首页> 外文期刊>Journal of chromatography, A: Including electrophoresis and other separation methods >Comparison of hollow fiber liquid phase microextraction and dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction for the determination of organosulfur pesticides in environmental and beverage samples by gas chromatography with flame photometric detection
【24h】

Comparison of hollow fiber liquid phase microextraction and dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction for the determination of organosulfur pesticides in environmental and beverage samples by gas chromatography with flame photometric detection

机译:气相色谱-火焰光度法测定中空纤维液相微萃取与分散液-液微萃取测定环境和饮料样品中有机硫农药的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Two methods based on hollow fiber liquid phase microextraction (HF-LPME) and dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME), have been critically compared for the analysis of organosulfur pesticides (OSPs) in environmental and beverage samples by gas chromatography-flame photometric detection (GC-FPD). Experimental conditions including extraction solvent, solvent volume, extraction time, temperature and ionic strength have been investigated for both HF-LPME and DLLME. Under the optimal conditions, the limits of detection for the six target OSPs (malathion, chlorpyrifos, buprofezin, triazophos, carbosulfan and pyridaben) obtained by HF-LPME-GC-FPD and DLLME-GC-FPD were ranged from 1.16 mu g/L to 48.48 mu g/L and 0.21 mu g/L to 3.05 mu g/L, respectively. The relative standard deviations (RSDs, n = 5) were in the range of 3.4-8.0% and 8.5-13.7%with the enrichment factors (EFs) of 27-530 and 176-946 folds for HF-LPME-GC-FPD and DLLME-GC-FPD, respectively. Both methods were found to be simple, fast, efficient, and inexpensive. Compared with HF-LPME, the advantages of DLLME technique were less extraction time, suitable for batches of samples pretreatment simultaneously, a higher extraction capacity when analyzing simple samples such as water samples. While for the analysis of complicated matrix samples such as soil and beverage samples, HF-LPME was demonstrated to be more robust and more suitable. Both methods were applied to the analysis of six OSPs in different waters, soil and beverage samples, and no target OSPs was found in these samples. For analysis of the spiked samples, the recovery of 81.7-114.4% with RSDs of 0.6-9.6% were obtained for HF-LPME, and the recovery of 78.5-117.2% with RSDs of 0.6-11.9% were obtained for DLLME.
机译:对于通过气相色谱-火焰光度检测法分析环境和饮料样品中的有机硫农药(OSP),已对使用中空纤维液相微萃取(HF-LPME)和分散液-液微萃取(DLLME)的两种方法进行了严格比较。 GC-FPD)。对于HF-LPME和DLLME,已经研究了包括萃取溶剂,溶剂体积,萃取时间,温度和离子强度的实验条件。在最佳条件下,HF-LPME-GC-FPD和DLLME-GC-FPD获得的六种目标OSP(马拉硫磷,毒死rif,丁苯丙酸,三唑磷,碳硫丹和哒嗪)的检出限为1.16μg / L。分别为48.48μg/ L和0.21μg/ L至3.05μg/ L。 HF-LPME-GC-FPD的相对标准偏差(RSDs,n = 5)在3.4-8.0%和8.5-13.7%范围内,富集因子(EFs)为27-530和176-946倍。分别为DLLME-GC-FPD。发现这两种方法都是简单,快速,有效和廉价的。与HF-LPME相比,DLLME技术的优点是提取时间短,适合同时进行批次样品预处理,分析水样等简单样品时具有较高的提取能力。虽然用于分析复杂的基质样品(例如土壤和饮料样品),但HF-LPME被证明更耐用,更适合。两种方法都用于分析不同水,土壤和饮料样品中的六种OSP,在这些样品中未发现目标OSP。为了分析加标样品,HF-LPME的回收率为81.7-114.4%,RSD为0.6-9.6%,DLLME的回收率为78.5-117.2%,RSD为0.6-11.9%。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号