4.7 Article

Determination of triclosan and triclocarban in environmental water samples with ionic liquid/ionic liquid dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction prior to HPLC-ESI-MS/MS

期刊

MICROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 174, 期 1-2, 页码 145-151

出版社

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00604-011-0607-2

关键词

Triclosan; Triclocarban; Water samples; Ionic liquid/ionic liquid dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction; High-performance liquid chromatography-electrospray tandem mass spectrometry

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21077069, 21007035]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province [ZR2010BL029]
  3. State Key Laboratory of Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Science [KF2010-25]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A hydrophobic ionic liquid was finely dispersed in aqueous solution along with a hydrophilic ionic liquid. Following centrifugation, the two phases aggregate to form relatively large droplets. Based on this phenomenon, a method termed ionic liquid/ionic liquid dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction was developed. It was applied to the enrichment of triclosan (TCS) and triclocarban (TCC) from water samples prior to HPLC with electrospray tandem MS detection. The type and volume of the hydrophobic ionic liquid (the extraction solvent) and the hydrophilic ionic liquid (the disperser solvent), salt content, and extraction time were optimized. Under optimum conditions, the method gives a linear response in the concentration ranges from 0.5 to 100 mu g L(-1) for TCC and from 2.5 to 500 mu g L(-1) for TCS, respectively. The limits of detection are 0.23 and 0.35 mu g L(-1), and the repeatability is 5.4 and 6.4% for TCC and TCS, respectively. The method was validated with four environmental water samples, and average recoveries of spiked samples were in the range from 88% to 111%. The results indicate that the method is a promising new approach for the rapid enrichment and determination of organic pollutants.

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

4.7
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