Temperature‐controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid‐phase microextraction combined with HPLC with ultraviolet detector for the determination of fungicides

Present study described a simple, environmental benign, easy to operate, and determination method for fungicides including thiram, metalaxyl, diethofencarb, myclobutanil, and tebuconazole. The method is based on temperature‐controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid phase microextraction coupled to HPLC with ultraviolet detector. In the enrichment procedure, ionic liquid 1‐octyl‐3‐methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate [C₈MIM][PF₆] was used as the extraction solvent. Variable affecting parameters such as the volume of [C₈MIM][PF₆], temperature, extraction time, centrifuging time, and salting‐out effect have been optimized in detail. Under the optimal conditions, this method has been found to have good linear relationship in the concentration range of 1.0–100 μg/L and excellent detection sensitivity with LODs (S/N = 3) in the range of 0.32–0.79 μg/L. Precisions of proposed method were in the range of 3.7–5.9% for intraday and 7.8–11.0% for interday (RSDs, n = 6). The proposed method was used for the analysis of real water samples and good spiked recoveries at two different spiked levels were achieved in the range of 84.6–102%.     

Temperature‐controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid‐phase microextraction for the sensitive determination of triclosan and triclocarban in environmental water samples prior to HPLC‐ESI‐MS/MS

A novel dispersive liquid‐phase microextraction method without dispersive solvents has been developed for the enrichment and sensitive determination of triclosan and triclocarban in environmental water samples prior to HPLC‐ESI‐MS/MS. This method used only green solvent 1‐hexyl‐3‐methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate as extraction solvent and overcame the demerits of the use of toxic solvents and the instability of the suspending drop in single drop liquid‐phase microextraction. Important factors that may influence the enrichment efficiencies, such as volume of ionic liquid, pH of solutions, extraction time, centrifuging time and temperature, were systematically investigated and optimized. Under optimum conditions, linearity of the method was observed in the range of 0.1–20 μg/L for triclocarban and 0.5–100 μg/L for triclosan, respectively, with adequate correlation coefficients (R>0.9990). The proposed method has been found to have excellent detection sensitivity with LODs of 0.04 and 0.3 μg/L, and precisions of 4.7 and 6.0% (RSDs, n=5) for triclocarban and triclosan, respectively. This method has been successfully applied to analyze real water samples and satisfactory results were achieved.     

Trace determination of hexabromocyclododecane diastereomers in water samples with temperature controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid phase microextraction

A novel temperature controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid phase microextraction(TCIL-DLPME) coupled with rapid resolution liquid chromatography-electrospray tandem mass spectrometry(RRLC-ESI-MS-MS) has been developed for the enrichment and determination of three hexabromocyclododecane diastereomers(HBCDs) in water samples.Green solvent ionic liquid(IL) was used as extraction solvent instead of toxic organic solvents.This technique also avoided the usage of dispersive solvent.Some important parameters that might affect the extraction efficiency were optimized.Under the optimum conditions,good linear relationship,sensitivity and reproducibility were obtained.All the limits of detection for the three diastereomers were 0.1 ng/ mL.The linear range was obtained in the range of 1-100 ng/mL for the total amount of three HBCD diastereomers.It was satisfactory to analyze real environmental water samples with the recoveries ranging from 77.2%to 99.3%.The main advantage of the method is toxic organic solvent-free.     

Enrichment and sensitive determination of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane and its metabolites with temperature controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid phase microextraction prior to high performance liquid phase chromatography

Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and its main metabolites are important environmental pollutants and have been in the focusing center. It is of great value to develop simple, rapid, sensitive and easy to operate method for monitoring them. Present work established a novel temperature controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid phase microextraction method in combination with high performance liquid chromatography for the enrichment and determination of DDT and its metabolites. Proposed method used only ionic liquid 1-hexyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([C₆MIM][PF₆]) for the enrichment and overcame the demerits of conventional single drop liquid phase microextraction and dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction. Temperature has two functions here, one is to promote the dispersing of ionic liquid into the solution and forming infinitesimal micro-drop and increasing the chance of the analytes extracted into ionic liquid phase, and the other one is to perform phase-separation. A series of factors that would affect the extraction performance was systematically investigated and optimized. The experimental results indicated that the detection limits obtained for p,p′-DDD, p,p′-DDT, o,p′-DDT and p,p′-DDE were 0.24, 0.24, 0.45, 0.24 ng mL⁻¹, respectively. The linear ranges for them were from 1.0 to 100 ng mL⁻¹, and the precisions were between 3.8% and 6.7% (n = 6). The proposed method was validated with four real-world samples and excellent results were achieved.     

