Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 409, Issue 15, pp 3861–3870 | Cite as

Investigation of carbon-based nanomaterials as sorbents for headspace in-tube extraction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

  • Xochitli L. Osorio Barajas
  • Thorsten Hüffer
  • Pascal Mettig
  • Beat Schilling
  • Maik A. Jochmann
  • Torsten C. Schmidt
Research Paper

Abstract

Carbon-based nanomaterials (CNM) represent promising materials for the application as sorbents in micro- and other extraction devices. In this work, we investigate the applicability of five different CNM (multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs), fullerenes, carboxylic acid functionalized multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs-COOH), graphene platelets, and carbon nanohorns) for their performance on PAH extraction from the aqueous phase by headspace in-tube extraction (HS-ITEX). Optimal extraction parameters for HS-ITEX were determined using a Box-Behnken experimental design. From the extraction yield response, central point analysis, fullerenes showed the best extraction properties for the eight selected headspace compatible PAHs (naphthalene, acenaphthylene, acenaphthene, fluorene, phenanthrene, anthracene, fluoranthene, and pyrene). Fullerenes were used for a further method validation including the linear range, limit of detection, precision, as well as recovery. Finally, extraction yields were compared to a commercial material (Tenax GR), demonstrating that fullerene represents a better option as sorbent in ITEX for PAH analysis. Method detection limits for the PAH on fullerene ranged from 10 to 300 ng L−1, with recoveries between 45 and 103%.

