4.6 Article

Rapid Monitoring of Organochlorine Pesticide Residues in Various Fruit Juices and Water Samples Using Fabric Phase Sorptive Extraction and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 24, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules24061013

关键词

fabric phase sorptive extraction; gas chromatography-mass spectrometry; organochlorine pesticides; sample preparation

资金

  1. University Grant Commission (UGC), New Delhi

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fabric phase sorptive extraction, an innovative integration of solid phase extraction and solid phase microextraction principles, has been combined with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry for the rapid extraction and determination of nineteen organochlorine pesticides in various fruit juices and water samples. FPSE consolidates the advanced features of sol-gel derived extraction sorbents with the rich surface chemistry of cellulose fabric substrate, which could extract the target analytes directly from the complex sample matrices, substantially simplifying the sample preparation operation. Important FPSE parameters, including sorbent chemistry, extraction time, stirring speed, type and volume of back-extraction solvent, and back-extraction time have been optimized. Calibration curves were obtained in a concentration range of 0.1-500 ng/mL. Under optimum conditions, limits of detection were obtained in a range of 0.007-0.032 ng/mL with satisfactory precision (RSD < 6%). The relative recoveries obtained by spiking organochlorine pesticides in water and selected juice samples were in the range of 91.56-99.83%. The sorbent sol-gel poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(propylene glycol)-poly(ethylene glycol) was applied for the extraction and preconcentration of organochlorine pesticides in aqueous and fruit juice samples prior to analysis with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. The results demonstrated that the present method is simple, rapid, and precise for the determination of organochlorine pesticides in aqueous samples.

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

4.6
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