微波辅助萃取与超声波萃取丹参中丹酚酸B的比较研究

本文对微波辅助萃取和超声波萃取丹参中丹酚酸B进行了比较研究,并用高效液相色谱法(HPLC)测定了丹参中丹酚酸B.考察了微波辅助萃取和超声波萃取参数的影响,在各自最佳萃取条件下进行了丹参中的丹酚酸B提取率的比对,结果表明:微波辅助萃取6 min的提取率高于超声波萃取30 min的提取率.微波辅助萃取法与超声波萃取法相比具有省时、高效和溶剂用量少的特点.利用指纹图谱比较了两种萃取方式提取的化学成分的差异,结果显示两种萃取方法提取的主要成分组成基本相同,其共有成分比例相近.     

微波间歇萃取-分光光度法测定三七中总皂苷

本文建立了采用微波辅助间歇提取三七样品中的总皂苷,并以分光光度法测定其含量的实验方法。分别通过单因素实验和正交实验设计,优化了萃取溶剂浓度、溶剂用量、微波功率和微波辐射时间等提取条件,确定了微波辅助萃取法提取三七中皂苷类化合物的最佳条件为:使用浓度为60%的乙醇,在液固比100∶1的条件下,以255 W的微波功率,微波间歇萃取10×20 s。在上述最优条件下进行了精密度和回收率实验,加入回收率在97.7%~101.8%之间,RSD为1.54%(n=5)。与传统的索氏提取法和超声波提取法比较,微波辅助萃取法具有操作简便,宽速,重现性好等特点,实验结果表明此方法可推广应用于各类中草药中总皂苷的含量测定。     

快速溶剂萃取柚皮中的黄酮类化合物

采用快速溶剂萃取法从柚子皮中提取出黄酮类化合物,考察了不同的提取溶剂、提取时间、提取温度、循环次数等提取条件下的提取效果,并与微波法、超声波法及索氏提取法进行了对比.结果表明,快速溶剂萃取法提取柚子皮中的黄酮类化合物,在提取溶剂用量、提取时间和提取效率等方面,均优于传统的提取方法,且自动化程度高,为进一步开发利用柚子皮的药用价值提供了参考.     

加速溶剂萃取-气相色谱-质谱法测定土壤中醚类杀虫剂

农药的使用,对发展现代农业起到了积极作用,但是其大量使用甚至滥用,不仅对环境造成严重的污染,同时对人体健康造成危害,因此,对农药进行分析和检测十分必要[1]。固相基质(土壤等)的萃取方法主要有索氏提取[2]、超声辅助萃取[3]、微波辅助萃取[4]、超临界萃取[5]和加速溶剂萃取[6]等。加速溶剂萃取是在较高温度(50℃~200℃)、较高压力(6.89~20.68MPa)下对样品进行萃取,溶剂用量     

土壤中吡虫啉加速溶剂萃取和传统提取方法对比研究

对土壤样品中吡虫啉快速压力溶剂萃取技术(PSE)与传统提取方法(超声波萃取、振荡提取和索氏萃取)进行了对比研究。结合固相萃取柱(SPE)净化-HPLC测定技术比较了4种提取方法对土壤样品中吡虫啉的提取效果。探讨了温度对PSE的影响,确定在萃取压力100bar、温度80℃条件下,PSE效果最好,3个土壤样品不同添加浓度下,吡虫啉平均回收率均大于85%,标准偏差小于2.5%。与从土壤中提取吡虫啉的传统方法相比,PSE回收率高于超声波萃取和振荡提取,其重现性和回收率与索氏萃取相当甚至更好,而且PSE避免了使用超声波萃取和振荡提取所带来的多次清洗的问题,节省溶剂;比索氏萃取节省时间。     

