4.7 Article

Field-based application of developed solid phase extraction with inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry for vanadium speciation analysis of groundwaters from Argentina

期刊

TALANTA
卷 165, 期 -, 页码 391-397

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2016.12.078

关键词

Vanadium; Speciation; SPE; ICP-MS; Groundwater; Argentina

资金

  1. Ministry of Manpower, Sultanate of Oman [CAS-E4G1LJ2C18P0L8]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

High levels of vanadium have been reported in groundwater ( < 0.05-5300 mu g L-1 V) from different parts of Argentina, yet no detailed study of vanadium speciation has been performed. A highly selective strong anion exchange - solid phase extraction (SAX-SPE) method was used (in -situ) for vanadium speciation analysis of groundwater samples from La Pampa - LP (General San Martin and Eduardo Castex) and Buenos Aires - BA (San German) provinces in Argentina. In this method both vanadyl (V-Iv) and vanadate (V-v) were trapped by the complexation with disodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid on a pre-conditioned SAX cartridge. In the laboratory, vanadium species were separated at different eluent pH levels. V-IV was eluted at pH 4 using methanol and tetrabutylammonium hydroxide. V-v was eluted at pH 8 using dihydrogen ammonium phosphate. The eluted species were analysed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). This method was validated using an inter-analytical method comparison with HPLC-ICP-MS. A Paired t -test revealed that there was no significant difference (probability, P < 0.05) between the two methods. V-v was found to be predominate species in both sample collection areas (LP: 69 - 100%, BA: 33 - 89% of species) over the range of 158.0 - 4748.0 mu g L-1 in LP and 88.5 - 504.0 mu g L-1 in BA. Vlv was found at higher levels (29.0-301.0 mu g L-1) in Buenos Aires compared to General San Martin groundwater (4.4 - 161.0 mu g L-1). The results enhance the potential knowledge of the speciation of vanadium in terms of water quality and human health.

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