Keywords

PAHs Carbon-based nanomaterials Headspace ITEX GC/MS Box-Behnken design 

Supplementary material

216_2017_331_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (620 kb)
ESM 1(PDF 620 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Maghsoudi S, Noroozian E. HP-SPME of volatile polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from water using multiwalled carbon nanotubes coated on a steel fiber through electrophoretic deposition. Chromatographia. 2012;75:913–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Xiao CH, et al. Use of polymeric fullerene as a new coating for solid-phase microextraction. Chromatographia. 2000;52:803–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang JX, et al. Multiwalled carbon nanotubes coated fibers for solid-phase microextraction of polybrominated diphenyl ethers in water and milk samples before gas chromatography with electron-capture detection. J Chromatogr A. 2006;1137:8–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Xiao C, et al. Application of the polysilicone fullerene coating for solid-phase microextraction in the determination of semi-volatile compounds. J Chromatogr A. 2001;927:121–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pyrzynska K. Carbon nanotubes as sorbents in the analysis of pesticides. Chemosphere. 2011;83:1407–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Serrano A, Gallego M. Fullerenes as sorbent materials for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene isomers preconcentration. J Sep Sci. 2006;29:33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cai Y, et al. Multiwalled carbon nanotubes as a solid-phase extraction adsorbent for the determination of bisphenol a, 4-n-nonylphenol, and 4-tert-octylphenol. Anal Chem. 2003;75:2517–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vallant RM, et al. Development and application of C60-fullerene bound silica for solid-phase extraction of biomolecules. Anal Chem. 2007;79:8144–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huang KJ, et al. Spectrofluorimetric determination of glutathione in human plasma by solid-phase extraction using graphene as adsorbent. Spectrochim Acta A. 2011;79:1860–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Valcárcel M, et al. Carbon nanostructures as sorbent materials in analytical processes. Trends Anal Chem. 2008;27:34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhang BT, et al. Application of carbon-based nanomaterials in sample preparation: a review. Anal Chim Acta. 2013;784:1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Georgakilas V, et al. Functionalization of graphene: covalent and non-covalent approaches, derivatives and applications. Chem Rev. 2012;112:6156–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hüffer T, et al. Interactions between aromatic hydrocarbons and functionalized C60 fullerenes – insights from experimental data and molecular modelling. Environ. Science: Nano 2017. doi:10.1039/C7EN00139H
  14. 14.
    D'Souza F, Kadish KM. Handbook of carbon nano naterials: volume 7: synthetic developments of graphene and nanotubes. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Company; 2015. p. 500.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kremser A, Jochmann MA, Schmidt TC. PAL SPME arrow—evaluation of a novel solid-phase microextraction device for freely dissolved PAHs in water. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2015;408:943–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    (2008) Waters Corporation EPA Method 550.1 Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (pahs) Determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in drinking water by liquid-solid extraction and high performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection. 1–15.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Munch JW. Method 525.2 Revision 2.0 Determination of organic compounds in drinking water by liquid-solid extraction and capillary column gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. 1995.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Poster DL, et al. Analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in environmental samples: a critical review of gas chromatographic (GC) methods. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2006;386:859–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang H, Campiglia AD. Determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in drinking water samples by solid-phase nanoextraction and high-performanceliquid chromatography. Anal Chem. 2008;80:8202–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Namieśnik J, Szefer P. Analytical measurements in aquatic environments. United Kingdom: CRC; 2009. p. 503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wei MC, Jen JF. Determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in aqueous samples by microwave assisted headspace solid-phase microextraction and gas chromatography/flame ionization detection. Talanta. 2007;72:1269–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zuazagoitia D, Millán E, Garcia R. A screening method for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons determination in water by headspace SPME with GC-FID. Chromatographia. 2007;66:773–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Laaks J, et al. In-tube extraction of volatile organic compounds from aqueous samples: an economical alternative to purge and trap enrichment. Anal Chem. 2010;82:7641–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Laaks J, Jochmann MA, Schmidt TC. Solvent-free microextraction techniques in gas chromatography. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2012;402:565–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bezerra MA, et al. Response surface methodology (RSM) as a tool for optimization in analytical chemistry. Talanta. 2008;76:965–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lou H, et al. Systematic investigation on parameters of solution blown micro/nanofibers using response surface methodology based on Box-Behnken design. J Appl Polym Sci. 2013;130:1383–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hüffer T, et al. How redox conditions and irradiation affect sorption of PAHs by dispersed fullerenes (nC60). Environ Sci Technol. 2013;47:6935–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wu L, et al. Application of the Box–Behnken design to the optimization of process parameters in foam cup molding. Expert Syst Appl. 2012;39:8059–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ferreira SLC, et al. Statistical designs and response surface techniques for the optimization of chromatographic systems. J Chromatogr A. 2007;1158:2–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ferreira SLC, et al. Box-Behnken design: an alternative for the optimization of analytical methods. Anal Chim Acta. 2007;597:179–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Díaz E, Ordóñez S, Vega A. Adsorption of volatile organic compounds onto carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofibers, and high-surface-area graphites. J Colloid Interf Sci. 2007;305:7–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Laaks J, et al. Optimization strategies of in-tube extraction (ITEX) methods. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2015;407:6827–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hüffer T, et al. Multi-walled carbon nanotubes as sorptive material for solventless in-tube microextraction (ITEX2)—a factorial design study. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2013;405:8387–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pan B, Xing B. Adsorption mechanisms of organic chemicals on carbon nanotubes. Environ Sci Technol. 2008;42:9005–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Peng HB, et al. Organic contaminants and carbon nanoparticles: sorption mechanisms and impact parameters. J Zhejiang Univ Sci A. 2014;15:606–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shen X, Zhang G, Bjerg B. Assessments of experimental designs in response surface modelling process: estimating ventilation rate in naturally ventilated livestock buildings. Energ and Buildings. 2013;62:570–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Molitor N, Kitamura T, Javelle C. Status paper: background information on carbon nanohorns (CNH). Germany: TIE GmbH; 2013.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hu X, et al. Impact of some environmentally relevant parameters on the sorption of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons to aqueous suspension of fullerene. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2008;27:1868–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ionic Liquids Technologies GmbH Technical data sheet Graphene platelets, 11–15 nm, 99.5%. 2012: Germany.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bergmann CP, Machado F. Carbon nanoadsorbents, in carbon nanomaterials as adsorbents for environmental and biological applications. Switzerland: Springer; 2015. p. 122.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    White CM, et al. Characterisation of commercially CVD grown multi-walled carbon nanotubes for paint applications. Prog Org Coat. 2016;90:44–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sigma-Aldrich. Product specification Product Number: 755125. 2015: USA.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Yang K, Xing B. Desorption of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from carbon nanomaterials in water. Environ Pollut. 2007;145:529–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kadish KM, Ruoff RS, Group ESF. Proceedings of the Symposium on Recent Advances in the Chemistry and Physics of Fullerenes and Related Materials. 1996; Electrochemical Society.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Li Q, Alvarez PJ. 2010 progress report: interactions of natural organic matter with C60 fullerene and their impact on C60 transport, bioavailability and toxicity. 2010; EPA.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Cheng X, Kan AT, Tomson MB. Naphthalene adsorption and desorption from aqueous C60 fullerene. J Chem Eng Data. 2004;49:675–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Laaks J, et al. In-tube extraction-GC-MS as a high-capacity enrichment technique for the analysis of alcoholic beverages. J Agric Food Chem. 2014;62:3081–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Glaser JA, et al. Trace analyses for wastewaters. Environ Sci Technol. 1981;15:1426–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Menzel R, et al. Inverse gas chromatography of as-received and modified carbon nanotubes. Langmuir. 2009;25:8340–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Karwa M, Somenath M. Gas chromatography on self-assembled, single-walled carbon nanotubes. Anal Chem. 2006;78:2064–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xochitli L. Osorio Barajas
    • 1
    • 2
  • Thorsten Hüffer
    • 3
  • Pascal Mettig
    • 1
  • Beat Schilling
    • 4
  • Maik A. Jochmann
    • 1
    • 5
  • Torsten C. Schmidt
    • 1
    • 5
  1. 1.Instrumental Analytical ChemistryUniversity of Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany
  2. 2.Dow Deutschland Anlagen GmbH, Analytical SciencesStadeGermany
  3. 3.Department of Environmental Geosciences and Environmental Science Research NetworkUniversity of ViennaViennaAustria
  4. 4.BGB Analytik GmbHAdliswilSwitzerland
  5. 5.Centre for Water and Environmental Research (ZWU)University of Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany

Personalised recommendations