Vortex‐assisted liquid–liquid microextraction using a low‐toxicity solvent for the determination of five organophosphorus pesticides in water samples by high‐performance liquid chromatography

Vortex‐assisted liquid–liquid microextraction followed by high‐performance liquid chromatography with UV detection was applied to determine Isocarbophos, Parathion‐methyl, Triazophos, Phoxim and Chlorpyrifos‐methyl in water samples. 1‐Bromobutane was used as the extraction solvent, which has a higher density than water and low toxicity. Centrifugation and disperser solvent were not required in this microextraction procedure. The optimum extraction conditions for 15 mL water sample were: pH of the sample solution, 5; volume of the extraction solvent, 80 μL; vortex time, 2 min; salt addition, 0.5 g. Under the optimum conditions, enrichment factors ranging from 196 to 237 and limits of detection below 0.38 μg/L were obtained for the determination of target pesticides in water. Good linearities (r > 0.9992) were obtained within the range of 1–500 μg/L for all the compounds. The relative standard deviations were in the range of 1.62–2.86% and the recoveries of spiked samples ranged from 89.80 to 104.20%. The whole proposed methodology is simple, rapid, sensitive and environmentally friendly for determining traces of organophosphorus pesticides in the water samples.     

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.     

Development of single‐drop microextraction and simultaneous derivatization followed by GC‐MS for the determination of aliphatic amines in tobacco

In this work, for the first time, headspace (HS) single‐drop microextraction and simultaneous derivatization followed by GC‐MS was developed to determine the aliphatic amines in tobacco samples. In the HS extraction procedure, the mixture of derivatization reagent and organic solvent was employed as the extraction solvent for HS single‐drop microextraction and in situ derivatization of aliphatic amine in the samples. Fast extraction and simultaneous derivatization of the analytes were performed in a single step, and the obtained derivatives in the microdrop extraction solvent were analyzed by GC‐MS. The optimized experiment conditions were: sample preparation temperature of 80°C and time of 30 min, HS extraction solvent (the mixture of benzyl alcohol and 2,3,4,5,6‐pentafluorobenzaldehyde) volume of 2.0 μL, extraction time of 90 s. With the optimal conditions, the method validations were also studied. The method has good linearity (R² more than 0.99), accepted precision (RSD less than 13%), good recovery (98–104%) and low limit of detection (0.11–0.97 μg/g). Finally, the proposed technique was successfully applied to the analyses of aliphatic amines in tobacco samples of seven different brands. It was further demonstrated that the proposed method offered a simple, low‐cost and reliable approach to determine aliphatic amines in tobacco samples.     

Determination of organic pollutants in coking wastewater by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction/GC/MS

A method based on dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with GC/MS was developed for quantitative analysis of the major organic pollutants listed in the United States Environmental Protection Agency method 8270 and the 15 European‐priority polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in coking wastewater. The major parameters such as extraction solvent, dispersive solvent, solution pH, and extraction time were systematically optimized. The optimum extraction conditions were found to be: 15 μL mixture of 2:1 v/v carbon tetrachloride and chlorobenzene as the extraction solvent, 0.75 mL ACN as the dispersive solvent, solution pH of 8, and extraction time of 2 min. For the major pollutants listed in the United States Environmental Protection Agency 8270, the linear ranges were 0.1 to 100 mg/L, the enrichment factors ranged from 452 to 685, and the relative recoveries ranged from 67.5 to 103.5% with RSDs of 4.0–9.1% (n = 5) at the concentrations of 10 mg/L under the optimum extraction conditions. For the 15 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, the linear ranges were 0.1 to 100 μg/L, the enrichment factors ranged from 645 to 723, and the relative recoveries ranged from 94.5 to 107.6% with RSDs of 4.6–9.0% (n = 5) at the concentrations of 10 μg/L. The usefulness of the developed method was demonstrated by applying it in the analysis of real‐world coking wastewater samples.     

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.     

