Next Article in Journal
Identification and Functional Characterization of the RcFAH12 Promoter from Castor Bean in Arabidopsis thaliana
Next Article in Special Issue
Evaluating the Degradation Process of Collagen Sponge and Acellular Matrix Implants In Vivo Using the Standardized HPLC-MS/MS Method
Previous Article in Journal
A Novel Method for Simulating Micro-Scale Water Droplet Movements
Previous Article in Special Issue
Purification of Two Taxanes from Taxus cuspidata by Preparative High-Performance Liquid Chromatography
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Separations
Volume 10
Issue 1
10.3390/separations10010001
separations-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Natural Monoterpene Enol for Dispersive Liquid–Liquid Microextraction Based on Solidification of Floating Organic Droplets for Determination of Benzophenone Compounds in Water Samples

by
Xian Zhang
1,
Luyun Zhang
2,
Dan Zheng
1,
Zhenzhen Xia
1,
Maomin Peng
1,
Danling Sun
3,
Xizhou Hu
1,* and
Xitian Peng
1,*
1
Institute of Quality Standards and Testing Technology for Agro-Products, Hubei Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Hubei Key Laboratory of Nutritional Quality and Safety of Agro-Products, Wuhan 430064, China
2
School of Medicine, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China
3
College of Laboratory Medicine, Hubei University of Chinese Medicine, Wuhan 430065, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Separations 2023, 10(1), 1; https://doi.org/10.3390/separations10010001
Submission received: 29 November 2022 / Revised: 10 December 2022 / Accepted: 13 December 2022 / Published: 20 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry Technology Research)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In the current study, an effective and simple procedure of extraction for the four benzophenone compounds from water samples was achieved by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) based on the solidification of floating organic droplets (SFO) with a natural monoterpene enol as the extractant. As a natural, high solidification point, inexpensive, and environmentally friendly hydrophobic solvent, α−terpineol was selected firstly as an extractant for DLLME and could be collected and transferred easily after extraction by solidification at a lower temperature. Several main parameters closely related to extraction efficiencies, such as volume of extractant, extraction time, pH and salt concentration of the sample solution, temperature, and time of the solidification process, were investigated in detail. The results showed that the established method had good extraction performance for benzophenone compounds with enrichment factors in the range of 29–47. Furthermore, the linearities were over the range of 2–2000 µg/L, and the limits of detection were 0.12–0.53 µg/L for four benzophenone compounds. The recoveries ranged from 80.2% to 108.4%, with RSDs (intra- and inter-assay) less than 8.5%. At last, the method applicability was investigated by the determination of the benzophenone compounds in aqueous solutions, and satisfactory recoveries (83.0–107.0%) were acquired. Taken together, α−terpineol, a natural monoterpene enol, was first used as an extractant of DLLME-SFO, which provided an alternative method with simplicity and rapidity for the determination of benzophenone compounds in aqueous samples.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Nowadays, sample preparation technology has been developing towards high efficiency, rapidity, environmental sustainability, economy, and miniaturization [1,2]. Microextraction technologies, including solid phase microextraction (SPME) [3,4] and liquid phase microextraction (LPME) [5,6,7,8], have obtained great attention and overcome some intrinsic disadvantages such as consumption of many organic solvents, cumbersome steps, and time-consuming and laborious processes in traditional sample preparation techniques. Accordingly, microextraction technology, with its advantages of simplicity and rapid extraction equilibrium, plays a more and more important role in environmental, biological, and medical analysis [2,8,9].
Among various LPME techniques, dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME), first proposed by Assadi et al. [10] in 2006, has aroused widespread interest in sample preparation [10,11]. However, in traditional DLLME, the available extractants are very limited, and a small amount of extractant is difficult to collect for the following instrumental analysis. Some high-density extractants (>1 g/cm3 at 20 °C) can be collected stably at the bottom of the centrifuge tube after the centrifugation step [11]. However, the recovery process is relatively difficult for lighter-density extractants than water. Accordingly, solidification of the floating organic droplet (SFO) [12,13,14,15,16,17,18], collection by nanoparticles [5,19], and the upper narrow neck of the vessel [20,21] are usually employed for the recovery of those light extractants. In the SFO procedure, the extractant droplet with a high solidification point can be collected and transferred easily after extraction by solidification at a lower temperature [13]. Currently, only a handful of traditional organic extractants such as 1-undecanol, 1-dodecanol, 1-nonanoic acid, and 1-octanoic acid have been employed in DLLME-SFO to extract some halogenated hydrocarbons and phytosterol compounds from aqueous or oil samples [12,13,16]. Considering the great application potential of DLLME-SFO in sample preparation, some new-style, natural, and environmentally friendly extractants with low densities and appropriate solidification points should be explored.
α−Terpineol, a monoterpene enol essential oil, is widely used in the preparation of daily and edible flavors [22]. It has a high melting point (37 °C) and low vapor pressure (0.4 mmHg), is slightly soluble in water (0.71 g/L at 20 °C), and lighter than water (0.934 g/mL at 20 °C) (shown in Table 1), which makes it an excellent hydrophobic extractant for DLLME-SFO. In our previous work, a deep eutectic solvent (DES) was synthesized by mixing α−terpineol with 1-octanol and used for the extraction of phenols in aqueous solutions [23]. As far as we know, no other reports have been published directly using α−terpineol as an extractant. Therefore, it is of significance to extend its application as an extractant in DLLME-SFO.
Benzophenone compounds [24,25,26] are widely applied to the formulation of sunscreen products and industrial products such as plastics and coatings. The structure and properties of four representative benzophenone compounds are shown in Table 1. However, some reports from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) showed that benzophenones in general had the environmentally critical properties of being highly lipophilic, persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic and would be harmful to aquatic organisms [27]. Even so, it will be highly desirable to develop an efficient and environmentally friendly method for analyzing benzophenones in water solutions. At present, the methods for detecting such substances in the literature include HPLC-UV [5,28,29,30], CE-UV [31], GC-MS [7,9,32], and LC-MS [6,26,33,34,35,36]. Among them, HPLC-UV was mostly popular in routine monitoring due to its low cost and ease of operation.
Herein, an effective method for analyzing the benzophenone compounds in aqueous solutions was developed by DLLME-SFO combined with HPLC. α−Terpineol was used as the extractant to capture benzophenone compounds through hydrophobic and hydrogen bonding interaction. Several parameters closely related to the extraction efficiencies of benzophenones were investigated in detail. At last, the developed method’s applicability was examined by the determination of the benzophenone compounds in water samples.

