Cited by 71Analytical chemistry methods developmentPesticide Residue Analysis and SafetyAnalytical Chemistry and Chromatography

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

Vera-Avila, Luz E., Rojo-Portillo, Tania, Covarrubias-Herrera, Rosario, Peña-Alvarez, Araceli·2013·Analytica Chimica Acta

Abstract

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 (LogKow 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 LogKow 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 (r(2)>0.995). Extraction recoveries for pollutants with LogKow 1.46-2.8 were in the range 13-62%, directly depending on individual LogKow values; however, good linearity (r(2)>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 LogKow≤1 (sulfa drugs), other more polar extraction solvents (ionic liquids) should be explored for highly hydrophilic pollutants.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.aca.2013.10.052

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vera-Avila, L. E., Rojo-Portillo, T., Covarrubias-Herrera, R., & Peña-Alvarez, A.
Affiliations
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX)
Corresponding author
Vera-Avila, Luz E.
Venue
Analytica Chimica Acta
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-12
Volume
805
Pages
60-69
ISSN
0003-2670 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2042890400
Cited by
71
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 5
FWCI
9.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Analytica Chimica Acta (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical chemistry methods development
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Pesticide Residue Analysis and Safety
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Analytical Chemistry and Chromatography
Keywords
dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction, solidification of floating organic drop, organic pollutants, water samples, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, pesticides, chlorophenoxy herbicides, DDT, phenols, sulfonamides, 1-dodecanol, log Kow, extraction efficiency, sample preparation, ionic liquids

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review