Rapid pretreatment and determination of bisphenol A in water samples based on vortex‐assisted liquid–liquid microextraction followed by high‐performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection

A method for the rapid pretreatment and determination of bisphenol A in water samples based on vortex‐assisted liquid–liquid microextraction followed by high‐performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection was proposed in this paper. A simple apparatus consisting of a test tube and a cut‐glass dropper was designed and applied to collect the floating extraction drop in liquid–liquid microextraction when low‐density organic solvent was used as the extraction solvent. Solidification and melting steps that were tedious but necessary once the low‐density organic solvent used as extraction solvent could be avoided by using this apparatus. Bisphenol A was selected as model pollutant and vortex‐assisted liquid–liquid microextraction was employed to investigate the usefulness of the apparatus. High‐performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection was selected as the analytical tool for the detection of bisphenol A. The linear dynamic range was from 0.10 to 100 μg/L for bisphenol A, with good squared regression coefficient (r² = 0.9990). The relative standard deviation (n = 7) was 4.7% and the limit of detection was 0.02 μg/L. The proposed method had been applied to the determination of bisphenol A in natural water samples and was shown to be economical, fast, and convenient.     

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.     

Vortex‐assisted surfactant‐enhanced‐emulsification liquid–liquid microextraction of biogenic amines in fermented foods before their simultaneous analysis by high‐performance liquid chromatography

A simple, rapid, sensitive, and environmentally friendly method, based on modified dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with high‐performance liquid chromatography was developed for the simultaneous determination of five biogenic amines in fermented food samples. Biogenic amines were derivatized with 9‐fluorenylmethyl chloroformate, extracted by vortex‐assisted surfactant‐enhanced emulsification liquid–liquid microextraction, and then analyzed by high‐performance liquid chromatography. Five biogenic amine compounds were separated within 30 min using a C₁₈ column and gradient elution with acetonitrile and 1% acetic acid. Factors influencing the derivatization and extraction efficiency such as type and volume of extraction solvent, type, and concentration of surfactant, pH, salt addition, and vortex time were optimized. Under the optimum conditions, the method provided the enrichment factors in the range of 161–553. Good linearity was obtained from 0.002–0.5 mg/L for cadaverine and tyramine, 0.003–1 mg/L for tryptamine and histamine, and 0.005–1 mg/L for spermidine with coefficient of determination (R²) > 0.992. The limits of detection ranged from 0.0010 to 0.0026 mg/L. The proposed method was successfully applied to analysis of biogenic amines in fermented foods such as fermented fish (plaa‐som), wine and beer where good recoveries were obtained in the range of 83.2–112.5%     

Use of volatile organic solvents in headspace liquid‐phase microextraction by direct cooling of the organic drop using a simple cooling capsule

A low‐cost and simple cooling‐assisted headspace liquid‐phase microextraction device for the extraction and determination of 2,6,6‐trimethyl‐1,3 cyclohexadiene‐1‐carboxaldehyde (safranal) in Saffron samples, using volatile organic solvents, was fabricated and evaluated. The main part of the cooling‐assisted headspace liquid‐phase microextraction system was a cooling capsule, with a Teflon microcup to hold the extracting organic solvent, which is able to directly cool down the extraction phase while the sample matrix is simultaneously heated. Different experimental factors such as type of organic extraction solvent, sample temperature, extraction solvent temperature, and extraction time were optimized. The optimal conditions were obtained as: extraction solvent, methanol (10 μL); extraction temperature, 60°C; extraction solvent temperature, 0°C; and extraction time, 20 min. Good linearity of the calibration curve (R² = 0.995) was obtained in the concentration range of 0.01–50.0 μg/mL. The limit of detection was 0.001 μg/mL. The relative standard deviation for 1.0 μg/mL of safranal was 10.7% (n = 6). The proposed cooling‐assisted headspace liquid‐phase microextraction device was coupled (off‐line) to high‐performance liquid chromatography and used for the determination of safranal in Saffron samples. Reasonable agreement was observed between the results of the cooling‐assisted headspace liquid‐phase microextraction high‐performance liquid chromatography method and those obtained by a validated ultrasound‐assisted solvent extraction procedure.     