中药大黄中蒽醌的微波辅助流动萃取研究

利用微波辅助流动萃取法提取大黄中的蒽醌类化合物，考察了微波提取条件(包括溶剂浓度、微波辐射功率、溶剂提升量)对大黄中葸醌提取率的影响，采用分光光度法测定提取液中蒽醌的含量．结果表明溶剂为60%乙醇，提升量为4mL／min，微波功率为80％时，提取效率最佳．微波辅助流动萃取法与超声波法和索氏提取法相比，具有提取效率高，时间短且节能的良好特点．     

微波辅助萃取新鲜芦荟叶中芦荟甙的研究

应用密闭微波萃取装置对芦荟中的有效成分芦荟甙进行了微波萃取研究,并利用透射电子显微镜对微波萃取机理进行了初步探讨.讨论了不同萃取剂、溶剂浓度、萃取时间和微波功率等对提取率的影响.在萃取剂为乙醇-水体系,溶剂(乙醇)体积分数为70%、萃取时间为4min及微波功率为340W的条件下,萃取效果最佳.与索氏提取及超声波萃取法相比,本法具有萃取速度快、提取率高及溶剂用量少等特点.     

UE/ME-GC-MS提取分析普洱茶的挥发和半挥发性成分

采用超声波提取（UE）和微波萃取（ME）两种前处理方法提取普洱茶的挥发性成分,利用气相色谱-质谱（GC-MS）联用仪进行定性检测,并加入乙酸苯乙酯作为内标进行定量分析。结果表明：两种萃取方法共鉴定出挥发性成分88种,其中超声波萃取检测出79种,微波萃取检测出69种。普洱茶的主要挥发性成分有11,14,17-二十三碳烯酸甲酯、咖啡因、棕榈酸、维生素E、β-香树脂醇、植醇等。超声波萃取法得到的提取率较高,而微波提取法耗时较短,两者各有所长,应根据需要来选择。     

微波辅助微固相萃取-气相色谱/质谱法测定河水中5种有机磷农药

建立了一种微波辅助微固相萃取法,用于提取河水中的5种有机磷农药,用多壁碳纳米管做微固相萃取的吸附剂,对河水中的有机磷农药进行吸附,解析液用气相色谱/质谱法(GC-MS)分析。实验考察了提取温度、时间、解析溶剂的种类、解析时间对目标化合物峰面积的影响。确定最优的实验条件为:微波提取温度为70℃、提取时间为5min、乙酸乙酯为解析溶剂、超声解析的时间为10min。对加标的河水样品进行了分析,所得河水样品中被测物的回收率为94.3%~99.3%,相对标准偏差(RSD)为2.1%~5.9%。     

不同基质中有机氯农药提取技术及发展趋势

该文根据各种基质特点及其中有机氯农药的分布特点,对不同介质中有机氯农药的提取方法进行了归纳.着重介绍了不同基质中有机氯农药提取方法,如均质法、固相萃取法、索氏提取法、基质固相分散法、加速溶剂萃取法、超临界流体提取法、超声波提取法和微波辅助提取法等.通过详细实例,总结了上述提取方法的优缺点,并对有机氯农药提取方法做了展望...     

加速溶剂萃取技术在中药有效成分分析中的应用

以两种药材为研究实例,对加速溶剂萃取法（ASE）在中药材有效成分提取研究中的应用进行了简要介绍。采用正交试验法考察了提取丹参中丹酚酸B的提取条件（萃取温度、静态萃取时间、萃取溶剂以及料液比）,确定了较好的实验条件。比较了ASE、水蒸气蒸馏法、超声波提取法及索氏提取法对木香挥发油的提取效果,结果表明ASE对木香挥发油的提取效果最好。     

Evaluation of Soxhlet extraction, accelerated solvent extraction and microwave-assisted extraction for the determination of polychlorinated biphenyls and polybrominated diphenyl ethers in soil and fish samples

