In-sample acetylation-non-porous membrane-assisted liquid–liquid extraction for the determination of parabens and triclosan in water samples

A procedure for the determination of seven parabens (esters of 4-hydroxybenzoic acid), including the distinction between branched and linear isomers of propyl- and butyl-parabens and triclosan in water samples, was developed and evaluated. The procedure includes in-sample acetylation-non-porous membrane-assisted liquid–liquid extraction and large volume injection–gas chromatography–ion trap–tandem mass spectrometry. Different derivatisation strategies were considered, i.e. post-extraction silylation with N-methyl-N-(tert-butyldimethylsilyl)-trifluoroacetamide and in situ acylation with acetic anhydride (Ac₂O) and isobutylchloroformate. Moreover, acceptor solvent and the basic catalyser of the acylation reaction were investigated. Thus, in situ derivatisation with Ac₂O and potassium hydrogenphosphate (as basic catalyser) was selected. Potassium hydrogenphosphate overcomes some drawbacks of other basic catalysers, e.g. toxicity and bubble formation, while leads to higher responses. Subsequently, other experimental variables affecting derivatisation–extraction yield such as pre-stirring time, salt addition and volume of Ac₂O were optimised by an experimental design approach. Under optimised conditions, the proposed method achieved detection limits from 0.1 to 1.4 ng L⁻¹ for a sample volume of 18 mL and extraction efficiencies, estimated by comparison with liquid–liquid extraction, between 46% (for methyl- and ethyl-parabens) and 110% (for benzylparaben). The reported sample preparation approach is free of matrix effects for parabens but affected for triclosan with a reduction of ≈ 40% when wastewater samples are analysed; therefore, both internal and external calibration can be used as quantification techniques for parabens, but internal standard calibration is mandatory for triclosan. The application of the method to real samples revealed the presence of these compounds in raw wastewater at concentrations up to 26 ng mL⁻¹, the prevalence of the linear isomer of propylparaben (n-PrP), and the coexistence of the two isomers of butylparaben (i-BuP and n-BuP) at similar levels.     

Analysis of PAH compounds in soil with on-line coupled pressurised hot water extraction–microporous membrane liquid–liquid extraction–gas chromatography

Pressurised hot water extraction (PHWE) was coupled on-line with microporous membrane liquid-liquid extraction (MMLLE) and gas chromatography (GC) in the analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds in soil. The MMLLE serves as a trapping device after the PHWE. Water from PHWE is directed to the donor side of the membrane unit and the analytes are extracted to the acceptor solution on the other side of the membrane. The role of MMLLE is to clean and concentrate the extract, which is then transferred on-line to the GC via a sample loop and an on-column interface using partially concurrent solvent evaporation. Separate optimisation of MMLLE and simulations of the PHWE-MMLLE connection were carried out before the actual on-line coupling. After optimisation of the whole on-line system, the efficiencies of the PHWE-MMLLE-GC and PHWE-solid-phase trap extractions were compared. The PHWE-MMLLE-GC method allowed on-line analysis of soil samples. The method was linear, with limits of detection in the range 0.05-0.13 ng and limits of quantification 0.65-1.66 microg g(-1). Comparison of the results with those obtained by other techniques confirmed the good performance.     

Capabilities and limitations of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with solidification of floating organic drop for the extraction of organic pollutants from water samples

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with solidification of floating organic drop (DLLME-SFO) is one of the most interesting sample preparation techniques developed in recent years. Although several applications have been reported, the potentiality and limitations of this simple and rapid extraction technique have not been made sufficiently explicit. In this work, the extraction efficiency of DLLME-SFO for pollutants from different chemical families was determined. Studied compounds include: 10 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, 5 pesticides (chlorophenoxy herbicides and DDT), 8 phenols and 6 sulfonamides, thus, covering a large range of polarity and hydrophobicity (Log K_ow 0–7, overall). After optimization of extraction conditions using 1-dodecanol as extractant, the procedure was applied for extraction of each family from 10-mL spiked water samples, only adjusting sample pH as required. Absolute recoveries for pollutants with Log K_ow 3–7 were >70% and recovery values within this group (18 compounds) were independent of structure or hydrophobicity; the precision of recovery was very acceptable (RSD < 12%) and linear behavior was observed in the studied concentration range (r² > 0.995). Extraction recoveries for pollutants with Log K_ow 1.46–2.8 were in the range 13–62%, directly depending on individual Log K_ow values; however, good linearity (r² > 0.993) and precision (RSD < 6.5%) were also demonstrated for these polar solutes, despite recovery level. DLLME-SFO with 1-dodecanol completely failed for extraction of compounds with Log K_ow ≤ 1 (sulfa drugs), other more polar extraction solvents (ionic liquids) should be explored for highly hydrophilic pollutants.     

