Determination of Trihalomethanes in Drinking Water by Dispersive Liquid–Liquid Microextraction then Gas Chromatography with Electron-Capture Detection

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) has been used for preconcentration of trihalomethanes (THMs) in drinking water. In DLLME an appropriate mixture of an extraction solvent (20.0 μL carbon disulfide) and a disperser solvent (0.50 mL acetone) was used to form a cloudy solution from a 5.00-mL aqueous sample containing the analytes. After phase separation by centrifugation the enriched analytes in the settled phase (6.5 ± 0.3 μL) were determined by gas chromatography with electron-capture detection (GC–ECD). Different experimental conditions, for example type and volume of extraction solvent, type and volume of disperser solvent, extraction time, and use of salt, were investigated. After optimization of the conditions the enrichment factor ranged from 116 to 355 and the limit of detection from 0.005 to 0.040 μg L⁻¹. The linear range was 0.01–50 μg L⁻¹ (more than three orders of magnitude). Relative standard deviations (RSDs) for 2.00 μg L⁻¹ THMs in water, with internal standard, were in the range 1.3–5.9% (n = 5); without internal standard they were in the range 3.7–8.6% (n = 5). The method was successfully used for extraction and determination of THMs in drinking water. The results showed that total concentrations of THMs in drinking water from two areas of Tehran, Iran, were approximately 10.9 and 14.1 μg L⁻¹. Relative recoveries from samples of drinking water spiked at levels of 2.00 and 5.00 μg L⁻¹ were 95.0–107.8 and 92.2–100.9%, respectively. Comparison of this method with other methods indicates DLLME is a very simple and rapid (less than 2 min) method which requires a small volume of sample (5 mL).     

Determination of some sulfonylurea herbicides in soil by a novel liquid-phase microextraction combined with sweeping micellar electrokinetic chromatography

A novel method for the determination of five sulfonylurea herbicides in soil was developed by a dispersive solid-phase extraction (DSPE) clean-up followed by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME), prior to sweeping micellar electrokinetic chromatography (MEKC). In the DSPE-DLLME, 10 g of soil sample was first extracted with 10 mL of acetonitrile containing 5% formic acid (pH 3.0). The extract was then cleaned-up by a DSPE with C₁₈ as sorbent. A 1 mL aliquot of the resulting extract was then added into a centrifuge tube containing 5 mL of water adjusted to pH 2.0 and 60.0 μL chlorobenzene (as extraction solvent) for DLLME procedure. Then, the organic sample extraction solution was evaporated to dryness, and reconstituted with 20.0 μL of 1.0 mmol L⁻¹ Na₂HPO₄ (pH 10.0) for sweeping-MEKC analysis after DLLME. Under optimized conditions, the method provided as high as 3,000- to 5,000-fold enrichments factors. The linearity of the method was in the range of 3.3–200 ng g⁻¹ for chlorimuron ethyl and bensulfuron methyl, and in the range of 1.7–200 ng g⁻¹ for tribenuron methyl, chlorsulfuron and metsulfuron methyl, with the correlation coefficients (r) ranging from 0.9965 to 0.9983, respectively. The limits of detection (LODs) ranged from 0.5 to 1.0 ng g⁻¹. The intraday relative standard deviations (RSDs, n = 5) were below 5.3% and interday RSDs (n = 15) within 6.8%. The recoveries of the method for the five sulfonylureas from soil samples at spiking levels of 5.0, 20.0, and 100.0 ng g⁻¹ were 76.0–93.5%, respectively. The developed method has been successfully applied to the analysis of the target sulfonylurea herbicide residues in soil samples with a satisfactory result.     

