4.5 Article

The use of graphene-based magnetic nanoparticles as adsorbent for the extraction of triazole fungicides from environmental water

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
卷 35, 期 17, 页码 2266-2272

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.201200285

关键词

Determination; Graphene magnetic nanocomposite; High-performance liquid chromatography; Triazole fungicides

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31171698]
  2. Hebei Province Science and Technology Support Program [12396908D]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A graphene-based magnetic nanocomposite (graphene-ferriferrous oxide; G-Fe3O4) was synthesized and used as an effective adsorbent for the preconcentration of some triazole fungicides (myclobutanil, tebuconazole, and hexaconazole) in environmental water samples prior to high-performance liquid chromatography-ultraviolet detection. The method, which takes the advantages of both nanoparticle adsorption and magnetic phase separation from the sample solution, could avoid the time-consuming experimental procedures commonly involved in the traditional solid phase extraction such as centrifugation and filtrations. Various experimental parameters affecting the extraction efficiencies such as the amount of the magnetic nanocomposite, extraction time, the pH values of the sample solution, salt concentration, and desorption conditions were investigated. Under the optimum conditions, the enrichment factors of the method for the three analytes were 5824, 3600, and 4761, respectively. A good linearity was observed in the range of 0.150 ng/mL for tebuconazole and 0.0550 ng/mL for myclobutanil and hexaconazole, respectively, with the correlation coefficients ranging from 0.9992 to 0.9996. The limits of detection (S/N = 3) of the method were between 0.005 and 0.01 ng/mL. The results indicated that as a magnetic solid-phase extraction adsorbent, the graphene-ferriferrous oxide (G-Fe3O4) has a great potential for the preconcentration of some compounds from liquid 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