4.7 Article

Preparation and characterization of magnetic nanoparticles for the on-line determination of gold, palladium, and platinum in mine samples based on flow injection micro-column preconcentration coupled with graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry

期刊

TALANTA
卷 118, 期 -, 页码 231-237

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2013.10.018

关键词

Crown ether-functionalized magnetic nanoparticles; Flow injection; Preconcentration; Graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrophotometry; Precious metals

资金

  1. State Key Laboratory of Inorganic Synthesis and Preparative Chemistry, College of Chemistry, Jilin University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A simple and highly selective procedure for on-line determination of trace levels of Au, Pd, and Pt in mine samples has been developed using flow injection-column adsorption preconcentration coupled with graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrophotometry (FI-column-GFAAS). The precious metals were adsorbed on the as-synthesized magnetic nanoparticles functionalized with 4'-aminobenzo-15-crown-5-ether packed into a micro-column and then eluted with 2% thiourea+0.1 mol L-1 HCl solution prior to the determination by GFAAS. The properties of the magnetic adsorbents were investigated by scanning electron microscope (SEM), X-ray diffraction (XRD), and vibrating sample magnetometer (VSM). Various experimental parameters affecting the preconcentration of Au, Pd, and Pt were investigated and optimized. Under the optimal experimental conditions, the detection limits of the developed technique were 0.16 ng mL(-1) for Au, 0.28 ng mL(-1) for Pd, and 1.01 ng mL(-1) for Pt, with enrichment factors of 24.3, 13.9, and 17.8, respectively. Precisions, evaluated as repeatability of results, were 1.1%, 3.9%, and 4.4% respectively for Au, Pd, and Pt. The developed method was validated by the analysis of Au, Pd, and Pt in certified reference materials and mine samples with satisfactory results. (C) 2013 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