Determination of phenols in environmental water samples by ionic liquid-based headspace liquid-phase microextraction coupled with high-performance liquid chromatography

Headspace liquid-phase microextraction (HS-LPME) has been applied to efficient enrichment of phenols such as 2-nitrophenol, 4-chlorophenol, 2,4-dichlorophenol, and 2-naphthol from water samples based on 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([C4MIM][PF6]) as an extractant. Some parameters that may influence HS-LPME were investigated. The linear range was in the range of 0.5-100 microg/L, and the enrichment factors and repeatability (RSD, n = 6) of the proposed method were in the range of 17.2-160.7 and 5.4-8.9%, respectively. The detection limit for each analyte ranged from 0.3 to 0.5 microg/L. Complex matrices of environmental water samples had a small effect on the enrichment, and this problem could be resolved by the addition of sodium ethylene diamine tetraacetate (EDTA) into the samples. The spiked recoveries were in the range of 89.4-114.2%. All these facts demonstrated that the proposed method, with merits of low cost, simplicity, and easy operation, would be a competitive alternative procedure for the determination of such compounds at trace level.     

Magnetic solid‐phase extraction or dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for pyrethroid determination in environmental samples

The determination of 15 pyrethroids in soil and water samples was carried out by gas chromatography with mass spectrometry. Compounds were extracted from the soil samples (4 g) using solid–liquid extraction and then salting‐out assisted liquid–liquid extraction. The acetonitrile phase obtained (0.8 mL) was used as a dispersant solvent, to which 75 μL of chloroform was added as an extractant solvent, submitting the mixture to dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction. For the analysis of water samples (40 mL), magnetic solid‐phase extraction was performed using nanocomposites of magnetic nanoparticles and multiwalled carbon nanotubes as sorbent material (10 mg). The mixture was shaken for 45 min at room temperature before separation with a magnet and desorption with 3 mL of acetone using ultrasounds for 5 min. The solvent was evaporated and reconstituted with 100 μL acetonitrile before injection. Matrix‐matched calibration is recommended for quantification of soil samples, while water samples can be quantified by standards calibration. The limits of detection were in the range of 0.03–0.5 ng/g (soil) and 0.09–0.24 ng/mL (water), depending on the analyte. The analyzed environmental samples did not contain the studied pyrethroids, at least above the corresponding limits of detection.     

Optimization of temperature-controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid phase microextraction combined with high performance liquid chromatography for analysis of chlorobenzenes in water samples

Temperature-controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid phase microextraction (TCIL-DLPME) combined with high performance liquid chromatography-diode array detection (HPLC-DAD) was applied for preconcentration and determination of chlorobenzenes in well water samples. The proposed method used 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([C₄mim][PF₆]) as the extraction solvent. The effect of different variables on extraction efficiency was studied simultaneously using an experimental design. The variables of interest in the TCIL-DLPME were extraction solvent volume, salt effect, solution temperature, extraction time, centrifugation time, and heating time. The Plackett-Burman design was employed for screening to determine the variables significantly affecting the extraction efficiency. Then, the significant factors were optimized by using a central composite design (CCD) and the response surface equations were developed. The optimal experimental conditions obtained from this statistical evaluation included: extraction solvent volume, 75 μL; extraction time, 20 min; centrifugation time, 25 min; heating time, 4 min; solution temperature, 50 °C; and no addition of salt. Under optimal conditions, the preconcentration factors were between 187 and 298. The limit of detections (LODs) ranged from 0.05 μg L⁻¹ (for 1,2-dichlorobenzene) to 0.1 μg L⁻¹ (for 1,2,3-trichlorobenzene). Linear dynamic ranges (LDRs) of 0.5-300 and 0.5-500 μg L⁻¹ were obtained for dichloro- and trichlorobenzenes, respectively. The performance of the method was evaluated for extraction and determination of chlorobenzenes in well water samples in micrograms per liter and satisfactory results were obtained (RSDs < 9.2%).     

