English   español  
Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/16737
Compartir / Impacto:
Estadísticas
Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE
Citado 164 veces en Web of Knowledge®  |  Ver citas en Google académico
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Título

Simplified procedures for the analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in water, sediments and mussels

AutorMartínez, Elena; Gros, Meritxell; Lacorte Bruguera, Silvia; Barceló, Damià
Palabras claveWater analysis
Sediments
Mussels
Extraction methods
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
Fecha de publicación11-ago-2004
EditorElsevier
CitaciónJournal of Chromatography A 1047(1): 69-76 (2004)
ResumenWe describe in this paper simple and robust analytical protocols to determine the 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) of the US Environmental Protection Agency priority list in water, sediment and mussels. For water samples, eight different solid-phase extraction (SPE) sorbents have been compared and among them, C18 provided highest recoveries and limits of detection of 0.3–15 ng/L. For lyophilized sediments, Soxhlet and ultrasonic extraction were compared, and the last one permitted to recover all analytes with highest repetitivity and was validated by analysing a certified reference material. Finally, the analysis of mussels was undertaken using Soxhlet, ultrasonic and pressurized liquid extraction (PLE) and the performance of several clean-up steps are compared. Whereas for the former two, incomplete recovery or losses of some analytes were evidenced, PLE permitted a more efficient extraction and although alkaline digestion was necessary to remove coextracted compounds, the method gave acceptable recoveries and limits of detection of 0.5–7.7 μg/kg dry mass, as for sediments. In all cases, analysis was performed by gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry and internal standard quantification was performed using five deuterated PAHs. Each method performance is discussed for the three matrices analysed and the paper reports advantages and disadvantages of each for their routine application in monitoring programs.
Descripción8 pages, 3 figures, 5 tables.-- PMID: 15460247 [PubMed].-- Printed version published Aug 27, 2004.-- Presented at the 3rd Meeting of the Spanish Association of Chromatography and Related Techniques and the European Workshop: 3rd Waste Water Cluster, Aguadule (Almeria), Spain, Nov 19–21, 2003.
Versión del editorhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2004.07.003
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/16737
DOI10.1016/j.chroma.2004.07.003
ISSN0021-9673 (Print)
1873-3778 (Online)
Aparece en las colecciones: (IDAEA) Artículos
Ficheros en este ítem:
No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.
Mostrar el registro completo
 



NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.