Suitability of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the in situ silylation of chlorophenols in water samples before gas chromatography with mass spectrometry

Trace analysis of chlorophenols in water was performed by simultaneous silylation and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction followed by gas chromatography with mass spectrometry. Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction was carried out using an organic solvent lighter than water (n‐hexane). The effect of different silylating reagents on the method efficiency was investigated. The influence of derivatization reagent volume, presence of catalyst and derivatization/extraction time on the yield of the derivatization reaction was studied. Different parameters affecting extraction efficiency such as kind and volume of extraction and disperser solvents, pH of the sample and addition of salt were also investigated and optimized. Under the optimum conditions, the calibration graphs were linear in the range of 0.05–100 ng/mL and the limit of detection was 0.01 ng/mL. The enrichment factors were 242, 351, and 363 for 4‐chlorophenol, 2,4‐dichlorophenol, and 2,4,6‐trichlorophenol, respectively. The values of intra‐ and inter‐day relative standard deviations were in the range of 3.0–6.4 and 6.1–9.9%, respectively. The applicability of the method was investigated by analyzing water and wastewater samples.     

Sensitive determination of methadone in human serum and urine by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction based on the solidification of a floating organic droplet followed by HPLC–UV

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction based on solidification of floating organic droplet was developed for the extraction of methadone and determination by high‐performance liquid chromatography with UV detection. In this method, no microsyringe or fiber is required to support the organic microdrop due to the usage of an organic solvent with a low density and appropriate melting point. Furthermore, the extractant droplet can be collected easily by solidifying it at low temperature. 1‐Undecanol and methanol were chosen as extraction and disperser solvents, respectively. Parameters that influence extraction efficiency, i.e. volumes of extracting and dispersing solvents, pH, and salt effect, were optimized by using response surface methodology. Under optimal conditions, enrichment factor for methadone was 134 and 160 in serum and urine samples, respectively. The limit of detection was 3.34 ng/mmL in serum and 1.67 ng/mL in urine samples. Compared with the traditional dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, the proposed method obtained lower limit of detection. Moreover, the solidification of floating organic solvent facilitated the phase transfer. And most importantly, it avoided using high‐density and toxic solvents of traditional dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method. The proposed method was successfully applied to the determination of methadone in serum and urine samples of an addicted individual under methadone therapy.     

Use of an ionic liquid‐based surfactant as pseudostationary phase in the analysis of carbamates by micellar electrokinetic chromatography

The applicability of an ionic liquid‐based cationic surfactant 1‐dodecyl‐3‐methyl‐imidazolium tetrafluoroborate (C₁₂MImBF₄) as pseudostationary phase in MEKC has been evaluated for the analysis of 11 carbamate pesticides (promecarb, carbofuran, metolcarb, fenobucarb, aldicarb, propoxur, asulam, benomyl, carbendazim, ethiofencarb, isoprocarb) in juice samples. Under optimum conditions (separation buffer, 35 mM NaHCO₃ and 20 mM C₁₂MImBF₄, pH 9.0; capillary temperature 25°C; voltage –22 kV) the analysis was carried out in less than 12 min, using hydrodynamic injection (50 mbar for 7.5 s) and detection at 200 nm. For the extraction of these CRBs from juice samples, a dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) procedure has been proposed, by optimization of variables affecting the efficiency of the extraction. Following this treatment, sample throughput was approximately 12 samples per hour, obtaining a preconcentration factor of 20. Matrix‐matched calibration curves were established using tomato juice as representative matrix (from 5 to 250 μg/L for CBZ, BY, PX, CF, FEN, ETH, ISP, and 25–250 μg/L for ASL, ALD, PRC, MTL), obtaining quantification limits ranging from 1 to 18 μg/L and recoveries from 70 to 96%, with RSDs lower than 9%.     

