Abstract
Two different extraction methods for the determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soil are compared: the extraction in combination with ultrasonic treatment, and the Soxhlet extraction method according to DIN-draft 38414 Part 21. Different types of real soil were extracted and analysed by HPLC with diode-array detector and fluorescence detection. The results show that the efficiency of the ultrasonic method is comparable to the Soxhlet method.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Geckler KE, Eckstein H (1987) Analytische und präparative Labormethoden. Vieweg, Wiesbaden
Bock R (1974) Methoden der analytischen Chemie. Eine Einführung. 1. Trennungsmethoden. Verlag Chemie, Weinheim
Falbe J, Regitz M (1992) Römpps Chemie Lexikon, 6th ed. Thieme, Stuttgart
Offprint of “Maschinenmarkt” Nr. 24/1992. Vogel, Würzburg
Chem. Laboratorium Dr. E. Weßling (1992) Standard operating procedure: Determination of PAH
DIN-draft 38414 Part 21
Doerffel K (1984) Statistik in der analytischen Chemie, 3rd ed. Verlag Chemie Weinheim
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hechler, U., Fischer, J. & Plagemann, S. Comparison of different extraction methods for the determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soil. Fresenius J Anal Chem 351, 591–592 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00322742
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00322742