CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 21Analytical chemistry methods developmentElectrochemical Analysis and ApplicationsEnvironmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies

Preconcentration of copper and lead using deep eutectic solvent modified magnetic nanoparticles and determination by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry

Open access
Liu, Qi, Huang, Xueying, Liang, Pei·2020·Atomic Spectroscopy
DOI 10.46770/as.2020.01.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In this work, an efficient and eco-friendly magnetic solid-phase extraction method was developed for the simultaneous preconcentration and separation of copper and lead from environmental samples.Deep eutectic solvent modified nano-Fe 3 O 4 particles (Fe 3 O 4 -DES) were used as the adsorbent in the MSPE procedure.The analytes were trapped by the adsorbent while stirring and separated from the solution by the action of an external magnetic field.Then, the analytes were eluted from the surface of Fe 3 O 4 -DES with HNO 3 solution and determined by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES).Several factors affecting the extraction efficiency, such as type of DES, pH of the solution, extraction time, amount of the adsorbent, sample volume, and the volume and concentration of the eluent, were investigated.Under the optimal conditions, the detection limits of the proposed method were 0.29 μg L -1 and 0.51 μg L -1 for copper and lead respectively, with a relative standard deviation of 3.55% and 2.62%, respectively (n=7).Verification of the accuracy of the method was carried out by analysis of certified reference materials.The method was applied to the determination of trace amounts of copper and lead in environmental samples with satisfactory results.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.46770/as.2020.01.005

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Liu et al. confirmed that the presence of major cations and anions has no significant influence on the preconcentration of Cu and Pb, obtaining recovery values in the range of 94-102%.

    “The authors confirmed that the presence of major cations and anions has no significant influence on the preconcentration of Cu and Pb, obtaining recovery values in the range of 94e102%.”

    From Magnetic deep eutectic solvents in microextraction techniques (2022) · cites this paper as [22]

    The ‘Effect of interferences’ passage and Table 2 state that major coexisting cations and anions had no significant influence on Cu and Pb preconcentration. But Table 2 reports interference-test recoveries of 94.1–106%, not 94–102%. The latter range approximately describes the separate real-sample recovery experiments in Table 5 (94–102.1%). (LLM, conf=0.91)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The results of Liu et al. demonstrated the feasibility of the method in environmental samples.

    “These results demonstrated the feasibility of this method in environmental samples.”

    From Magnetic deep eutectic solvents in microextraction techniques (2022) · cites this paper as [22]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. [1]1. H. R. Pohl, H. G. Abadin and J. F. Risher, Neurodegenerative Diseases and Metal Ions: Metal Ions in Life Sciences, Vol. 1, Wiley, Chichester, England, 2006.
  2. [3]3. C. A. Fleming and J. T. Trevors, Water Air Soil Poll., 1989, 44, 143-158.
  3. [4]4. P. Liang and J. Yang, J. Food Compos. Anal., 2010, 23, 95-99.
  4. [5]5. T. Dasbasi, S. Sacmaci, N. Cankaya and C. Soykan, C. Food Chem., 2016, 211, 68-73.
  5. [6]6. K. Pytlakowska, M. Matussek, B. Hachuła, M. Pilch, K. Kornaus, M. Zubko and W. A. Pisarski, Spectrochim. Acta B, 2018, 147, 79-86.
  6. [7]7. L. L. Zhao, S. X. Zhong, K. M. Fang, Z. S. Qian and J. R. Chen, J. Hazard. Mater., 2012, 239, 206-212.
  7. [8]8. F. L. F. Silva, W. O. Matos and G. S. Lopes, Anal. Methods, 2015, 7, 9844-9849.
  8. [9]9. Z. H. Li, J. X. Chen, M. S. Liu and Y. L. Yang, Anal. Methods, 2014, 6, 2294-2298.
  9. [10]10. S. M. Sorouraddin, J. Iran. Chem.l Soc., 2016, 13, 2219-2227.
  10. [11]11. P. Liang and H. B. Sang, Anal. Biochem., 2008, 380, 21-25.
  11. [12]12. A. N. Anthemidis and K. I. G. Ioannou, Talanta, 2009, 79, 86-91.
  12. [13]13. N. Jalbani and M. Soylak, Food Chem., 2015, 167, 433-437.
  13. [14]14. M. Wierucka and M. Biziuk, M. TRAC-Trend. Anal. Chem., 2014, 59, 50-58.
  14. [16]16. W. A. W. Ibrahim, H. R. Nodeh, H. Y. Aboul-Enein and M. M. Sanagi, Crit. Rev. Anal. Chem., 2015, 45, 270-287.
  15. [17]17. D. N. Huang, C. H. Deng and X. M. Zhang, Anal. Methods, 2014, 6, 7130-7141.
  16. [18]18. Y. Yamini and M. Safari, Microchem. J., 2018, 143, 503-511.
  17. [20]20. X. X. Wei, Y. Z. Wang, J. Chen, P. L. Xu and Y. G. Zhou, Talanta, 2018, 182, 484-491.
  18. [21]21. E. L. Smith, A. P. Abbott and K. S. Ryder, Chem. Rev., 2014, 114, 11060-11082.
  19. [22]22. A. Paiva, R. Craveiro, I. Aroso, M. Martins, R. L. Reis and A. R. C. Duarte, ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng., 2014, 2, 1063-1071.
  20. [23]23. Q. H. Zhang, K. D. O. Vigier, S. Royer and F. Jerome, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2012, 41, 7108-7146.
  21. [24]24. X. X. Li and K. H. Row, J. Sep. Sci., 2016, 39, 3505-3520.
  22. [25]25. M. H. Zainal-Abidin, M. Hayyan, A. Hayyan and N. S. Jayakumar, Anal. Chim. Acta, 2017, 979, 1-23.
  23. [26]26. A. Shishov, A. Bulatov, M. Locatelli, S. Carradori and V. Andruch, Microchem. J., 2017, 135, 33-38.
  24. [27]27. S. C. Cunha and J. O. Fernandes, TRAC-Trend. Anal. Chem., 2018, 105, 225-239.
  25. [28]28. J. Lee, D. Jung and K. Park, TRAC-Trend. Anal. Chem., 2019, 118, 853-868.
  26. [29]29. S. Dadfarnia, A. M. H. Shabani, F. Tamaddon and M. Rezaei, Anal. Chim. Acta, 2005, 539, 69-75.
  27. [30]30. N. Dalali, M. Ashouri and S. Nakisa, J. Iran. Chem. Soc., 2012, 9, 181-188.
  28. [31]31. M. Karimi, A. M. H. Shabani and S. Dadfarnia, Microchim. Acta, 2016, 183, 563-571.
  29. [32]32. M. D. Farahani and F. Shemirani, Microchim. Acta, 2012, 179, 219-226.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Liu, Q., Huang, X., & Liang, P.
Affiliations
Central China Normal University (CN)
ORCID
Venue
Atomic Spectroscopy
Publisher
Atomic Spectroscopy Press Limited
Published
2020-02-25
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
36-42
ISSN
  • 0195-5373 (ISSN-L)
  • 2708-521X
DOI
10.46770/as.2020.01.005
OpenAlex
W3037095704
Cited by
21
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Atomic Spectroscopy (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical chemistry methods development
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Electrochemistry › Electrochemical Analysis and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Environmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies
Keywords
copper, lead, deep eutectic solvents, magnetic solid-phase extraction, Fe3O4 nanoparticles, magnetic nanoparticles, preconcentration, trace metal analysis, environmental samples

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