Orthogonal array optimization of ionic liquid based dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction for toxic anilines in foods

A simple and rapid method of ionic liquid based dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction(DLLME) combining with high performance liquid chromatography(HPLC) was developed for the analysis of four toxic anilines in flour steamed bread and maize steamed bread.Several possible influential factors such as the type of ionic liquid and disperser solvent,extraction time,sample pH,ionic strength and the volume of ionic liquid and disperser solvent were optimized using single factor experiments and orthogonal array design(OAD) with OA 25(5 4) matrix.Analysis of variance(ANOVA) and percent contribution(PC) were used to investigate the significance of the factors of OAD.Sample pH and ionic strength are statistically demonstrated two chief factors.Under the optimum condition,the method exhibits a good linearity(r 2 > 0.99) over the studied range(50-1000 ng g 1) for anilines.The extraction factors and recoveries for the anilines in two kinds of steamed breads ranged between 34.1%-73.3% and 44.3%-95.3%,respectively.The limit of detections(LODs) and limit of quantitations(LOQs) ranged between 10-15 ng g 1 and 30-45 ng g-1.     

Dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction and liquid chromatographic determination of pentachlorophenol in water

A simple and sensitive dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction method for extraction and preconcentration of pentachlorophenol (PCP) in water samples is presented. After adjusting the sample pH to 3, extraction was performed in the presence of 1% W/V sodium chloride by injecting 1 mL acetone as disperser solvent containing 15 μL tetrachloroethylene as extraction solvent. The proposed DLLME method was followed by HPLC-DAD for determination of PCP. It has good linearity (0.994) with wide linear dynamic range (0.1–1000 μg L⁻¹) and low detection limit (0.03 μg L⁻¹), which makes it suitable for determination of PCP in water samples.      

Comparison of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction and hollow fiber liquid–liquid–liquid microextraction for the determination of fentanyl,alfentanil, and sufentanil in water and biological fluids by high-performance liquid chromatography

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) and hollow fiber liquid–liquid–liquid microextraction (HF-LLLME) combined with HPLC–DAD have been applied for the determination of three narcotic drugs (alfentanil, fentanyl, and sufentanil) in biological samples (human plasma and urine). Different DLLME parameters influencing the extraction efficiency such as type and volume of the extraction solvent and the disperser solvent, concentration of NaOH, and salt addition were investigated. In the HF-LLLME, the effects of important parameters including organic solvent type, concentration of NaOH as donor solution, concentration of H₂SO₄ as acceptor phase, salt addition, stirring rate, temperature, and extraction time were investigated and optimized. The results showed that both extraction methods exhibited good linearity, precision, enrichment factor, and detection limit. Under optimal condition, the limits of detection ranged from 0.4 to 1.9 μg/L and from 1.1 to 2.3 μg/L for DLLME and HF-LLLME, respectively. For DLLME, the intra- and inter-day precisions were 1.7–6.4% and 14.2–15.9%, respectively; and for HF-LLLME were 0.7–5.2% and 3.3–10.1%, respectively. The enrichment factors were from 275 to 325 and 190 to 237 for DLLME and HF-LLLME, respectively. The applicability of the proposed methods was investigated by analyzing biological samples. For analysis of human plasma and urine samples, HF-LLLME showed higher precision, more effective sample clean-up, higher extraction efficiency, lower organic solvent consumption than DLLME.     

LC Determination of Trace Amounts of Phenoxyacetic Acid Herbicides in Water after Dispersive Liquid–Liquid Microextraction

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) for extraction and preconcentration of phenoxyacetic acid herbicides in water samples is described. After adjusting the pH to 1.5, the sample was extracted in the presence of 10% w/v sodium chloride by injecting 1 mL acetone as disperser solvent containing 25 μL of chlorobenzene as extraction solvent. The effect of parameters, such as the nature and amount of extraction and disperser solvents, ionic strength of the sample, pH, temperature and extraction time were optimized. DLLME was followed by LC for the determination of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and 4-chloro-2-methyl phenoxyacetic acid. The method had good linearity and a wide linear dynamic range (0.5–750 μg L^?1) with a detection limit of 0.16 μg L^?1 for both the PAAs, making it suitable for their determination in water samples.     

