Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
PII: S0003-2670(16)30625-0
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2016.05.014
Reference: ACA 234580
Please cite this article as: M. Asadi, S. Dadfarnia, A.M.H. Shabani, Simultaneous extraction and
determination of albendazole and triclabendazole by a novel syringe to syringe dispersive liquid phase
microextraction-solidified floating organic drop combined with high performance liquid chromatography,
Analytica Chimica Acta (2016), doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2016.05.014.
This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
drop combined with high performance liquid chromatography and fluorescence detection
PT
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Yazd University, Yazd, 89195-741, Iran
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
1
Corresponding author. Tel.: +983531232667; fax: +98 3538210644.
E-mail Address: sdadfarnia@yazd.ac.ir (S. Dadfarnia).
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
PT
6 Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Yazd University, Yazd, 89195-741, Iran
7
RI
8 Abstract
9
10 A syringe to syringe dispersive liquid phase microextraction-solidified floating organic drop was
SC
11 introduced and used for the simultaneous extraction of trace amounts of albendazole and
12 triclabendazole from different matrices. The extracted analytes were determined by high
U
13 performance liquid chromatography along with fluorescence detection. The analytical parameters
14
AN
affecting the microextraction efficiency including the nature and volume of the extraction
solvent, sample volume, sample pH, ionic strength and the cycles of extraction were optimized.
M
15
16 The calibration curves were linear in the range of 0.1-30.0 µg L-1 and 0.2-30.0 µg L-1 with
D
17 determination coefficients of 0.9999 and 0.9998 for albendazole and triclabendazole respectively.
TE
18 The detection limits defined as three folds of the signal to noise ratio were found to be 0.02 µg L-
1
19 for albendazole and 0.06 µg L-1 for triclabendazole. The inter-day and intra-day precision
EP
20 (RSD%) for both analytes at three concentration levels (0.5, 2.0 and 10.0 µg L-1) were in the
21 range of 6.3-10.1% and 5.0-7.5% respectively. The developed method was successfully applied
C
22 to determine albendazole and triclabendazole in water, cow milk, honey, and urine samples.
AC
25
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +983531232667; fax: +98 3538210644.
E-mail Address: sdadfarnia@yazd.ac.ir (S. Dadfarnia).
1
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
26 1. Introduction
28 anthelmintic drugs (BADs). These drugs are widely used for the control and treatment of
29 parasitic infections in animals and agriculture. However, long-term use of BADs can cause
PT
30 several toxic effects including congenic malformations, diarrhea, polyploidy, necrotic
RI
31 lymphoadenopathy, and pulmonary edemas [1]. The widespread and improper use of BADs can
32 also result in contamination of dairy products and water by their residue, which is a potential
SC
33 threat to human consumers [2]. So, the government and corresponding organizations have set a
34 maximum concentration level (MCL) or maximum residue limits (MRLs) to control the amount
U
35 of BADs in drinking water and food samples. For example, Codex [3] and the Australian
36
AN
Government has recommended an MRL of <100 µg kg-1 for benzimidazole anthelmintics in milk
[4], the European Water Framework Directive has set an MCL of 0.1 mg L-1 for most
M
37
38 benzimidazole compounds in natural waters [5], and the European Community legislation has set
D
39 an MRL of 10 and 100 µg Kg-1 for TCB and ALB in milk respectively [6]. Therefore,
TE
40 development of accurate analytical techniques to monitor and determine these drugs in food and
43 capillary zone electrophoresis (CZE) [10], and high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)
C
44 [11] have been used to determine these drugs. Among the mentioned techniques, high
AC
46 fluorescence detection system [14] is widely applied to determine ABDs in different real
47 samples. However, due to the low concentration of the drugs in real samples and the complexity
2
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
49 separation and preconcentration step is required prior to drug analysis by HPLC. In this regard,
50 several sample preparation methods including liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) [15], solid-phase
51 extraction (SPE) [16], solid phase microextraction (SPME) [11] and liquid phase microextraction
52 (LPME) [17] have been used. However, traditional sample pretreatment methods (i.e. LLE and
PT
53 SPE) are time-consuming as well as labor-intensive, and LLE needs large volumes of highly
RI
54 pure and toxic organic solvents. To overcome these limitations, sample pretreatment has moved