Determination of phthalic acid esters in Chinese white spirit using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with sweeping β‐cyclodextrin‐modified micellar electrokinetic chromatography

A simple method that consumes low organic solvent is proposed for the analysis of phthalic acid esters in Chinese white spirit using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with sweeping‐micellar electrokinetic chromatography. Tetrachloromethane and white‐spirit‐containing ethanol were used as the extraction and dispersing solvents, respectively. The electrophoresis separation buffer was composed of 5 mM β‐cyclodextrin, 50 mM sodium dodecyl sulfate and 25 mM borate buffer (pH 9.2) with 9% acetonitrile, enabling the baseline resolution of the analytes within 13 min. Under the optimum conditions, satisfactory linearities (5–1000 ng/mL, r ≥ 0.9909), good reproducibility (RSD ≤ 6.7% for peak area, and RSD ≤ 2.8% for migration time), low detection limits (0.4–0.8 ng/mL) and acceptable recovery rates (89.6–105.7%) were obtained. The proposed method was successfully applied to 22 Chinese white spirits, and the content of dibutyl phthalate in 55% of the samples exceeded the Specific Migration Limit of 0.3 mg/kg established by the domestic and international regulations.     

Determination of phthalate esters in bottled water using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with GC–MS

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method was developed for the determination of the amount of phthalate esters in bottled drinking water samples and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction samples were analyzed by GC–MS. Various experimental conditions influencing the extraction were optimized. Under the optimized conditions, very good linearity was observed for all analytes in a range between 0.05 and 150 μg/L with coefficient of determination (R²) between 0.995 and 0.999. The LODs based on S/N = 3 were 0.005–0.22 μg/L. The reproducibility of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction was evaluated. The RSDs were 1.3–5.2% (n = 3). The concentrations of phthalates were determined in bottled samples available in half shell. To understand the leaching profile of these phthalates from bottled water, bottles were exposed to direct sunlight during summer (temperature from 34–57°C) and sampled at different intervals. Result showed that the proposed dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction is suitable for rapid determination of phthalates in bottled water and di‐n‐butyl, butyl benzyl, and bis‐2‐ethylhexyl phthalate compounds leaching from bottles up to 36 h. Thereafter, degradation of phthalates was observed.     

Accelerated solvent extraction combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction before gas chromatography with mass spectrometry for the sensitive determination of phenols in soil samples

A method combining accelerated solvent extraction with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction was developed for the first time as a sample pretreatment for the rapid analysis of phenols (including phenol, m‐cresol, 2,4‐dichlorophenol, and 2,4,6‐trichlorophenol) in soil samples. In the accelerated solvent extraction procedure, water was used as an extraction solvent, and phenols were extracted from soil samples into water. The dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction technique was then performed on the obtained aqueous solution. Important accelerated solvent extraction and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction parameters were investigated and optimized. Under optimized conditions, the new method provided wide linearity (6.1–3080 ng/g), low limits of detection (0.06–1.83 ng/g), and excellent reproducibility (<10%) for phenols. Four real soil samples were analyzed by the proposed method to assess its applicability. Experimental results showed that the soil samples were free of our target compounds, and average recoveries were in the range of 87.9–110%. These findings indicate that accelerated solvent extraction with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction as a sample pretreatment procedure coupled with gas chromatography and mass spectrometry is an excellent method for the rapid analysis of trace levels of phenols in environmental soil samples.     

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with acetonitrile stacking through capillary electrophoresis for the determination of three selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor drugs in body fluids

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction was combined with acetonitrile stacking in capillary electrophoresis for the identification of three selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (citalopram, fluoxetine, and fluvoxamine) in human fluids such as urine and plasma. Parameters that affect the extraction and stacking efficiency, such as the type and volume of the extraction and disperser solvent, extraction time, salt addition for dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, and sample matrices, pH, and concentration of the separation buffer for stacking, were investigated and optimized. Under optimum conditions, the enrichment factors were in the range of 1195–1441. Limits of detection ranged from 1.4 to 1.7 nM for the target analytes. Calibration graphs displayed satisfied linearity with R² greater than or equal to 0.9978, and relative standard deviations of the peak area analysis were in the range of 2.9–5.0% (n = 3). The recoveries of all tricyclic antidepressant drugs from urine and plasma were in the range of 77–117 and 79–106%, respectively. The findings of this study show that dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction acetonitrile‐stacking capillary electrophoresis is a rapid and convenient method for identifying tricyclic antidepressant drugs in urine and plasma.     