Effective liquid–liquid extraction method for analysis of pyrethroid and phenylpyrazole pesticides in emulsion-prone surface water samples

The distribution of pyrethroid and phenylpyrazole pesticides in the water environment has raised public concerns because of their potential risks to ecosystem and human health. However, co-extraction of emulsifier type compounds (by liquid–liquid extraction, LLE) present in environmental samples can present a challenge for quantifying typically low concentrations of pesticides. Several methods were evaluated for breaking emulsions in problematic environmental surface water samples extracted by LLE using methylene chloride. Target pesticides included 11 typical pyrethroid and phenylpyrazole pesticides commonly used in agricultural and landscape insect pest control. The most effective method was selected for validation in fortification studies with GC-ECD analysis. The average recoveries of spiked pyrethroid and phenylpyrazole pesticides were 88.2–123.4% for water samples with moderate emulsions and 93.0–117.4% for water samples with severe emulsions. Recoveries of the pesticides ranged 81.0–126.4% (water samples with moderate emulsions) and 95.9–110.6% (water samples with severe emulsions) for lowest fortification level (5–20 ng L⁻¹), 88.2–123.4% (water samples with moderate emulsions) and 93.0–117.4% (water samples with severe emulsions) for middle fortification level (10–40 ng L⁻¹), and 90.2–119.9% (water samples with moderate emulsions) and 91.2–105.9% (water samples with severe emulsions) for highest fortification level (50–200 ng L⁻¹). Relative standard deviations of pesticide recoveries were usually <10%. Results indicate that this method is a robust and reproducible option for LLE of pyrethroid and phenylpyrazole pesticides from emulsion-prone surface water samples.     

Low toxic dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction using halosolvents for extraction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in water samples

A low toxic dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (LT-DLLME) combined with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS) had been developed for the extraction and determination of 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in water samples. In normal DLLME assay, chlorosolvent had been widely used as extraction solvents; however, these solvents are environmental-unfriendly. In order to solve this problem, we proposed to use low toxic bromosolvent (1-bromo-3-methylbutane, LD₅₀ 6150 mg/kg) as the extraction solvent. In this study we compared the extraction efficiency of five chlorosolvents and thirteen bromo/iodo solvents. The results indicated that some of the bromo/iodo solvents showed better extraction and had much lower toxicity than chlorosolvents. We also found that propionic acid is used as the disperser solvent, as little as 50 μL is effective. Under optimum conditions, the range of enrichment factors and extraction recoveries of tap water samples are ranging 372–1308 and 87–105%, respectively. The linear range is wide (0.01–10.00 μg L⁻¹), and the limits of detection are between 0.0003 and 0.0078 μg L⁻¹ for most of the analytes. The relative standard deviations (RSD) for 0.01 μg L⁻¹ of PAHs in tap water were in the range of 5.1–10.0%. The performance of the method was gauged by analyzing samples of tap water, sea water and lake water samples.     

Trace determination of EDTA from water samples using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with HPLC-DAD

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) in conjunction with high-performance liquid chromatography-diode array detection (HPLC-DAD) has been applied to the extraction and determination of EDTA in sediments and water samples. The effect of extraction, nature and volume of disperser solvent, pH value of sample solution, extraction time and extraction temperature were investigated. Under the optimal conditions the analytical range of EDTA was from 3.0 to 50.0 μg L^?1 with a correlation coefficient of 0.9982 and a detection limit of 1.7 μg L^?1. The relative standard deviation (RSD) was less than 5.4% (n?=?5), and the recovery values were in the range of 89–95%. The simplicity, high enrichment, high recovery and good repeatability are the main advantages of the method presented. The DLLME-HPLC-DAD method was successfully applied to the analysis of EDTA in aqueous samples.     