Dispersive liquid-phase microextraction using ionic liquid as extractant for the enrichment and determination of DDT and its metabolites in environmental water samples

Ionic liquids are a kind of environmentally friendly solvents which have drawn great attention in many fields. The potential of ionic liquid as dispersive liquid-phase microextraction (DLPME) solvent for the enrichment of typical persistent organic pollutants, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), and its metabolites including 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis-(4′-chlorophenyl)ethane and 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis-(4′-chlorophenyl)ethylene has been investigated. Parameters that may influence the extraction efficiency, such as the type and volume of ionic liquid, the type and volume of disperser solvent, extraction time, and sample pH, were investigated and optimized in detail. The experimental results showed the excellent linear relationship between peak area and the concentration of DDT and its metabolites over the range of 1–50 μg L⁻¹, and the precisions (RSDs) were 5.27–6.73% under the optimal conditions. The limits of detection could reach 0.33–0.63 μg L⁻¹. Satisfied results were achieved when the proposed method was applied to determine the target compounds in real-world water samples with spiked recoveries over the range 94.4–115.3%. All these facts indicated that ionic liquid DLPME coupled to HPLC was an environmentally friendly alternative for the rapid analysis of DDT and its metabolites at trace level in environmental water samples.     

Rapid determination of 226Ra in drinking water samples using dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction coupled with liquid scintillation counting

A new radioanalytical method was developed for rapid determination of ²²⁶Ra in drinking water samples. The method is based on extraction and preconcentration of ²²⁶Ra from a water sample to an organic solvent using a dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME) technique followed by radiometric measurement using liquid scintillation counting. In DLLME for ²²⁶Ra, a mixture of an organic extractant (toluene doped with dibenzo-21-crown-7 and 2-theonyltrifluoroacetone) and a disperser solvent (acetonitrile) is rapidly injected into the water sample resulting in the formation of an emulsion. Within the emulsion, ²²⁶Ra reacts with dibenzo-21-crown-7 and 2-theonyltrifluoroacetone and partitions into the fine droplets of toluene. The water/toluene phases were separated by addition of acetonitrile as a de-emulsifier solvent. The toluene phase containing ²²⁶Ra was then measured by liquid scintillation counting. Several parameters were studied to optimize the extraction efficiency of ²²⁶Ra, including water immiscible organic solvent, disperser and de-emulsifier solvent type and their volume, chelating ligands for ²²⁶Ra and their concentrations, inorganic salt additive and its concentration, and equilibrium pH. With the optimized DLLME conditions, the accuracy (expressed as relative bias, B _r ) and method repeatability (expressed as relative precision, S _B ) were determined by spiking ²²⁶Ra at the maximum acceptable concentration level (0.5 Bq L⁻¹) according to the Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality. Accuracy and repeatability were found to be less than −5% (B _r ) and less than 6% (S _B ), respectively, for both tap water and bottled natural spring water samples. The minimum detectable activity and sample turnaround time for determination of ²²⁶Ra was 33 mBq L⁻¹ and less than 3 h, respectively. The DLLME technique is selective for extraction of ²²⁶Ra from its decay progenies.     

Determination of cobalt in water samples by atomic absorption spectrometry after pre-concentration with a simple ionic liquid-based dispersive liquid-liquid micro-extraction methodology

