| Literature DB >> 36080464 |
Sam-Ang Supharoek1,2, Bordin Weerasuk3, Watsaka Siriangkhawut3, Kate Grudpan4, Kraingkrai Ponhong3,5.
Abstract
An ultrasound-assisted, one-pot cloud point extraction was developed for the determination of iron in vegetable samples by UV-Visible spectrophotometry. This method was based on the complexation of iron with an environmentally-friendly natural chelating agent extracted from Dipterocarpus intricatus Dyer fruit at pH 5.5 in the presence of Triton X-114. Reagent extraction, complexation, and preconcentration were performed simultaneously using ultrasound-assisted extraction at 45 °C. The surfactant-rich phase was diluted with ethanol and loaded through a syringe barrel packed with cotton that acted as a filter to trap the reagent powder. Analyte-entrapped on cotton was eluted using 0.1 mol·L-1 nitric acid solution. Filtrate and eluate solutions were measured absorbance of the dark-blue product at 575 nm. Influential parameters for the procedure were investigated. Under the optimum experimental conditions, the calibration curve was linear, ranging from 0.1 to 1.0 mg·L-1 with r2 = 0.997. Limits of detection and quantification were 0.03 and 0.09 mg·L-1, respectively while precision values of intra-day and inter-day were less than 5%. Recovery at 0.5 mg·L-1 ranged from 89.0 to 99.8%, while iron content in vegetable samples ranged from 2.45 to 13.36 mg/100 g. This method was cost-effective, reliable, eco-friendly, and convenient as a green analytical approach to determining iron content.Entities:
Keywords: Dipterocarpus intricatus Dyer; green analytical method; iron determination; natural reagent; spectrophotometry; ultrasound-assisted one-pot cloud point extraction
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36080464 PMCID: PMC9457780 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27175697
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.927
Figure 1Results of the reaction between the natural reagent and various metal ions (a) Digital images; (b) absorption spectra under 1 mL of natural reagent, 10 mg·L−1 of each metal ion (― Blank; Fe2+; Fe3+; Mn2+; Mo(VI); Pb2+; Cr(VI); Ni2+; ---- Cd2+; Hg2+; Ca2+; Cu2+; Al3+; Na+; Mg2+, and K+) and 5.0 mL of 1.0 mol·L−1 acetate buffer pH 5.5.
Figure 2Results of natural reagent−iron complex and tannic−iron complex (a) Absorption spectra and digital images of iron associated with natural reagent and tannic acid and (b) FT−IR spectra of iron-natural reagent and iron−tannic acid complex.
Figure 3Complex formation between tannin and iron(III) [47,48].
Figure 4Optimal conditions of various parameters on sensitivity for the determination of total iron by the developed method at maximum wavelength 575 nm; (a) Effect of amount of Dipterocarpus intricatus Dyer fruit powder; (b) Effect of pH; (c) Effect of Triton X-114 concentration; (d) Effect of temperature; (e) Effect of ultrasonic irradiation; (f) Effect of dissolution solvent; (g) Effect of cotton weight and (h) Effect of elution solvent.
Analytical results of figures of merit for the proposed method compared with other natural reagents.
| Natural Reagent. | Analytical Method | Preconcentration Method | Sample | Linearity | LOD/LOQ | %RSD | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indian gooseberry | Flow injection spectrophotometry | - | Pharmaceutical preparations and water samples, groundwater, and tap water | 0.5–20.0 | 0.31/0.5 | 2.02–2.32 | [ |
| Guava leaves | Flow injection spectrophotometry | - | Tap water | 1.0–10.0 | 1/- | 3–10 | [ |
| Green tea | Flow injection spectrophotometry | - | Pharmaceutical preparations | 1.0–20.0 | 0.05/- | 1.1–7.1 | [ |
| Betel nut | Sequential injection spectrophotometry | - | Rice | 0.2–10 | 0.06/0.20 | <5 | [ |
| Lead tree | Spectrophotometry | - | Blood tonic | 0–10 | 0.2/0.7 | <5 | [ |
| Sequential injection spectrophotometry | - | Groundwater | 1.0–8.0 | 0.05/0.17 | 2.6 | [ | |
| Spectrophotometry | Cloud point extraction | Vegetable | 0.1–1.0 | 0.03/0.09 | 0.9–2.3 | This study |
Iron concentration in vegetables analyzed by the developed method and FAAS.
| Vegetable Sample | Iron (mg/100 g ±SD, | |
|---|---|---|
| Proposed | FAAS | |
| Chinese kale | 3.47 ± 0.20 | 3.51 ± 0.30 |
| Sweet basil | 2.45 ± 0.30 | 2.48 ± 0.24 |
| 8.76 ± 0.29 | 9.34 ± 0.39 | |
| Siamese neem flower | 4.49 ± 0.19 | 4.68 ± 0.20 |
| Wildbetal leafbush | 4.94 ± 0.10 | 5.32 ± 0.26 |
| Thai copper pod | 13.36 ± 0.95 | 12.44 ± 0.94 |
| Peppermint leaf | 8.87 ± 0.43 | 9.20 ± 0.26 |
| Turkey berry fruit | 5.25 ± 0.27 | 5.01 ± 0.15 |
Figure 5Ultrasound-assisted one-pot operational steps to determine iron by the developed method.