Sequential dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the determination of aryloxyphenoxy‐propionate herbicides in water

A novel dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) method followed by HPLC analysis, termed sequential DLLME, was developed for the preconcentration and determination of aryloxyphenoxy‐propionate herbicides (i.e. haloxyfop‐R‐methyl, cyhalofop‐butyl, fenoxaprop‐P‐ethyl, and fluazifop‐P‐butyl) in aqueous samples. The method is based on the combination of ultrasound‐assisted DLLME with in situ ionic liquid (IL) DLLME into one extraction procedure and achieved better performance than widely used DLLME procedures. Chlorobenzene was used as the extraction solvent during the first extraction. Hydrophilic IL 1‐octyl‐3‐methylimidazolium chloride was used as a dispersive solvent during the first extraction and as an extraction solvent during the second extraction after an in situ chloride exchange by bis[(trifluoromethane)sulfonyl]imide. Several experimental parameters affecting the extraction efficiency were studied and optimized with the design of experiments using MINITAB® 16 software. Under the optimized conditions, the extractions resulted in analyte recoveries of 78–91%. The correlation coefficients of the calibration curves ranged from 0.9994 to 0.9997 at concentrations of 10–300, 15–300, and 20–300 μg L^?1. The relative SDs (n = 5) ranged from 2.9 to 5.4%. The LODs for the four herbicides were between 1.50 and 6.12 μg L^?1.     

Dispersion‐solidification liquid–liquid microextraction for volatile aromatic hydrocarbons determination: Comparison with liquid phase microextraction based on the solidification of a floating drop

Two microextraction techniques – liquid phase microextraction based on solidification of a floating organic drop (LPME‐SFO) and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with a solidification of a floating organic drop (DLLME‐SFO) – are explored for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and o‐xylene sampling and preconcentration. The investigation covers the effects of extraction solvent type, extraction and disperser solvents' volume, and the extraction time. For both techniques 1‐undecanol containing n‐heptane as internal standard was used as an extracting solvent. For DLLME‐SFO acetone was used as a disperser solvent. The calibration curves for both techniques and for all the analytes were linear up to 10 μg/mL, correlation coefficients were in the range 0.997–0.998, enrichment factors were from 87 for benzene to 290 for o‐xylene, detection limits were from 0.31 and 0.35 μg/L for benzene to 0.15 and 0.10 μg/L for o‐xylene for LPME‐SFO and DLLME‐SFO, respectively. Repeatabilities of the results were acceptable with RSDs up to 12%. Being comparable with LPME‐SFO in the analytical characteristics, DLLME‐SFO is superior to LPME‐SFO in the extraction time. A possibility to apply the proposed techniques for volatile aromatic hydrocarbons determination in tap water and snow was demonstrated.     

Preconcentration Ultra Trace of Cd(II) in Water Samples Using Dispersive Liquid‐Liquid Microextraction with Salen(N,N′‐Bis(Salicylidene)‐Ethylenediamine) and Determination Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) technique was successfully used as a sample preparation method for graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry (GF AAS). In this extraction method, 500 μL methanol (disperser solvent) containing 34 μL carbon tetrachloride (extraction solvent) and 0.00010 g Salen(N,N′‐bis(salicylidene)ethylenediamine) (chelating agent) was rapidly injected by syringe into the water sample containing cadmium ions (interest analyte). Thereby, a cloudy solution formed. The cloudy state resulted from the formation of fine droplets of carbon tetrachloride, which have been dispersed, in bulk aqueous sample. At this stage, cadmium reacts with Salen(N,N′‐bis(salicylidene)‐ethylenediamine), and therefore, hydrophobic complex forms which is extracted into the fine droplets of carbon tetrachloride. After centrifugation (2 min at 5000 rpm), these droplets were sedimented at the bottom of the conical test tube (25 ± 1 μL). Then a 20 μL of sedimented phase containing enriched analyte was determined by GF AAS. Some effective parameters on extraction and complex formation, such as extraction and disperser solvent type and their volume, extraction time, salt effect, pH and concentration of the chelating agent have been optimized. Under the optimum conditions, the enrichment factor 122 was obtained from only 5.00 mL of water sample. The calibration graph was linear in the range of 2‐21 ng L^?1 with a detection limit of 0.5 ng L^?1. The relative standard deviation (R.S.D._s) for ten replicate measurements of 20 ng L^?1 of cadmium was 2.9%. The relative recoveries of cadmium in tap, sea and rain water samples at a spiking level of 5 and 10 ng L^?1 are 99, 94, 97 and 96%, respectively. The characteristics of the proposed method have been compared with cloud point extraction (CPE), on‐line liquid‐liquid extraction, single drop microextraction (SDME), on‐line solid phase extraction (SPE) and co‐precipitation based on bibliographic data. Therefore, DLLME combined with GF AAS is a very simple, rapid and sensitive method, which requires low volume of sample (5.00 mL).     

