4.7 Article

Chemometric assisted ultrasound leaching-solid phase extraction followed by dispersive-solidification liquid-liquid microextraction for determination of organophosphorus pesticides in soil samples

期刊

TALANTA
卷 137, 期 -, 页码 167-173

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2015.01.031

关键词

Dispersive-solidification liquid-liquid microextraction; Solid phase extraction; Soil samples; Organophosphorus pesticides; Chemometric tools

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ultrasound leaching-solid phase extraction (USL-SPE) followed by dispersive-solidification liquid-liquid microextraction (DSLLME) was developed for preconcentration and determination of organophosphorus pesticides (OPPs) in soil samples prior gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis. At first, OPPs were ultrasonically leached from soil samples by using methanol. After centrifugation, the separated methanol was diluted to 50 mL with double-distillated water and passed through the C-18 SPE cartridge. OPPs were eluted with 1 mL acetonitrile. Thus, 1 mL acetonitrile extract (disperser solvent) and 10 mu l 1-undecanol (extraction solvent) were added to 5 mL double-distilled water and a DSLLME technique was applied. The variables of interest in the USL-SPE-DSLLME method were optimized with the aid of chemometric approaches. First, in screening experiments, fractional factorial design (FFD) was used for selecting the variables which significantly affected the extraction procedure. Afterwards, the significant variables were optimized using response surface methodology (RSM) based on central composite design (CCD). Under the optimum conditions, the enrichment factors were 6890-8830. The linear range was 0.025-625 ng g(-1) and limits of detection (LODs) were between 0.012 and 0.2 ng g(-1). The relative standard deviations (RSDs) were in the range of 4.06-8.9% (n=6). The relative recoveries of OPPs from different soil samples were 85-98%. (C) 2015 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

4.7
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