Applied Water Science. Группа авторов

Скачать книгу

SPME using a TiO₂ NPs fiber, stirring at 30°C in DI mode for 75 min, and desorption at 285°C for 5 min GC-FID, GC-MS 0.17–0.40 μg/L 86–107% at 2μg/L One sample was analyzed and residues of DIBP and DEHP were found at 1.0 and 2.2 μg/L, respectively TiO₂ NPs fiber showed better extraction efficiency than PDMS and poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene)-TiO₂ fibers. DI-SPME provided better sensitivity than HS mode [39] DMP, DEP, DBP, and DEHP Mineral, river and tap waters (15 mL) SPME using a SiO₂-PDMS-MWCNTs fiber, stirring at 40°C in DI mode for 30 min, and desorption at 280°C for 2 min GC-FID 0.033–0.067 μg/L 79.62–109.3% at 10 μg/L One sample of each water were analyzed and residues of DBP and DEHP were found at 5.26 and 8.47 μg/L, respectively, in the mineral water sample SiO₂-PDMS-MWCNTs fiber showed better extraction efficiency than PDMS, PA and DVB-CAR-PDMS fibers [43] DPP, DIBP, DBP, DNPP, BBP, and DEHP Mineral and tap waters (10 mL) SPME using a poly-o-aminophenol-MWCNTs fiber, stirring at 35°C in DI mode for 60 min, and desorption at 280°C for 2 min GC-FID 0.10–0.25 μg/L 91–115% at 5 and 50 μg/L Three mineral water samples and 1 tap water sample were analyzed and contained at least 2 PAEs at levels from 0.3 ± 0.02 to 8.1 ± 0.19 μg/L, except for 1 mineral water sample NaCl and dextrose injection solutions were also analyzed [42] DBP, BBP, DEHA, DEHP, and DNOP Tap, barreled drinking and pond waters (10 mL plus 15% w/v NaCl) SPME using a PS-MWCNTs fiber, stirring at room temperature in DI mode for 60 min, and desorption at 280°C for 5 min GC-MS/MS 0.0038-0.059 μg/L 73.4-103.8% at 0.05 and 0.2 μg/L One sample of each water were analyzed and contained at least 1 PAE at levels from 0.038 ± 0.004 to 0.060 ± 0.007 μg/L A Box-Behnken design was used for optimization purposes [41] DPP, DBP, DEHA, and DEHP Mineral, tanked and tap waters, and boiling water exposed to a PET container (10 mL plus 30% w/v NaCl) SPME using a G-PVC fiber, stirring at 70°C in HS mode for 35 min, and desorption at 230°C for 4 min GC-FID 0.2–0.3 μg/L 88–108% at 10 and 20 μg/L One sample of each water were analyzed and residues of DPP and DBP were found at 2.1 and 1.8 μg/L, respectively, only in the boiling water exposed to a PET container A central composite design was used for optimization purposes. Sunflower and olive oils were also analyzed [20] DMP, DEP, DIBP, DBP, DMEP, BMPP, DEEP, DNPP, BBP, DHXP, DBEP, DCHP, DPhP, DEHP, DNOP, and DINP Sea water (10 mL) SPME using a PDMS fiber, stirring at 35°C in DI mode for 40 min, and desorption at 40°C for 6 min GC-MS 0.00017–0.0011 μg/L 68.0–114.0%, but 55.4% for DMP, at 100 and 300 μg/L Eleven sample was analyzed and contained at least 9 PAEs at levels from 0.270 to 1.39 μg/L Sediment was also analyzed by conventional SPE [96] DEP, DIBP, DBP, BBP, and DEHP River, bottled and mineral waters (4 mL plus 20% w/v NaCl) SPME using a polyamide6-MnO fiber, stirring at 80°C in HS mode for 30 min, and desorption at 200°C for 5 min GC-μ-ECD 0.13–0.64 μg/L 90.3–106% at 10 and 100 μg/L One sample of each water were analyzed and residues of DEP, DIBP and DBP were found at levels from 9.24 to 29.3 μg/L, respectively, in the bottle and mineral waters Polyamide6-MnO fiber showed better extraction efficiency than PDMS fiber. Soda was also analyzed [44] DMP, DEHP, DBP, DNPP, BBP, and DNOP Tap and sea water (20 mL adjusted at pH 4) SPME using a GO-1-(3-aminopropyl)-3-vinyl imidazolium bromide/tetrafluoroborate fiber, stirring at 35°C in DI mode for 30 min, and desorption at 175°C for 5 min GC-MS 0.017–0.10 μg/L 87.6–101.2% at 1 and 5 μg/L One sample of each water were analyzed, and no residues were detected GO-1-(3-aminopropyl)-3-vinyl imidazolium bromide fiber showed higher extraction efficiency than GO-1-(3-aminopropyl)-3-vinyl imidazolium tetrafluoroborate, PA and CAR-PDMS fibers. Coffee was also analyzed [52] DEP, DPP, DAP, DBP, BBP, and DEHP Water (- mL plus 20% w/v NaCl) SPME using a OH-TPB-COFs fiber, stirring at 105°C in HS mode for 50 min, and desorption at 250°C for 7 min GC-FID 0.11–1.50 μg/L 78.6–101.9% at 1 and 5 μg/L Three sample were analyzed and contained at least 4 PAEs at levels from 1.39 to 5.78 μg/L OH-TPB-COFs fiber showed better extraction efficiency than PDMS fiber [46] DMP, DBP, DINP, DEP, BBP, DEHP, DNOP, and DIDP Mineral water (9 mL) IT-SPME using AC-PS-DVB monolithic columns, and desorption with 1.5 mL ACN CE-DAD, UHPLC-UV 0.59–9.83 μg/L 78.8–104.6% at 50 μg/L One sample was analyzed, and no residues were detected AC-PS-DVB monolithic column showed better extraction efficiency than AC-poly(BMA-EDMA) monolithic column. ACN showed higher extraction efficiency than MeOH as desorption solvent. [62] DMP, DEP, DAP, BBP, DBP, DNPP, and DCHP Disposable tableware, plastic cup and river waters (45 mL plus 2% v/v MeOH) IT-SPME using PDA-melamineformaldehyde aerogel-carbonfiber tube, and desorption with MeOH-water for 0.6 mL HPLC-DAD 0.07–0.16 μg/L 77–120% at 10 and 15 μg/L One sample of each water were analyzed and residues of DAP, BBP and DNPP were found at levels from 0.12 to 0.99 μg/L in the water in plastic cup PDA-melamineformaldehyde aerogelcarbon-fiber tube showed better extraction efficiency than melamine-formaldehyde aerogel-carbon-fiber and bare carbon-fiber tubes [23]

Скачать книгу