SC
56 SPME and LPME.
57 Liquid phase microextraction (LPME) is a miniaturized mode of LLE that greatly reduces
U
58 the consumption of organic phases [18]. LPME has the advantages of low cost, simple operation,
59
AN
low toxicity and a high enrichment factor. Different modes of LPME that have been developed
include single drop microextraction (SDME) [19], hollow fiber liquid phase microextraction
M
60
61 (HF-LPME) [20], dispersive liquid phase microextraction (DLPME) [21,22], and solidified
D
62 floating organic drop microextraction (SFODME) [23,24]. Among these modes, DLPME has
TE
63 been widely used for the extraction of different analytes from various matrices [25]. In this mode
64 of LPME, the extraction solvent with a density higher or lower than that of water is mixed with a
EP
65 polar solvent such as methanol or acetonitrile (as a dispersive solvent) and is rapidly injected into
66 the aqueous sample containing the analyte. In this state, a cloudy solution containing fine
C
67 droplets of the extraction solvent is formed in the aqueous phase which results in rapid extraction
AC
68 of the target analyte. DLPME has the advantages of rapidity, simplicity, low cost, use of low
69 amounts of organic solvents, possibility of obtaining a high enrichment factor as well as no need
70 for a large sample volume and a specific extraction vessel. However, this method is a ternary
71 component solvent system, and the dispersive solvent may cause an increase in the solubility of
3
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
72 the extraction solvent in the aqueous phase as well as a decrease in the partition coefficients of
73 analytes between the aqueous phase and the extraction solvent. Furthermore, separation and
PT
76 (VAEME) [27,28], and DLPME based on solidified floating organic drop (DLPME-SFOD)
RI
77 [29,30] have been developed. In VAEME and UAEME, the dispersive solvent is eliminated and
78 the extraction solvent is dispersed in the aqueous sample by the use of vortex energy and
SC
79 ultrasound radiation respectively. However, these methods require longer extraction time than
80 the traditional DLPME as the dispersion of the solvent takes longer time, and the ultrasonic
U
81 energy may cause the degradation of analytes and complexes. In DLPME-SFOD mode, a low-
82
AN
toxin and low-density organic solvent, such as 1-dodecanol, with a melting point near the room
temperature is used as the extraction solvent. This simplifies the solvent recovery at the end of
M
83
84 extraction as the solvent solidifies and floats on the top of the sample solution. However, the
D
85 method is still a three-phase system and does not alleviate the need for a dispersive solvent.
TE
86 In this research, a new mode of DLPME called ‘syringe to syringe dispersive liquid phase
88 method, two disposal syringes are connected to each other through one needle and used as an
89 extraction flask. The sample solution along with the extraction solvent is put in syringe 1, and
C
90 then syringe 2 is connected to it. The solvent is simply dispersed in the aqueous phase through
AC
91 the injection and back injection of the mixture of the sample and the extraction solvent into the
92 extraction vessel. Finally, the mixture is transferred to a centrifuge tube, and the phases are
93 separated and easily recovered by centrifugation and solidification of the extraction solvent in an
94 ice bath. This technique does not require a dispersive solvent, vortex mixer or ultrasound bath. In
4
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
95 addition, as the extraction is performed in a closed system, it prevents the loss of the extraction
96 solvent through evaporation and alleviates the harmful effects of hazardous analytes and toxic
97 organic solvents on the operator and the environment. The designed method is applied for
98 simultaneous separation and preconcentration of trace amounts of ALB and TCB from various
PT
99 samples before their determination by high performance liquid chromatography.
RI
100
101 2. Experimental
SC
102 2.1. Chemicals and reagents
103 Albendazole and triclabendazole of analytical reagent grades were supplied from Sigma
U
104 Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA). HPLC grade water and methanol, dipotassium hydrogen phosphate,
105
AN
hydrochloric acid, sodium chloride, 1-dodecanol, 1-decanol, and 2-undecanol (of analytical grade)
were provided from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany). The stock standard solutions of ALB and
M
106
107 TCB were prepared at the concentration of 100 mg L-1 by dissolving an appropriate amount of
D
108 each drug in methanol. The solutions were then kept in a refrigerator at -4 °C. Working standard
TE
109 solutions were prepared on a daily basis by diluting the stock standard solution adequately with
110 high purity water (HPLC grade). All the prepared standard and solutions were kept in clean
EP
112 A phosphate buffer solution (2.0 mol L-1, pH = 8.0) was prepared by dissolving 358 g of
C
113 dipotassium hydrogen phosphate in 900 mL of deionized water, adjusting its pH to 8.0 with
AC
114 hydrochloric acid and diluting the solution to 1000 mL with deionized water.
