| Literature DB >> 25426299 |
Fariborz Omidi1, Mohammad Behbahani2, Hamid Sadeghi Abandansari2, Alireza Sedighi3, Seyed Jamaleddin Shahtaheri4.
Abstract
A molecular-imprinted polymer nanoparticles (MIP-NP) for the selective preconcentration of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) is described. It was obtained by precipitation polymerization from methacrylic acid (the functional monomer), ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (the cross-linker), 2,2'-azobisisobutyronitrile (the initiator) and 2,4-D (the template molecule) in acetonitrile solution. The MIP-NPs were characterized by thermogravimetric analysis, and by scanning electron microscopy. Imprinted 2,4-D molecules were removed from the polymeric structure using acetic acid in methanol (15:85 v/v %) as the eluting solvent. The sorption and desorption process occur within 10 min and 15 min, respectively. The maximum sorbent capacity of the molecular imprinted polymer is 89.2 mg g(-1). The relative standard deviation and limit of detection for water samples by introduced selective solid phase extraction were 4.2% and 1.25 μg L(-1), and these data for urine samples were 4.7% and 1.80 μg L(-1), respectively. The method was applied to the determination of 2,4-D in the urine and different water samples.Entities:
Keywords: 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid; Molecular imprinted polymer nanoparticles; Selective preconcentration; Urine and water samples
Year: 2014 PMID: 25426299 PMCID: PMC4240808 DOI: 10.1186/s40201-014-0137-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Environ Health Sci Eng
Figure 1A scheme for the synthesis of 2,4-D imprinted polymer nanoparticles.
Figure 2A schematic illustration of extraction procedure.
Figure 3The thermogram of synthesized molecular imprinted polymer nanoparticles.
Figure 4The SEM micrograph of synthesized molecular imprinted polymer nanoparticles.
Figure 5The effect of solution’s pH on the adsorption efficiency of 2,4-D on MIP-NPs. (Conditions: 2,4-D concentration: 0.02 mgL−1, Sample volume: 10 mL, Adsorption time: 10 min).
Figure 6The effect of adsorption time (a) and desorption time (b) on the adsorption efficiency and recovery of 2,4-D from MIP-NPs.
The effect of elution solvent type (The volume for each elution solvent was 5 mL) on the recovery of the target molecule from MIP-NPs (The obtained results are the mean of three measurements)
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Methanol | 100 | 70.0 ± 1.4 |
| Water | 100 | 52.0 ± 1.6 |
| Methanol: Acetic acid | 95:5 | 82.0 ± 1.0 |
| Water: Acetic acid | 95:5 | 66.0 ± 1.2 |
| Methanol: Acetic acid | 90:10 | 90.0 ± 1.7 |
| Methanol: Acetic acid | 85:15 | 99.0 ± 1.0 |
| Methanol: Acetic acid | 80:20 | 97.0 ± 0.8 |
| Methanol: Acetic acid | 75:25 | 89.0 ± 1.0 |
aRecovery (%) bStandard deviation.
The effect of elution solvent volume on the recovery of the target molecule from MIP-NPs (The obtained results are the mean of three measurements)
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Methanol: Acetic acid (85:15) | 5 | 99.0 ± 0.8 |
| Methanol: Acetic acid (85:15) | 4 | 99.0 ± 1.0 |
| Methanol: Acetic acid (85:15) | 3 | 99.0 ± 0.9 |
| Methanol: Acetic acid (85:15) | 2 | 99.0 ± 1.0 |
| Methanol: Acetic acid (85:15) | 1.5 | 99.0 ± 1.0 |
| Methanol: Acetic acid (85:15) | 1.0 | 74.0 ± 1.2 |
aRecovery (%) bStandard deviation.
The comparison between extraction recovery and adsorption capacity of MIP and NIP
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Molecular imprinted polymer (MIP) | 99.0 ± 1.0 | 89.2 |
| Non imprinted polymer (NIP) | 34.0 ± 1.3 | 12.1 |
aRecovery (%) bStandard deviation.
Determination of 2,4-D in urine and different water samples
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Distilled water | 2,4-D | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 50.0 μg L−1 | 49.3 μg L−1 | 3.1 | 3.6 | 98.6 | ||
| Tap water | 2,4-D | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 50.0 μg L−1 | 49.2 μg L−1 | 3.4 | 3.7 | 98.4 | ||
| Siahrood river water | 2,4-D | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 50.0 μg L−1 | 49.4 μg L−1 | 3.5 | 4.3 | 98.8 | ||
| Derka river water | 2,4-D | --- | 1.9 μg L−1 | --- | --- | --- |
| 50.0 μg L−1 | 51.4 μg L−1 | 4.1 | 4.4 | 99.0 | ||
| Sea water | 2,4-D | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 50.0 μg L−1 | 49.1 μg L−1 | 4.2 | 4.5 | 98.2 | ||
| Urine | 2,4-D | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 50.0 μg L−1 | 48.9 μg L−1 | 4.1 | 4.6 | 97.8 |
Figure 7The chromatograms of the (A) non-spiked and (B) spiked (100 μgL ) sea water sample after extraction under optimum conditions (a) and the chromatograms of the (A) non-spiked and (B) spiked (100 μgL ) urine sample after extraction under optimum conditions (b).