A rapid dispersive liquid-liquid micro-extraction (DLLME) methodology based on the application of 1-hexylpyridinium hexafluorophosphate [C₆py][PF₆] ionic liquid (IL) as an extractant solvent was applied for the pre-concentration of trace levels of cobalt prior to determination by flame atomic absorption spectrometry (FAAS). 1-Phenyl-3-methyl-4-benzoyl-5-pyrazolone (PMBP) was employed as a chelator forming a Co-PMBP complex to extract cobalt ions from aqueous solution into the fine droplets of [C₆py][PF₆]. Some effective factors that influence the micro-extraction efficiency include the pH, the PMBP concentration, the amount of ionic liquid, the ionic strength, the temperature and the centrifugation time which were investigated and optimized. In the optimum experimental conditions, the limit of detection (3s) and the enrichment factor were 0.70 μg L⁻¹ and 60, respectively. The relative standard deviation (RSD) for six replicate determinations of 50 μg L⁻¹ Co was 2.36%. The calibration graph using the pre-concentration system was linear at levels 2–166 μg L⁻¹ with a correlation coefficient of 0.9982. The applicability of the proposed method was evaluated by the determination of trace amounts of cobalt in several water samples.      

Analysis of captan, folpet, and captafol in apples by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with gas chromatography

A novel method was developed for the determination of captan, folpet, and captafol in apples by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) coupled with gas chromatography–electron capture detection (GC–ECD). Some experimental parameters that influence the extraction efficiency, such as the type and volume of the disperser solvents and extraction solvents, extraction time, and addition of salt, were studied and optimized to obtain the best extraction results. Under the optimum conditions, high enrichment factors for the compounds were achieved ranging from 824 to 912. The recoveries of fungicides in apples at spiking levels of 20.0 μg kg⁻¹ and 70.0 μg kg⁻¹ were 93.0–109.5% and 95.4–107.7%, respectively. The relative standard deviations (RSDs) for the apple samples at 30.0 μg kg⁻¹ of each fungicide were in the range from 3.8 to 4.9%. The limits of detection were between 3.0 and 8.0 μg kg⁻¹. The linearity of the method ranged from 10 to 100 μg kg⁻¹ for the three fungicides, with correlation coefficients (r ²) varying from 0.9982 to 0.9997. The obtained results show that the DLLME combined with GC–ECD can satisfy the requirements for the determination of fungicides in apple samples. Figure Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) coupled with gas chromatography–electron capture detection (GC–ECD) allows satisfactory determination of fungicides in apple samples     

Combination of ionic liquid-based dispersive liquid-liquid micro-extraction with stopped-flow spectrofluorometry for the pre-concentration and determination of aluminum in natural waters, fruit juice and food samples

In this research, we combined ionic liquid-based dispersive liquid-liquid micro-extraction (IL-based DLLME) with stopped-flow spectrofluorometry (SFS) to evaluate the concentration of aluminum in different real samples at trace level. 1-Hexylpyridinium hexafluorophosphate [Hpy][PF₆] ionic liquid and 8-hydroxyquinoline (oxine), which forms a highly fluorescent complex with Al³⁺, were chosen as the extraction solvent and chelating agent, respectively. The hydrophobic Al-oxine complex was extracted into the [Hpy][PF₆] and separated from the aqueous phase. Then, the concentration of the enriched aluminum in the sediment phase was determined by SFS. Some effective parameters that influence the SFS signals and the micro-extraction efficiency, such as the suction and sending time, the concentration of the chelating agent, pH, the amount of the ionic liquid, the type of disperser solvent and diluting agent, ionic strength, extraction time, equilibration temperature and centrifugation time were investigated and optimized. In the optimum experimental conditions, the limit of detection (3 s) and enrichment factor were 0.05 μg L⁻¹ and 100, respectively. The relative standard deviation (RSD) for six replicate determinations of 6 μg L⁻¹ Al was 1.7%. The calibration graph using the pre-concentration system was linear in the range of 0.06-15 μg L⁻¹ with a correlation coefficient of 0.9989. The developed method was validated by the analysis of certified reference materials and applied successfully to the determination of aluminum in several water, fruit juice and food samples.     