At-line microextraction by packed sorbent-gas chromatography–mass spectrometry for the determination of UV filter and polycyclic musk compounds in water samples

An at-line analysis protocol is presented that allows the determination of four UV filters, two polycyclic musk compounds and caffeine in water at concentration level of ng L⁻¹. The fully automated method includes analytes enrichment by Microextraction by packed sorbent (MEPS) coupled directly to large volume injection-gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Two common SPE phases, C8 and C18, were examined for their suitability to extract the target substances by MEPS. The analytes were extracted from small sample volumes of 800 μL with recoveries ranging from 46 to 114% for the C8-sorbent and 65–109% for the C18-sorbent. Limits of detection between 34 and 96 ng L⁻¹ enable the determination of the analytes at common environmental concentration levels. Both sorbents showed linear calibration curves for most of the analytes up to a concentration level of 20 ng mL⁻¹. Carryover was minimized by washing the sorbents 10 times with 100 μL methanol. After this thorough cleaning, the MEPS are re-used and up to 70 analyses can be performed with the same sorbent. The fully automated microextraction GC–MS protocol was evaluated for the influence of matrix substances typical for wastewater. Dilution of samples prior to MEPS is recommended when the polar caffeine is present at high concentration. Real water samples were analyzed by the MEPS-GC–MS method and compared to standard SPE.     

Extraction of pesticides in water samples using vortex-assisted liquid–liquid microextraction

A simple solvent microextraction method termed vortex-assisted liquid–liquid microextraction (VALLME) coupled with gas chromatography micro electron-capture detector (GC-μECD) has been developed and used for the pesticide residue analysis in water samples. In the VALLME method, aliquots of 30 μL toluene used as extraction solvent were directly injected into a 25 mL volumetric flask containing the water sample. The extraction solvent was dispersed into the water phase under vigorously shaking with the vortex. The parameters affecting the extraction efficiency of the proposed VALLME such as extraction solvent, vortex time, volumes of extraction solvent and salt addition were investigated. Under the optimum condition, enrichment factors (EFs) in a range of 835–1115 and limits of detection below 0.010 μg L⁻¹ were obtained for the determination of target pesticides in water. The calculated calibration curves provide high levels of linearity yielding correlation coefficients (r²) greater than 0.9958 with the concentration level ranged from 0.05 to 2.5 μg L⁻¹. Finally, the proposed method has been successfully applied to the determination of pesticides from real water samples and acceptable recoveries over the range of 72–106.3% were obtained.     

Analysis of triorganotin compounds in water samples by hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography–electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry

Hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC)–electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry (ESI-MS) was evaluated for the analysis of tributyltin (TBT) and triphenyltin (TPT) in water samples. Separation was performed in isocratic mode on an Atlantis HILIC silica (2.1 mm × 150 mm, 5 μm) column with a mobile phase of acetonitrile–0.1% aqueous HCOOH (86:14, v/v) at a flow rate of 0.2 mL/min. Under optimum conditions, limits of detection for TBT and TPT were 10 and 20 pg injected onto the column, respectively. The extraction of triorganotin compounds from seawater samples was carried out using a polymer-based solid phase extraction cartridge of mixed modes with reversed-phase and weak anion exchange. Tributyltin-d₂₇ chloride and triphenyltin-d₁₅ chloride were used as internal standards. The relative standard deviations for the analysis were less than 4%. Using the proposed method, it was possible to analyze concentrations of TPT and TBT in seawater at ppt levels.     

Pre-concentration of phenolic compounds in water samples by novel liquid–liquid microextraction and determination by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Pre-concentration and determination of 8 phenolic compounds in water samples has been achieved by in situ derivatization and using a new liquid–liquid microextraction coupled GC–MS system. Microextraction efficiency factors have been investigated and optimized: 9 μL 1-undecanol microdrop exposed for 15 min floated on surface of a 10 mL water sample at 55 °C, stirred at 1200 rpm, low pH level and saturated salt conditions. Chromatographic problems associated with free phenols have been overcome by simultaneous in situ derivatization utilizing 40 μL of acetic anhydride and 0.5% (w/v) K₂CO₃. Under the selected conditions, pre-concentration factor of 235–1174, limit of detection of 0.005–0.68 μg/L (S/N = 3) and linearity range of 0.02–300 μg/L have been obtained. A reasonable repeatability (RSD ≤ 10.4%, n = 5) with satisfactory linearity (0.9995 ≥ r² ≥ 0.9975) of results illustrated a good performance of the present method. The relative recovery of different natural water samples was higher than 84%.     

