4.6 Article

Comparison of solid phase extraction, saponification and gel permeation chromatography for the clean-up of microwave-assisted biological extracts in the analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1128, 期 1-2, 页码 10-16

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2006.06.063

关键词

microwave-assisted extraction; biological samples; polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; solid phase extraction; saponification; gel permeation chromatography

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The feasibility of different clean-up procedures was studied for the determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in biota samples such as oysters, mussels and fish liver. In this sense, once the samples were extracted - essentially with acetone and in a microwave system - and before they could be analysed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), three different approaches were studied for the clean-up step: solid phase extraction (SPE), microwave-assisted saponification (MAS) and gel permeation chromatography (GPC). The main aim of this work was to maximise the recoveries of PAHs and to minimise the presence of interfering compounds in the last extract. In the case of SPE, Florisil((R)) cartridges of 1, 2 and 5 g, and silica cartridges of 5 g were studied. In that case, and with oysters and mussels, microwave-assisted extraction and 5 g Florisil((R)) cartridges provided good results. In addition, the concentrations obtained for Standard Reference Material (SRM) NIST 2977 (mussel tissue) were in good agreement with the certified values. In the case of microwave-assisted saponification, the extracts were not as clean as those obtained with 5 g Florisil((R)) and this fact lead to overestimate the concentration of the heaviest PAHs. Finally, the cleanest extracts were obtained by GPC. The method was successfully applied to mussels, oysters and hake liver, and the results obtained for NIST 2977 (mussel tissue) were within the confidence interval of the certified reference material for most of the certified analytes. (c) 2006 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

4.6
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