2. Experimental

2.1. Chemicals and Reagents

Four benzophenone compounds, including 4-hydroxybenzophenone (HB, 99%), 2, 4-hydroxybenzophenone (DB, 99%), benzophenone (BP, 99%), and 2-hydroxybenzophenone (HMB, 99%), were obtained from Anpel Technologies (Shanghai, China). α−Terpineol (98%) was brought from Aladdin (Shanghai, China). Acetic acid (AcOH), acetonitrile (ACN), and methanol (MeOH) of chromatographic grade were obtained by Sinopharm (Shanghai, China). Purified water was produced by the Millipore apparatus (Bedford, USA).
The benzophenone stock solution (1000 mg/L) was prepared with MeOH, and the working solution was prepared by diluting the above stock solution with water. All prepared solutions are stored in a refrigerator at 4 °C.

2.2. Instrumentation

The LC20 HPLC analysis system was obtained from Shimadzu (Japan) with a diode array detector (DAD). Chromatographic separation was performed using a Symmetry C18 column (4.6 × 250 mm, I.D. 5 μm), with the isocratic elution composed of ACN and water containing 1% AcOH (60:40, v/v). The UV wavelengths were conducted at 290 nm for BP and 254 nm for the other analytes (HB, DB, and HMB), respectively, and the flow rate was set at 1.0 mL/min.

2.3. SFO-DLLME Procedure

An aliquot of the sample (8.0 mL) was added to a 10 mL screwcap glass centrifuge tube, and then 80 µL of melted α−terpineol was added using a long injection needle. The mixture was homogenized by ultrasound at 40 KHz for 10 min to form a cloudy solution. After centrifugation at 5000 rpm for 2 min, the screwcap glass centrifuge tube was put into a container filled with ice water for 5 min, and then the solidified extractant was taken out by spoon and melted in a water bath at 40 ℃. Finally, 20 µL of the extractant was mixed fully with ACN of equal volume before injection.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Characterization of α−Terpineol

The vibration of atoms in molecules reveals characteristic functional groups of organic compounds [37,38]. Figure 1 showed the characteristic spectra peaks of α−terpineol at 2966 and 3383 cm−1, which represented the stretching vibrations of C–H and O–H, and the same groups also exists in benzophenone compounds, so hydrophobic and intermolecular hydrogen bonding interaction might be attributed to the extraction mechanism between them.

