4.8 Article

Proposed Guidelines for Solid Phase Extraction of Suwannee River Dissolved Organic Matter

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 88, 期 13, 页码 6680-6688

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.5b04501

关键词

-

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council (CSC)
  2. International Humic Substances Society (IHSS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes improved guidelines for dissolved organic matter (DOM) isolation by solid phase extraction (SPE) with a styrene-divinylbenzene copolymer (PPL) sorbent, which has become an established method for the isolation of DOM from natural waters, because of its ease of application and appreciable carbon recovery. Suwannee River water was selected to systematically study the effects of critical SPE variables such as loading mass, concentration, flow rate, and up-scaling on the extraction selectivity of the PPL sorbent. High-field Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry (FTICR MS) and proton nuclear magnetic resonance (H-1 NMR) spectroscopy were performed to interpret the DOM chemical space of eluates, as well as permeates and-wash liquids with molecular resolution. Up to 89% dissolved organic carbon (DOC) recovery was obtained with a DOC/PPL mass ratio of 1:800 at a DOC concentration of 20 mg/L. With the 0 application of larger loading volumes, low proportions of highly oxygenated compounds were retained on the PPL sorbent. The effects of the flow rate on the extraction selectivity of the sorbent were marginal. Up-scaling had a limited effect on the extraction selectivity with the exception of increased self-esterification with a methanol solvent, resulting in methyl ester groups. Furthermore, the SPE/PPL extract exhibited highly authentic characteristics in comparison with original water and reverse osmosis samples. These findings will be useful for reproducibly isolating DOM with representative molecular compositions from various sources and concentrations and minimizing potential inconsistencies among interlaboratory comparative studies.

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

4.8
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