| Literature DB >> 35520865 |
Ramsingh Kurrey1, Manas Kanti Deb1, Kamlesh Shrivas1, Jayant Nirmalkar2, Bhupendra Kumar Sen3, Mithlesh Mahilang1, Vikas Kumar Jain4.
Abstract
Herein, we report a KBr-impregnated paper substrate as a sample probe to enhance the attenuated total reflection-Fourier transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) signal strength of anionic surfactants (AS) and non-ionic surfactants (NS) in an aqueous solution. The mechanism for the sensing of AS and NS is based on the strong interaction of surfactants with the silicate groups (SiO4 4-) of the KBr-impregnated paper substrate. The role of SiO4 4- on the surface of the paper is to enhance the adsorption of AS and NS, resulting in improved IR signal intensities for the target analytes. The improved signal intensity at 1253 cm-1 (SO4 2-, symmetric stretching) for AS and 1114 cm-1 (C-O-C, stretching vibration) for NS were selected for quantification. SEM-EDX was employed to determine the elemental compositions of pre- and post-adsorbed AS and NS on glass fibre filter paper (GFF). The linear range for the determination of AS and NS was 10-100 μg L-1 with a method detection limit (MDL) of 4 μg L-1 and method quantification limit (MQL) of 12 μg L-1. The good relative recovery of 71.4-109.7% and the interference studies showed the selectivity of the method for the determination of AS and NS in environmental water and commodity samples. The advantages of this method include its cost-effectiveness, enhanced sensitivity, disposability and accessibility of the paper substrate. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 35520865 PMCID: PMC9057572 DOI: 10.1039/d0ra07286a
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Flow diagram of the procedures for the analysis of surfactants using modified GFF as a paper substrate (CAS,NS (100 μg L−1) = 20 μL; paper diameter = 5 mm; number of scans = 15; and temperature = 65 °C for 2 min).
Fig. 2Preliminary spectral analysis of LABS (a and e), SDBS (b and f), alkylphenol ethoxylate (Triton X-100) (c and g) and mixed AS and NS (d and h) without and with the KBr-impregnated paper substrate (CAS,NS (100 μg L−1) = 20 μL; paper diameter = 5 mm; number of scans = 15; and temperature = 65 °C for 2 min).
Fig. 3(A) ATR-FTIR spectra and (B) SEM images of different papers including (a) GFF paper, (b) Whatman filter paper, (c) tissue paper, (d) Xerox printing paper, (e) quartz filter paper, and (f) normal filter paper with KBr impregnation.
Fig. 4Surfactants/silicate interaction mechanism for the determination of AS and NS using KBr-impregnated paper coupled with FTIR on (a) fabricated GFF, (b) AS and NS adsorbed on paper surface and interaction with silicate containing GFF, (c) interaction of EMV of reflected radiation with analytes containing KBr-impregnated paper and (d) SE/ATR-FTIR spectra of surfactants (CAS,NS (100 μg L−1) = 20 μL; paper diameter = 5 mm; number of scans = 15; and temperature = 65 °C for 2 min).
Fig. 5FTIR spectra of mixed AS and NS using KBr-impregnated paper substrate method (a), KBr substrate method without paper (b), SE/ATR-FTIR spectra of different concentrations (10–100 μg L−1) of mixed AS and NS (c), and graphical representation of linear least squares (LLS) calibration model with K–M theory using Sigma plot 10 (d) (CAS,NS (10–100 μg L−1) = 20 μL; paper diameter = 5 mm; number of scans = 15; and temperature = 65 °C for 2 min).