Ligandless,deep eutectic solvent‐based ultrasound‐assisted dispersive liquid‐liquid microextraction with solidification of the aqueous phase for preconcentration of lead,cadmium, cobalt and nickel in water samples

A green and efficient sample preparation method using a deep eutectic solvent‐based ultrasounds‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with solidification of the aqueous phase followed by high performance liquid chromatography analysis was developed for preconcentration and determination of heavy metals in environmental samples. In the proposed method, a novel, low density deep eutectic solvent was prepared by mixing trihexyl(tetradecyl)phosphonium chloride and thiosalicylic acid at a molar ratio of 1:2 and used both as an extractant and complexing agent. Ultrasound was used to disperse the extractant in the aqueous phase of the sample. Then, the phases were separated by centrifugation, after which the aqueous phase was frozen and the surface extractant phase was dissolved in a small volume of acetonitrile and subjected to liquid chromatographic analysis. The proposed method provided precisions (relative standard deviation, n = 5) in the range of 2.6–4.7%. The limit of detection were 0.05, 0.13, 0.06, and 0.11 µg/L for Pb(II), Cd(II), Co(II), Ni(II), respectively. The enhancement factors were equal to 154, 159, 162, and 158 for lead(II), cadmium(II), cobalt(II), and nickel(II), respectively. The accuracy of the proposed method was evaluated using certified reference materials (CA011b – hard drinking water, NIST 1643e – trace elements in water, TMRAIN‐04 – simulated rain sample).     

Application of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the preconcentration of eight parabens in real samples and their determination by high‐performance liquid chromatography

A simple and sensitive method for the simultaneous determination of eight parabens in human plasma and urine samples was developed. The samples were preconcentrated using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction based on the solidification of floating organic drops and determined by high‐performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection. The influence of variables affecting the extraction efficiency was investigated and optimized using Placket–Burman design and Box–Behnken design. The optimized values were: 58 μL of 1‐decanol (as extraction solvent), 0.65 mL methanol (as disperser solvent), 1.5% w/v NaCl in 5.0 mL of sample solution, pH 10.6, and 4.0 min centrifugation at 4000 rpm. The extract was injected into the high‐performance liquid chromatography system for analysis. Under the optimum conditions, the linear ranges for eight parabens in plasma and urine were 1.0–1000 ng/mL, with correlation coefficients above 0.994. The limit of detection was 0.2–0.4 and 0.1–0.4 ng/mL for plasma and urine samples, respectively. Relative recoveries were between 80.3 and 110.7%, while relative standard deviations were less than 5.4%. Finally, the method was applied to analyze the parabens in 98 patients of primary breast cancer. Results showed that parabens existed widely, at least one paraben detected in 96.9% (95/98) of plasma samples and 98.0% (96/98) of urine samples.     

Determination of triazine herbicides in juice samples by microwave‐assisted ionic liquid/ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with high‐performance liquid chromatography

A novel microextraction method, termed microwave‐assisted ionic liquid/ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, has been developed for the rapid enrichment and analysis of triazine herbicides in fruit juice samples by high‐performance liquid chromatography. Instead of using hazardous organic solvents, two kinds of ionic liquids, a hydrophobic ionic liquid (1‐hexyl‐3‐methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate) and a hydrophilic ionic liquid (1‐butyl‐3‐methylimidazolium tetrafluoroborate), were used as the extraction solvent and dispersion agent, respectively, in this method. The extraction procedure was induced by the formation of cloudy solution, which was composed of fine drops of 1‐hexyl‐3‐methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate dispersed entirely into sample solution with the help of 1‐butyl‐3‐methylimidazolium tetrafluoroborate. In addition, an ion‐pairing agent (NH₄PF₆) was introduced to improve recoveries of the ionic liquid phase. Several experimental parameters that might affect the extraction efficiency were investigated. Under the optimum experimental conditions, the linearity for determining the analytes was in the range of 5.00–250.00 μg/L, with the correlation coefficients of 0.9982–0.9997. The practical application of this effective and green method is demonstrated by the successful analysis of triazine herbicides in four juice samples, with satisfactory recoveries (76.7–105.7%) and relative standard deviations (lower than 6.6%). In general, this method is fast, effective, and robust to determine triazine herbicides in juice samples.     