Stir-bar-sorptive extraction and ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry for simultaneous analysis of UV filters and antimicrobial agents in water samples

Stir-bar-sorptive extraction (SBSE) with liquid desorption (LD) and ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography–electrospray ionization triple-quadrupole tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC–(ESI)MS–MS) were used for analysis of six personal care products in environmental water: four UV filters (2,2-dihydroxy-4-methoxybenzophenone, benzophenone-3, octocrylene, and octyldimethyl-p-aminobenzoic acid) and two antimicrobial agents (triclocarban and triclosan). Experimental conditions that affect SBSE-LD sorption efficiency (extraction time and temperature, sample pH, and ionic strength) and desorption efficiency (solvent, temperature, and time) were optimized. The method proved to be sensitive—a 50-mL sample was used to determine these compounds in environmental waters at trace levels. The detection limits of the analytical method were 2.5 ng L⁻¹ for river water and 5–10 ng L⁻¹ for effluent and influent sewage water. In river waters, benzophenone-3 was found at levels from 6 ng L⁻¹ to 28 ng L⁻¹ and triclosan at levels <LOQ. Benzophenone-3 was found between 75 and 127 ng L⁻¹ in influent sewage, whereas concentrations of benzophenone-3 and triclosan were commonly below 25 ng L⁻¹ in effluent sewage.     

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method based on solidification of floating organic drop for extraction of organochlorine pesticides in water samples

A new simple and rapid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method has been developed for the extraction and analysis of organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) in water samples. The method is based on the solidification of a floating organic drop (DLLME-SFO) and is combined with gas chromatography/electron capture detection (GC/ECD). Very little solvent is required in this method. The disperser solvent (200 μL acetonitrile) containing 10 μL hexadecane (HEX) is rapidly injected by a syringe into the 5.0 mL water sample. After centrifugation, the fine HEX droplets (6 ± 0.5 μL) float at the top of the screw-cap test tube. The test tube is then cooled in an ice bath. After 5 min, the HEX solvent solidifies and is then transferred into a conical vial, where it melts quickly at room temperature, and 1 μL of it is injected into a gas chromatograph for analysis. Under optimum conditions, the enrichment factors and extraction recoveries are high and range between 37–872 and 82.9–102.5%, respectively. The linear range is wide (0.025–20 μg L⁻¹), and the limits of detection are between 0.011 and 0.11 μg L⁻¹ for most of the analytes. The relative standard deviation (RSD) for 1 μg L⁻¹ of OCPs in water was in the range of 5.8–8.8%. The performance of the method was gauged by analyzing samples of lake and tap water.     

Development of molecularly imprinted-solid phase extraction combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for selective extraction and preconcentration of triazine herbicides from aqueous samples

In this study, a sensitive and developed method based on the use of molecularly imprinted-solid phase extraction along with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction has been reported for selective extraction and pre-concentration of triazine pesticides from aqueous samples. Molecularly imprinted microspheres (template, atrazine) were synthesized using precipitation polymerization and used as sorbent in SPE procedure. A model solution containing the studied pesticides was slowly passed through the atrazine-MIP cartridge. The adsorbed analytes were eluted with methanol, mixed with carbon tetrachloride (as extraction solvent) and rapidly injected into deionized water. In this process, the analytes were extracted into fine droplets of carbon tetrachloride and the fine droplets were sedimented in bottom of the conical test tube by centrifugation. Finally, GC-FID was used for the separation and determination of analytes in the sedimented phase. Some important parameters affecting the performance of developed method were completely investigated. The linear ranges of calibration curves were wide and limits of detection and limits of quantification were between 0.2–7 and 0.5–20 ng mL^?1, respectively. The relative standard deviation obtained for six repeated experiments of atrazine (10 ng mL^?1) was 3.1 %. The relative recoveries obtained for the atrazine in the spiked samples were within in the range of 92–98 %.     

