| Literature DB >> 35540597 |
Ashraf A Mohamed1, Eslam H A Mahmoud1, Mostafa M H Khalil1.
Abstract
Desktop scanners can be favorable alternatives to sophisticated spectrophotometers for the assessment of analytes in complex real samples. Distinctively, our method has been thoroughly investigated, optimized, validated and successfully applied to the assessment of silver and gold in complex real samples, applying syringal rhodanine (SR) as a novel specifically tailored chromogenic reagent and using a desktop scanner as a versatile sensor. Maximum colour absorbance was obtained in the presence of cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) and cetyltrimethylammonium chloride (CTAC) for silver and gold chelates, respectively. For each metal ion, two ternary complexes were formed depending on the SR concentration with stoichiometries of 1 : 1 : 1 and 1 : 2 : 3 (Ag-SR-CPC) and 1 : 2 : 3 and 1 : 3 : 4 (Au-SR-CTAC), respectively. The methods adhered to Beer's law for 0.15-2.5 and 0.15-2.25 μg mL-1 with detection limits of 0.0089 and 0.0163 μg mL-1 for silver and gold, respectively. The molar absorptivities were 3.63 × 104 and 6.15 × 104 L mol-1 cm-1 at 550 nm and 554 nm, with Sandell's sensitivity indexes of 0.0029 and 0.0032 μg cm-2, respectively. The method was successfully applied to the assessment of silver and gold in a wide range of complex environmental samples. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 35540597 PMCID: PMC9075269 DOI: 10.1039/c9ra06840f
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1(A) Effect of pH on the spectral characteristics of 3 × 10−5 mol L−1 SR. Curves: 1, pH = 2.41; 2, pH = 4.02; 3, pH = 5.43; 4, pH = 5.92; 5, pH = 6.62; 6, pH = 7.78; 7, pH = 8.22; 8, pH = 8.91; 9, pH = 9.22; 10, pH = 9.43; 11, pH = 9.62; 12, pH = 9.80; 13, pH = 9.95; 14, pH = 10.41; 15, pH = 10.62; 16, pH = 10.82; 17, pH = 11.20; 18, pH = 11.62; 19, pH = 12.08; 20, pH = 12.64. (B) Molar ratios of various species and pKa values of SR calculated using Datan software. pK1 = 6.61; pK2 = 10.87.
Fig. 2Effect of pH on the absorbance of Ag–SR–CPC and Au–SR–CTAC chelates. (A) spectrophotometric data. (B) and (C) corresponding DIBA results for the Ag—SR–CPC and Au–SR–CTAC chelates, respectively. [Ag+] = [Au3+] = 2 μg mL−1; CTAC, cetyltrimethyl ammonium chloride; CPC, cetyl pyridinium chloride; other conditions are those of the recommended procedure.
Fig. 3Effect of some cationic surfactants on the spectral characteristics of Ag–SR and Au–SR chelates. CTAB, cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide; CPB, cetyl pyridinium bromide; except for the abscissa variable, other conditions and symbols are those of Fig. 2. (A) Spectrophotometric data. (B and C) Corresponding DIBA results for the Ag–SR–CPC and Au–SR–CTAC chelates, respectively. (D) Spectrophotometric data for the effects of surfactant's concentration. (E and F) Corresponding DIBA results for Ag–SR and Au–SR chelates, respectively.
Fig. 4Molar ratio and continuous variation plots of the Ag–SR (A–D) and Au–SR (E–H) ternary complexes.
Fig. 5Calibration plots for the determination of Ag(i) and Au(iii); (A) spectrophotometrically; (B) and (C) DIBA-based data; (D) and (E) are scanned and cropped images of Ag–SR–CPC and Au–SR–CTAC chelates, respectively. Except for the abscissa variable, other conditions are those of Fig. 2. Captured images were arbitrarily compressed to fit into the page margins; however, for image processing, the original uncompressed images were used.
Effect of foreign ions on the determination of silver(i) and gold(iii) as the ternary complexesa
| Ternary silver complex method | Ternary gold complex method | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Foreign ion | Tolerance limit [ion]/[Ag] | Foreign ion | Tolerance limit [ion]/[Au] |
| Glycine, tartrate, citrate, succinate, acetate, benzoate | >5000 | Glycine, tartrate, citrate, succinate, acetate, benzoate, Cl− | >5000 |
| Ascorbic acid, Mo( | 3000 | Mo( | 4000 |
| Ca( | 2500 | Ca( | 2500 |
| Mg( | 1500 | PO42−, SO42− | 2000 |
| Fe( | 500 | Mg( | 1500 |
| Pb( | 250 | Al( | 500 |
| ClO3−, SCN−, NH4+ | 150 | Pb( | 200 |
| Pt(II)b, Pd( | 100 | Pt( | 150 |
| BrO3−, SCN− | 100 | ||
Conditions were those of the recommended procedure using 2 μg mL−1 Ag(i) or Au(iii).
Masking agents: (a) 1 mL 0.01 mol L−1 EDTA/citrate solution; (b) 0.1 mL of 0.25 mol L−1 ethanolic solution of DMG; (c) 0.1 mL of 0.1 mol L−1 ascorbic acid; (d) 0.1 mL of 0.1 mol L−1 iodide/Cl–NH3OH.