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with nonaqueous capillary electrophoresis for the determination of fluoroquinolone antibiotics in waters

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) was combined for the first time with NACE‐UV for the selective determination of eight fluoroquinolone antibiotics (lomefloxacin, levofloxacin, marbofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, sarafloxacin, enrofloxacin, danofloxacin and difloxacin) in mineral and run‐off waters. Field‐enhanced sample injection was carried out in order to improve the sensitivity, whereas pipemidic acid was used as internal standard. The BGE that provided complete separation of the eight analytes and the internal standard was composed of 3 M acetic acid, 49 mM ammonium acetate in 55:45 v/v methanol:ACN. Optimum DLLME conditions (extraction of 5 mL of water at pH 7.6 with 685 μL of CHCl₃ and 1250 μL of ACN, extractant and disperser solvents, respectively) were achieved by means of experimental design methodology. Calibration curves of the whole method were obtained with correlation coefficients (R) higher than 0.994 in all cases. An accuracy and precision study was carried out at different levels of concentration, finding that there were no significant differences (Student's t‐test) between real and spiked concentrations.     

In‐line preconcentration capillary zone electrophoresis for the analysis of haloacetic acids in water

Two in‐line enrichment procedures (large volume sample stacking (LVSS) and field amplified sample injection (FASI)) have been evaluated for the CZE analysis of haloacetic acids (HAAs) in drinking water. For LVSS, separation on normal polarity using 20 mM acetic acid–ammonium acetate (pH 5.5) containing 20% ACN as BGE was required. For FASI, the optimum conditions were 25 s hydrodynamic injection (3.5 kPa) of a water plug followed by 25 s electrokinetic injection (?10 kV) of the sample, and 200 mM formic acid–ammonium formate buffer at pH 3.0 as BGE. For both FASI and LVSS methods, linear calibration curves (r²>0.992), limit of detection on standards prepared in Milli‐Q water (49.1–200 μg/L for LVSS and 4.2–48 μg/L for FASI), and both run‐to‐run and day‐to‐day precisions (RSD values up to 15.8% for concentration) were established. Due to the higher sensitive enhancement (up to 310‐fold) achieved with FASI‐CZE, this method was selected for the analysis of HAAs in drinking water. However, for an optimal FASI application sample salinity was removed by SPE using Oasis WAX cartridges. With SPE‐FASI‐CZE, method detection limits in the range 0.05–0.8 μg/L were obtained, with recoveries, in general, higher than 90% (around 65% for monochloroacetic and monobromoacetic acids). The applicability of the SPE‐FASI‐CZE method was evaluated by analyzing drinking tap water from Barcelona where seven HAAs were found at concentration levels between 3 and 13 μg/L.     

High‐density extraction solvent‐based solvent de‐emulsification dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with MEKC for detection of chlorophenols in water samples

For the first time, the high‐density solvent‐based solvent de‐emulsification dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (HSD‐DLLME) was developed for the fast, simple, and efficient determination of chlorophenols in water samples followed by field‐enhanced sample injection with reverse migrating micelles in CE. The extraction of chlorophenols in the aqueous sample solution was performed in the presence of extraction solvent (chloroform) and dispersive solvent (acetone). A de‐emulsification solvent (ACN) was then injected into the aqueous solution to break up the emulsion, the obtained emulsion cleared into two phases quickly. The lower layer (chloroform) was collected and analyzed by field‐enhanced sample injection with reverse migrating micelles in CE. Several important parameters influencing the extraction efficiency of HSD‐DLLME such as the type and volume of extraction solvent, disperser solvent and de‐emulsification solvent, sample pH, extraction time as well as salting‐out effects were optimized. Under the optimized conditions, the proposed method provided a good linearity in the range of 0.02–4 μg/mL, low LODs (4 ng/mL), and good repeatability of the extractions (RSDs below 9.3%, n = 5). And enrichment factors for three phenols were 684, 797, and 233, respectively. This method was then utilized to analyze two real environmental samples from wastewater and tap water and obtained satisfactory results. The obtained results indicated that the developed method is an excellent alternative for the routine analysis in the environmental field.     