3.2. Optimization of Extraction Conditions

Several parameters related to the extraction efficiency, such as volume of extractant, extraction time, pH and salt concentration of sample solution, temperature, and time of solidification, were investigated, respectively. Herein, the optimization of the DLLME-SFO procedure was performed in a mixed benzophenone standard solution at 50 µg/L. Three replicates were set for each trial.

3.2.1. Volume of the Extractant

The amount of α−terpineol is of significance to efficiently extract target analytes in DLLME. In the current study, the influences of α−terpineol ranging from 60 μL to 120 μL on the extraction efficiency were investigated (Figure 2a). As the amount of the extractant increased, the response of the four benzophenone compounds gradually decreased. In other words, lower enrichment factors but higher absolute extraction recoveries could be obtained with an increasing amount of the extractant. Of course, a higher enrichment factor could be obtained by using a relatively small amount of extractant. However, when the amount of α−terpineol was less than 80 μL, the extractant was inconvenient to be collected after solidification. Considering comprehensively, 80 μL of α−terpineol was selected as the subsequent experimental.

3.2.2. Extraction Time

In order to accelerate the dispersion of the extractant in the water solution and reach the extraction equilibrium quickly, extraction time was investigated ranging from 5 min to 20 min. Moreover, we defined the extraction time as ultrasonic time after α−terpineol was injected into the sample solution. As shown in Figure 2b, extraction equilibrium could be reached within 10 min, and prolonged extraction time had no effect on the extraction efficiencies. Therefore, the extraction time was set at 10 min to speed up the sample preparation process.

3.2.3. pH

As the status of some benzophenone compounds with phenolic hydroxyl groups was transformed by the pH of the solutions, the pH investigated ranged from 3 to 11. As shown in Figure 2c, the pH had no effect on the extraction efficiency of BP because of the lack of ionizable groups, while the extraction efficiencies of HB, DB, and HMB decreased slightly when the pH was from 3.0 to 7.0 and dropped rapidly when the pH exceeded 7.0. This is attributed to the fact that the pKa of HB, DB, and HMB was 7.95, 7.53, and 7.56, and the benzophenone compounds existed mainly in a neutral state when the pH value was less than two units relative to their pKa value, which was favorable for extraction through hydrophobic and hydrogen bonding. The benzophenone compounds gradually ionized with the increase in pH, which was not conducive to extraction. Therefore, pH 5.0 was the optimal extraction condition.

3.2.4. Salt Concentration

To evaluate the influence of salt concentration on extraction efficiency, 0–100 mM of sodium chloride was added to the aqueous solutions. As shown in Figure 2d, the extraction efficiency increased slowly with increasing salt concentration and then decreased gradually in the range of 0–120 mM of sodium chloride solutions, mainly because the addition of inorganic salt in liquid samples could increase the ionic strength of the solution and decrease the solubility of organic compounds, i.e., the “salting-out effect” [39]. However, excessive salt content could also hinder the mass transfer process. In general, the ionic strength in this range had a limited effect on improving the extraction efficiency. Therefore, no sodium chloride was added for ease of operation.

3.2.5. Temperature and Time of Solidification Process

To investigate the effect of the solidification process of four benzophenone compounds, the condensation system ranged from −20 °C to 20 °C (the solidification time was set at 15 min). The extraction phase did not solidify within 24 h when the solidification temperature was set at 20 °C. As shown in Figure 2e, the specified temperature ranged from −20 °C to 10 °C had little effect on the extraction efficiency. Moreover, α−terpineol solidified slowly at 10 °C (about 9 min), while it only took 5 min to solidify at 0 °C. It also could be observed that, when the temperature was −20 °C, the water phase also began to solidify, which affected the separation of the extractant from the water phase. Taken together, the temperature of solidification was set at 0 °C.
Subsequently, the time of solidification was also investigated. The result in Figure 2f showed that the specified time had little effect on the extraction efficiency in the range of 5–25 min. Thus, 5 min of solidification time was sufficient to shorten the sample preparation process.

