| Literature DB >> 31752256 |
Yuanman Liu1, Ziling Li1, Ziyang Zhang1, Tengwen Zhao1, Manman Wang1, Xuesheng Wang1.
Abstract
A diatomite supported graphene oxide composite (GO@Dt-NH2) was fabricated and explored as a solid-phase extraction adsorbent coupled with high performance liquid chromatography to determine the trace hydroxyl polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (2-hydroxy-naphthalene, 2-hydroxy-fluorene, 1-hydroxy-phenanthrene, and 1-hydroxy-pyrene) in urine samples. The fabricated composites were characterized by X-ray powder diffractometry and scanning electron microscopy. GO@Dt-NH2 offered enhanced adsorption affinity towards the analytes compared with the bare diatomite. The amount of graphene oxide and the factors affecting solid-phase extraction were investigated in detail. Under the optimized conditions, the method gave good linearity (0.30-200 ng/mL) and a low detection limit (0.10-0.15 ng/mL) for the hydroxyl polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. The average recovery for spiked urine samples with three levels ranged from 90.6% to 100%. The intra-day and inter-day relative standard deviations were in the range of 1.8-6.4% and 2.7-11.8%, respectively. Besides, the GO@Dt-NH2 provided enrichment factors of 18-20 and superior purification ability. The developed method was successfully applied to the determination of hydroxyl polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in urine samples from smoking volunteers.Entities:
Keywords: diatomite; graphene oxide; hydroxyl polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; solid-phase extraction; urine
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31752256 PMCID: PMC6891718 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24224186
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1(a) Effect of percentage of GO (0.0 to 1.6%) in the reaction mixture on extraction efficiency, (b) XRD patterns of Dt–NH2, GO, and GO@Dt–NH2, SEM images of (c) Dt–NH2 and (d) GO@Dt–NH2 (5000×, inlet, 20 000×).
The structure and logP values of the OH-PAHs and the adsorption capacities of Dt–NH2 and GO@Dt–NH2.
| Analyte | Structure | logP | Adsorption Capacity (mg/g) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dt–NH2 | GO@Dt–NH2 | |||
| 2-OHNap |
| 2.71 | 0.0 | 181.8 |
| 2-OHFlu |
| 3.43 | 9.3 | 265.4 |
| 1-OHPhe |
| 3.94 | 9.9 | 288.7 |
| 1-OHPyr |
| 4.29 | 17.8 | 409.6 |
Figure 2Effect of (a) the loading volume, (b) the eluting solvent, and (c) the eluting volume on the extraction efficiency of four OH-PAHs (n = 3).
Linear Range, Limits of Detection (LODs), Limits of Quantification (LOQ), Recovery, and Precision of the Developed Method.
| Analyte | Linear Range (ng/mL) | Regression Equation 1 | LOD (ng/mL) | LOQ (ng/mL) | Spiked Level (ng/mL) | Recovery (%) | Precision | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intra-day | Inter-day | |||||||
| 2-OHNap | 0.50–200 | y = 0.431x + 2.17 | 0.15 | 0.50 | 0.5 | 95.5 | 6.4 | 11.8 |
| 1 | 90.6 | 2.9 | 3.0 | |||||
| 2 | 93.9 | 4.3 | 11.3 | |||||
| 2-OHFlu | 0.30–150 | y = 1.23x + 5.65 (0.999) | 0.10 | 0.30 | 0.5 | 93.0 | 3.3 | 9.6 |
| 1 | 95.0 | 4.3 | 5.7 | |||||
| 2 | 93.1 | 2.9 | 6.7 | |||||
| 1-OHPhe | 0.30–150 | y = 2.92x + 7.76 (0.999) | 0.10 | 0.30 | 0.5 | 93.2 | 6.1 | 8.6 |
| 1 | 96.2 | 2.4 | 2.7 | |||||
| 2 | 100 | 5.6 | 3.7 | |||||
| 1-OHPyr | 0.40–200 | y = 22.7x − 31.2 (0.999) | 0.12 | 0.40 | 0.5 | 93.8 | 5.5 | 5.9 |
| 1 | 95.5 | 2.7 | 7.9 | |||||
| 2 | 94.6 | 1.8 | 9.0 | |||||
1 x, mass concentration, ng/mL, y, peak area.
