Comparative Study of Phenol and Pentachlorophenol Analysis Methods in Wastewater by SPME/GC-MS

Ji-Young Kyung, Yo-yong Kim, S. Hwang, Wo-kyung Nam, K. Park, Tae-Hwa Kim
{"title":"Comparative Study of Phenol and Pentachlorophenol Analysis Methods in Wastewater by SPME/GC-MS","authors":"Ji-Young Kyung, Yo-yong Kim, S. Hwang, Wo-kyung Nam, K. Park, Tae-Hwa Kim","doi":"10.36278/jeaht.22.3.95","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The solvent extraction method for the analysis of phenol and pentachlorophenol in the present standard methods for the examination of water pollution is not easy to perform due to the use of a large amount of solvent and long pretreatment time. Therefore, the solid phase microextraction (SPME) method, which does not require an extraction solvent, was used a pretreatment approach and its applicability as an alternative to the conventional solvent extraction method was studied. The SPME conditions of fiber adsorption, concentration of NaCl, adsorption time, stirring speed, and stirrer temperature were optimized.Moreover, we assessed whether these conditions satisfied the QA/QCrequirements of the standard methods. In addition, the recovery test was performed on the effluent, and the test results of the solvent extraction and SPME methods were statistically compared by the paired t-test for phenol and pentachlorophenol analyses. As a result, there was a difference in the results of the two methods for pentachlorophenol. Therefore, the SPME method was not adequate, but phenol was judged to be appropriate as it showed 0.948 μg/L of LOD, 3.020 μg/L of LOQ, 1.8% of precision and 97.7% of accuracy. In addition, the validation test indicated that the recovery of phenol in the effluent was better than 95% by SPME. Moreover, because the paired t-test showed that the SPME method was not different from the solvent extraction method, the SPME method can replace the solvent extraction method for phenol analysis.","PeriodicalId":15758,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Analysis, Health and Toxicology","volume":"89 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Analysis, Health and Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36278/jeaht.22.3.95","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The solvent extraction method for the analysis of phenol and pentachlorophenol in the present standard methods for the examination of water pollution is not easy to perform due to the use of a large amount of solvent and long pretreatment time. Therefore, the solid phase microextraction (SPME) method, which does not require an extraction solvent, was used a pretreatment approach and its applicability as an alternative to the conventional solvent extraction method was studied. The SPME conditions of fiber adsorption, concentration of NaCl, adsorption time, stirring speed, and stirrer temperature were optimized.Moreover, we assessed whether these conditions satisfied the QA/QCrequirements of the standard methods. In addition, the recovery test was performed on the effluent, and the test results of the solvent extraction and SPME methods were statistically compared by the paired t-test for phenol and pentachlorophenol analyses. As a result, there was a difference in the results of the two methods for pentachlorophenol. Therefore, the SPME method was not adequate, but phenol was judged to be appropriate as it showed 0.948 μg/L of LOD, 3.020 μg/L of LOQ, 1.8% of precision and 97.7% of accuracy. In addition, the validation test indicated that the recovery of phenol in the effluent was better than 95% by SPME. Moreover, because the paired t-test showed that the SPME method was not different from the solvent extraction method, the SPME method can replace the solvent extraction method for phenol analysis.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
SPME/GC-MS分析废水中苯酚与五氯酚方法的比较研究
现行水污染检验标准方法中用于分析苯酚和五氯酚的溶剂萃取法,由于使用的溶剂量大,预处理时间长,不易执行。因此,采用不需要萃取溶剂的固相微萃取(SPME)法作为预处理方法,研究其替代传统溶剂萃取法的适用性。对纤维吸附条件、NaCl浓度、吸附时间、搅拌速度和搅拌温度进行了优化。此外,我们评估了这些条件是否满足标准方法的QA/ q要求。并对出水进行回收试验,采用苯酚和五氯酚配对t检验对溶剂萃取法和SPME法的试验结果进行统计学比较。因此,两种方法对五氯酚的测定结果存在差异。结果表明,SPME法的定量限为0.948 μg/L,定量限为3.020 μg/L,精密度为1.8%,准确度为97.7%。验证试验表明,SPME法对出水苯酚的回收率可达95%以上。此外,由于配对t检验表明SPME法与溶剂萃取法没有差异,因此SPME法可以取代溶剂萃取法进行苯酚分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Characteristics of Volatile Organic Compounds Distribution in Downtown Ansan Near Industrial Complexes Global Performance, Trends, and Challenges for Assessment and Management of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs): A Critical Review Examination of the Utility of Environmental DNA Metabarcoding for Monitoring Fish Species in Han Rivr, Korea Distribution and Risk Assessment of Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in the South Han River Analysis and Change in Concentration of Micropollutants in Stream Affected by WWTP Effluents using Portable Composite Sampler and LC-HRMS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1