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction based on ionic liquid in combination with high-performance liquid chromatography for the determination of bisphenol A in water

A method termed dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) coupled with high-performance liquid chromatography-variable wavelength detection (HPLC-VWD) was developed. DLLME-HPLC-VWD is a method for determination of bisphenol A (BPA) in water samples. In this microextraction method, several parameters such as extraction solvent volume, sample volume, disperser solvent, ionic strength, pH, and disperser volume were optimised with the aid of interactive orthogonal array and a mixed level experiment design. First, an orthogonal array design was used to screen the significant variables for the optimisation. Second, the significant factors were optimised by using a mixed level experiment. Under the optimised extraction conditions (extraction solvent: ionic liquid [C₆MIM][PF₆], 60 µL; dispersive solvent: methanol, 0.4 mL; and pH = 4.0), the performance of the established method was evaluated. The response linearity of the method was observed in a range of 0.002–1.0 mg L^?1 (three orders of magnitude) with correlation coefficient (R ²) of 0.9999. The repeatability of this method was 4.2–5.3% for three different BPA levels and the enrichment factors were above 180. The extraction recovery was about 50% for the three different concentrations with 3.4–6.4% of RSD. Limit of detection of the method was 0.40 µg L^?1 at a signal-to-noise ratio of 3. In addition, the relative recovery of sample of Songhua River, tap water and barrel-drain water at different spiked concentration levels was ranged 95.8–103.0%, 92.6–98.6% and 87.2–95.3%, respectively. Compared with other extraction technologies, there have been the following advantages of quick, easy operation, and time-saving for the present method.     

Ionic liquids dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction and high‐performance liquid chromatographic determination of irbesartan and valsartan in human urine

An environmentally friendly ionic liquids dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (IL‐DLLME) method coupled with high‐performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) for the determination of antihypertensive drugs irbesartan and valsartan in human urine samples was developed. The HPLC separations were accomplished in less than 10 min using a reversed‐phase C₁₈ column (250 × 4.60 mm i.d., 5 µm) with a mobile phase containing 0.3 % formic acid solution and methanol (v/v, 3:7; flow rate, 1.0 mL/min). UV absorption responses at 236 nm were linear over a wide concentration range from 50 µg/mL to the detection limits of 3.3 µg/L for valsartan and 1.5 µg/L for irbesartan. The effective parameters on IL‐DLLME, such as ionic liquid types and their amounts, disperser solvent types and their volume, pH of the sample and extraction time were studied and optimized. The developed IL‐DLLME‐HPLC was successfully applied for evaluation of the urine irbesartan and valsartan profile following oral capsules administration. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with high-performance liquid chromatography-UV detection as a very simple,rapid and sensitive method for the determination of bisphenol A in water samples

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) coupled with high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-UV detection was applied for the extraction and determination of bisphenol A (BPA) in water samples. An appropriate mixture of acetone (disperser solvent) and chloroform (extraction solvent) was injected rapidly into a water sample containing BPA. After extraction, sedimented phase was analyzed by HPLC-UV. Under the optimum conditions (extractant solvent: 142 μL of chloroform, disperser solvent: 2.0 mL of acetone, and without salt addition), the calibration graph was linear in the range of 0.5–100 μg L⁻¹ with the detection limit of 0.07 μg L⁻¹ for BPA. The relative standard deviation (RSD, n = 5) for the extraction and determination of 100 μg L⁻¹ of BPA in the aqueous samples was 6.0%. The results showed that DLLME is a very simple, rapid, sensitive and efficient analytical method for the determination of trace amount of BPA in water samples and suitable results were obtained.     

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled to liquid chromatography for thiamine determination in foods