115
5
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
117 A Knauer HPLC system (Berlin, Germany) composed of LC-pump 1000, 20 µL sample
118 loop and a fluorescence detector RF-10AXL (Shimadzu, Japan) was used for chromatographic
119 analysis. The detector excitation and emission wavelengths were set at 290 and 330 nm
120 respectively. Separation of the analytes was carried out on a Nucleosil-C18 column (250 mm ×
PT
121 4.6 mm, 5 µm). The mobile phase consisted of a mixture of methanol and water (80: 20). The
RI
122 flow rate and the column temperature were set at 0.9 mL min-1 and 40 °C respectively.
123
SC
124 2.3. SS-DLPME-SFOD procedure
125 In the design of the extraction system, two medical syringes were connecting to each other. For
U
126 this purpose, the needle of one of the medical syringe was removed, the needle of the second one
127
AN
was cut and shortened to 5 mm and was inserted into the head of the first syringe. Finally, the
connection was insulated with PVC glue so that no leak was observed during the injection and
M
128
129 back injection process. The pH of ten milliliters of the sample or the standard solution was
D
130 adjusted to 8.0 (using a 0.5 mL phosphate buffer 2.0 mol L-1, pH = 8.0), the solution was drawn
TE
131 into syringe 1, and 30 µL of 1-dodecanol was added to it (Fig. 1). Then, syringe 1 was connected
132 to syringe 2, and the mixture (i.e. the sample solution and the organic solvent) in syringe 1 was
EP
133 rapidly injected into syringe 2 followed by back injection of the mixture in syringe 2 to syringe
134 1. This procedure was repeated four times until the solvent was completely dispersed in the
C
135 aqueous phase and the equilibrium was achieved. The resulting dispersed mixture was
AC
136 transferred to a closed conical centrifuged tube and centrifuged at 5000 rpm for four minutes.
137 Finally, the sample tube was transferred into an ice bath where 1-dodecanol was solidified after
138 about four minutes, and the solidified organic drop was transferred into a conical vial in room
6
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
139 temperature where it melted immediately. 20 µL of the extract containing ALB and TCB was
141
PT
143 2.4.1. Water samples
RI
144 A tap water sample was collected freshly from Bijan Chemistry laboratory (Mashhad,
145 Iran), and wastewater was taken from the effluent of a wastewater treatment plant (Mashhad,
SC
146 Iran) and poured in polypropylene bottles. The water samples were filtered through a Millipore
147 0.45 µm pore-size filter, the pH was adjusted to 8.0 by a phosphate buffer, and the samples were
U
148 treated according to the given procedure.
151 kept frozen. It was melted at room temperature just before the extraction, centrifuged for 15
D
152 minutes at 5000 rpm and filtered. The matrix effect was reduced through dilution of the sample
TE
153 for five times and, subsequently, the sample was subjected to SS-DLPME-SFOD procedure and
156 Pasteurized and homogenized cow milk was obtained from a local market (Mashhad,
C
157 Iran). The milk sample was prepared according to the given procedure [31]. Thus, 5.0 mL of the
AC
158 sample was mixed with 4.0 mL of 3.0% (w/v) trichloroacetic acid in a 15 mL vial and vortexed
159 for 30 seconds. The mixture was left on its own for 15 minutes to allow precipitation of the
160 proteins. Afterwards, it was centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 10 minutes. The supernatant solution
7
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
161 was filtered, and the pH was adjusted to 8.0 by a phosphate buffer. Finally, the volume was
162 adjusted to 10.0 mL with HPLC grade water and treated according to the extraction procedure.
164 A honey sample was purchased from a local market (Mashhad, Iran). One gram of the
PT
165 sample was diluted to 10 mL with 0.5 mL of a phosphate buffer (pH = 8.0) and HPLC grade
RI
166 water and vortexed for four seconds. Then, the mixture was filtered and extracted according to
SC
168
U
170 In the preliminary study, an extraction system was designed, and albendazole (ALB) and
171
AN
triclabendazole (TCB), as two kinds of benzimidazole anthelmintic drugs, were selected as
model compounds. Then, the experimental parameters influencing the extraction efficiency of
M
172
173 the analytes, such as the type and volume of the organic phase, sample pH, ionic strength,
D
174 number of dispersion cycles of the extraction and sample volume, were studied and optimized.