Analytical results for AS and NS in commodity and environmental water samples using KBr-impregnated paper/FTIR (CAS,NS (100 μg L−1) and spiked with commodity and water samples = 20 μL; sample volume = 20 μL; paper diameter = 5 mm; number of scans = 15; and temperature = 65 °C for 2 min)a
| S. no. | Sample source | Surfactants found (μg L−1) | RSD, % ( | Standard addition (μg L−1) | Total surfactant found (μg L−1) | Recovery (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| 1 | CP1 | 0.05 ± 0.0005 | 4.1 | 20, 50 | 19.3, 51.1 | 96.2, 102.0 |
| 2 | CP2 | 2.06 ± 0.0015 | 4.2 | 20, 50 | 19.6, 56.0 | 87.6, 107.8 |
| 3 | CP3 | 0.05 ± 0.0005 | 2.9 | 20, 50 | 23.0, 54.3 | 101.1, 108.5 |
| 4 | CP4 | 3.14 ± 0.0050 | 3.5 | 20, 50 | 19.3, 50.1 | 80.8, 93.9 |
| 5 | CP5 | 1.85 ± 0.0052 | 2.5 | 20, 50 | 19.0, 51.2 | 85.7, 98.6 |
| 6 | CP6 | 0.05 ± 0.0007 | 4.2 | 20, 50 | 22.0, 55.0 | 109.7, 109.8 |
| 7 | CP7 | 0.55 ± 0.0011 | 5.5 | 20, 50 | 21.6, 55.2 | 105.2, 109.3 |
| 8 | CP8 | 0.05 ± 0.0016 | 4.5 | 20, 50 | 20.9, 55.0 | 104.7, 109.8 |
| 9 | CP9 | 0.12 ± 0.0005 | 3.2 | 20, 50 | 21.1, 53.1 | 104.9, 105.9 |
| 10 | CP10 | 0.01 ± 0.0008 | 4.5 | 20, 50 | 21.2, 54.6 | 105.9, 109.1 |
| 11 | CP11 | 2.43 ± 0.0014 | 5.1 | 20, 50 | 20.2, 56.0 | 88.8, 107.1 |
| 12 | CP12 | 2.57 ± 0.0012 | 4.3 | 20, 50 | 19.6, 52.7 | 85.1, 100.2 |
| 13 | CP13 | 8.01 ± 0.0012 | 4.8 | 20, 50 | 22.3, 53.1 | 71.4, 90.1 |
| 14 | CP14 | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND |
| 15 | CP15 | 2.52 ± 0.0021 | 2.2 | 20, 50 | 18.3, 47.83 | 78.8, 90.6 |
| 16 | WW1 | 23.2 ± 0.00519 | 3.9 | 20, 50 | 42.2, 59.3 | 76.0, 72.2 |
| 17 | WW2 | 22.0 ± 0.00271 | 2.0 | 20, 50 | 42.0, 69.7 | 80.0, 95.4 |
| 18 | WW3 | 24.6 ± 0.00175 | 4.7 | 20, 50 | 50.1, 75.1 | 102, 101 |
|
| ||||||
| 19 | CP6 | 0.05 ± 0.0017 | 3.1 | 20, 50 | 21.0, 54.0 | 104.7, 107.8 |
| 20 | CP16 | 0.81 ± 0.0014 | 4.5 | 20, 50 | 19.3, 57.83 | 92.4, 107.8 |
| 21 | CP3 | 0.04 ± 0.0025 | 3.5 | 20, 50 | 20.0, 51.3 | 99.7, 102.5 |
| 22 | CP2 | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND |
| 23 | CP4 | 3.43 ± 0.0041 | 2.8 | 20, 50 | 19.1, 47.1 | 78.3, 87.3 |
| 24 | CP11 | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND |
| 25 | CP8 | 2.10 ± 0.0005 | 4.2 | 20, 50 | 18.3, 49.1 | 80.9, 93.9 |
| 26 | WW2 | 8.3 ± 0.0017 | 4.2 | 20, 50 | 25.3, 54.7 | 85.0, 92.8 |
| 27 | WW1 | 11.1 ± 0.0027 | 0.5 | 20, 50 | 31.7, 41.9 | 103, 61.6 |
| 28 | WW3 | 5.2 ± 0.0015 | 4.7 | 20, 50 | 15.8, 45.7 | 53.0, 81.0 |
CPn (commodity product), WWn (wastewater), and ND (not detected).