A miniaturized dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) procedure coupled to liquid chromatography (LC) with fluorimetric detection was evaluated for the preconcentration and determination of thiamine (vitamin B₁). Derivatization was carried out by chemical oxidation of thiamine with 5 × 10⁻⁵ M ferricyanide at pH 13 to form fluorescent thiochrome. For DLLME, 0.5 mL of acetonitrile (dispersing solvent) containing 90 μL of tetrachloroethane (extraction solvent) was rapidly injected into 10 mL of sample solution containing the derivatized thiochrome and 24% (w/v) sodium chloride, thereby forming a cloudy solution. Phase separation was carried out by centrifugation, and a volume of 20 μL of the sedimented phase was submitted to LC. The mobile phase was a mixture of a 90% (v/v) 10 mM KH₂PO₄ (pH 7) solution and 10% (v/v) acetonitrile at 1 mL min⁻¹. An amide-based stationary phase involving a ligand with amide groups and the endcapping of trimethylsilyl was used. Specificity, linearity, precision, recovery, and sensitivity were satisfactory. Calibration graph was carried out by the standard additions method and was linear between 1 and 10 ng mL⁻¹. The detection limit was 0.09 ng mL⁻¹. The selectivity of the method was judged from the absence of interfering peaks at the thiamine elution time for blank chromatograms of unspiked samples. A relative standard deviation of 3.2% was obtained for a standard solution containing thiamine at 5 ng mL⁻¹. The esters thiamine monophosphate and thiamine pyrophosphate can also be determined by submitting the sample to successive acid and enzymatic treatments. The method was applied to the determination of thiamine in different foods such as beer, brewer’s yeast, honey, and baby foods including infant formulas, fermented milk, cereals, and purees. For the analysis of solid samples, a previous extraction step was applied based on an acid hydrolysis with trichloroacetic acid. The reliability of the procedure was checked by analyzing a certified reference material, pig’s liver (CRM 487). The value obtained was 8.76 ± 0.2 μg g⁻¹ thiamine, which is in excellent agreement with the certified value, 8.6 ± 1.1 μg g⁻¹.     

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction based on solidification of floating organic drop combined with field‐amplified sample injection in capillary electrophoresis for the determination of beta(2)‐agonists in bovine urine

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction based on solidification of floating organic drop (DLLME–SFO) was for the first time combined with field‐amplified sample injection (FASI) in CE to determine four β₂‐agonists (cimbuterol, clenbuterol, mabuterol, and mapenterol) in bovine urine. Optimum BGE consisted of 20 mM borate buffer and 0.1 mM SDS. Using salting‐out extraction, β₂‐agonists were extracted into ACN that was then used as the disperser solvent in DLLME–SFO. Optimum DLLME–SFO conditions were: 1.0 mL ACN, 50 μL 1‐undecanol (extraction solvent), total extraction time 1.5 min, no salt addition. Back extraction into an aqueous solution (pH 2.0) facilitated direct injection of β₂‐agonists into CE. Compared to conventional CZE, DLLME–SFO–FASI–CE achieved sensitivity enhancement factors of 41–1046 resulting in LODs in the range of 1.80–37.0 μg L^?1. Linear dynamic ranges of 0.15–10.0 mg L^?1 for cimbuterol and 15–1000 μg L^?1 for the other analytes were obtained with coefficients of determination (R²) ≥ 0.9901 and RSD% ≤5.5 (n = 5). Finally, the applicability of the proposed method was successfully confirmed by determination of the four β₂‐agonists in spiked bovine urine samples and accuracy higher than 96.0% was obtained.     

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction followed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry for the rapid and sensitive determination of UV filters in environmental water samples

The performance of the dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) technique for the determination of eight UV filters and a structurally related personal care species, benzyl salicylate (BzS), in environmental water samples is evaluated. After extraction, analytes were determined by gas chromatography combined with mass spectrometry detection (GC-MS). Parameters potentially affecting the performance of the sample preparation method (sample pH, ionic strength, type and volume of dispersant and extractant solvents) were systematically investigated using both multi- and univariant optimization strategies. Under final working conditions, analytes were extracted from 10 mL water samples by addition of 1 mL of acetone (dispersant) containing 60 μL of chlorobenzene (extractant), without modifying either the pH or the ionic strength of the sample. Limits of quantification (LOQs) between 2 and 14 ng L⁻¹, inter-day variability (evaluated with relative standard deviations, RSDs) from 9% to 14% and good linearity up to concentrations of 10,000 ng L⁻¹ were obtained. Moreover, the efficiency of the extraction was scarcely affected by the type of water sample. With the only exception of 2-ethylhexyl-p-dimethylaminobenzoate (EHPABA), compounds were found in environmental water samples at concentrations between 6 ± 1 ng L⁻¹ and 26 ± 2 ng mL⁻¹.     