TE
175 Each experiment was performed for three times, and the corresponding average and relative
177
179 The pH of a sample solution is an important factor that determines the ionic state of
AC
180 analytes as well as their distribution between aqueous and organic phases. Thus, pH must be
181 adjusted to the value at which analytes are mainly in their neutral forms so that their affinity for
182 the extraction solvent can become high. According to the pKa values of ALB (pKa1 = 5.54, pKa2 =
183 13.11) and TCB (pKa1 = 5.31, pKa2 = 12.91), these drugs should be mainly in their neutral forms
8
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
184 at pHs within their two pKa values [7]. So, several experiments were performed by varying the
185 sample pH in the range of 4.0-11.0 while keeping the other parameters constant. The results of
186 the study (Fig. 2) revealed that the peak areas of ALB and TCB increase by an increase of pH
187 from 4.0 to 8.0. However, further increase in the sample pH causes a slight decrease in the
PT
188 extraction efficiency. Thus, the sample pH was adjusted to 8.0 by a phosphate buffer for further
RI
189 experiments.
190
SC
191 3.2. Effect of nature and volume of extraction solvent
192 In SS-DLPME-SFOD, like in other LPME methods, the nature of extraction solvent is an
U
193 important parameter affecting the efficiency of extraction. The extraction solvent should have
194
AN
several characteristics such as high affinity for analytes, low solubility in sample solutions, low
density, and a melting point close to an ambient temperature. Therefore, the effect of several
M
195
196 organic solvents including 1-dodecanol, 1-undecanol, 1,10-dichlorodecane and 1-decanol on the
D
197 extraction of ALB and TCB by SS-DLPME-SFOD method was studied. The results (Fig. 3)
TE
198 showed that, with 1-dodecanol, the peak area and, therefore, the extraction efficiencies for ALB
199 and TCB were higher than those with the other solvents. This observation can be related to the
EP
200 lower polarity and, consequently, the higher affinity of 1-dodecanol (dielectric constant = 5.82)
202 (dielectric constant = 6.68) and 1-decanol (dielectric constant = 7.93). Therefore, 1-dodecanol
AC
204 To study the effect of the volume of extraction solvent on the extraction efficiency of the
205 developed method, some experiments were carried out using various volumes of 1-dodecanol
206 (30, 40, 50 and 60 µL). The results revealed that the analytical signals of ALB and TCB
9
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
207 decreased proportionally to the increase in the extraction solvent volume, indicating that the
208 extraction was constant within this range of 1-dodecanol volume. An extraction solvent volume
209 less than 30 µL was not taken into account due to the difficulty of collecting the solvent after
210 extraction. So, in order to obtain a high enrichment factor, 30 µL of 1-dodecanol was selected as
PT
211 the optimum volume of the extraction solvent.
RI
212
SC
214 In liquid phase extraction, adding salt to the aqueous phase usually improves the
215 extraction efficiency of the analytes through the salting out effect. However, in LPME in some
U
216 cases, a decrease in the extraction efficiency at a high concentration of salt has been observed
217
AN
[33], which can be attributed to the increase in the sample viscosity and the restriction of the
M
218 transfer of the analyte to the organic phase. Therefore, in order to investigate the effect of salt on
219 the SS-DLPME-SFOD performance, several experiments were carried out with different NaCl
D
220 concentrations (0.0–6.0%) while keeping the other experimental parameters constant. The results
TE
221 indicated that addition of salt had no significant effect on the analytical responses of ALB and
222 TCB. Thus, the method is suitable for the extraction of analytes from saline samples.
EP
223
225 SS-DLPME-SFOD is a close system in which the organic phase is dispersed in the
AC
226 aqueous phase through successive injections and back injections of the sample solution and the
227 extraction solvent using two syringes connected to each other with a gauge needle. In order to
228 perform SS-DLPME-SFOD with high efficiency in a short time, the number of injections must
229 be optimized. The effect of the number of injections and back injections was examined through
10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
230 1 to 9 injections under other constant experimental conditions. The results (Fig. 4) showed that
231 the analytical responses of ALB and TCB reached a maximum and remained constant after eight
232 injections, indicating that the system had reached a state of equilibrium. Therefore, eight-time
PT
234
RI
235 3.5. Effect of sample volume
236 The sample volume influences the efficiency of convection during the extraction
SC
237 procedure, the LPME efficiency as well as the enrichment factor. Therefore, to investigate the
238 effect of sample volume on the efficiency of the developed method, several experiments were
U
239 performed using different sample volumes (6-20 mL) containing a fixed amount of analytes (0.1
240
AN
µg ALB and 0.2 µg TCB). According to the results (Fig. 5), the analytical response was
maximum and constant up to 10 mL, but further increase in the sample volume caused a decrease
M
241
242 in the analyte response. This observation can be attributed to the incomplete dispersion of the
D
243 extraction solvent within a fixed number of injections. Thus, 10 mL was chosen as the maximum
TE
245
EP
247 The recommendations of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) [34] were used to
C
248 investigate the figures of merit of the developed SS-DLPME-SFOD technique. The regression
AC
249 equation, linear dynamic range (LDR), coefficient of determination (R2), limit of detection
250 (LOD), enhancement factor, and extraction recovery were determined under optimal conditions.