The results of ATR-FTIR using the KBr-impregnated paper for eight commercial product formulations containing AS and comparison with the results obtained using the potentiometric titration method (CAS,NS (100 μg L−1) and spiked with commodity sample = 20 μL; sample volume = 20 μL; paper diameter = 5 mm; number of scans = 15; and temperature = 65 °C for 2 min)
| S. no. | Commodity sample | ATR-FTIR | Potentiometric titration | AQA | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KBr-impregnated paper | NTSS |
|
| ||||
| AS found (μg L−1) | Recovery (%) | AS found (mmol L−1) | Recovery (%) | ||||
| 1 | Hand-dishwashing detergent A | 2.06 ± 1.2 | 87.6 | 1.40 ± 0.8 | 102.5 | 2.2 | 2.4 |
| 2 | Hand-dishwashing detergent B | 2.21 ± 2.2 | 102.1 | 2.13 ± 1.8 | 102.0 | 1.5 | 2.4 |
| 3 | Hand-dishwashing detergent C | 2.05 ± 1.4 | 101.5 | 2.98 ± 0.6 | 101.4 | 5.4 | 2.4 |
| 4 | Hand-dishwashing detergent D | 2.01 ± 0.5 | 107.4 | 4.50 ± 0.3 | 101.0 | 2.7 | 2.4 |
| 5 | Heavy duty powder detergent A | 2.41 ± 0.8 | 100.1 | 2.31 ± 0.6 | 99.1 | 1.8 | 2.0 |
| 6 | Heavy duty powder detergent B | 1.95 ± 1.3 | 98.5 | 1.05 ± 0.9 | 102.6 | 2.1 | 2.4 |
| 7 | Gel detergent A | 1.21 ± 0.17 | 100.2 | 0.75 ± 0.08 | 100.7 | 4.5 | 2.4 |
| 8 | Gel detergent B | 0.42 ± 0.06 | 85.9 | 0.89 ± 0.03 | 100.3 | 4.1 | 1.9 |
Attenuated total reflectance-Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy.
Potentiometric titration method.
Nanotube surfactant sensor.
Analytical quality assurance.
Tabulated F6,6-value at 95% confidence limit is 4.28 twelve degrees of freedom at the probability level of 0.05.
Tabulated t-value at 95% confidence level is 2.571 for N1 = 6 (i.e., for ν1 = N1 − 1 = 5, ν2 = N2 − 1 = 5).
Some typical methods for the analysis of surfactants and their characteristic features
| S. no. | Technique | Linear range, μg L−1 | MDL, μg L−1 | RSD, % | Recovery, % | Samples | Advantages | Disadvantages | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Spectrophotometry | 10–500 | 3.0 | 1.8 | 91.2–94.5 | River, municipal, domestic, tap water | Easy handling, no requirement of tedious sample preparation, and cheap cost of instrument | Low sensitivity, toxic solvent requirement, and time consuming |
|
| 2 | Fluorimetry | 250–35 500 | 7.0 | 4.0 | 92.9–105.3 | River water | Easy, low cost and there is no need for sophisticated instruments | Selective for particular analytes with color complexes |
|
| 3 | HPLC-UV | 0.08–80 | 15.0 | 12.4 | 80.5–115.1 | Waste, lake pond water | Able to determine analytes with high molecular weight and low volatile compounds, and good separation efficiency | Improper separation due to the formation of micelles in chromatographic column |
|
| 4 | MOP-ME/DRS-FTIR | 0.150–300 | 0.05 | 3.8 | 97.1–109.5 | Wastewater | Easy to analyze solid and liquid samples, and high sensitivity and sample throughput | Instrument costly, and extraction is necessary for selective determination |
|
| 5 | ESI-MS | 0.4–140 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 95.0–97.0 | Sewage, river | Use samples with large masses, and sample structure can be determined fairly easily | Cannot analyze mixtures very well and apparatus is also very difficult to clean |
|
| 6 | AP–MALDI–MS | 50–1500 | 10.0 | 9.8 | 91.0–98.7 | River, municipal wastewater | Very high resolution power and sensitivity, rapid analysis, and good recovery | Derivatization required, and expensive and sophisticated |
|
| 7 | KBr-impregnated paper/ATR-FTIR | 10–100 | 4.0 | 2.3 | 95.4–109.7 | Domestic wastewater, commodity samples | Simple, rapid, highly sensitive, trace detection efficiency, reduced time, good recovery, and high sample throughput | Costly instrument, time consuming for preparation of KBr pellet, and small spectral interference |
|