Development of an Amperometric Biosensor for β‐N‐Oxalyl‐L‐α,β‐Diaminopropionic Acid (β‐ODAP)

An amperometric method for the determination of the neurotoxic amino acid β‐N‐oxalyl‐L ‐α,β‐diaminopropionic acid (β‐ODAP) using a screen printed carbon electrode (SPCE) is reported. The electrode material was bulk‐modified with manganese dioxide and used as a detector in flow injection analysis (FIA). The enzyme glutamate oxidase (GlOx) was immobilized in a Nafion‐film on the electrode surface. The performance of the biosensor was optimized using glutamate as an analyte. Optimum parameters were found as: operational potential 440 mV (vs. Ag/AgCl), flow rate 0.2 mL min^?1, and carrier composition 0.1 mol L^?1 phosphate buffer (pH 7.75). The same conditions were used for the determination of β‐ODAP. The signal was linear within the concentration range 53–855 μmol L^?1 glutamate and 195–1950 μmol L^?1 β‐ODAP. Detection limits (as 3σ value) for both analytes were 9.12 and 111.0 μmol L^?1, respectively, with corresponding relative standard deviations of 3.3 and 4.5%. The biosensor retained more than 73% of its activity after 40 days of on‐line use.     

Capillary electrophoresis‐laser‐induced fluorescence detection of rat brain catecholamines with microwave‐assisted derivatization

In this study, a rapid and sensitive method is described for the catecholamines detection in rat brain. CE with LIF detection for the determination of FITC derivatized catecholamines (dopamine, epinephrine, and norepinephrine) was demonstrated. Conventional water bath and microwave‐assisted derivatization methods were employed and a significant reduction in the derivatization time from 2 h for the conventional water bath at room temperature (ca. 25°C) to 2 min for the microwave‐assisted derivatization was achieved. Online sample concentration of field‐amplified sample stacking (FASS) method was employed to achieve higher sensitivities (the detection limits obtained in the normal injection mode ranged from 2.6 to 4.5 ng L^?1 and in the FASS mode ranged from 22 to 34 pg L^?1). Furthermore, this microwave‐assisted derivatization CE–LIF method successfully determined catecholamines in rat brain with as low as 100 ng L^?1 (FASS mode) to 10 μg L^?1 (normal injection mode). This CE–LIF method provided better detection ability when compared to the best reports on catecholamines analyses.     

Ultrasound Assisted Emulsification Microextraction Based on dimetyl (E)‐2‐[(Z)‐1‐acetyl)‐2‐hydroxy‐1‐propenyl]‐2‐butenedioate for Determination of Total Amount of Iron in Water and Tea Samples

An ultrasound assisted emulsification microextraction (USAEME) is successfully used for extraction and determination of trace amount of iron in water and tea samples, followed by flame atomic absorption spectroscopy (FAAS). In this approach, a new synthetic ligand dimetyl (E)‐2‐[(Z)‐1‐acetyl)‐2‐hydroxy‐1‐propenyl]‐2‐butenedioate (DAHPB) is used as chelating agent and chloroform is selected as an extraction solvent. The factors influencing the complex formation and extraction by USAEME method are optimized. These factors are extraction solvent type as well as extraction volume, time, temperature, pH, and the amount of chelating agent. Under optimum conditions, an enrichment factor of 202.9 is obtained from only 7.1 mL of aqueous phase. The calibration graph using the preconcentration system for iron is linear between 40.0 and 800.0 μg L^?1 with a detection limit of 7.4 μg L^?1. The relative standard deviation (R.S.D) for ten replicate measurements of 500.0 μg L^?1 of iron is 2.5%.     

Voltammetric Determination of Phenoxybenzyl‐Type Insecticides at Chemically Modified Conducting Polymer‐Carbon Nanotubes Coated Electrodes

The electrochemical reduction of three common insecticides such as cypermethrin (CYP), deltamethrin (DEL) and fenvalerate (FEN) was investigated at glassy carbon electrode (GCE), multiwalled carbon nanotubes modified GCE (MWCNT‐GCE), polyaniline (herein called as modifier M₁) and polypyrrole (herein called as modifier M₂) deposited MWCNT/GCE using cyclic voltammetry. Influences of pH, scan rate, and concentration were studied. The surface morphology of the modified film was characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and X‐ray diffraction analysis (XRD). A systematic study of the experimental parameters that affect differential pulse stripping voltammetry (DPSV) was carried out and the optimized experimental conditions were arrived at. The calibration plots were linear over the insecticide's concentration range 0.1–100 mg L^?1 and 0.05–100 mg L^?1 for all the three insecticides at MWCNT‐GCE and MWCNT(M₁)‐GCE respectively. The MWCNT(M₂)‐GCE performed well among the three electrode systems and the determination range obtained was 0.01–100 mg L^?1 for CYP, DEL and FEN. The limit of detection (LOD) was 0.35 μg L^?1, 0.9 μg L^?1 and 0.1 μg L^?1 for CYP, DEL and FEN respectively on MWCNT(M₂)‐GCE modified system. Suitability of this method for the trace determination of insecticide in spiked soil sample was also determined.     