251 The results are summarized in Table 1. The inter-day (n = 3) and intra-day (n = 5) precision
11
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
252 (RSD%) of the SS-DLPME-SFOD method (Table 2) were evaluated by analyzing the samples
253 spiked at three concentration levels (i.e. 0.5, 2.0, 10.0 µg L-1).
254 The enhancement factor was defined as the ratio of the slope of the calibration curve after
255 the SS-DLPME-SFOD method to the slope of the calibration curve without extraction. The ratio
PT
256 was found to be 281 and 311 for ALB and TCB respectively. The extraction recovery (ER) was
RI
257 calculated using the following equation:
V
ER% = EF × ( ) × 100 (Eq. 1)
SC
V
258 where Va and Vo are the volumes of the aqueous sample and the organic phase respectively
U
259 [28,35].
260 AN
261 3.7. Application of SS-DLPME -SFOD
M
262 The applicability of the developed SS-DLPME-SFOD-HPLC/FLD method in the analysis
of real samples was evaluated through extraction and determination of ALB and TCB in water,
D
263
264 wastewater, milk and urine samples. The accuracy of the method was determined through
TE
265 recovery experiments by spiking the samples at two different concentrations of ALB and TCB.
EP
266 The recovery (R%), and accuracy (Error%) were calculated according to the following equations
267 respectively:
C
Cf -Ci
R% = ( ) × 100 (Eq. 2)
Ca
AC
268 where Ci, Ca and Cf are the initial concentrations of the analyte in the sample, the concentration
269 of the analyte in the sample after spiking by a certain amount of the standard, and the
270 concentration of the analyte determined in the spiked sample by the proposed method
12
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
271 respectively. The results of this study (Table 3) show that the recoveries and the errors are in the
272 range of 96.0 to 104.3% and + 4.3 to - 4.0% respectively, suggesting that the present method
273 provides acceptable rates of recovery and accuracy for the determination of ALB and TCB in
PT
275 The chromatograms of the standard along with the milk sample (spiked and unspiked)
RI
276 after extraction by the developed method (Fig. 6) show that the peaks are symmetrical, and the
277 retention times of the analytes are constant in the standard and the real sample. Furthermore, the
SC
278 unspiked milk chromatogram shows a lack of any interference peak at the retention time of the
279 analytes. Thus, the method can be considered accurate for the determination of ALB and TCB.
U
280
281
AN
3.8. Comparison of the developed method with other recent microextraction methods combined
284 other microextraction techniques [36,37] combined with HPLC for the extraction and
TE
286 HPLC/FLD method provides a higher enhancement factor and, consequently, lower LODs
EP
287 values than the other techniques do. The precision of the method is also comparable to that of
288 other methods, and the method can be applied to a wider range of matrices.
C
289
AC
290 4. Conclusion
292 floating organic drop (SS-DLPME-SFOD) was introduced and used for the simultaneous
293 extraction of trace amounts of albendazole and triclabendazole from different matrices. The
13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
294 designed microextraction technique was combined with high performance liquid
296 separation/preconcentration and determination of trace amounts of ALB and TCB in water,
297 urine, milk and honey samples. The SS-DLPME-SFOD method is privileged for its high
PT
298 enhancement factor, low detection limit, good accuracy and precision. It also has the advantages
RI
299 of rapidity, simplicity, low cost and being environment-friendly. Moreover, it does not need any
300 dispersing agent (e.g. a polar solvent or surfactant) or specific instrument (e.g. a vortex mixer,
SC
301 magnetic stirrer or ultrasonic bath), and as the extraction is performed in a close system, the
302 possibility of loss of the organic solvent during the extraction is minimized.