Development of dispersive liquid-phase microextraction based on new ionic liquid 1,3-diisooctylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate as solvent for the extraction and determination of dicofol and its degradation products in water samples

In the current paper we describe a novel sample preparation technique termed dispersive liquid-phase microextraction for the preconcentration and determination of 2,2,2-trichloro-1,1-bis(4-chlorophenyl)ethanol (dicofol) and its degradation products in water samples that includes 2-(2-chlorophenyl)-2-(4-chlorophenyl)-1,1-dichloroethene(2,4′-DDE), 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis(4-chlorophenyl)ethane(4,4′-DDE) and 1,1,1-trichloro-2-(2-chlorophenyl)-2-(4-chlorophenyl)ethane (2,4′-DDT) coupled with gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GC-MS), in which a new ionic liquid 1,3-diisooctylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate abbreviated as [D(i-C₈)IM][PF₆] was used as extraction solvent. For each one extraction, 1.00 mL of the methanol solution containing 40 µL of the ionic liquid was sprayed into 25.00 mL of water sample. In the meantime the ionic liquid was finely dispersed into the aqueous phase and analytes were rapidly migrated into the ionic liquid. After the solution was centrifuged for 2 min at 5000 rpm, the droplets of the ionic liquid are subsided in the bottom of the conical test tube (30.0 ± 0.2 µL). Moreover, the factors relevant to extraction efficiencies were investigated and optimised including the volume of the ionic liquid, disperser solvent, extraction time, sample pH and ionic strength. Under optimal conditions, the enrichment factors of the extraction were between 550 and 725 with an extraction efficiency ranging from 66% to 87% for each different analyte. Finally, 1.0 µL of the ionic liquid collected from above extraction was injected into the injector block of GC-MS instrument for analysis. The detection limit (S/N = 3), the relative standard deviations for 2.0 µg L^?1 of the standard analyte (n = 5) and linearity in a calibration range were found to be 3–8 ng L^?1, 1.0–2.7% and 10–3000 ng L^?1, respectively. Good spiked recoveries over the range of 92.0–13.5% were obtained. The proposed method offers the advantages of simplicity of operation, rapidity, good extraction efficiency and enrichment factor; it has been successfully applied to determination of dicofol and its degradation products in environmental water samples.     

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.     

Combination of ionic liquid dispersive liquid-phase microextraction and high performance liquid chromatography for the determination of triazine herbicides in water samples

A temperature-controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid-phase microextraction in combination with high performance liquid chromatography was developed for the enrichment and determination of triazine herbicides such as cyanazine,simazine,and atrazine in water samples.1-Octyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate([C8MIM][PF6]) was selected as the extraction solvent.Several experimental parameters were optimized.Under the optimal conditions,the linear range for cyanazine was in the concentration range of 0.5–80 mg/L and the linear range for simazine and atrazine was in the range of1.0–100 mg/L.The limit of detection(LOD,S/N = 3) was in the ranges of 0.05–0.06 mg/L,and the intra day and inter day precision(RSDs,n = 6) was in the ranges of 3.2%–6.6% and 4.8%–8.9%,respectively.Four real water samples were analyzed with the developed method,and the experimental results showed that the spiked recoveries were satisfactory.All these exhibited that the developed method was a valuable tool for monitoring such pollutants.     