Determination of estrogens in environmental water samples using 1,3‐dipentylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ionic liquid as extraction solvent in dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction

In this work, the potential of a symmetric dialkyl‐substituted ionic liquid (IL), 1,3‐dipenthylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([PPIm][PF₆]), as extraction solvent in dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) has been studied for the analysis of a group of three natural (estriol, 17β‐estradiol, and 17α‐estradiol) and four synthetic (17α‐ethynylestradiol, diethylstibestrol, dienestrol, and hexestrol) estrogenic compounds as well as one mycotoxin with estrogenic activity (zearalenone) in different types of water samples (Milli‐Q, mineral, and wastewater). Separation, determination, and quantification were developed by HPLC‐DAD and a fluorescence detector (FD) connected in series. Factors influencing the IL‐DLLME procedure (sample pH, amount of IL, type and volume of disperser solvent, ionic strength, and assistance of vortex agitation) were investigated and optimized by means of a step‐by‐step approach. Once the optimum extraction conditions were established (10 mL of water at pH 8, 60 mg of [PPIm][PF₆], 500 μL of ACN as disperser solvent and vortex agitation for 1 min), the calibration curves of the whole method (IL‐DLLME‐HPLC‐DAD/FD) were obtained and precision and accuracy were evaluated. It was demonstrated that the developed methodology was repeatable, accurate, and selective with limits of detection in the 0.30–0.57 μg/L and 13.8–37.1 μg/L range for FD and DAD, respectively. Relative recovery values were higher than 85% for the different types of water samples and the Student's t test demonstrated that there were not significant differences between the added and the found concentration.     

On‐line preconcentration strategy for the simultaneous quantification of three local anesthetics in human urine using CZE

The simultaneous determination of usually employed anesthetics (procaine, lidocaine, and bupivacaine) has been developed and validated using CE with ultraviolet detection at 212 nm. The separation of these three drugs has been achieved in less than 7 min, using a temperature of 25ºC and 25 kV, with a 150 mM citrate buffer (pH 2.5) as BGE. Field‐amplified sample injection (FASI) has been used for on‐line sample preconcentration. Ultrapure water and ACN 50/50 (v/v) mixture gave the greatest enhancement factor when it was employed as an injection solvent. Injection voltage and time were optimized, being 13 kV and 13 s, the optimum values, respectively. To avoid the possible irreproducibility associated with the electrokinetic injection, an internal standard such as tetracaine, was employed. The instrumental detection limits (LOD S/N = 3) for the compounds ranged between 2.6 and 7.0 μg L⁻¹ and the quantitation limits (LOQ S/N = 10) between 37.8 and 55.9 μg L⁻¹. The detection limits obtained in real human urine samples ranged between 55.2 and 83.6 μg L⁻¹ and the quantitation limits between 196.0 and 276.0 μg L⁻¹. The proposed method has demonstrated its applicability to the analysis of these local anesthetics in urine samples without any pretreatment, allowing the rapid determination of these target analytes.     

Optimization of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with central composite design for preconcentration of chlordiazepoxide drug and its determination by HPLC‐UV

A simple, rapid, and sensitive method based on dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with HPLC‐UV detection applied for the quantification of chlordiazepoxide in some real samples. The effect of different extraction conditions on the extraction efficiency of the chlordiazepoxide drug was investigated and optimized using central composite design as a conventional efficient tool. Optimum extraction condition values of variables were set as 210 μL chloroform, 1.8 mL methanol, 1.0 min extraction time, 5.0 min centrifugation at 5000 rpm min^?1, neutral pH, 7.0% w/v NaCl. The separation was reached in less than 8.0 min using a C₁₈ column using isocratic binary mobile phase (acetonitrile/water (60:40, v/v)) with flow rate of 1.0 mL min^?1. The linear response (r² > 0.998) was achieved in the range of 0.005–10 μg mL^?1 with detection limit 0.0005 μg mL^?1. The applicability of this method for simultaneous extraction and determination of chlordiazepoxide in four different matrices (water, urine, plasma, and chlordiazepoxide tablet) were investigated using standard addition method. Average recoveries at two spiking levels were over the range of 91.3–102.5% with RSD < 5.0% (n = 3). The obtained results show that dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with HPLC‐UV is a fast and simple method for the determination of chlordiazepoxide in real samples.     

