4.2 Article

Sustainable Eco-Friendly Ultra-High-Performance Liquid Chromatographic Method for Simultaneous Determination of Caffeine and Theobromine in Commercial Teas: Evaluation of Greenness Profile Using NEMI and Eco-Scale Assessment Tools

期刊

JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL
卷 101, 期 6, 页码 1781-1787

出版社

AOAC INT
DOI: 10.5740/jaoacint.18-0084

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Green analytical chemistry (GAC) aims to eliminate or minimize the amount of hazardous solvents consumed and generated daily worldwide. Considering the environmental impact of all analytical procedures and replacing the polluting methodologies with clean ones is of a paramount interest. Objective: This work aims to develop and validate a sustainable, fast, and economic ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography method for simultaneous determination of methylxanthines in commercial tea samples as well as to evaluate the greenness profile of the proposed method using two greenness assessment tools: National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) and analytical Eco-scale. Methods: The method was designed based on applying GAC principles in method development. The green chromatography approach was applied by using benign mobile phases. The chromatographic separation was optimized to minimize sample preparation, achieve short analysis time with low solvent consumption, and minimize waste generation. Results: All the studied analytes were separated in only 1.7 min. The detection limits of the studied analytes ranged from 0.015 to 0.03 mg/L, while LOQs were in the range of 0.05 to 0.1 mu g/L with UV detection. The proposed method neither uses nor generates harmful chemicals, it passes the four quadrants of the NEMI greenness profile, and it has a high Eco-scale score. Conclusions: Compared with the reported methods, the proposed method is greener, more economical, and faster; therefore, it can be used as a green alternative to the existing conventional methods for routine analysis of the studied analytes without harming the environment.

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

4.2
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