4.7 Article

Determination of 236U in environmental samples by single extraction chromatography coupled to triple-quadrupole inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry

期刊

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 944, 期 -, 页码 44-50

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2016.09.033

关键词

U-236 activity; U-236/U-238; Triple-quadrupole inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry; Soil; Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident

资金

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [24110004, 24310002, 16K12592]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21407149, 11435002]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16K12592, 26340019, 24110004] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In order to measure trace U-236 and U-236/U-238 in environmental samples with a high matrix effect, a novel and simple method was developed that makes the digestion and purification procedures compatible with advanced triple-quadrupole inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. A total dissolution of sample with HF + HNO3 + HClO4 was followed by chromatographic separation with a single resin column containing normal type DGA resin (N, N, N', N'-tetra-n-octyldiglycolamide) as the extractant system. The analytical accuracy and precision of U-236/U-238 ratios, measured as (UO+)-U-236-O-16/(UO+)-U-238-O-16, were examined by using the reference materials IAEA-135, IAEA-385, IAEA-447, and JSAC 0471. The low method detection limit (3.50 x 10(-6) Bq kg(-1)) makes it possible to perform routine monitoring of environmental U-236 due to global fallout combined with the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident fallout (> 10(-5) Bq kg(-1)). Finally, the developed method was successfully applied to measure U-236/U-238 ratios and U-236 activities in soil samples contaminated by the accident. The low U-236/U-238 atom ratios ((1.50 -13.5) x 10(-8)) and U-236 activities ((2.25-14.1) x 10(-2) mBq kg(-1)) indicate U-236 contamination was mainly derived from global fallout in the examined samples. (C) 2016 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