4.7 Article

Highly selective determination of total mercury(II) sub microgram per liter by β-cyclodextrin polymer solid-phase spectrophotometry using 1,3-di-(4-nitrodiazoamino)-benzene

期刊

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 532, 期 2, 页码 121-128

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2004.10.062

关键词

solid-phase spectrophotometry; beta-cyclodextrin; 1,3-di-(4-nitrodiazoamino)-benzene; mercury(II); beta-CDP-DNAAB; water; dust

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A highly selective beta-cyclodextrin polymer solid-phase spectrophotometric (beta-CDPSPS) method is described for the determination of total mercury(II) sub microgram per liter. The methods are based on the chromogenic reaction of mercury(II) with 1,3-di-(4-nitrodiazoamino)benzene (DNAAB) loaded on beta-cyclodextrin polymer (beta-CDP). In pH 10.0 borax buffer, Hg(II)-DNAAB complex on beta-CDP gives a positive peak at 445 nm and a negative one at 545 nm. The absorbance was measured at two peaks and the net absorbance (As) was calculated between the difference of positive and negative peaks. The apparent molar absorptivity is 1.1 x 10(7) l Mol(-1) cm(-1) (82-fold of it in solution) for 100 ml sample and the linear range of the determination is 0.062-250 mu g l(-1). The selectivity for coexistent ions was greatly improved, only silver(I) interfered with the mercury determination and the amount of the others was reduced 25-1000 times compared to previous solution method. The interference caused by silver(l) can be eliminated using tri-n-octylmethylammonium bromide as masking agent. The detection limit and the quantification limit were found to be 0.024 and 0.062 mu g l(-1), respectively. The relative standard deviation of ten replicate determinations of 5.0 mu g mercury(II) in 100 ml sample was of 2.4%. The method was validated by analyzing the water and soil reference materials and successfully applied to the determination of mercury(II) in locally collected water and dust samples. (c) 2004 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