3.3. Method Performance of SFO-DLLME-HPLC

The feasibility of the developed method was evaluated through relevant parameters under the above optimal parameters, including linearity, the limit of detection (LOD), accuracy, precision, and enrichment factor. As summarized in Table 2, good linearities (R2 > 0.9915) were acquired, ranging from 2 to 2000 µg/L for the benzophenone compounds. The LODs for the proposed method, defined as an S/N of 3, ranged from 0.12 to 0.53 µg/L. The accuracy and precision were reflected by the recoveries and relative standard deviations (RSDs) of three different concentration levels, respectively. As shown in Table 2, excellent accuracies were found ranging from 80.2% to 108.4% with RSDs less than 6.4% for intra-assay (n = 6) and 8.5% for inter-assay (n = 3). The enrichment factors of the four benzophenone compounds were between 29 and 47.

3.4. Determination of Real Water Samples

Four samples collected in the surrounding area of Wuhan city (China), including tap water, lake water, domestic wastewater, and wastewater from a paint factory, were analyzed using the above-developed method. As shown in Table 3, 54.2 µg/L of HB was found in the factory wastewater, and no analyte under investigation was detected in the remaining samples. Subsequently, 50 µg/L of benzophenone standard solution was added to the above samples to evaluate the applicability of the developed method, and the results (Table 3) revealed that the recoveries of the benzophenone compounds ranged from 83.0% to 107.0% with RSDs less than 6.3%, which fully indicated that the developed method had good applicability and could be used for the routine determination of the benzophenone compounds in water samples. The representative chromatograms of the wastewater samples from a paint factory are shown in Figure 3.

3.5. Method Comparison

An object comparison with reported literature for the determination of benzophenone compounds in aqueous solutions was performed, as listed in Table 4. On the whole, low LODs (0.12–0.53 µg/L) and easy operation procedures were found in this study. In particular, some organic reagents, such as ACN, ethyl acetate, and acetone, were frequently used in previously published methods, while only a small amount of organic compound (80 µL) was needed in the proposed SFO-DLLME method. Furthermore, α−terpineol, as a natural edible flavor, is efficient, green, and economical, which could conform to the requirements of green chemistry, which expanded further the application range of DLLME. The presented method was very reliable for the determination of the benzophenone compounds in water samples.

4. Conclusions

In this study, α−terpineol, a natural edible flavor monoterpene enol compound, was firstly used as an extractant of DLLME for the determination of the benzophenone compounds in water samples. Because of the high solidification point and hydrophobic properties, it could be easily collected and transferred in an ice water bath after extraction. Furthermore, only a small amount of an extractant was used in the as-proposed method compared with many organic reagents in previous literature. Under optimized conditions, the as-proposed method exhibited good precision (RSDs ≤ 8.5%), good accuracy (80.2–108.4%), and low LOD (0.12–0.53 µg/L). At last, this method was further confirmed to be effective, simple, and reliable through the determination of benzophenone compounds in real samples, which could also be expected for the analysis of analogous hydrophobic compounds to further expand the application of DLLME.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, X.H. and X.P.; methodology, X.Z. and L.Z.; software, Z.X. and L.Z.; validation, M.P.; formal analysis, L.Z., X.Z. and D.Z.; investigation, Z.X. and D.Z.; resources, D.S. and X.H.; data curation, Z.X.; writing—original draft preparation, X.Z. and X.H.; writing—review and editing, L.Z.; supervision, X.P. and X.H.; funding acquisition, X.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the Key Research and Development Program of the Hubei Province of China (2020BBB078).

