4.5 Article

Magnetic metal-organic framework MIL-100(Fe) microspheres for the magnetic solid-phase extraction of trace polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from water samples

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
卷 39, 期 12, 页码 2356-2364

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.201600100

关键词

Fluorescence detection; Liquid chromatography; Magnetic solid-phase extraction; Metal-organic frameworks; Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21265004, 21465008]
  2. Opening Fund of Key Laboratory of Aquatic Product Processing from Ministry of Agriculture of China [NYJG201504]
  3. Natural Science Foundation from Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region [2014GXNSFAA118063, 2015GXNSFAA139024, 2015GXNSFFA139005]
  4. project of high level innovation team and outstanding scholar in Guangxi colleges and universities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this work, a magnetic metal-organic framework designated as MIL-100(Fe) was prepared and applied as a magnetic solid-phase extraction sorbent for the determination of trace polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in environmental water samples by coupling with high-performance liquid chromatography and fluorescence detection. The magnetic microspheres exhibited large surface areas and high extraction ability, making them excellent candidates as sorbents for enrichment of trace polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Under the optimized experimental conditions, good sensitivity levels were achieved with low detection limits ranging from 32 to 2110 pg/mL and good linearities with correlation coefficients higher than 0.9990 for the investigated 13 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. The proposed method has been validated in the analysis of real water samples with mean recoveries in the range of 81.4-126.9% at four spiked levels and the relative standard deviations in the range of 1.3-17.0%. The magnetic MIL-100(Fe) microspheres were stable enough for 150 extractions without a significant loss of extraction performance.

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

4.5
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