Surfactant‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction of nitrazepam and lorazepam from plasma and urine samples followed by high‐performance liquid chromatography with UV analysis

Surfactant‐assisted liquid–liquid microextraction followed by high‐performance liquid chromatography with UV detection has been developed for the simultaneous preconcentration and determination of lorazepam and nitrazepam in biological fluids. In this study, an ionic surfactant (cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide) was used as an emulsifier. The predominant parameters affecting extraction efficiency such as the type and volume of extraction solvent, the type and concentration of surfactant, sample pH, and the concentration of salt added to the sample were investigated and opted. Under the optimum conditions (extraction solvent and its volume, 1‐octanol, 70 μL; surfactant and its concentration, 1 mL of ultra‐pure water containing 2 mmol L^?1 cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide; sample pH = 9 and salt content of 10% NaCl w/v), the preconcentration factors were obtained in the range of 202–241 and 246–265 for nitrazepam and lorazepam, respectively. The limits of quantification for both drugs were 5 μg L^?1 in water sample and 10 μg L^?1 in biological fluids with R² values higher than 0.993. The suitability of the proposed method was successfully confirmed by the extraction and determination of the target drugs in human urine and plasma samples in the range of microgram per liter.     

Response surface methodology for optimization of cyanamide analysis by in situ derivatization and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction

Cyanamide is widely used for agricultural purposes; therefore, its residues can be found in water. A new method was developed for its quantification using in situ derivatization with 2,6‐dimethyl‐4‐quinolinecarboxylic acid N‐hydroxysuccinimide ester followed by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) and high‐performance liquid chromatography/fluorescence analysis. Multivariate chemometric techniques were successfully used to obtain the optimum conditions for direct derivatization and DLLME extraction. Derivatization parameters and DLLME extraction conditions were optimized by a two‐step design, 2^k factorial design for screening, and central composite design for optimization. Best derivatization conditions were addition of 600 μL of derivatizing reagent, a temperature of 4 ºC, and pH 8.5, whereas for optimum extraction 800 μL of solvent, 30% NaCl conc. w/v, and pH 3.8 were chosen. The analytical performance of the method for routine analysis was evaluated. Excellent linearity was achieved from 10 to 200 µg L⁻¹ with a correlation factor of 0.9996. Precision ranged from 3.5% to 5.5% for intraday assays and 8.5% to 8.6% for interday assays. The mean recoveries performed on water from different origins (ground, river, sea, tap, and mineral) at three levels of concentration (20, 75, and 200 µg L⁻¹) ranged from 90.2% to 110.2%. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Determination of Cyanuric Acid in Milk Powder and Swimming Pool Water by Ion‐pair Reversed‐phase Liquid Chromatography

An ion‐pair reversed‐phase high‐performance liquid chromatographic method, using tetrabutylammonium bromide (TBAB) as ion‐pair reagent, has been developed for the analysis of cyanuric acid (CA) in milk powder and swimming pool water. It was found that the effect of the concentrations of ion‐pair reagent on the retention of cyanuric acid was different for standard solution and different real samples. The separation was carried out on a reversed‐phase C₁₈ column with 85:15 (V/V) water‐acetonitrile (ACN) containing different concentration of TBAB as mobile phase for different samples. The linear range of the calibration curve for CA was 0.1–100 mg·L^?1. The detection limits calculated at S/N=3 was 0.11 mg·L^?1 for the analysis of milk powder and 0.31 mg·L^?1 for the analysis of swimming pool water, respectively. The method was successfully applied to the analysis of CA in milk powder and swimming pool water.     