Data Availability Statement

Data are available upon request from the authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Asensio-Ramos, M.; Hernández-Borges, J.; Rocco, A.; Fanali, S. Food analysis: A continuous challenge for miniaturized separation techniques. J. Sep. Sci. 2009, 32, 3764–3800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Soares Da Silva Burato, J.; Vargas Medina, D.A.; De Toffoli, A.L.; Vasconcelos Soares Maciel, E.; Mauro Lanças, F. Recent advances and trends in miniaturized sample preparation techniques. J. Sep. Sci. 2020, 43, 202–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Al-Shaalan, N.H.; Ali, I.; Alothman, Z.A.; Al-Wahaibi, L.H.; Alabdulmonem, H. Application of Composite NanoMaterial to Determine Phenols in Wastewater by Solid Phase Micro Membrane Tip Extraction and Capillary Electrophoresis. Molecules 2019, 24, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Hu, X.; Wang, X.; Feng, Q. Determination of Benzimidazole Residues in Edible Animal Food by Polymer Monolith Microextraction Combined with Liquid Chromatography-mass Spectrometry. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2009, 58, 112–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Ziemblinska-Bernart, J.; Nowak, I.; Rykowska, I. Fast dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction based on magnetic retrieval of in situ formed an ionic liquid for the preconcentration and determination of benzophenone-type UV filters from environmental water samples. J. Iran Chem. Soc. 2019, 16, 661–671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Abril, C.; Martin, J.; Malvar, J.L.; Santos, J.L.; Aparicio, I.; Alonso, E. Dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction as a new clean-up procedure for the determination of parabens, perfluorinated compounds, UV filters, biocides, surfactants, and plasticizers in root vegetables. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2018, 410, 5155–5163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Pierson, S.; Trujillo-Rodriguez, M.; Anderson, J. Rapid analysis of ultraviolet filters using dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction coupled to headspace gas chromatography and mass spectrometry. J. Sep. Sci. 2018, 41, 3081–3088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Chisvert, A.; Benede, J.L.; Salvador, A. Current trends on the determination of organic UV filters in environmental water samples based on microextraction techniques-A review. Anal. Chim. Acta 2018, 1034, 22–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Vila, M.; Llompart, M.; Garcia-Jares, C.; Dagnac, T. Different miniaturized extraction methodologies followed by GC-MS/MS analysis for the determination of UV filters in beach sand. J. Sep. Sci. 2018, 41, 3449–3458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Rezaee, M.; Assadi, Y.; Milani Hosseini, M.-R.; Aghaee, E.; Ahmadi, F.; Berijani, S. Determination of organic compounds in water using dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction. J. Chromatogr. A 2006, 1116, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Rezaee, M.; Yamini, Y.; Faraji, M. Evolution of dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction method. J. Chromatogr. A 2010, 1217, 2342–2357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Afshar Mogaddam, M.R.; Farajzadeh, M.A.; Azadmard Damirchi, S.; Nemati, M. Dispersive solid phase extraction combined with solidification of floating organic drop–liquid–liquid microextraction using in situ formation of deep eutectic solvent for extraction of phytosterols from edible oil samples. J. Chromatog. A 2020, 1630, 461523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Mansour, F.R.; Danielson, N.D. Solidification of floating organic droplet in dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction as a green analytical tool. Talanta 2017, 170, 22–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Fu, B.; Zhang, J.; Jiang, H.; Zhou, L. Factty acid and solidification floating organic drop-based dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction method coupled with high performance liquid chromatogrphy for the determination of 4-ethyphenol and 4-ethylguaiacol in wine. Chin. J. Chromatogr. 