4.7 Article

Determination of total cationic and total anionic arsenic species in oyster tissue using microwave-assisted extraction followed by HPLC-ICP-MS

期刊

TALANTA
卷 51, 期 2, 页码 303-314

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0039-9140(99)00264-7

关键词

microwave-assisted extraction; arsenic species; HPLC-ICP-MS; oyster tissue; DORM 1

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A microwave-assisted digestion procedure was developed in presence of concentrated nitric acid (2.0 ml) and 30% hydrogen peroxide (0.20 ml) using a closed pressurized microwave digestion system for the determination of total anionic and total cationic arsenic compounds reside in oyster tissue. At 450 W for 15 min digestion, 74% of anionic arsenic, and 31% of cationic arsenic (105% total arsenic) were retrieved. At 300 W microwave power, 68% of anionic and 30.5% of cationic arsenic (98.5% total arsenic), and 100 W, 63% of anionic and 31% of cationic arsenic (94% total arsenic) were extracted out. The methanol water mixture (9:1) was cull out, exclusively 31.6% of anionic and 29% of cationic arsenic compounds (60.6% total). The dimethylarsinoylriboside (phosphate-arsenosugar) was the predominant arsenic species, along with arsenobetaine (AB), dimethylarsinic acid (DMA), inorganic arsenic, methylarsonic acid (MA), arsenocholine (AC), trimethylarsineoxide (TMAO:) and tetramethylarsonium ion (TMI). Some other arsenic compounds, those were not matched with the retention time of the available standards, were also detected. Arsenosugar was fragile and adequately transmuted to DMA (100%), AB and AC to TMAO (100%) when 450 W microwave power was applied for 15 min. The separation and quantification of arsenic compounds in the microwave digests and extracts, were carried out in anion (PRP-X100) and cation (LC-SCX) exchange columns using ICP-MS as arsenic specific detector. The procedure was also validated by determining the total cationic and total anionic arsenic compounds present in DORM 1. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science 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