| Literature DB >> 29565297 |
Ireneusz Sowa1, Magdalena Wójciak-Kosior2, Maciej Strzemski3, Jan Sawicki4, Michał Staniak5, Sławomir Dresler6, Wojciech Szwerc7, Jarosław Mołdoch8,9, Michał Latalski10.
Abstract
Polyaniline (PANI) is one of the best known conductive polymers with multiple applications. Recently, it was also used in separation techniques, mostly as a component of composites for solid-phase microextraction (SPME). In the present paper, sorbent obtained by in situ polymerization of aniline directly on silica gel particles (Si-PANI) was used for dispersive solid phase extraction (d-SPE) and matrix solid-phase extraction (MSPD). The efficiency of both techniques was evaluated with the use of high performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection (HPLC-DAD) quantitative analysis. The quality of the sorbent was verified by Raman spectroscopy and microscopy combined with automated procedure using computer image analysis. For extraction experiments, triterpenes were chosen as model compounds. The optimal conditions were as follows: protonated Si-PANI impregnated with water, 160/1 sorbent/analyte ratio, 3 min of extraction time, 4 min of desorption time and methanolic solution of ammonia for elution of analytes. The proposed procedure was successfully used for pretreatment of plant samples.Entities:
Keywords: MSPD; Si-PANI; d-SPE; polyaniline; sample pretreatment; triterpenes
Year: 2018 PMID: 29565297 PMCID: PMC5951313 DOI: 10.3390/ma11040467
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1The morphology of Si-PANI particles: (a) microscope picture of silica and Si-PANI; (b) particle diameter distribution of silica and Si-PANI; (c) the examples of spatial distribution of polyaniline on the surface within the particle.
Figure 2Smoothed Raman spectra of Si PANI sorbent: protonated (red line) and deprotonated (blue line).
Figure 3Percentage of retained analytes depending on Si-PANI form and impregnation solution.
Figure 4Modeled chain of polyaniline: (a) Deprotonated and (b) Protonated form.
Figure 5Effect of extraction time on percentage of retained analytes.
Figure 6Effect of sorbent/analytes ratio on percentage of retained analytes.
Figure 7Effect of various solutions on the elution of retained analytes.
Figure 8Effect of desorption time on percentage of eluted analytes.
Validation parameters for determination of triterpenic acids (n = 5).
| Parameters | Oleanolic Acid | Ursolic Acid | Betulinic Acid |
|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration range | 0.05–1.00 mg/mL | 0.005–1.00 mg/mL | 0.002–0.10 mg/mL |
| Correlation coefficient (r) | 0.9994 | 0.9998 | 0.9999 |
| Linear regression equation | |||
| RSD values of peak area | 0.64–1.32% | 0.83–1.22% | 0.41–0.78% |
| LOD (µg/mL) | 0.13 | 0.14 | 0.12 |
| LOQ (µg/mL) | 0.43 | 0.46 | 0.40 |
The content of investigated analytes obtained with the use of various extraction methods (mg analytes/g of dried material ± SD).
| Compound | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without Purification | d-SPE | MSPD | Without Purification | d-SPE | MSPD | |
| 0.82 ± 0.10 | 0.78 ± 0.04 | 0.57 ± 0.04 | - | - | - | |
| 6.95 ± 0.41 | 6.55 ± 0.30 | 4.81 ± 0.21 | 0.69 ± 0.09 | 0.64 ± 0.07 | 0.45 ± 0.03 | |
| - | - | - | 1.14 ± 0.11 | 1.04 ± 0.10 | 0.77 ± 0.06 | |
Figure 93D HPLC chromatograms of investigated plant extracts obtained with the use of various extraction methods; I-Viscum album L. and II-Ocimum basilicum L.