2015, 34, 895–900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Chang, C.; Huang, S. Determination of the steroid hormone levels in water samples by dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction with solidification of a floating organic drop followed by high-performance liquid chromatography. Anal. Chim. Acta 2010, 662, 39–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Xu, H.; Ding, Z.; Lv, L.; Song, D.; Feng, Y. A novel dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction based on solidification of floating organic droplet method for determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in aqueous samples. Anal. Chim. Acta 2009, 636, 28–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Leong, M.; Huang, S. Dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction method based on solidification of floating organic drop combined with gas chromatography with electron-capture or mass spectrometry detection. J. Chromatogr. A 2008, 1211, 8–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Khalili Zanjani, M.R.; Yamini, Y.; Shariati, S.; Jönsson, J.Å. A new liquid-phase microextraction method based on solidification of floating organic drop. Anal. Chim. Acta 2007, 585, 286–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Shi, Z.; Lee, H. Dispersive Liquid-Liquid Microextraction Coupled with Dispersive μ-Solid-Phase Extraction for the Fast Determination of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Environmental Water Samples. Anal. Chem. 2010, 82, 1540–1545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Hu, X.; Wu, J.; Feng, Y. Molecular complex-based dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction: Analysis of polar compounds in aqueous solution. J. Chromatogr. A 2010, 1217, 7010–7016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Farajzadeh, M.A.; Seyedi, S.E.; Shalamzari, M.S.; Bamorowat, M. Dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction using extraction solvent lighter than water. J. Sep. Sci. 2009, 32, 3191–3200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Available online: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/alpha-TERPINEOL (accessed on 15 March 2022).
  23. Hu, X.; Zhang, L.; Xia, H.; Peng, M.; Zhou, Y.; Xu, Z.; Peng, X. Dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction based on a new hydrophobic deep eutectic solvent for the determination of phenolic compounds in environmental water samples. J. Sep. Sci. 2020, 44, 1510–1520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Schlumpf, M.; Schmid, P.; Durrer, S.; Conscience, M.; Maerkel, K.; Henseler, M.; Gruetter, M.; Herzog, I.; Reolon, S.; Ceccatelli, R.; et al. Endocrine activity and developmental toxicity of cosmetic UV filters-an update. Toxicology 2004, 205, 113–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ramos, S.; Homem, V.; Santos, L. Simultaneous determination of synthetic musks and UV-filters in water matrices by dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction followed by gas chromatography tandem mass-spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 2019, 1590, 47–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Vela-Soria, F.; Ballesteros, O.; Zafra-Gomez, A.; Ballesteros, L.; Navalon, A. A new method for the determination of benzophenone-UV filters in human serum samples by dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Talanta 2014, 121, 97–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. IARC. Some Chemicals Present in Industrial and Consumer Products, Food and Drinking-water. IARC Monogr. Eval. Carcinog. Risks Hum. 2013, 101, 285–304. [Google Scholar]
  28. Locatelli, M.; Furton, K.G.; Tartaglia, A.; Sperandio, E.; Ulusoy, H.I.; Kabir, A. An FPSE-HPLC-PDA method for rapid determination of solar UV filters in human whole blood, plasma and urine. J. Chromatogr. B 2019, 1118–1119, 40–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ge, D.; Zhang, Y.; Dai, Y.; Yang, S. Air-assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction based on a new hydrophobic deep eutectic solvent for the preconcentration of benzophenone-type UV filters from aqueous samples. J. Sep. Sci. 2018, 41, 1635–1643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Vidal, L.; Chisvert, A.; Canals, A.; Salvador, A. Sensitive determination of free benzophenone-3 in human urine samples based on an ionic liquid as extractant phase in single-drop microextraction prior to liquid chromatography analysis. J. Chromatogr. A 2007, 1174, 95–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Purra, M.; Cinca, R.; Legaz, J.; Nunez, O. Solid-phase extraction and field-amplified sample injection-capillary zone electrophoresis for the analysis of benzophenone UV filters in environmental water samples. