Cited by 70Analytical chemistry methods developmentElectrochemical Analysis and ApplicationsIonic liquids properties and applications

A New Robust, Deep Eutectic-Based Floating Organic Droplets Microextraction Method for Determination of Lead in a Portable Syringe System Directly Couple with FAAS

Naeemullah, Tuzen, Mustafa·2019·Talanta

Abstract

In the present method, a novel and simple portable in situ deep eutectic-based floating organic droplets dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction method was developed for lead in real food and water samples by a portable microsampling syringe system directly couple with FAAS (DES-µSS). Choline chloride-decanoic acid (ChCl: Decanoic acid (1:1)) was used as a green hydrophobic deep eutectic-based floating organic droplets dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction of lead complex (Pb-2,9 dimethyl-4,7-diphenyl-1,10-phenanthroline) from real aqueous samples. The aqueous solution containing DES was rapidly 10 times sucked up/down by using a micro pipette tip syringe system to properly mix the extraction solvent in the aqueous medium. The whole solution was sucked into the micro pipette tip syringe system and placed in an ice bath for 5 min until decanoic base DES solidify into fine droplets. The solidify metal complex enriched (Pb-2,9 dimethyl-4,7-diphenyl-1,10-phenanthroline) was fine droplets was separated by simply press manually the plunger syringe system inside to expel the lower aqueous to the beaker. The different variables were screened out statistically by using multivariate optimization. Under these optimal conditions, good responses were obtained in the concentration ranges of 2.5-100 µg L-1. The relative standard deviation (RSD) and enhancement factor were found to be 4.2% and 150, respectively. The limit of detection (LOD) of the proposed method was found to be 0.086 µg L-1. The t-test was used to check the validity of the proposed method while using CRM samples. It was observed that calculated t value 0.50 less than the t crit (2.91) at 95% confidence interval which indicating no significant difference between finding and certified values (p > 0.05). The relative % recovery is > 95%, indicated high validity and accuracy of the present method. The method was used to quantify the trace levels of lead in real water and food samples under optimized conditions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.talanta.2018.12.027

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

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Naeemullah, & Tuzen, M.
Affiliations
Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa Üniversitesi (TR)
Venue
Talanta
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-05
Volume
196
Pages
71-77
ISSN
0039-9140 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2904017744
Cited by
70
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 8
FWCI
6.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Talanta (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • TUBITAK
  • Turkish Academy of Sciences
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical chemistry methods development
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Electrochemistry › Electrochemical Analysis and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Catalysis › Ionic liquids properties and applications
Keywords
deep eutectic solvents, dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction, lead determination, flame atomic absorption spectrometry, 2,9-dimethyl-4,7-diphenyl-1,10-phenanthroline, food samples, water samples, trace metal analysis

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