Analysis of short‐chain aliphatic amines in food and water samples using a near infrared cyanine 1‐(ε‐succinimydyl‐hexanoate)‐1′‐methyl‐3,3,3′,3′‐tetramethyl‐indocarbocyanine‐5,5′‐disulfonate potassium with CE–LIF detection

Precolumn derivatization of six short‐chain aliphatic amines by a near‐infrared dye, 1‐(ε‐succinimydyl‐hexanoate)‐1′‐methyl‐3,3,3′,3′‐tetramethyl‐indocarbocyanine‐5,5′‐ disulfonate potassium (MeCy5‐OSu), followed by MEKC–CE–LIF detection has been developed as a method for the determination of aliphatic amines in environmental water and food. Optimum derivatization was operated nicely in pH 9.0 borate buffer at 20°C for 30 min. Well separated peaks were observed with a pH 9.5 BGE containing 10 mmol L^?1 phosphoric acid, 20 mmol L^?1 SDS, and 7% methanol buffered with 1.0 mol L^?1 NaOH. The separation procedure was rapidly achieved within 11 min and the matrix interferences could be effectively eliminated. A linear calibration graph was obtained for 5–200 nmol L^?1 analytes with a correlation coefficient in the range 0.9933–0.9995 for amines. This method was successfully utilized to determine aliphatic amines in lake, sewage water, and red wine with recoveries ranging from 96.4 to 105% and the RSDs ranging from 0.9 to 2.9%. Near‐infrared, LIF‐detector‐compatible MeCy5‐OSu was proved suitable for the accurate, sensitive, and rapid separation and determination of aliphatic amines in water and food samples.     

Polymer monolith microextraction online coupled to hydrophilic interaction chromatography/mass spectrometry for analysis of β2‐agonist in human urine

An analytical method based on online combination of polymer monolith microextraction (PMME) technique with hydrophilic interaction LC (HILIC)/MS is presented. The extraction was performed with a poly(methacrylic acid‐co‐ethylene glycol dimethacrylate) monolithic column while the subsequent separation was carried out on a Luna silica column by HILIC. After 1:1 v/v dilution with 20 mM phosphate solution at pH 7.0 and centrifugation, urine sample was directly used for extraction. After optimization, 85% ACN (containing 0.3% formic acid v/v) was used for rapid online elution, which was also the mobile phase in HILIC to avoid band broadening during separation or carry‐over that was usually observed in PMME‐RP LC system. Online automation of extraction and separation procedures was realized under the control of a program in this study. The developed method was applied to rapid and sensitive monitoring of three β₂‐agonist traces in human urine. The LODs (S/N = 3) of the method were found to be 0.05–0.09 ng/mL of β₂‐agonists in urine. The recoveries of three β₂‐agonists spiked in five different urine samples ranged from 79.8 to 119.8%, with RSDs less than 18.0%.     

Ultrasound‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry in negative chemical ionization mode for the determination of polybrominated diphenyl ethers in water

A simple and economical method for the determination of eight polybrominated diphenyl ethers (BDE‐28, 47, 99, 100,153,154,183, and 209) in water was developed. This method involves the use of ultrasound‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with GC‐MS in negative chemical ionization mode. Various parameters affecting the extraction efficiency, including the type and volume of extraction and dispersive solvents, salt concentration, extraction time, and ultrasonic time, were investigated. A volume of 1.0 mL of acetone (dispersive solvent) containing 10 μL tetrachloroethylene (extraction solvent) was injected into 5.0 mL of water samples and then emulsified by ultrasound for 2.0 min to produce the cloudy solution. Under the optimal condition, the enrichment factors for the eight PBDEs were varied from 845‐ to 1050‐folds. Good linearity was observed in the range of 1.0–200 ng L^?1 for BDE‐28, 47, 99, and 100; 5.0–200 ng L^?1 for BDE‐153, 154, and 183; and 5.0–500 ng L^?1 for BDE‐209. The RSD values were in the range of 2.5–8.4% (n = 5) and the LODs ranged from 0.40 to 2.15 ng L^?1 (S/N = 3). The developed method was applied for the determination of eight BPDEs in the river and lake water samples, and the mean recoveries at spiking levels of 5.0 and 50.0 ng L^?1 were in the range of 70.6–105.1%.     

Voltammetric Determination of 3‐Nitrofluoranthene and 3‐Aminofluoranthene at Boron Doped Diamond Thin‐Film Electrode

The voltammetric behavior of 3‐nitrofluoranthene and 3‐aminofluoranthene was investigated in mixed methanol‐water solutions by differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) at boron doped diamond thin‐film electrode (BDDE). Optimum conditions have been found for determination of 3‐nitrofluoranthene in the concentration range of 2×10^?8–1×10^?6 mol L^?1, and for determination 3‐aminofluorathnene in the concentration range of 2×10^?7–1×10^?5 mol L^?1, respectively. Limits of determination were 3×10^?8 mol L^?1 (3‐nitrofluoranthene) and 2×10^?7 mol L^?1 (3‐aminofluoranthene).