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2014, 406, 6189–6202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Nurerk, P.; Llompart, M.; Donkhampa, P.; Bunkoed, O.; Dagnac, T. Solid-phase extraction based on MIL-101 adsorbent followed by gas chromatography tandem mass spectrometry for the analysis of multiclass organic UV filters in water. J. Chromatogr. A 2020, 1610, 460564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Li, X.; Chen, G.; Liu, J.; Liu, Y.; Zhao, X.; Cao, Z.; Xia, L.; Li, G.; Sun, Z.; Zhang, S.; et al. A rapid, accurate and sensitive method with the new stable isotopic tags based on microwave-assisted dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction and its application to the determination of hydroxyl UV filters in environmental water samples. Talanta 2017, 167, 242–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. He, K.; Timm, A.; Blaney, L. Simultaneous determination of UV-filters and estrogens in aquatic invertebrates by modified quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe extraction and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 2017, 1509, 91–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Cheng, J.; Kong, X.; Liu, S.; Che, D.; Sun, Z.; Li, G.; Ping, M.; Tang, J.; You, J. Determination of Ultraviolet Filters in Domestic Wastewater by LC–MS Coupled with Polydopamine-Based Magnetic Solid-Phase Extraction and Isotope-Coded Derivatization. Chromatographia 2018, 81, 1673–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Piovesana, S.; Capriotti, A.L.; Cavaliere, C.; La Barbera, G.; Samperi, R.; Zenezini Chiozzi, R.; Laganà, A. A new carbon-based magnetic material for the dispersive solid-phase extraction of UV filters from water samples before liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry analysis. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2017, 409, 4181–4194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kursunlu, A.N.; Acikbas, Y.; Ozmen, M.; Erdogan, M.; Capan, R. Fabrication of LB thin film of pillar[5]arene-2-amino-3-hydroxypyridine for the sensing of vapors. Mater. Lett. 2020, 267, 127538–127541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Bastug, E.; Kursunlu, A.N.; Guler, E. A fluorescent clever macrocycle: Deca-bodipy bearing a pillar[5]arene and its selective binding of asparagine in half-aqueous medium. J. Lumin. 2020, 225, 117343–117378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Tabata, M.; Kumamoto, M.; Nishimoto, J. Chemical properties of water-miscible solvents separated by salting-out and their application to solvent extraction. Anal. Sci. 1994, 10, 383–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Separations 10 00001 g001 550
Figure 1. FTIR spectrum of α−terpineol.
Figure 1. FTIR spectrum of α−terpineol.
Separations 10 00001 g001
Separations 10 00001 g002 550
Figure 2. Optimization of extraction conditions. (a). volume of the extractant; (b). extraction time; (c). pH; (d). salt concentration; (e). solidification temperature; (f). solidification time.
Figure 2. Optimization of extraction conditions. (a). volume of the extractant; (b). extraction time; (c). pH; (d). salt concentration; (e). solidification temperature; (f). solidification time.
Separations 10 00001 g002
Separations 10 00001 g003 550
Figure 3. Chromatograms of the factory wastewater sample. Chromatograms of a, b, and c represented wastewater samples before and after extraction and spiked standard samples after extraction, respectively.
Figure 3. Chromatograms of the factory wastewater sample. Chromatograms of a, b, and c represented wastewater samples before and after extraction and spiked standard samples after extraction, respectively.
Separations 10 00001 g003
Table
Table 1. Structure and physicochemical properties of benzophenone compounds and extractants in this study.
Table 1. Structure and physicochemical properties of benzophenone compounds and extractants in this study.
CompoundStructurepKaLogP
4-Hydroxybenzophenone (HB)Separations 10 00001 i0017.953.07
2,4-Dihydroxybenzophenone (DB)Separations 10 00001 i0027.532.96
Benzophenone (BP)Separations 10 00001 i003—3.38
2-Hydroxy-4-methoxybenzophenone (HMB)Separations 10 00001 i0047.563.52