Ultrapreconcentration and determination of organophosphorus pesticides in water by solid‐phase extraction combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction and high‐performance liquid chromatography

Solid‐phase extraction coupled with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction was developed as an ultra‐preconcentration method for the determination of four organophosphorus pesticides (isocarbophos, parathion‐methyl, triazophos and fenitrothion) in water samples. The analytes considered in this study were rapidly extracted and concentrated from large volumes of aqueous solutions (100 mL) by solid‐phase extraction coupled with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction and then analyzed using high performance liquid chromatography. Experimental variables including type and volume of elution solvent, volume and flow rate of sample solution, salt concentration, type and volume of extraction solvent and sample solution pH were investigated for the solid‐phase extraction coupled with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with these analytes, and the best results were obtained using methanol as eluent and ethylene chloride as extraction solvent. Under the optimal conditions, an exhaustive extraction for four analytes (recoveries >86.9%) and high enrichment factors were attained. The limits of detection were between 0.021 and 0.15 μg/L. The relative standard deviations for 0.5 μg/L of the pesticides in water were in the range of 1.9–6.8% (n = 5). The proposed strategy offered the advantages of simple operation, high enrichment factor and sensitivity and was successfully applied to the determination of four organophosphorus pesticides in water samples.     

Preconcentration and determination of 2‐mercaptobenzimidazole by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction and experimental design

A method was developed to determine 2‐mercaptobenzimidazole in water and urine samples using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction technique coupled with ultraviolet–visible spectrophotometry. It was essential to peruse the effect of all parameters that can likely influence the performance of extraction. The influence of parameters, such as dispersive and extraction solvent volume and sample volume, on dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction was studied. The optimization was carried out by the central composite design method. The central composite design optimization method resulted in 1.10 mL dispersive solvent, 138.46 μL extraction solvent, and 4.46 mL sample volume. Under the optimal terms, the calibration curve was linear over the range of 0.003–0.18 and 0.007–0.18 μg/mL in water and urine samples, respectively. The limit of detection and quantification of the proposed approach for 2‐mercaptobenzimidazole were 0.013 and 0.044 μg/mL in water samples and 0.016 and 0.052 μg/mL in urine samples, respectively. The method was successfully applied to determination of 2‐mercaptobenzimidazole in urine and water samples.     

Solid‐phase extraction combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the determination of pyrethroid pesticides in wheat and maize samples

A rapid, selective and sensitive sample preparation method based on solid‐phase extraction combined with the dispersive liquid–liquid microextration was developed for the determination of pyrethroid pesticides in wheat and maize samples. Initially, the samples were extracted with acetonitrile and water solution followed phase separation with the salt addition. The following sample preparation involves a solid‐phase extraction and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction step, which effectively provide cleanup and enrichment effects. The main experimental factors affecting the performance both of solid‐phase extraction and dispersive liquid–liquid microextration were investigated. The validation results indicated the suitability of the proposed method for routine analyze of pyrethroid pesticides in wheat and maize samples. The fortified recoveries at three levels ranged between 76.4 and 109.8% with relative standard deviations of less than 10.7%. The limit of quantification of the proposed method was below 0.0125 mg/kg for the pyrethoroid pesticides. The proposed method was successfully used for the rapid determination of pyrethroid residues in real wheat and maize samples from crop field in Beijing, China.     

Ionic liquid foam floatation coupled with ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the separation and determination of estrogens in water samples by high‐performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection

An ionic liquid foam floatation coupled with ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method was proposed for the extraction and concentration of 17‐α‐estradiol, 17‐β‐estradiol‐benzoate, and quinestrol in environmental water samples by high‐performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection. 1‐Hexyl‐3‐methylimidazolium tetrafluoroborate was applied as foaming agent in the foam flotation process and dispersive solvent in microextraction. The introduction of the ion‐pairing and salting‐out agent NH₄PF₆ was beneficial to the improvement of recoveries for the hydrophobic ionic liquid phase and analytes. Parameters of the proposed method including concentration of 1‐hexyl‐3‐methylimidazolium tetrafluoroborate, flow rate of carrier gas, floatation time, types and concentration of ionic liquids, salt concentration in samples, extraction time, and centrifugation time were evaluated. The recoveries were between 98 and 105% with relative standard deviations lower than 7% for lake water and well water samples. The isolation of the target compounds from the water was found to be efficient, and the enrichment factors ranged from 4445 to 4632. This developing method is free of volatile organic solvents compared with regular extraction. Based on the unique properties of ionic liquids, the application of foam floatation, and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction was widened.     

