2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.microc.2019.05.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Application of zinc/aluminum layered double hydroxide nanosorbent in a fixed-bed column for SPE-preconcentration followed by HPLC determination of diclofenac in biological and hospital wastewater samples

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It should be mentioned that due to the absence of carbonate and hydroxyl groups, the position of the absorption peaks assigned to Zn-O and Al-O exhibit some shifts compared to Zn-Al-LDH. It should be noted that the FT-IR spectra were matched well with the spectra reported in the previously published literatures [31][32][33][34]. Figure 1B, indicates the XRD patterns of the prepared precursor Zn-Al-LDH and Zn-Al-LDO, respectively.…”
Section: Surface Characteristics Of the Coatingsupporting
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It should be mentioned that due to the absence of carbonate and hydroxyl groups, the position of the absorption peaks assigned to Zn-O and Al-O exhibit some shifts compared to Zn-Al-LDH. It should be noted that the FT-IR spectra were matched well with the spectra reported in the previously published literatures [31][32][33][34]. Figure 1B, indicates the XRD patterns of the prepared precursor Zn-Al-LDH and Zn-Al-LDO, respectively.…”
Section: Surface Characteristics Of the Coatingsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…In addition, the specific surface areas of the LDH precursor and the final in‐situ prepared LDO estimated by the Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) method are 53.4 and 75.6 m 2 /g, respectively. The slightly larger specific surface area of the in‐situ prepared LDO is related with its rough surface [32]. Moreover, pore volume of 0.59 cm 3 /g with a pore size of 16.03 nm, were also estimated for the LDO.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Appropriate linearity was observed for both curves, with lower R 2 = 0.9954 (VT-EHDDMA) and these values being in accordance with the literature for the development of calibration curves using SPE systems, presenting R 2 values higher than 0.98. 37–42 To evaluate the REF, the ratio of the slopes was used between the calibration curves after and before the preconcentration step. 29,40,43–46…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, conventional QuEChERS methods usually require commercial materials including primary secondary amine (PSA), C18, and graphitized carbon black (GCB) as purification adsorbents. 15 In fact, PSA can only remove some organic acids and colorings, C18 is particularly effective for the removal of low molecular weight compounds such as lipids and sugars, and the excessive use of GCB results in losses of aromatic mycotoxins; therefore, these adsorbents are not suitable for the removal of the complex matrix in maize. Furthermore, while centrifugation is an essential step in traditional QuEChERS, it requires considerable time and is not appropriate for some high-throughput studies.…”
Section: ■ Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Liquid–liquid extraction (LLE), solid-phase extraction (SPE), and QuEChERS are the most widely used sample preconcentration techniques among industry researchers. , Because LLE and SPE methods are usually complicated, time-consuming, and expensive and result in a large loss of solution, QuEChERS-based (quick, easy, inexpensive, effective, rugged, and safe) methods have become a powerful tool in recent years. However, conventional QuEChERS methods usually require commercial materials including primary secondary amine (PSA), C18, and graphitized carbon black (GCB) as purification adsorbents . In fact, PSA can only remove some organic acids and colorings, C18 is particularly effective for the removal of low molecular weight compounds such as lipids and sugars, and the excessive use of GCB results in losses of aromatic mycotoxins; therefore, these adsorbents are not suitable for the removal of the complex matrix in maize.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%