α-TerpineolSeparations 10 00001 i00515.092.98
Table
Table 2. Linearity range, correlation coefficient, limit of detection, enrichment multiple, accuracy, and precision (RSD) of the developed method.
Table 2. Linearity range, correlation coefficient, limit of detection, enrichment multiple, accuracy, and precision (RSD) of the developed method.
AnalytesLinearity Range
(μg/L)		R2LOD
(μg/L)		Enrichment
Factor		Recoveries (RSD, %)
Intra-Assay (n = 6)Inter-Assay (n = 3)
2 µg/L200 µg/L2000 µg/L2 µg/L200 µg/L2000 µg/L
HB2–20000.99670.123680.9 (6.2)95.8 (3.4)98.7 (3.8)80.2 (4.4)98.2 (5.7)99.6 (4.8)
DB2–20000.99860.303881.4 (5.8)100.3 (5.6)93.7 (2.2)85.0 (5.9)96.4 (6.0)97.9 (5.2)
BP2–20000.99250.374780.6 (4.7)97.6 (4.3)98.9 (4.5)81.2 (5.6)99.5 (4.9)99.3 (3.8)
HMB2–20000.99150.532981.2 (6.4)95.1 (6.2)96.5 (5.8)82.0 (8.5)108.4 (5.1)97.9 (4.9)
Table
Table 3. Analytical results of environmental water samples.
Table 3. Analytical results of environmental water samples.
SampleAnalytesFound
(μg/L)		Added
(μg/L)		Determined
(μg/L)		Recoveries
(%)		RSDs (%)
(n = 3)
The tap waterHBN.D. a5042.685.24.6
DBN.D.5047.995.83.4
BPN.D.5050.2100.45.7
HMBN.D.5048.496.84.1
The lake waterHBN.D.5047.895.66.3
DBN.D.5049.198.24.8
BPN.D.5043.787.43.9
HMBN.D.5048.997.82.9
Domestic wastewaterHBN.D.5050.7101.42.6
DBN.D.5050.6101.22.1
BPN.D.5053.5107.03.7
HMBN.D.5047.995.81.4
The paint factory wastewaterHB54.25095.783.02.5
DBN.D.5045.891.61.5
BPN.D.5046.793.43.8
HMBN.D.5041.883.60.7
a Not detected.
Table
Table 4. Comparison with previous literature for the determination of four benzophenone compounds.
Table 4. Comparison with previous literature for the determination of four benzophenone compounds.
MatrixExtraction TechniqueCharacteristicsLODsRecovery (%)Instrumental AnalysisRef.
Environmental waterDLLMEILDB: 0.02 μg/L
HMP: 0.016 μg/L		70.5–90.3
79.5–91.3		UPLC-PDA[5]
Root vegetablesUA-DLLMEACNHB: 0.3 μg/L
DB: 0.15 μg/L
HMP: 0.03 μg/L		70–90
87–92
98–111		LC-MS/MS[6]
Beach sandSPMEAcOEtHMB: 2.5–3.3 ng/g
(LOQ)		>85GC-MS/MS[9]
Human whole blood, plasma and urineFPSESol-gel sorbent coated fabricDB: 30 μg/L
BP: 30 μg/L
HMB: 30 μg/L		—HPLC-PDA[28]
Aqueous solutionAA-DLLMEDESHB: 0.1 μg/L
DB: 0.1 μg/L
BP: 0.1 μg/L
HMP: 0.05 μg/L		93.5
94.1
96.6
94.5		HPLC-DAD[29]
Environmental waterMA-DLLMEAC; SILDB: 1.21 ng/L
HMP:1.19 ng/L		70–116
82–106		LC-MS/MS[33]
Tap water, lake water, domestic wasterwater, factory wastewaterSFO-DLLMEα-TerpineolHB: 0.12 μg/L
DB: 0.30 μg/L
BP: 0.37 μg/L
HMP: 0.53 μg/L		78.9–99.6
75.0–100.3
81.2–99.5
71.2–108.4		HPLC-DADThis work
* UA, Ultrasound-assisted extraction; AA, Air-assisted; MA, microwave-assisted; FPSE, Fabric phase sorptive extraction; SIL, Stable isotope labeling; PDA, photo-diode array; DAD, Diode array detector; IL, Ionic liquid; AcOEt, Ethyl acetate; DES, Deep eutectic solvent.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, X.; Zhang, L.; Zheng, D.; Xia, Z.; Peng, M.; Sun, D.; Hu, X.; Peng, X. A Natural Monoterpene Enol for Dispersive Liquid–Liquid Microextraction Based on Solidification of Floating Organic Droplets for Determination of Benzophenone Compounds in Water Samples. Separations 2023, 10, 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/separations10010001

AMA Style

Zhang X, Zhang L, Zheng D, Xia Z, Peng M, Sun D, Hu X, Peng X. A Natural Monoterpene Enol for Dispersive Liquid–Liquid Microextraction Based on Solidification of Floating Organic Droplets for Determination of Benzophenone Compounds in Water Samples. Separations. 2023; 10(1):1. https://doi.org/10.3390/separations10010001

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Xian, Luyun Zhang, Dan Zheng, Zhenzhen Xia, Maomin Peng, Danling Sun, Xizhou Hu, and Xitian Peng. 2023. "A Natural Monoterpene Enol for Dispersive Liquid–Liquid Microextraction Based on Solidification of Floating Organic Droplets for Determination of Benzophenone Compounds in Water Samples" Separations 10, no. 1: 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/separations10010001

APA Style

Zhang, X., Zhang, L., Zheng, D., Xia, Z., Peng, M., Sun, D., Hu, X., & Peng, X. (2023). A Natural Monoterpene Enol for Dispersive Liquid–Liquid Microextraction Based on Solidification of Floating Organic Droplets for Determination of Benzophenone Compounds in Water Samples. Separations, 10(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/separations10010001

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop