4.5 Article

Combining stir-bar sorptive extraction and large volume injection-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry for the determination of benzotriazole UV stabilizers in wastewater matrices

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
卷 35, 期 3, 页码 459-467

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.201100448

关键词

Benzotriazoles; Large volume injection-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (LVI-GC-MS); Stir-bar sorptive extraction (SBSE); UV stabilizers; Wastewater matrices

资金

  1. Spanish Government, Xunta de Galicia
  2. E. U. [CTQ2009-08377, PGIDIT08MDS008CT]
  3. FPU
  4. Isidro Parga Pondal

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stir-bar sorptive extraction and liquid desorption followed by large volume injection-gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry under selected ion monitoring mode acquisition (SBSE-LD/LVI-GC-MS(SIM)) was applied for the determination of six benzotriazole UV stabilizers (Tinuvin P, Allyl-bzt, Tinuvin 320, Tinuvin 326, Tinuvin 327 and Tinuvin 328) in wastewater matrices. Parameters affecting the performance of extraction and desorption steps were thoroughly evaluated using uni- and multivariate optimization strategies, based on the use of experimental factorial designs. Assays performed with stir bars, coated with 24 mu L of polydimethylsiloxane, on 25 mL of ultra-pure water samples spiked at the 0.5 ng/mL level, yielded recoveries ranging from 47.9 +/- 1.4% (Tinuvin P) to 103.1 +/- 3.6% (Tinuvin 326), under optimized experimental conditions. When applied to complex matrices (e.g. wastewater), the methodology showed also excellent linear dynamic ranges (0.0210.00ng/mL) for the six benzotriazole UV stabilizers studied with correlation coefficients higher than 0.9970, limits of quantification in between 0.004 and 0.015ng/mL, suitable repeatability (RSD<12.7%) and reproducibility (RSD<4.5%). The application of the proposed methodology to urban sewage waters from Spain and Portugal wastewater plants revealed the presence of low contents of some benzotriazole UV stabilizers.

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