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.     

Binary–solvent–based ionic–liquid–assisted surfactant‐enhanced emulsification microextraction for the determination of four fungicides in apple juice and apple vinegar

A binary–solvent–based ionic–liquid–assisted surfactant‐enhanced emulsification microextraction method was developed for the separation/preconcentration and determination of four fungicides (pyrimethanil, fludioxonil, cyprodynil, pyraclostrobin) in apple juice and apple vinegar. A nonchlorinated solvent amyl acetate, which has a lower density than water, was used as the extraction solvent, and an ionic liquid 1‐hexyl‐3‐methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate, which has a high density and low toxicity, was used as a secondary solvent mixed with the extraction solvent. After centrifugation, the binary solvent drop with a relatively high density was deposited on the bottom of the tube. Some parameters influencing the extraction efficiency of analytes such as type of extraction solvent, ratio of ionic liquid, volume of mixed solvent, type and concentration of surfactant, sample pH, NaCl concentration, and vortex time were investigated and optimized. Under the optimized conditions, the proposed method provided a good linearity in the range of 5–200 μg/L. The limits of quantification of the method were in the range of 2–5 μg/L. The relative standard deviations for interday assays were 1.7–11.9%. The method was applied to the determination of pyrimethanil, fludioxonil, cyprodynil, and pyraclostrobin in apple juice and apple vinegar samples, and the accuracy was evaluated through recovery experiments.     

A dispersive liquid–liquid micellar microextraction for the determination of pharmaceutical compounds in wastewaters using ultra‐high‐performace liquid chromatography with DAD detection

A dispersive liquid–liquid micellar microextraction (DLLMME) method coupled with ultra‐high‐performance liquid chromatography (UHPLC) using Diode Array Detector (DAD) detector was developed for the analysis of five pharmaceutical compounds of different nature in wastewaters. A micellar solution of a surfactant, polidocanol, as extraction solvent (100 μL) and chloroform as dispersive solvent (200 μL) were used to extract and preconcentrate the target analytes. Samples were heated above critical temperature and the cloudy solution was centrifuged. After removing the chloroform, the reduced volume of surfactant was then injected in the UHPLC system. In order to obtain high extraction efficiency, the parameters affecting the liquid‐phase microextraction, such as time and temperature extraction, ionic strength and surfactant and organic solvent volume, were optimized using an experimental design. Under the optimized conditions, this procedure allows enrichment factors of up to 47‐fold. The detection limit of the method ranged from 0.1 to 2.0 µg/L for the different pharmaceuticals. Relative standard deviations were <26% for all compounds. The procedure was applied to samples from final effluent collected from wastewater treatment plants in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (Spain), and two compounds were measured at 67 and 113 µg/L in one of them. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Dispersion‐solidification liquid–liquid microextraction for volatile aromatic hydrocarbons determination: Comparison with liquid phase microextraction based on the solidification of a floating drop

Two microextraction techniques – liquid phase microextraction based on solidification of a floating organic drop (LPME‐SFO) and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with a solidification of a floating organic drop (DLLME‐SFO) – are explored for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and o‐xylene sampling and preconcentration. The investigation covers the effects of extraction solvent type, extraction and disperser solvents' volume, and the extraction time. For both techniques 1‐undecanol containing n‐heptane as internal standard was used as an extracting solvent. For DLLME‐SFO acetone was used as a disperser solvent. The calibration curves for both techniques and for all the analytes were linear up to 10 μg/mL, correlation coefficients were in the range 0.997–0.998, enrichment factors were from 87 for benzene to 290 for o‐xylene, detection limits were from 0.31 and 0.35 μg/L for benzene to 0.15 and 0.10 μg/L for o‐xylene for LPME‐SFO and DLLME‐SFO, respectively. Repeatabilities of the results were acceptable with RSDs up to 12%. Being comparable with LPME‐SFO in the analytical characteristics, DLLME‐SFO is superior to LPME‐SFO in the extraction time. A possibility to apply the proposed techniques for volatile aromatic hydrocarbons determination in tap water and snow was demonstrated.     

