4.7 Article

Synthetic approaches to parabens molecularly imprinted polymers and their applications to the solid-phase extraction of river water samples

期刊

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 677, 期 1, 页码 72-78

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2010.07.021

关键词

Molecularly imprinted polymer; Parabens; Precipitation polymerisation; Semi-covalent approach; Sacrificial spacer

资金

  1. Ministry of Education and Science [CTM2008-06847-C02-01, CTQ2008-0825]
  2. Departament d'Innovacio, Universitat i Empresa de la Generalitat de Catalunya
  3. Fons Social Europeu [2007FLB 01357]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper we describe the synthesis, characterisation and use of two distinct molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) prepared using esters of p-hydroxybenzoic acid (parabens) as templates: one MIP was synthesised by precipitation polymerisation using a semi-covalent molecularly imprinting strategy with methyl paraben as the template/target (MIP 1); the second MIP was prepared in monolithic form through a conventional non-covalent molecular imprinting strategy, with butyl paraben as the template (MIP 2). MIP 1 recognized methyl paraben, showed cross-selectivity for other parabens analytes used in the study and higher affinity towards these compounds than did a non-imprinted control polymer. Similarly, MIP 2 demonstrated higher affinity towards paraben analytes than a non-imprinted control polymer. For the analysis of environmental water samples, a solid-phase extraction (SPE) protocol was developed using MIP 2 as sorbent, and results were compared to a SPE using a commercial sorbent (Oasis HLB). With MIP 2 as sorbent and butyl paraben as target, when percolating 500 mL of river water spiked at 1 mu g L-1 through the SPE cartridge, and using 1 mL of isopropanol as cleaning solvent, a higher recovery of butyl 4-hydroxybenzoate (butyl paraben) and a cleaner chromatogram where achievable when using the MIP compared to the commercial sorbent. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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