Premium
Dispersive Liquid‐Liquid Microextraction of Cu(II) Using a Novel Dioxime for Its Highly Sensitive Determination by Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry
Author(s) -
Hashemi Payman,
Hosseini Sayyed Mohammad,
Kakanejadifard Ali,
Azimi Gholamhassan,
Zohrehvand Somayeh
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
journal of the chinese chemical society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.329
H-Index - 45
eISSN - 2192-6549
pISSN - 0009-4536
DOI - 10.1002/jccs.201000018
Subject(s) - chemistry , graphite furnace atomic absorption , detection limit , disperser , chromatography , extraction (chemistry) , solvent , analytical chemistry (journal) , certified reference materials , calibration curve , atomic absorption spectroscopy , aqueous solution , copper , enrichment factor , graphite , elution , tap water , physics , organic chemistry , quantum mechanics , chemical engineering , environmental engineering , engineering
A dispersive liquid‐liquid microextraction (DLLME) technique was proposed for the enrichment and graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometric (GFAAS) determination of Cu 2+ in water samples. In this method a mixture of 480 μL acetone (disperser solvent) containing 26 μg S,S‐bis(2‐aminobenzyl)‐dithioglyoxime (BAT) ligand and 20 μL carbon tetrachloride (extraction solvent) was rapidly injected by a syringe into 5 mL aqueous sample containing copper ions (analyte). Thereby, a cloudy solution formed. After centrifugation, the fine droplets containing the extracted copper complex were sedimented at the bottom of the conical test tube. This phase was collected by a microsyring and after dilution by methanol, 20 μL of it was injected into the graphite tube of the instrument for analysis. Effects of some parameters on the extraction, such as extraction and disperser solvent type and volume, extraction time, salt concentration, pH and concentration of the chelating agent were optimized. The response surface method was used for optimization of the effective parameters on the extraction recovery. Under these conditions, an enrichment factor of 312 was obtained. The calibration graph was linear in the rage of 2–50 μ L −1 Cu 2+ with a detection limit of 0.03 μg L −1 and a relative standard deviation (RSD) for five replicate measurements of 3.4% at 20 μg L −1 Cu 2+ . The method was successfully applied to the determination of Cu 2+ in some spring water samples.