首页> 外文期刊>Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry >Separation of nanoparticles from polydisperse environmental samples: comparative study of filtration, sedimentation, and coiled tube field-flow fractionation
【24h】

Separation of nanoparticles from polydisperse environmental samples: comparative study of filtration, sedimentation, and coiled tube field-flow fractionation

机译:来自多分散环境样品的纳米颗粒的分离:过滤,沉降和卷绕管场流动分馏的比较研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Nanoparticles (NPs) in the environment have a potential risk for human health and the ecosystem due to their ubiquity, specific characteristics, and properties (extreme mobility in the environment, abilities to accumulate of toxic elements and penetrate into living organisms). There is still a gap in studies on the chemical composition of natural NPs. The main reason is the difficulty to recover NPs, which may represent only one-thousandth or less of the bulk environmental sample, for further dimensional and quantitative characterization. In the present study, a methodology for the recovery of the nanoparticle fraction from polydisperse environmental samples was developed taking as example volcanic ashes from different regions of the world. For the first time, three separation methods, namely, filtration through a 0.45-mu m membrane, sedimentation, and coiled tube field-flow fractionation (CTFFF), were comparatively studied. The separated fractions were characterized by laser diffraction and scanning electron microscopy and then analyzed by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission and mass spectrometry. It has been shown that all three methods provide the separation of NPs less than 400 nm from the bulk material. However, the fraction separated by sedimentation also contained a population (5% in mass) of submicron particles ( 400-900 nm). The filtration resulted in low recovery of NPs. The determination of most trace elements was then impossible; the concentration of elements was under the limit of detection of the analytical instrument. The sedimentation and CTFFF made it possible to determine quantifiable concentrations for both major and trace elements in separated fractions. However, the sedimentation took 48 h while CTFFF enabled the fractionation time to be decreased down to 2 h. Hence, CTFFF looked to be the most promising method for the separation of NPs followed by their quantitative elemental analysis.
机译:环境中的纳米颗粒(NPS)具有危险的人类健康和生态系统的潜在风险,由于它们的笨拙,特异性和性质(环境中的极端流动性,积聚有毒元素并渗透到生物体中)。关于天然NPS的化学成分的研究仍然存在差距。主要原因是难以恢复NPS,其可以仅代表散装环境样品的一千分之一,以进行进一步的尺寸和定量表征。在本研究中,开发了一种从多分散环境样品中回收纳米粒子级分的方法,以提及来自世界不同地区的示例火山灰。第一次进行三种分离方法,即通过0.45μm膜,沉降和卷绕管场 - 流分馏(CTFFF)过滤。通过激光衍射和扫描电子显微镜表征分离的级分,然后通过电感耦合等离子体原子发射和质谱分析。已经表明,所有三种方法都提供了从散装材料中小于400nm的NPS的分离。然而,通过沉淀物分离的级分也含有亚微米颗粒(400-900nm)的群体(质量5%)。过滤导致NPS的恢复低。那么最不可能确定大多数微量元素;元素的浓度在分析仪器的检测限度下。沉降和CTFFF使得可以在分离的级分中确定主要和微量元素的可量化浓度。然而,沉降需要48小时,而CTFFF使分馏时间降低至2小时。因此,CTFFF看起来是最有希望的NPS分离后的方法,然后定量元素分析。

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