recoveries of eight phenolic compounds were found in the range of 55.2-95.9%. The calibration curves showed the linearity ranging from 5 to 150 ng/mL with linear regression coefficient R-2 values above 0.98. Method repeatability presented as intra- and interday precisions were also found with the RSDs less than 4.10 and 7.61%, respectively. The distribution coefficients between VPDB and water (K-VPDB/W) for phenolic compounds were also calculated and compared with K-O/W. Finally, the proposed method was successfully applied to the determination of the target compounds in tap water, sea water and wastewater samples.

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