U
303
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
14
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
304 References
305 [1] X. Xia, Y. Dong, P. Luo, X. Wang, X. Li, S. Ding, J. Shen, Determination of benzimidazole
PT
308 [2] D. Chen, Y. Tao, Z. Liu, Z. Liu, L. Huang, Y. Wang, Y. Pan, D. Peng, M. Dai, Z. Yuan,
RI
309 Development of a high-performance liquid chromatography method to monitor the residues
SC
311 [3] CAC F. WHO, Maximum residue limits for veterinary drugs in foods, Proceedings of the
U
313 [4] Pesticides A. Australia Government Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines
316 benzimidazole fungicides in water samples by on-line MISPE-HPLC, Anal. Bioanal. Chem.
D
318 [6] Council Regulation of the European Union No. 2377/90 and Commission Regulation Nos.
320 [7] M. Danaher, H. De Ruyck, S.R. Crooks, G. Dowling, M. O’Keeffe, Review of methodology
321 for the determination of benzimidazole residues in biological matrices, J. Chromatogr. B 845
C
323 [8] C. Soto, D. Contreras, S. Orellana, J. Yañez, M.I. Toral, Simultaneous determination of
325 calibration methods in veterinary pharmaceutical formulation, Anal. Sci. 26 (2010) 891-896.
15
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
328 [10] X.Z. Hu, M.L. Chen, Q. Gao, Q.W. Yu, Y.Q. Feng, Determination of benzimidazole
329 residues in animal tissue samples by combination of magnetic solid-phase extraction with
PT
330 capillary zone electrophoresis, Talanta 89 (2012) 335-341.
RI
331 [11] Y. Zhang, X. Huang, D. Yuan, Determination of benzimidazole anthelmintics in milk and
SC
333 performance liquid chromatography–diode array detection, Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 407
U
335 [12] D. Chen, Y. Tao, H. Zhang, Y. Pan, Z. Liu, L. Huang, Y. Wang, D. Peng, X. Wang, M. Dai,
336
AN
Z. Yuan, Development of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry with
341 anthelmintics in egg samples by high performance liquid chromatography, Food Anal.
EP
343 [14] G.C. Batzias, E. Theodosiadou, G.A. Delis, Quantitative determination of albendazole
C
344 metabolites in sheep spermatozoa and seminal plasma by liquid chromatographic analysis
AC
346 [15] M. Whelan, B. Kinsella, A. Furey, M. Moloney, H. Cantwell, S.J. Lehotay, M. Danaher,
347 Determination of anthelmintic drug residues in milk using ultra high performance liquid
16
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
350 [16] G. Balizs, Determination of benzimidazole residues using liquid chromatography and
PT
352 [17] Y. Santaladchaiyakit, S. Srijaranai, Preconcentration and simultaneous analysis of
RI
353 benzimidazole anthelmintics in milk samples by ultrasound-assisted surfactant-enhanced
SC
355 Methods 6 (2013) 1551-1560.
356 [18] S. Dadfarnia, A.M. Haji Shabani, Choice of solvent in liquid-phase microextraction, in:
U
357 Francisco Pena-Pereira (Ed.), Miniaturization in sample preparation, De Gruyter Open Ltd,
360 forsythiae essential oil by ionic liquids-assisted microwave distillation coupled with
D
363 [20] M. Asadi, S. Dadfarnia, A.M. Haji Shabani, B. Abbasi, Hollow fiber liquid phase
EP
364 microextraction method combined with high performance liquid chromatography for
366 nabumetone in cow milk, water, and biological samples, Food Anal. Methods DOI:
AC
367 10.1007/s12161-016-0449-y.
370 followed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry, Anal. Chim. Acta 826 ( 2014) 28-34.
17
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
371 [22] H.K. Shih, T.Y. Shu, V. Kumar Ponnusamy, J.F. Jen, A novel fatty-acid-based in-tube
PT
375 [23] M. Asadi, S. Dadfarnia, A.M. Haji Shabani, B. Abbasi, Simultaneous extraction and
RI
376 quantification of lamotrigine, phenobarbital, and phenytoin in human plasma and urine
377 samples using solidified floating organic drop microextraction and high-performance liquid
SC
378 chromatography, J. Sep. Sci. 38 (2015) 2510-2516.
379 [24] M. Asadi, A.M. Haji Shabani, S. Dadfarnia, B. Abbasi, Solidified floating organic drop
U
380 microextraction combined with high performance liquid chromatography for the
381
AN
determination of carbamazepine in human plasma and urine samples, Chin. J. Chromatogr.