Results of the determination of silver and gold in goldmines samples using DIBA, spectrophotometric and ICP-AES methods; n = 5
| Source | ICP | Spectrophotometer | DIBA (G) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD (μg g−1) | Mean ± SD (μg g−1) |
|
|
| Mean ± SD (μg g−1) |
|
|
| |
|
| |||||||||
| Umm urayyat | 31.66 ± 0.36 | 31.56 ± 0.36 | 1.00 | 0.43 | 0.67 | 31.57 ± 0.36 | 1.00 | 0.41 | 0.69 |
| Haimour | 12.58 ± 0.01 | 12.49 ± 0.02 | 4.00 | 1.31 | 0.06 | 12.61 ± 0.01 | 1.00 | 1.18 | 0.08 |
| Mongul | 16.18 ± 0.09 | 16.24 ± 0.12 | 1.78 | 0.96 | 0.09 | 16.42 ± 0.14 | 2.42 | 0.98 | 0.10 |
| Fatiri | 3.57 ± 0.01 | 3.62 ± 0.01 | 1.00 | 1.59 | 0.09 | 3.63 ± 0.02 | 4.00 | 1.63 | 0.08 |
| Abu Marawat | 12.74 ± 0.02 | 13.03 ± 0.03 | 2.25 | 0.63 | 0.61 | 13.13 ± 0.04 | 4.00 | 0.87 | 0.57 |
| Um Atoud | 20.12 ± 0.14 | 20.36 ± 0.14 | 1.00 | 1.63 | 0.11 | 20.52 ± 0.15 | 1.15 | 1.80 | 0.11 |
|
| |||||||||
| Um qurayyat | 0.52 ± 0.01 | 0.51 ± 0.01 | 1.619 | 0.63 | 0.53 | 0.50 ± 0.01 | 1.691 | 0.66 | 0.51 |
| Haimour | 3.37 ± 0.08 | 3.32 ± 0.07 | 1.433 | 0.97 | 0.21 | 3.29 ± 0.08 | 1.024 | 0.99 | 0.19 |
| Mongul | 5.69 ± 0.11 | 5.66 ± 0.09 | 1.471 | 1.82 | 0.06 | 5.57 ± 0.09 | 1.535 | 1.98 | 0.07 |
| Fatiri | 12.48 ± 0.30 | 12.10 ± 0.24 | 1.623 | 1.21 | 0.09 | 12.23 ± 0.15 | 3.896 | 1.52 | 0.10 |
| Abu Marawat | 59.75 ± 0.66 | 60.34 ± 0.86 | 1.699 | 2.00 | 0.11 | 60.97 ± 0.77 | 1.367 | 2.13 | 0.13 |
| Um Atoud | 0.74 ± 0.02 | 0.73 ± 0.01 | 2.367 | 1.96 | 0.06 | 0.71 ± 0.02 | 1.562 | 1.99 | 0.08 |
Comparison with other spectrophotometric methods for silver and gold determination
| Reagent | pH |
|
| Sensitivity μg cm−2 | Comments | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Dithizone | ≤4 mol L−1 H2SO4 | 462 | 3.1 | 0.003 | Extraction with CCl4 |
|
| 4-(2-Quinolylazo)phenol | 9.2 | 530 | 8.3 | 0.001 | Cu, co, Fe, Ni, and Pd interfere |
|
| 4,4′-Bis(dimethylamino)thiobenzophenone | 3 | 520 | 9.3 | 0.001 | Noble metals interfere |
|
| 2-Cyano-3-iminodithiobutyrate | 4–6 | 565 | 1.3 | 0.008 | Hg interferes |
|
| 2′,3′-Dihydroxypyridyl-4 ′-azobenzene-4-arsenate | 535 | 3.0 | 0.004 | Complex formation in strongly alkaline medium |
| |
|
| 0.05 mol L−1 HNO3 | 580 | 2.0 | 0.005 | With long pathlength cuvettes |
|
| 5-(4-Hydroxybenzylidene)rhodanine | Citrate buffer | 490 | 1.5 | 0.007 | Pt metal interferes |
|
| 5-[4-(2-Methyl-3-hydroxy-5-hydroxymethyl)pyridylene]rhodanine | 8.2 | 530 | 1.5 | 0.007 | Pt metal interferes |
|
| 5-(2,4-Dihydroxybenzylidene)rhodanine | 10 | 547 | 7.1 | 0.002 |
| |
| Syringal rhodanine–CPC | 9.8 | 550 | 3.63 | 0.003 | Spectrophotometer is not needed | This work |
|
| ||||||
| Dithizone | 420 | 2.8 | 0.007 | Extraction with chloroform |
| |
| 4-(2-Pyridylazo)resorcinol | 2.5 | 540 | 8.3 | 0.002 | Extraction; strong interferences |
|
| 4-(2-Thiazolylazo)resorcinol | 1.5 | 520 | 1.5 | 0.013 | Extraction; strong interferences |
|
| 5-(4-Dimethylaminobenzylidene)rhodanine | 0.12 mol L−1 HCl | 500 | — | — |
| |
| 5-(2.4-Dihydroxybenzylidene)rhodanine | 10 | 558 | 8.5 | 0.002 |
| |
| 5-(4-Dimethylaminobenzylidene)rhodanine | 0.12 mol L−1 HCl | 515 | 3.9 | 0.005 | Extraction with isoamyl acetate |
|
| 5-(4-Dimethylaminobenzylidene)rhodanine | 3 | 515 | 3.8 | 0.005 | Pt metal interferes |
|
| 5-( | 446 | 0.9 | 0.022 | Pt metal interferes |
| |
| 5-(6-Methylpyridyl)methylenerhodanine | 420 | 1.1 | 0.018 | Pt metal interferes |
| |
| Syringal rhodanine–CTAC | 10 | 554 | 6.15 | 0.003 | Spectrophotometer is not needed | This work |