Low‐density solvent‐based vortex‐assisted surfactant‐enhanced emulsification liquid–liquid microextraction and its application

For the first time, the low‐density solvent‐based vortex‐assisted surfactant‐enhanced emulsification liquid–liquid microextraction, followed by GC‐flame photometric detection has been developed for the determination of eight organophosphorus pesticides in aqueous samples. A small volume of organic extraction solvent (toluene) was dispersed into the aqueous samples by the assistance of surfactant and vortex agitator. The extraction was performed in a special disposable polyethylene pipette, allowing using the reagents with lower density than water as extraction solvents. The influence parameters were systemically investigated and optimized: toluene (30 μL) and Triton X‐100 (0.2 mmol/L) were used as the extraction solvent and the surfactant, respectively, and the extraction was performed for 1 min under room temperature without adding sodium chloride. Under the optimum conditions, the validation parameters such as the RSD (n = 6; 2.1–11.3%), LOD (0.005 and 0.05 μg/L), and linear range (0.1–50.0 μg/L with correlation coefficients (0.9958–0.9992) showed the method was satisfying. The proposed method has been successfully applied to the determination of the organophosphorus pesticides in real samples with recoveries between 82.8 and 100.2%.     

Rapid determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in rainwater by liquid–liquid microextraction and LC with core‐shell particles column and fluorescence detection

Liquid–liquid microextraction coupled to LC with fluorescence detection for the determination of Environmental Protection Agency's 16 priority pollutant polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in rainwater has been developed. The optimization of the extraction method has involved several parameters, including the comparison between an ultrasonic bath and a magnetic stirrer as extractant apparatus, the choice of the extractant solvent, and the optimization of the extraction time. Liquid–liquid microextraction gave good results in terms of recoveries (from 73.6 to 102.8% in rainwater) and repeatability, with a very simple procedure and low solvent consumption. The reported chromatographic method uses a Core‐Shell technology column, with particle size <3 μm instead of classical 5‐μm particles column. The resulting backpressure was below 300 bar, allowing the use of a conventional HPLC system rather than the more expensive ultrahigh performance LC (UHPLC). An average decrease of 59% in run time and 75% in eluent consumption has been obtained, compared to classical HPLC methods, keeping good separation, sensitivity, and repeatability. The proposed conditions were successfully applied to the determinations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in genuine rainwater samples.     

Air‐assisted liquid–liquid extraction coupled with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction and a drying step for extraction and preconcentration of some phthalate esters from edible oils prior to their determination by GC

In this work, a new, cheap, simple, fast, and low organic solvent consuming procedure is proposed for isolation, enrichment, and gas chromatographic determination of some phthalate esters in edible oils. The method is based on a combination of air‐assisted liquid–liquid extraction and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction followed by a drying step under N₂ gas. Several experimental parameters affecting both extraction and preconcentration steps were investigated and optimized. Under the optimum conditions for the proposed method, wide linear ranges (0.05–800 μg/L) and low detection limits (0.007–0.023 μg/L) were observed. The ranges of enrichment factors and extraction recoveries were 68–340 and 14–68%, respectively. Eventually, the target analytes were successfully determined in different edible oils using the proposed method.     

Supercritical fluid extraction followed by supramolecular solvent microextraction as a fast and efficient preconcentration method for determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in apple peels

In this work, reverse micelle‐based supramolecular solvent microextraction method coupled with supercritical fluid extraction and used for determining trace amounts of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in apple peels. The extract was analyzed by high‐performance liquid chromatography equipped with a fluorescence detector. Coupling supramolecular solvent microextraction with supercritical fluid extraction method, resolve low preconcentration factor of supercritical fluid extraction method, improved limit of detection of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and allow the use of supramolecular solvent microextraction in solid matrices. The effective parameters on the supramolecular solvent microextraction and supercritical fluid extraction efficiency were optimized using one variable at a time and face centered design methods, respectively. Under the optimum condition, the limits of detection and limits of quantifications were in the range of 0.34–1.27 and 1.03–3.82 µg/kg, respectively. Analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in apple peels showed that the supercritical fluid extraction/ supramolecular solvent microextraction method provide great potential for trace analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in fruit samples (RSDs < 7.7%).     