Simultaneous preconcentration and determination of 2,4‐D,alachlor and atrazine in aqueous samples using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction followed by high‐performance liquid chromatography ultraviolet detection

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with high‐performance liquid chromatography‐ultraviolet detection as a fast and inexpensive technique was applied to the simultaneous extraction and determination of traces of three common herbicides, 2,4‐D, alachlor and atrazine, in aqueous samples. The critical experimental parameters, including type of the extraction and disperser solvents as well as their volumes, sample pH, salt addition, extraction time and centrifuging time, and speed were investigated and optimized. Under the optimum conditions, the calibration graphs found to be linear in the range of 0.3–200 μg/L with limits of detection in the range of 0.05–0.1 μg/L. The relative standard deviations were in the range of 4.5–6.2% (n = 7). The relative recoveries of well, tap, and river water samples which have been spiked with different levels of herbicides were 92.0–107.0, 82.0–104.0, and 82.0–86.0%, respectively.     

Use of dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction for the determination of carbamates in juice samples by sweeping-micellar electrokinetic chromatography

Dispersive liquid?Cliquid microextraction (DLLME) has been proposed for the extraction and preconcentration of 12 carbamate pesticides in juice samples, followed by their determination by micellar electrokinetic chromatography with diode-array detection. To improve sensitivity, an on-capillary sample concentration method based on sweeping has been developed. Also, separations were performed in an extended light path fused-silica capillary; the separation buffer consisted of 100?mM borate and 50?mM SDS (pH?9.0) with 5% acetonitrile. Samples were introduced by hydrodynamic injection, dissolved in the separation buffer, but free of micelles. Several parameters of the DLLME procedure (such as type and volume of extraction and dispersive solvents, pH, salt addition, and extraction time) were optimized. Recoveries obtained for fortified juice samples (banana, pineapple, and tomato) at three different concentration levels, ranged from 78% to 105%, with relative standard deviations lower than 9%. The limits of detection ranged from 1 to 7???g l^?1. Moreover, the method is fast, simple, and environmentally friendly.     

Development of Dispersive Liquid‐Liquid Microextraction Based on Solidification of Floating Organic Drop for the Determination of Trace Cobalt in Water Samples

A liquid‐phase microextraction technique was developed using dispersive liquid‐liquid microextraction based on solidification of floating organic drop combined with flame atomic absorption spectrometry, for the extraction and determination of trace amounts of cobalt in water samples. Microextraction efficiency factors, such as the type and volume of extraction and dispersive solvents, pH, extraction time, the chelating agent amount, and ionic strength were investigated and optimized. Under optimum conditions, an enrichment factor of 160 was obtained from 10.0 mL of water sample. The calibration graph was linearin the range of 1.15‐110 μg L^?1 with a detection limit of 0.35 μg L^?1. The relative standard deviation for ten replicate measurements of 10 and 100 μg L^?1 of cobalt were 3.26% and 2.57%, respectively. The proposed method was assessed through the analysis of certified reference water or recovery experiments.     

分散液液微萃取技术及其在生物样品分析中的研究进展

分散液液微萃取是一种新型微萃取技术,具有易操作、低成本、耗时短、环境友好、萃取效率高等优点。该文着眼于分散液液微萃取技术中萃取剂的性质及辅助分散方式,综述了常规分散液液微萃取、离子液体分散液液微萃取、超声辅助分散液液微萃取等多种萃取模式,并重点归纳总结了近5年分散液液微萃取技术在生物样品分析领域的应用进展。     

Determination of chlorophenols in water using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with water‐in‐oil microemulsion electrokinetic chromatography in normal stacking mode