33 (2015) 634-641.
M
382
383 [25] S. Dadfarnia, A.M. Haji Shabani, Recent development in liquid phase microextraction for
D
384 determination of trace level concentration of metals-A review, Anal. Chim. Acta 658 (2010)
TE
385 107-119.
386 [26] K. Cai, D. Hu, B. Lei, H. Zhao, W. Pan, B. Song, Determination of carbohydrates in
EP
388 dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method, Anal. Chim. Acta 882 (2015) 90-100.
C
389 [27] G. Cinelli, P. Avino, I. Notardonato, A. Centola, M. Vincenzo Russo, Rapid analysis of six
AC
392 chromatography–ion trap mass spectrometry, Anal. Chim. Acta 769 (2013) 72-78.
18
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
393 [28] M. Asadi, A.M. Haji Shabani, S. Dadfarnia, B. Abbasi, Vortex-assisted surfactant-enhanced
395 with high performance liquid chromatography for determination of naproxen and
PT
397 [29] L.E. Vera-Avila, T. Rojo-Portillo, R. Covarrubias-Herrera, A. Peña-Alvarez, Capabilities
RI
398 and limitations of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with solidification of floating
399 organic drop for the extraction of organic pollutants from water samples, Anal. Chim. Acta
SC
400 805 (2013) 60-69.
401 [30] D. Afzali, A.R. Mohadesi, B. Bahadori Jahromi, M. Falahnejad, Separation of trace amount
U
402 of silver using dispersive liquid–liquid based on solidification of floating organic drop
403
AN
microextraction. Anal. Chim. Acta 684 (2011) 54-58.
405 liquid microextraction for the determination of macrocyclic lactones in milk by liquid
D
406 chromatography with diode array detection and atmospheric pressure chemical ionization
TE
408 [32] M. Yang, X. Xi, X. Yang, L. Bai, R. Lu, W. Zhou, S. Zhang, H. Gao, Determination of
EP
409 benzoylurea insecticides in environmental water and honey samples using ionic-liquid-
414 [34] U.S. FDA – Guidance for Industry (draft): Analytical Procedures and Methods Validation:
19
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
416 [35] N. Shokoufi, F. Shemirani, Y. Assadi, Fiber optic-linear array detection spectrophotometry
418 preconcentration and determination of palladium and cobalt, Anal. Chim. Acta 597 (2007)
419 349-356.
PT
420 [36] Y. Santaladchaiyakit, S. Srijaranai, Surfactant-solvent-based quaternary component
RI
421 emulsification microextraction followed by high performance liquid chromatography for the
422 simultaneous analysis of benzimidazole anthelmintics in milk samples, Food Anal. Methods
SC
423 7 (2014) 1238-1246.
U
425 Determination of benzimidazole anthelmintics using HPLC after vortex-assisted mixed
426
AN
anionic–cationic surfactant-enhanced emulsification microextraction with solidification of
428
D
429
TE
C EP
AC
20
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
432 Fig. 2. Effect of the sample pH on the microextraction. Conditions: ALB and TCB
433 concentrations are10 and 20 µg L−1, respectively; sample volume, 10 mL; extraction solvent, 1-
PT
434 dodecanol (30 µL); number of injections, eight times.
RI
435 Fig. 3. Effect of the nature of extraction solvent on the microextraction. Conditions: sample pH,
436 8;ALB and TCB concentrations are 10 and 20 µg L−1, respectively; sample volume, 10 mL;
SC
437 volume of extraction solvent, 30 µL; number of injections, eight times.