Vortex‐ and CO2‐gas‐assisted liquid–liquid microextraction with salt addition for the high‐performance liquid chromatographic determination of furanic compounds in concentrated juices and dried fruits

A novel microextraction method based on vortex‐ and CO₂‐assisted liquid–liquid microextraction with salt addition for the isolation of furanic compounds (5‐hydroxymethyl‐2‐furaldehyde, 5‐methyl‐2‐furaldehyde, 2‐furaldehyde, 3‐furaldehyde, 2‐furoic and 3‐furoic acids) was developed. Purging the sample with CO₂ was applied after vortexing to enhance the phase separation and mass transfer of the analytes. The optimum extraction conditions were: extraction solvent (volume), propyl acetate (125 μL); sample pH, 2.4; vortexing time, 45 s; salt concentration, 25% w/v and purging time, 5 min. The analytes were separated using an ODS Hypersil C₁₈ column (250×4.6 mm i.d, 5 μm) under gradient flow. The proposed method showed good linearities (r² >0.999), low detection limits (0.08–1.9 μg/L) and good recoveries (80.7–122%). The validated method was successfully applied for the determination of the furanic compounds in concentrated juice (mango, date, orange, pomegranate, roselle, mangosteen and soursop) and dried fruit (prune, date and apricot paste) samples.     

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction using extraction solvent lighter than water

For the first time a dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method on the basis of an extraction solvent lighter than water was presented in this study. Three organophosphorus pesticides (OPPs) were selected as model compounds and the proposed method was carried out for their preconcentration from water samples. In this extraction method, a mixture of cyclohexane (extraction solvent) and acetone (disperser) is rapidly injected into the aqueous sample in a special vessel (see experimental section) by syringe. Thereby, a cloudy solution is formed. In this step, the OPPs are extracted into the fine droplets of cyclohexane dispersed into aqueous phase. After centrifuging the fine droplets of cyclohexane are collected on the upper of the extraction vessel. The upper phase (0.40 μL) is injected into the gas chromatograph (GC) for separation. Analytes were detected by a flame ionization detector (FID) (for high concentrations) or MS (for low concentrations). Some important parameters, such as the kind of extraction and dispersive solvents and volume of them, extraction time, temperature, and salt amount were investigated. Under the optimum conditions, the enrichment factors (EFs) ranged from 100 to 150 and extraction recoveries varied between 68 and 105%, both of which are relatively high over those of published methods. The linear ranges were wide (10–100 000 μg/L for GC‐FID and 0.01–1 μg/L for GC‐MS) and LODs were low (3–4 μg/L for GC‐FID and 0.003 μg/L for GC‐MS). The RSDs for 100.0 μg/L of each OPP in water were in the range of 5.3–7.8% (n = 5).     

Reversed‐phase vortex‐assisted liquid–liquid microextraction: A new sample preparation method for the determination of amygdalin in oil and kernel samples

A novel, simple, and rapid reversed‐phase vortex‐assisted liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with high‐performance liquid chromatography has been introduced for the extraction, clean‐up, and preconcentration of amygdalin in oil and kernel samples. In this technique, deionized water was used as the extracting solvent. Unlike the reversed‐phase dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, dispersive solvent was eliminated in the proposed method. Various parameters that affected the extraction efficiency, such as extracting solvent volume and its pH, vortex, and centrifuging times were evaluated and optimized. The calibration curve shows good linearity (r² = 0.9955) and precision (RSD < 5.2%) in the range of 0.07–20 μg/mL. The limit of detection and limit of quantitation were 0.02 and 0.07 μg/mL, respectively. The recoveries were in the range of 96.0–102.0% with relative standard deviation values ranging from 4.0 to 5.1%. Unlike the conventional extraction methods for plant extracts, no evaporative and re‐solubilizing operations were needed in the proposed technique.