2018
DOI: 10.1007/s41207-018-0066-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determination of 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in surface and groundwater in North Lebanon by using SPME followed by GC–ITMS/MS

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The aquatic environment is contaminated by various organic and inorganic substances like pesticides, pharmaceuticals, etc., originating from industrial, municipal, or agricultural activities (Yadav et al 2015;Jabali et al 2018). During the last few decades, pesticides are being used heavily in agriculture to ensure high crop yield.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The aquatic environment is contaminated by various organic and inorganic substances like pesticides, pharmaceuticals, etc., originating from industrial, municipal, or agricultural activities (Yadav et al 2015;Jabali et al 2018). During the last few decades, pesticides are being used heavily in agriculture to ensure high crop yield.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The focus of this work was the optimization of the HS-SPME strategy, while a previously optimized GC-MS method was employed for the PAHs detection. Among the wide range of possibilities offered by the SPME coatings, polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) was selected for this study due to its commercial availability and suitability to extract PAHs, as previously reported [ 33 , 34 , 35 ]. A preliminary evaluation of an HS-SPME-GC-MS method was performed to set the concentration levels to be spiked onto the sprout pool, in order to have an acceptable sensitivity for the subsequent optimization.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The extraction time was shorter than that by SPME GC‐MS [44] and HS‐SPME GC‐FID [45], but longer than that by SPME GC‐MS [42, 43] and SPME GC‐MS [46]. The LODs were lower than that by the methods [42, 44, 45], but higher than that by HS‐SPME GC‐MS [43] and SPME GC‐MS [46]. In short, the current method has a relatively good performance in terms of sensitivity (the LOD ranged from 0.05 to 0.15 ng/mL), linear range (0.25–50 ng/mL), and extraction time (45 min).…”
Section: Resuits and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The established method was compared with some relevant SPME methods in literatures [42–46] through the parameters of LODs, linear range and extraction time (Table 2). The linear response range for the analytes by the current method was wider than that by SPME‐GC‐MS methods [44, 46], but narrower than that by SPME GC‐MS [42], HS‐SPME GC‐MS [43], and HS‐SPME GC‐FID [45]. The extraction time was shorter than that by SPME GC‐MS [44] and HS‐SPME GC‐FID [45], but longer than that by SPME GC‐MS [42, 43] and SPME GC‐MS [46].…”
Section: Resuits and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation