The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Determination of submillimolar concentration of ferrate(VI) in alkaline solutions by amperometric titration
Abstract
A new amperometric titration method was developed for quantitative determination of ferrate(VI) (FeVIO42−) in the 7.06×10−5−5.73×10−3 M concentration range. Chromium(III) hydroxide solution was used as the titrant. The diffusion current (Id) had a linear relationship with the concentration of ferrate(VI) and slopes were dependent on the concentration of NaOH. The amperometric titration could detect a lower concentration of ferrate(VI) than could potentiometric and colorimetric titrations. The method was applied successfully to determine concentrations of ferrate(VI), generated electrochemically, in strong alkaline solutions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The titrimetric method proposed by Schreyer is considered the most accurate method for quantification of ferrates and has been used as a standard procedure to benchmark other methods.
“The titrimetric method proposed by Schreyer et al.(J.M. Schreyer, G. W. Thompson', 1950) is considered the most accurate method for quantification of ferrates”
From Analytical quantification of electrochemical ferrates for drinking water treatments (2017) · cites this paper as [14]
The Introduction says the paper’s amperometric method has better precision and accuracy than the volumetric chromite method, and the Results and discussion report better reproducibility for the amperometric method. The Titration procedure confirms that the chromite method was used for comparison, but the paper does not call it the most accurate method; it says the opposite for the methods compared. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 25
- C. He, X. Li, V.K. Sharma, S. Li, Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 5890 (2009)
- C. Li, X.Z. Li, N. Graham, N.Y. Gao, Water Res. 42, 109 (2008)
- C. Lee, Y. Lee, C. Schmidt, J. Yoon, U. von Gunten, Water Res. 42, 433 (2008)
- J.Q. Jiang, Q. Yin, J.L. Zhou, P. Pearce, Chemosphere. 61, 544 (2005)
- V.K. Sharma, J. Environ. Sci. Health, Part A: Toxic/Hazard. Subst. Environ. Eng. 45, 645 (2010)
- V.K. Sharma, Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 5148 (2010)
- V.K. Sharma, F. Kazama, H. Jiangyong, A.K. Ray, J. Water Health. 3, 45 (2005)
- Y. Lee, U.V. Gunten, Water Res. 44, 555 (2010)
- J.Q. Jiang, J. Hazard. Mater. 146, 617 (2007)
- V.K. Sharma, Chemosphere. 73, 1379 (2008)
- V.K. Sharma, R.A. Yngard, D.E. Cabelli, J. Clayton Baum, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 77, 761 (2008)
- V.K. Sharma, G.A.K. Anquandah, R.A. Yngard, H. Kim, J. Fekete, K. Bouzek, A.K. Ray, D. Golovko, J. Environ. Sci. Health, Part A: Toxic/Hazard. Subst. Environ. Eng. 44, 423 (2009)
- V.K. Sharma, J. Environ. Manag. 92, 1051 (2011)
- V.K. Sharma, G.W. Luther III, F.J. Millero, Chemosphere 82, 1083 (2011)
- Y. Lee, S.G. Zimmermann, A.T. Kieu, G.V. Gunten, Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 3831 (2009)
- J.Q. Jiang, S. Wang, A. Panagoulopoulos, Chemosphere. 63, 212 (2006)
- J.Q. Jiang, S. Wang, Environ. Eng. Sci. 20, 627 (2003)
- A. Jain, V.K. Sharma, M.S. Mbuya, J. Hazard. Mater. 169, 339 (2009)
- V.K. Sharma, M. Sohn, Environ. Int. 35, 743 (2009)
- R.A. Yngard, V.K. Sharma, J. Filip, R. Zboril, Environ. Sci. Technol. 42, 3005 (2008)
- K. Osathaphan, P. Tiyanont, R.A. Yngard, V.K. Sharma, Water Air Soil Pollut. 219, 5274 (2011)
- S. Licht, Energies 3, 960 (2010)
- J. Jiang, C. Stanford, M. Alsheyab, Sep. Purif. Technol. 68, 227 (2009)
- Z. Macova, K. Bouzek, J. Hives, V.K. Sharma, R.J. Terryn, J.C. Baum, Electrochim. Acta. 54, 2673 (2009)
- Y.D. Perfiliev, E.M. Benko, D.A. Pankratov, V.K. Sharma, S.D. Dedushenko, Inorg. Chim. Acta. 360, 2789 (2007)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Analytical quantification of electrochemical ferrates for drinking water treatments
Cataldo Hernández, M. A., May, A., Bonakdapour, A., Mohseni, M., & Wilkinson, D. P. (2017) · Canadian Journal of Chemistry · doi:10.1139/cjc-2016-0315 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Golovko, D., Sharma, V., Pavlova, O., Belyanovskaya, E., Golovko, I., Suprunovich, V., & Zboril, R.
- Venue
- Open Chemistry
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2011-07-24
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 808-812
- ISSN
- 2391-5420
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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