Analytical results for the determination of Hydroxylated PAHs (OH-PAHs) in urine samples from 10 smokers (n = 3).
| Sample | OH-PAHs | Found ± SD (ng/mL) | Recovery 1 (%) | RSD | Sample | OH-PAHs | Found ± SD (ng/mL) | Recovery (%) | RSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2-OHNap | 2.16 ± 0.07 | 102 | 9.7 | 6 | 2-OHNap | N.D. | 93.1 | 8.5 |
| 2-OHFlu | 1.04 ± 0.07 | 99.3 | 2.0 | 2-OHFlu | N.D. | 95.3 | 3.1 | ||
| 1-OHPhe | N.D. 2 | 93.3 | 7.7 | 1-OHPhe | N.D. | 94.8 | 4.6 | ||
| 1-OHPyr | 4.60 ± 0.06 | 103 | 7.9 | 1-OHPyr | 4.07 ± 0.15 | 96.2 | 7.5 | ||
| 2 | 2-OHNap | 2.65 ± 0.26 | 96.6 | 2.1 | 7 | 2-OHNap | 2.41 ± 0.07 | 98.1 | 10.7 |
| 2-OHFlu | N.D. | 97.7 | 4.4 | 2-OHFlu | 1.14 ± 0.05 | 94.6 | 2.0 | ||
| 1-OHPhe | N.D. | 93.8 | 2.6 | 1-OHPhe | N.D. | 93.8 | 5.6 | ||
| 1-OHPyr | 1.23 ± 0.15 | 95.0 | 6.0 | 1-OHPyr | 4.47 ± 0.04 | 93.6 | 6.3 | ||
| 3 | 2-OHNap | 0.91 ± 0.26 | 105 | 5.1 | 8 | 2-OHNap | 2.78 ± 0.09 | 97.4 | 7.2 |
| 2-OHFlu | N.D. | 94.8 | 3.7 | 2-OHFlu | N.D. | 96.9 | 4.3 | ||
| 1-OHPhe | N.D. | 100 | 2.5 | 1-OHPhe | N.D. | 92.8 | 6.5 | ||
| 1-OHPyr | 2.02 ± 0.06 | 103 | 9.1 | 1-OHPyr | 4.80 ± 0.01 | 86.4 | 7.6 | ||
| 4 | 2-OHNap | 3.66 ± 0.15 | 105 | 5.6 | 9 | 2-OHNap | 3.71 ± 0.11 | 100 | 5.7 |
| 2-OHFlu | 3.18 ± 0.04 | 88.0 | 3.3 | 2-OHFlu | N.D. | 96.1 | 3.4 | ||
| 1-OHPhe | N.D. | 89.6 | 3.1 | 1-OHPhe | N.D. | 96.1 | 3.6 | ||
| 1-OHPyr | N.D. | 92.9 | 4.7 | 1-OHPyr | 2.70 ± 0.03 | 88.3 | 5.1 | ||
| 5 | 2-OHNap | 4.02 ± 0.08 | 96.2 | 6.7 | 10 | 2-OHNap | 2.88 ± 0.14 | 108 | 8.0 |
| 2-OHFlu | 1.33 ± 0.09 | 89.1 | 3.4 | 2-OHFlu | 1.50 ± 0.11 | 87.0 | 4.0 | ||
| 1-OHPhe | 1.37 ± 0.08 | 101 | 3.8 | 1-OHPhe | N.D. | 98.0 | 4.2 | ||
| 1-OHPyr | 2.22 ± 0.07 | 96.8 | 2.7 | 1-OHPyr | 3.66 ± 0.09 | 90.1 | 3.8 |
1 Recovery data for spiked 2 ng/mL for each analyte. 2 N.D., Not detected.
Figure 3Chromatograms of urine samples (spiked with 2 ng/mL of 2-OHNap and 1-OHPyr, 1 ng/mL of 2-OHFlu and 2-OHPhe) with (a) direct injection, (b) solid-phase extraction (SPE) by commercial C18 adsorbent, (c) SPE of the GO@Dt–NH2 composites, and (d) the standard solution of OH-PAHs.
Figure 4Schematic illustration of the fabrication of GO@Dt–NH2 composites.