Three commonly applied extraction techniques for persistent organic chemicals, Soxhlet extraction (SE), accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) and microwave-assisted extraction (MAE), were applied on soil and fish samples in order to evaluate their performances. For both PCBs and PBDEs, the two more recent developed techniques (ASE and MAE) were in general capable of producing comparable extraction results as the classical SE, and even higher extraction recoveries were obtained for some PCB congeners with large octanol-water partitioning coefficients (K_ow). This relatively uniform extraction results from ASE and MAE indicated that elevated temperature and pressure are favorable to the efficient extraction of PCBs from the solid matrices. For PBDEs, difference between the results from MAE and ASE (or SE) suggests that the MAE extraction condition needs to be carefully optimized according to the characteristics of the matrix and analyte to avoid degradation of higher brominated BDE congeners and improve the extraction yields.     

Comparison of different extraction techniques for the determination of chlorinated pesticides in animal feed

The performances of Soxhlet extraction, dive-in Soxhlet extraction, microwave-assisted extraction (MAE), accelerated solvent extraction (ASE), fluidized-bed extraction (FBE), and ultrasonic extraction (UE) for the analysis of organochlorine pesticides in animal feed have been investigated. ASE and MAE provided significantly better extraction efficiency than Soxhlet extraction. The concentrations were 126.7 and 114.8%, respectively, of the values obtained by classical Soxhlet extraction, whereas the results from FBE and dive-in Soxhlet were comparable with those from the standard Soxhlet procedure. The reproducibility of FBE was the best, with RSDs ranging from 0.3 to 3.9%. Under the investigated operation conditions UE was not efficient, with the recoveries of target compounds being about 50% less than Soxhlet. Additionally, the performances of Soxhlet, dive-in Soxhlet, MAE, ASE and FBE were validated by determination of the certified reference material BCR-115. The results from the extraction techniques were in good agreement with the certified values.     

Extraction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and organochlorine pesticides from soils: a comparison between Soxhlet extraction, microwave-assisted extraction and accelerated solvent extraction techniques

The methods of simultaneous extraction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) from soils using Soxhlet extraction, microwave-assisted extraction (MAE) and accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) were established, and the extraction efficiencies using the three methods were systemically compared from procedural blank, limits of detection and quantification, method recovery and reproducibility, method chromatogram and other factors. In addition, soils with different total organic carbon contents were used to test the extraction efficiencies of the three methods. The results showed that the values obtained in this study were comparable with the values reported by other studies. In some respects such as method recovery and reproducibility, there were no significant differences among the three methods for the extraction of PAHs and OCPs. In some respects such as procedural blank and limits of detection and quantification, there were significant differences among the three methods. Overall, ASE had the best extraction efficiency compared to MAE and Soxhlet extraction, and the extraction efficiencies of MAE and Soxhlet extraction were comparable to each other depending on the property such as TOC content of the studied soil. Considering other factors such as solvent consumption and extraction time, ASE and MAE are preferable to Soxhlet extraction.     

GC/MS of terpenes in walnut-tree leaves after accelerated solvent extraction

Terpenes, e. g. (+)-alpha-pinene, (-)-camphene, (-)-(-pinene, myrcene, R-(+)-limonene, eucalyptol, (+/-)-linalool, (-)-bornyl acetate, (-)-trans-caryophyllene, and alpha-humulene were determined in leaves of walnut trees from the Juglandaceae family (walnut tree, royal (J. regia L.), black (J. nigra L.), and Siebold (J. sieboldiana, var. Cordiformis Lam.) using gas chromatography with mass spectrometric detection. Terpenes were repeatedly (3 cycles, 5 min each) extracted from leaves of walnut trees by accelerated (pressurized) solvent extraction (ASE) 150 bar and 120 degrees C. The efficiency of ASE extraction was superior to that of steam distillation, solvent extraction according to Soxhlet, sonication, and extraction by agitation. Differences in relative concentrations and distribution of terpenes were studied in dependence on the species of walnut tree and on different locations.     