Determination of ultraviolet filters in environmental water samples by temperature-controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid-phase microextraction

In the present study, a rapid, highly efficient and environmentally friendly sample preparation method named temperature-controlled ionic liquid dispersive liquid-phase microextraction (TC-IL-DLPME), followed by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) was developed for the extraction, preconcentration and determination of four benzophenone-type ultraviolet (UV) filters (viz. benzophenone (BP), 2-hydroxy-4-methoxybenzophenone (BP-3), ethylhexyl salicylate (EHS) and homosalate (HMS)) from water samples. An ultra-hydrophobic ionic liquid (IL) 1-hexyl-3-methylimidazolium tris(pentafluoroethyl)trifluorophosphate ([HMIM][FAP]), was used as the extraction solvent in TC-IL-DLPME. Temperature served two functions here, the promotion of the dispersal of the IL to the aqueous sample solution to form infinitesimal IL drops and increase the interface between them and the target analytes (at high temperature), and the facilitation of mass transfer between the phases, and achievement of phase separation (at low temperature). Due to the ultra-hydrophobic feature and high density of the extraction solvent, complete phase separation could be effected by centrifugation. Moreover, no disperser solvent was required. Another prominent feature of the procedure was the combination of extraction and centrifugation in a single step, which not only greatly reduced the total analysis time for TC-IL-DLPME but also simplified the sample preparation procedure. Various parameters that affected the extraction efficiency (such as type and volume of extraction solvent, temperature, salt addition, extraction time and pH) were evaluated. Under optimal conditions, the proposed method provided good enrichment factors in the range of 240–350, and relative standard deviations (n = 5) below 6.3%. The limits of detection were in the range of 0.2–5.0 ng/mL, depending on the analytes. The linearities were between 1 and 500 ng/mL for BP, 5 and 1000 ng/mL for BP-3, 10 and 1000 ng/mL for HMS and 5 and 1000 ng/mL for EHS. Finally, the proposed method was successfully applied to the determination of UV filters in swimming pool and tap water samples and acceptable relative recoveries over the range of 88.0–116.0% were obtained.     

Cyclodextrin‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the preconcentration of carbamazepine and clobazam with subsequent sweeping micellar electrokinetic chromatography

A new version of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, namely, cyclodextrin‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, with subsequent sweeping micellar electrokinetic chromatography has been developed for the preconcentration and sensitive detection of carbamazepine and clobazam. α‐Cyclodextrin and chloroform were used as the dispersive agent and extraction solvent, respectively. After the extraction, carbamazepine and clobazam were analyzed using micellar electrokinetic chromatography with ultraviolet detection. The detection sensitivity was further enhanced using the sweeping technique. Under optimal extraction and stacking conditions, the calibration curves of carbamazepine and clobazam were linear over a concentration range of 2.0–200.0 ng/mL. The method detection limits at a signal‐to‐noise ratio of 3 were 0.6 and 0.5 ng/mL with sensitivity enhancement factors of 3575 and 4675 for carbamazepine and clobazam, respectively. This developed method demonstrated high sensitivity enhancement factors and was successfully applied to the determination of carbamazepine and clobazam in human urine samples. The precision and accuracy for urine samples were less than 4.2 and 6.9%, respectively.     

Syringe‐to‐syringe dispersive liquid‐phase microextraction solidified floating organic drop combined with high‐performance liquid chromatography for the separation and quantification of ochratoxin A in food samples

A new, simple, and rapid syringe‐to‐syringe dispersive liquid‐phase microextraction with solidified floating organic drop was used for the separation and preconcentration of ochratoxin A from grain and juice samples before its quantification using high‐performance liquid chromatography and fluorescence detection. Factors influencing the microextraction efficiency of ochratoxin A, such as sample solution pH, type and volume of organic extractant, salt concentration, number of injections, and volume of the sample, were studied and optimized. Under the optimum properties, the calibration graph showed linearity in the range of 65.0–700.0 ng/L (coefficient of determination = 0.9991). The limit of detection was 20.0 ng/L. The inter‐day and intra‐day relative standard deviations were in the range of 5.0–8.5%. This method was successfully applied for the quantification of ochratoxin A in grain and juice samples.     