Ionic liquid based dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the extraction of pesticides from bananas

This paper describes a dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) procedure using room temperature ionic liquids (RTILs) coupled to high-performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection capable of quantifying trace amounts of eight pesticides (i.e. thiophanate-methyl, carbofuran, carbaryl, tebuconazole, iprodione, oxyfluorfen, hexythiazox and fenazaquin) in bananas. Fruit samples were first homogenized and extracted (1 g) with acetonitrile and after suitable evaporation and reconstitution of the extract in 10 mL of water, a DLLME procedure using 1-hexyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([C₆MIM][PF₆]) as extraction solvent was used. Experimental conditions affecting the DLLME procedure (sample pH, sodium chloride percentage, ionic liquid amount and volume of disperser solvent) were optimized by means of an experimental design. In order to determine the presence of a matrix effect, calibration curves for standards and fortified banana extracts (matrix matched calibration) were studied. Mean recovery values of the extraction of the pesticides from banana samples were in the range of 69–97% (except for thiophanate-methyl and carbofuran, which were 53–63%) with a relative standard deviation lower than 8.7% in all cases. Limits of detection achieved (0.320–4.66 μg/kg) were below the harmonized maximum residue limits established by the European Union (EU). The proposed method, was also applied to the analysis of this group of pesticides in nine banana samples taken from the local markets of the Canary Islands (Spain). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first application of RTILs as extraction solvents for DLLME of pesticides from samples different than water.     

Determination of Estrone and 17β-Estradiol in Water Samples Using Dispersive Liquid–Liquid Microextraction Followed by LC

A new method, termed dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME), was developed for the extraction and pre-concentration of estrone (E1) and 17β-estradiol (E2) in water samples. The samples were extracted by 0.50 mL methanol (disperser solvent) containing 25.0 μL tetrachloroethane (extraction solvent). Important factors such as the volume and type of extraction and disperser solvent, extraction time and salt effect were studied. Under optimum conditions, the enrichment factors and the limits of detection were 347 and 0.2 ng mL^?1 for E1, and 203 and 0.1 ng mL^?1 for E2, respectively. The linear range was 0.5–5,000 ng mL^?1. Compared to other methods, DLLME–LC–VWD has advantages for E1 and E2 analysis in water: high enrichment factor, low cost, simplicity, quick and easy operation.     

Determination of atranol and chloroatranol in perfumes using simultaneous derivatization and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction followed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

A new analytical method based on simultaneous derivatization and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) followed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS), for the determination of the allergenic compounds atranol and chloroatranol in perfumes, is presented. Derivatization of the target analytes by means of acetylation with anhydride acetic in carbonate buffer was carried out. Thereby volatility and detectability were increased for improved GC–MS sensitivity. In addition, extractability by DLLME was also enhanced due to a less polar character of the solutes. A liquid–liquid extraction was performed before DLLME to clean up the sample and to obtain an aqueous sample solution, free of the low polar matrix from the essential oils, as donor phase. Different parameters, such as the nature and volume of both the extraction and disperser solvents, the ionic strength of the aqueous donor phase or the effect of the derivatization reagent volume, were optimized. Under the selected conditions (injection of a mixture of 750 μL of acetone as disperser solvent, 100 μL of chloroform as extraction solvent and 100 μL of anhydride acetic as derivatization reagent) the figures of merit of the proposed method were evaluated. Limits of detection in the low ng mL⁻¹ range were obtained. Matrix effect was observed in real perfume samples and thus, standard addition calibration is recommended.