Comparison of extraction techniques and modeling of accelerated solvent extraction for the authentication of natural vanilla flavors

Accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) of vanilla beans has been optimized using ethanol as a solvent. A theoretical model is proposed to account for this multistep extraction. This allows the determination, for the first time, of the total amount of analytes initially present in the beans and thus the calculation of recoveries using ASE or any other extraction technique. As a result, ASE and Soxhlet extractions have been determined to be efficient methods, whereas recoveries are modest for maceration techniques and depend on the solvent used. Because industrial extracts are obtained by many different procedures, including maceration in various solvents, authenticating vanilla extracts using quantitative ratios between the amounts of vanilla flavor constituents appears to be unreliable. When authentication techniques based on isotopic ratios are used, ASE is a valid sample preparation technique because it does not induce isotopic fractionation.     

Determination of acetanilide herbicides in cereal crops using accelerated solvent extraction, solid-phase extraction and gas chromatography-electron capture detector

A method was developed to determine eight acetanilide herbicides from cereal crops based on accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) and solid-phase extraction (SPE) followed by gas chromatography-electron capture detector (GC-ECD) analysis. During the ASE process, the effect of four parameters (temperature, static time, static cycles and solvent) on the extraction efficiency was considered and compared with shake-flask extraction method. After extraction with ASE, four SPE tubes (graphitic carbon black/primary secondary amine (GCB/PSA), GCB, Florisil and alumina-N) were assayed for comparison to obtain the best clean-up efficiency. The results show that GCB/PSA cartridge gave the best recoveries and cleanest chromatograms. The analytical process was validated by the analysis of spiked blank samples. Performance characteristics such as linearity, limit of detection (LOD), limit of quantitation (LOQ), precision and recovery were studied. At 0.05 mg/kg spiked level, recoveries and precision values for rice, wheat and maize were 82.3-115.8 and 1.1-13.6%, respectively. For all the herbicides, LOD and LOQ ranged from 0.8 to 1.7 μg/kg and from 2.4 to 5.3 μg/kg, respectively. The proposed analytical methodology was applied for the analysis of the targets in samples; only three herbicides, propyzamid, metolachlor and diflufenican, were detected in two samples.     

加速溶剂萃取法快速提取黄连中的生物碱

探讨了快速溶剂萃取法（ASE）提取黄连中生物碱的可行性,并比较了该方法与回流提取法和超声提取法的优越性。以黄连中盐酸小檗碱的提取率为指标,以高效液相色谱法（HPLC）为检测方法,用正交实验对快速溶剂萃取法从黄连中提取盐酸小檗碱的工作条件进行优化。最佳仪器参数：提取溶剂为80%乙醇＋0.5%HCl,提取温度为130℃,静态提取时间为10 min,提取次数为1次。快速溶剂萃取法可作为黄连中生物碱分析测定的前处理方法。     

Application of accelerated solvent extraction to the investigation of saikosaponins from the roots of Bupleurum falcatum

Accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) was applied to the extraction of saikosaponin a, saikosaponin c and saikosaponin d from the roots of Bupleurum falcatum. Main extraction parameters such as the extraction solvents, extraction temperature and static extraction time were investigated and optimized. The optimized procedure employed 70% methanol as extraction solvent, 120°C of extraction temperature, 10 min of static extraction time, 60% of flush volume and the extraction recoveries of the three compounds were near to 100% with one extraction cycle. The extracted samples were analyzed by HPLC with UV detector. The HPLC conditions were as follows: Hypersil ODS2 (4.6 mm×250 mm, 5 μm) column, acetonitrile and water as mobile phase, flow rate of 1.0 mL/min, UV detection wavelength of 204 nm and injection volume of 20 μL. Compared with the traditional methods including heat‐reflux extraction and ultrasonic‐assisted extraction, the proposed ASE method was more efficient and faster to be operated. The results indicated that ASE was an alternative method for extracting saikosaponins from the roots of B. falcatum.