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction and spectrophotometric determination of cobalt in water samples

A new simple and rapid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction has been applied to preconcentrate trace levels of cobalt as a prior step to its determination by spectrophotometric detection. In this method a small amount of chloroform as the extraction solvent was dissolved in pure ethanol as the disperser solvent, then the binary solution was rapidly injected by a syringe into the water sample containing cobalt ions complexed by 1-(2-pyridylazo)-2-naphthol (PAN). This forms a cloudy solution. The cloudy state was the result of chloroform fine droplets formation, which has been dispersed in bulk aqueous sample. Therefore, Co-PAN complex was extracted into the fine chloroform droplets. After centrifugation (2 min at 5000 rpm) these droplets were sedimented at the bottom of conical test tube (about 100 µL) and then the whole of complex enriched extracted phase was determined by a spectrophotometer at 577 nm. Complex formation and extraction are usually affected by some parameters, such as the types and volumes of extraction solvent and disperser solvent, salt effect, pH and the concentration of chelating agent, which have been optimised for the presented method. Under optimum conditions, the enhancement factor (as the ratio of slope of preconcentrated sample to that obtained without preconcentration) of 125 was obtained from 50 mL of water sample, and the limit of detection (LOD) of the method was 0.5 µg L^?1and the relative standard deviation (RSD, n = 5) for 50 µg L^?1 of cobalt was 2.5%. The method was applied to the determination of cobalt in tap and river water samples.     

Development of counter current salting-out homogenous liquid–liquid extraction for isolation and preconcentration of some pesticides from aqueous samples

In this paper, a new version of salting-out homogenous liquid–liquid extraction based on counter current mode combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction has been developed for the extraction and preconcentration of some pesticides from aqueous samples and their determination by gas chromatography–flame ionization detection. In order to perform the method, aqueous solution of the analytes containing acetonitrile and 1,2-dibromoethane is transferred into a narrow bore tube which is filled partially with NaCl. During passing the solution through the tube, fine droplets of the organic phase are produced at the interface of solution and salt which go up through the tube and form a separated layer on the aqueous phase. The collected organic phase is removed and injected into de-ionized water for more enrichment of the analytes. Under the optimum extraction conditions, the method shows broad linear ranges for the target analytes. Enrichment factors and limits of detection for the selected pesticides are obtained in the ranges of 3480–3800 and 0.1–5 μg L⁻¹, respectively. Relative standard deviations are in the range of 2–7% (n = 6, C = 50 or 100 μg L⁻¹, each analyte). Finally, some aqueous samples were successfully analyzed using the developed method.     

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction using an in situ metathesis reaction to form an ionic liquid extraction phase for the preconcentration of aromatic compounds from water

A novel microextraction method is introduced based on dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) in which an in situ metathesis reaction forms a water-immiscible ionic liquid (IL) that preconcentrates aromatic compounds from water followed by separation using high-performance liquid chromatography. The simultaneous extraction and metathesis reaction forming the IL-based extraction phase greatly decreases the extraction time as well as provides higher enrichment factors compared to traditional IL DLLME and direct immersion single-drop microextraction methods. The effects of various experimental parameters including type of extraction solvent, extraction and centrifugation times, volume of the sample solution, extraction IL and exchanging reagent, and addition of organic solvent and salt were investigated and optimized for the extraction of 13 aromatic compounds. The limits of detection for seven polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons varied from 0.02 to 0.3 μg L⁻¹. The method reproducibility produced relative standard deviation values ranging from 3.7% to 6.9%. Four real water samples including tap water, well water, creek water, and river water were analyzed and yielded recoveries ranging from 84% to 115%.      

