4.2 Article

Dispersive Liquid-Liquid Microextraction Coupled with High-Performance Liquid Chromatography for Determination of Coumarin Compounds in Radix Angelicae Dahuricae

期刊

CHROMATOGRAPHIA
卷 75, 期 3-4, 页码 131-137

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10337-011-2177-1

关键词

Column liquid chromatography; Organic solvent dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction; Ionic liquid dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction; Coumarins; Radix Angelicae Dahuricae

资金

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [81041084]
  2. Nature Science Foundation of Shanxi Province [2011011035-2]
  3. Program for the Top Science and Technology Innovation Teams of Higher Learning Institutions of Shanxi Province, China
  4. Innovation Foundation of Shanxi Medical University, China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, two methods, organic solvent dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (OS-DLLME) and ionic liquid dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (IL-DLLME), coupled with high-performance liquid chromatography have been critically compared and introduced for the analysis of the eight coumarin compounds (psoralen, isopsoralen, bergapten, isobergapten, oxypeucedanin, imperatorin, osthole, and isoimperatorin) in Radix Angelicae Dahuricae samples. Experimental conditions have been investigated for both OS-DLLME and IL-DLLME. Under optimal conditions, the detection limits of the eight coumarin compounds obtained by OS-DLLME and IL-DLLME ranged between 0.002-0.026 ng mL(-1) and 0.013-0.66 ng mL(-1), respectively. The relative standard deviations (RSDs, n = 9) were lower than 8.7 and 8.4% with enrichment factors in the range of 145-380 and 130-230 folds for OS-DLLME and IL-DLLME, respectively. The results showed that there were no significant deviations between the two DLLME methods for the determination of the eight coumarin compounds. Both methods were simple, fast, efficient, and inexpensive. However, compared with IL-DLLME, the OS-DLLME technique exhibited a higher extraction capacity for the eight target analytes.

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