Simultaneous determination of simazine,cyanazine, and atrazine in honey samples by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with high‐performance liquid chromatography

A rapid and simple sample preparation method was developed for simultaneous determination of three triazine herbicides in honey samples. The selected herbicides were extracted from honey samples by ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, separated on a C₁₈ column (250 mm × 4.6 mm id, 5 μm) using acetonitrile and H₂O as the mobile phase with gradient elution, and then detected by high‐performance liquid chromatography. The parameters, such as the type and volume of the extraction and disperser solvent, ion strength, pH, extraction time, and centrifuge time were optimized in order to provide the excellent extraction performance. Good linearity was showed for all the target herbicides over the tested concentration range with correlation coefficient higher than 0.994. Three spiked levels (0.005, 0.05, 0.10 mg/kg) were applied for determination of the recoveries of the targets in honey samples in the range of 80–103% with relative standard deviations not larger than 10.6%. The limits of quantification for the analytes ranged between 1.5 and 4.0 μg/kg. The developed method was applied for determination of the target compounds residues in real samples.     

Ionic liquid‐based dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction followed by RP‐HPLC determination of saquinavir in rat serum: application to pharmacokinetics

An ionic liquid‐based dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction followed by RP‐HPLC determination of the most commonly prescribed protease inhibitor, saquinavir, in rat plasma was developed and validated. The effects of different ionic liquids, dispersive solvents, extractant/disperser ratio and salt concentration on sample recovery and enrichment were studied. Among the ionic liquids investigated, 1‐butyl‐3‐methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate was found to be most effective for extraction of saquinavir from rat serum. The recovery was found to be 95% at an extractant/disperser ratio of 0.43 using 1‐butyl‐3‐methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate and methanol as extraction and dispersive solvents. The recovery was further enhanced to 99.5% by addition of 5.0% NaCl. A threefold enhancement in detection and quantification limits was achieved, at 0.01 and 0.03 µg/mL, compared with the conventional protein precipitation method. A linear relationship was observed in the range of 0.035–10.0 µg/mL with a correlation coefficient (r²) of 0.9996. The method was validated and applied to study pharmacokinetics of saquinavir in rat serum. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Switchable‐hydrophilicity solvent liquid‐liquid microextraction versus dispersive liquid‐liquid microextraction prior to HPLC‐UV for the determination and isolation of piperine from Piper nigrum L

Switchable‐hydrophilicity solvent liquid‐liquid microextraction and dispersive liquid‐liquid microextraction were compared for the extraction of piperine from Piper nigrum L. prior to its analysis by using high‐performance liquid chromatography with UV detection. Under optimum conditions, limits of detection and quantitation were found as 0.2–0.6 and 0.7–2.0 μg/mg with the two methods, respectively. Calibration graphs showed good linearity with coefficients of determination (R²) higher than 0.9962 and percentage relative standard deviations lower than 6.8%. Both methods were efficiently used for the extraction of piperine from black and white pepper samples from different origins and percentage relative recoveries ranged between 90.0 and 106.0%. The results showed that switchable‐hydrophilicity solvent liquid‐liquid microextraction is a better alternative to dispersive liquid‐liquid microextraction for the routine analysis of piperine in food samples. A novel scaled‐up dispersive liquid‐liquid microextraction method was also proposed for the isolation of piperine providing a yield of 102.9 ± 4.9% and purity higher than 98.0% as revealed by NMR spectroscopy.     

Comparison of three different dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction modes performed on their most usual configurations for the extraction of phenolic,neutral aromatic,and amino compounds from waters

In this work we seek clues to select the appropriate dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction mode for extracting three categories of compounds. For this purpose, three common dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction modes were compared under optimized conditions. Traditional dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, in situ ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, and conventional ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction using chloroform, 1‐butyl‐3‐methylimidazolium tetrafluoroborate, and 1‐hexyl‐3‐methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate as the extraction solvent, respectively, were considered in this work. Phenolic, neutral aromatic, and amino compounds (each category included six members) were studied as analytes. The analytes in the extracts were determined by high‐performance liquid chromatography with UV detection. For the analytes with polar functionalities, the in situ ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction mode mostly led to better results. In contrast, for neutral hydrocarbons without polar functionalities, traditional dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction using chloroform produced better results. In this case, where dispersion forces were the dominant interactions in the extraction, the refractive index of solvent and analyte predicted the extraction performance better than the octanol/water partition coefficient. It was also revealed that none of the methods were successful in extracting hydrophilic analytes (compounds with the log octanol/water partition coefficient <2). The results of this study could be helpful in selecting a dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction mode for the extraction of various groups of compounds.