| Title |
Automated direct-immersion solid-phase microextraction using crosslinked polymeric ionic liquid sorbent coatings for the determination of water pollutants by gas chromatography
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00216-015-8658-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
María Cordero-Vaca, María J. Trujillo-Rodríguez, Cheng Zhang, Verónica Pino, Jared L. Anderson, Ana M. Afonso |
| Abstract |
Four different crosslinked polymeric ionic liquid (PIL)-based sorbent coatings were evaluated in an automated direct-immersion solid-phase microextraction method (automated DI-SPME) in combination with gas chromatography (GC). The crosslinked PIL coatings were based on vinyl-alkylimidazolium- (ViCnIm-) or vinylbenzyl-alkylimidazolium- (ViBzCnIm-) IL monomers, and di-(vinylimidazolium)dodecane ((ViIm)2C12-) or di-(vinylbenzylimidazolium)dodecane ((ViBzIm)2C12-) dicationic IL crosslinkers. In addition, a PIL-based hybrid coating containing multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) was also studied. The studied PIL coatings were covalently attached to derivatized nitinol wires and mounted onto the Supelco assembly to ensure automation when acting as SPME coatings. Their behavior was evaluated in the determination of a group of water pollutants, after proper optimization. A comparison was carried out with three common commercial SPME fibers. It was observed that those PILs containing a benzyl group in their structures, either in the IL monomer and crosslinker (PIL-1-1) or only in the crosslinker (PIL-0-1), were the most efficient sorbents for the selected analytes. The validation of the overall automated DI-SPME-GC-flame ionization detector (FID) method gave limits of detection down to 135 μg · L(-1) for p-cresol when using the PIL-1-1 and down to 270 μg · L(-1) when using the PIL-0-1; despite their coating thickness: ~2 and ~5 μm, respectively. Average relative recoveries with waters were of 85 ± 14 % and 87 ± 15 % for PIL-1-1 and PIL-0-1, respectively. Precision values as relative standard deviation were always lower than 4.9 and 7.6 % (spiked level between 10 and 750 μg · L(-1), as intra-day precision). |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 32 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 24% |
| Unknown | 4 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 23 | 70% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 7 | 21% |
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 03 June 2015.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#7,541
of 9,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,040
of 278,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#85
of 183 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 9,618 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. 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 278,538 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 183 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.