Utilization of homogeneous liquid–liquid extraction followed by HPLC-UV as a sensitive method for the extraction and determination of phthalate esters in environmental water samples

A simple and sensitive method for the extraction of four phthalate esters including dimethyl phthalate (DMP), diethyl phthalate (DEP), benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP) and di-n-butyl phthalate (DBP) as well as their determination in water samples was developed using homogeneous liquid–liquid extraction (HLLE) and HPLC-UV. The extraction method is based on the phase separation phenomenon by the salt addition to the ternary solvent system. The extraction parameters such as type and volume of extracting and consolute solvent, concentration of salt, pH of sample and extraction time were optimized. Under the optimal conditions (extraction solvent: 100?µL CHCl₃; consolute solvent: 2.0?mL methanol; NaCl 15% (w/v) and pH of sample: 6.5) extraction recovery was in the range of 92–102%. Linearity was observed in the range of 0.5–300?µg?L^?1 for DEP and 0.6–300?µg?L^?1 for DMP, BBP and DBP. Correlation coefficients (r ²), limits of detection (LODs) and relative standard deviations (RSDs) were in the ranges of 0.9976–0.9993, 0.18–0.25 and 1.5–4.8%, respectively. The method was successfully applied for the preconcentration and determination of these phthalate esters in the several environmental water samples.     

Development of deep eutectic solvent–based microwave-assisted extraction combined with temperature controlled ionic liquid–based liquid phase microextraction for extraction of aflatoxins from cheese samples

In this study, for the first time, a deep eutectic solvent-based microwave-assisted extraction was combined with ionic liquid–based temperature controlled liquid phase microextraction for the extraction of several aflatoxins from cheese samples. Briefly, the analytes are extracted from cheese sample (3 g) into a mixture of 1.5 mL choline chloride:ethylene glycol deep eutectic solvent and 3.5 mL deionized water by exposing to microwave irradiations for 60 s at 180 W. The liquid phase was taken and mixed with 55 μL 1-hexyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate. By cooling the solution in the refrigerator centrifuge, a turbid state was obtained and the analytes were extracted into the ionic liquid droplets. The analytes were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography equipped with fluorescence detector. Low limits of detection (9–23 ng kg^–1) and quantification (30–77 ng kg^–1), high extraction recovery (66%–83%), acceptable enrichment factor (40–50), and good precision (relative standard deviations ≤ 5.2%) were obtained using the offered approach. These results reveal the high extraction capability of the method for determination of aflatoxins in the cheese samples. In this method, there was no need for organic solvents and it can be considered as green extraction method.     

Supramolecular solvent-based liquid phase microextraction of malachite green at trace level from water samples for its UV–vis spectrophotometric detection

A simple and fast microextraction procedure based on supramolecular solvent extraction of malachite green from water samples has been established in the presented work. The effective analytical parameters including pH, solvent volume, sample volume etc. on the quantitative recoveries of the malachite green were optimised. Matrix effects were also investigated. The preconcentration factor was found as 50. The limit of detection and limit of quantification were 16.3 and 54.5 µg L^?1, respectively. The relative standard deviation percentage was below 7%. The presented procedure was applied to the determination of malachite green content of natural water samples from fish farm and tap water etc.     

Simultaneous liquid–liquid microextraction and polypropylene microporous membrane solid-phase extraction of organochlorine pesticides in water,tomato and strawberry samples

A procedure involving the simultaneous performance of liquid–liquid microextraction and polypropylene microporous membrane solid-phase extraction was carried out. The applicability of the proposed procedure was evaluated through extraction of several organochlorine pesticides from river water, tomato and strawberry samples. The parameters affecting the extraction efficiency were optimized by multivariable designs, and the analytical features were estimated. Under optimized conditions, analytes were concentrated onto 1.5 cm long microporous membranes placed directly into the sample containing 15 mL of water with 20 μL of 1-octanol. The best extraction conditions were achieved at 59 °C, with 60 min of extraction time and 2.91 g of sodium chloride. The desorption of the analytes was carried out using 30 μL of a mixture of toluene and hexane in the proportion of 60:40% (v/v) for 10 min. Detection limits in the range of 2.7–20.0 ng L⁻¹, 0.50–1.15 μg kg⁻¹, and 1.53–12.77 μg kg⁻¹ were obtained for river water, strawberry and tomato samples, respectively. Good repeatability was obtained for all three sample types. The results suggest that the proposed procedure represents a very simple and low-cost microextraction alternative rendering adequate limits of quantification for the determination of organochlorine pesticides in environmental and food samples.