The current routes to couple dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with capillary electrophoresis are the evaporation of water immiscible extractants and the back‐extraction of analytes. In this study, a new methodology for this combination using water‐in‐oil microemulsion electrokinetic chromatography coupled with normal stacking mode on‐line sample concentration was developed to analyze chlorophenols in water samples. The analytes were extracted with tributyl phosphate and the extractant dilution (3×) was directly injected into an electrophoresis buffer (7.7 cm) containing 5% sodium dodecyl sulfate, 78% 1‐butanol, 2% 1‐heptane, and 15% sodium acetate solution (pH 8.0). This proposed method is very simple and convenient compared to the conventional procedures. The key parameters affecting separation and concentration were systematically optimized. Under the optimized conditions, dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction contributed an enrichment factor of 45–50, and the overall sensitivity improvement was 312–418‐fold. Limits of detection between 1.4 and 3.0 ng/mL and limits of quantification between 4.5 and 10.2 ng/mL were achieved. Acceptable repeatability lower than 3.0% for migration time and 9.0% for peak areas were obtained. The developed method was successfully applied for analysis of the chlorophenols in real water samples.     

Determination of organochlorine pesticides in snow water samples by low density solvent based dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction

A simple, rapid, efficient, and environmentally friendly pretreatment based on a low‐density solvent based dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction was developed for determining trace levels of 17 organochlorine pesticides in snow. The parameters affecting the extraction efficiency, such as the type and volume of the extraction and dispersive solvents, extraction time, and salt content, were optimized. The optimized conditions yielded a good performance, with enrichment factors ranging from 271 to 474 and recoveries ranging from 71.4 to 114.5% and relative standard deviations between 1.6 and 14.8%. The detection limits, calculated as three times the signal‐to‐noise ratio, ranged from 0.02 to 0.11 μg/L. The validated method was used to successfully analyze 17 analytes in snow water samples, overcoming the drawbacks of some existing low‐density solvent liquid microextraction methods, which require special devices, large volumes of organic solvents, or complicated operation procedures.     

A comparison of various modes of liquid–liquid based microextraction techniques: Determination of picric acid

Three modes of liquid–liquid based microextraction techniques – namely auxiliary solvent‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, auxiliary solvent‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with low‐solvent consumption, and ultrasound‐assisted emulsification microextraction – were compared. Picric acid was used as the model analyte. The determination is based on the reaction of picric acid with Astra Phloxine reagent to produce an ion associate easily extractable by various organic solvents, followed by spectrophotometric detection at 558 nm. Each of the compared procedures has both advantages and disadvantages. The main benefit of ultrasound‐assisted emulsification microextraction is that no hazardous chlorinated extraction solvents and no dispersive solvent are necessary. Therefore, this procedure was selected for validation. Under optimized experimental conditions (pH 3, 7 × 10^?5 mol/L of Astra Phloxine, and 100 μL of toluene), the calibration plot was linear in the range of 0.02–0.14 mg/L and the LOD was 7 μg/L of picric acid. The developed procedure was applied to the analysis of spiked water samples.     

A hydrophobic deep eutectic solvent‐based vortex‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with HPLC for the determination of nitrite in water and biological samples

In recent years, hydrophobic deep eutectic solvents as new generation of green solvents have attracted wide attention in liquid microextraction technique. In this article, four hydrophobic deep eutectic solvents composed of trioctylmethylammonium chloride and oleic acid were designed and prepared firstly. Combined with high‐performance liquid chromatography, these deep eutectic solvents were used as an extraction solvent in vortex‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the selective enrichment and indirect determination of trace nitrite from real water and biological samples. This method is based on the diazotization‐coupling reaction of nitrite with p‐nitroaniline and diphenylamine in acidic water, and then the nitrite is quantified indirectly by measuring the obtained azo compounds. Some factors influencing the extraction efficiency, including the reaction and extraction conditions, were investigated. Under the optimized conditions, the method has a linear range of 1–300 μg/L with a correlation coefficient of 0.9924, limit of detection of 0.2 μg/L, limit of quantitation of 1 μg/L, intraday and interday relative standard deviations of 4.0 and 6.0%. This method was successfully applied in determination of nitrite from three environmental water and two biological samples with the recovery in the range of 90.5–115.2%. In addition, these results were well agreement with those obtained by the conventional Griess method.     

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.