↓ Skip to main content

Development and Validation of a Sensitive Method for Trace Nickel Determination by Slotted Quartz Tube Flame Atomic Absorption Spectrometry After Dispersive Liquid–Liquid Microextraction

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Development and Validation of a Sensitive Method for Trace Nickel Determination by Slotted Quartz Tube Flame Atomic Absorption Spectrometry After Dispersive Liquid–Liquid Microextraction
Published in
Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00128-018-2283-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Şükran Melda Yolcu, Merve Fırat, Dotse Selali Chormey, Çağdaş Büyükpınar, Fatma Turak, Sezgin Bakırdere

Abstract

In this study, dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction was systematically optimized for the preconcentration of nickel after forming a complex with diphenylcarbazone. The measurement output of the flame atomic absorption spectrometer was further enhanced by fitting a custom-cut slotted quartz tube to the flame burner head. The extraction method increased the amount of nickel reaching the flame and the slotted quartz tube increased the residence time of nickel atoms in the flame to record higher absorbance. Two methods combined to give about 90 fold enhancement in sensitivity over the conventional flame atomic absorption spectrometry. The optimized method was applicable over a wide linear concentration range, and it gave a detection limit of 2.1 µg L-1. Low relative standard deviations at the lowest concentration in the linear calibration plot indicated high precision for both extraction process and instrumental measurements. A coal fly ash standard reference material (SRM 1633c) was used to determine the accuracy of the method, and experimented results were compatible with the certified value. Spiked recovery tests were also used to validate the applicability of the method.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 23%
Researcher 4 18%
Professor 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 8 36%
Engineering 2 9%
Computer Science 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Unknown 10 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 April 2018.
All research outputs
#21,608,038
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#3,090
of 4,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#382,336
of 444,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#52
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,112 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 444,422 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.