438 Fig. 4. Effect of the number of injections on the microextraction. Conditions: sample pH, 8; ALB
U
439 and TCB concentrations are 10 and 20 µg L−1, respectively; sample volume, 10 mL; extraction
442 of ALB and TCB are 0.1and 0.2 µg, respectively; extraction solvent, 1-dodecanol (30 µL);
D
444 Fig. 6. Chromatograms of the spiked milk sample with 20 µg L−1 of ALB and TCB (a), unspiked
445 milk samples (b) and standard with 20 µg L−1 of ALB and TCB (c) after the SS-DLPME-SFOD
EP
447
C
448
AC
449
450
451
452
21
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
453
PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
454
EP
455 Fig. 1
456
C
457
AC
458
459
460
461
462
22
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
10.0
8.0
6.0
PT
TCB
4.0
RI
2.0
3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0
SC
Sample pH
463
U
464 Fig. 2
465
AN
466
M
467
468
D
469
TE
470
471
EP
472
C
473
474
AC
475
476
477
478
479
23
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
10.0
8.0
Peak area × 100000
6.0 ALB
PT
TCB
4.0
RI
2.0
SC
0.0
1-Dodecanol 1-Undecanol 1,10-Dichlorodecane 1-Decanol
U
480
481
AN Fig. 3
482
M
483
484
D
485
TE
486
487
EP
488
489
C
490
AC
491
492
493
494
495
24
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
8.0
6.0
Peak area × 100000
ALB
4.0
PT
TCB
2.0
RI
0.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
SC
Number of injections
496
U
497 Fig. 4
498
AN
499
M
500
501
D
502
TE
503
504
EP
505
C
506
507
AC
508
509
510
511
512
25
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
8.0
7.0
PT
TCB
4.0
RI
3.0
2.0
5 8 11 14 17 20 23
SC
Sample volume (mL)
513
U
514 Fig. 5
515
AN
516
M
517
518
D
519
TE
520
521
EP
522
C
523
524
AC
525
526
527
528
529
26
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
530
PT
RI
U SC
531
532
AN
Fig. 6
533
M
534
D
535
TE
536
537
EP
538
539
C
540
AC
541
542
543
544
545
27
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Analyte Linearity (µg L-1) Linear equation R2 LOD (µg L-1) EF ER (%)
PT
R2: Coefficient of determination; LOD: limit of detection; EF: enhancement factor; ER: Extraction recovery.
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
28
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 2
Precision of the developed method for the determination of ALB and TCB in blank real samples.
PT
Matrix Precision (RSD%)
RI
ALB (µg L-1) TCB (µg L-1)
SC
Inter-assay (n = 3) Intra-assay (n = 5) Inter-assay (n = 3) Intra-assay (n = 5)
U
Tap water 7.9 7.3 6.9 6.6 5.3 5.0 7.7 6.5 6.3 6.1 5.3 5.5
AN
Waste water 8.9 6.8 7.7 6.9 6.0 5.7 9.2 7.0 7.4 7.2 6.6 6.3
M
Cow milk 9.7 9.4 8.0 7.1 6.4 6.0 9.5 8.7 6.0 6.8 7.0 5.9
D
Honey 9.1 6.5 7.2 6.1 6.5 5.6 7.8 7.3 6.8 7.0 6.6 6.5
29
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
PT
Tap water - - - - - -
1 1.01 ± 0.06 101.0 +1.0 1 0.98 ± 0.07 98.0 -2.0
RI
10 9.83 ± 0.52 98.3 -1.7 10 10.15 ± 0.64 101.5 +1.5
Waste water - 5.60 - - - - - -
SC
1 6.58 ± 0.28 98.0 -2.0 1 0.99 ± 0.06 99.0 -1.0
10 15.63 ± 0.74 103.0 +3.0 10 10.12 ± 0.48 101.2 +1.2
Honey - - - - - - - -
U
1 1.01 ± 0.09 101.0 +1.0 1 1.02 ± 0.08 102.0 +2.0
AN
10 9.90 ± 0.61 99.0 -0.1 10 9.76 ± 0.51 97.6 -2.4
Cow milk - - - - - - - -
1 0.99 ± 0.05 99.0 -1.0 1 0.97 ± 0.04 97.0 -3.0
M
10 10.08 ± 0.49 100.8 +0.8 10 10.43 ± 0.65 104.3 +4.3
Urine - 14.36 - - - - - -
1 15.39 ± 0.78 103.0 +3.0 1 0.96 ± 0.08 96.0 -4.0
D
10 24.18 ± 1.79 98.2 -1.8 10 10.21 ± 0.53 102.0 +2.1
TE
C EP
AC
30
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 4 Comparison of the SS-DLPME-SFOD with other recent microextraction methods combined with HPLC.
PT
Analyte Analytical technique Sample RSD (%) LOD EF Ref.
RI
ALB (TBZ, OFZ, MEB and SPME–HPLC/DAD Milk and honey 2.3 8.5 0.21 52 [11]
SC
FBZ)
U
ALB (OFZ, MBZ and FBZ) UAEME-HPLC/PDA Egg <11.3 <9.0 12.5 - [13]
AN
ALB (TBZ, OFZ and UASEME –HPLC/DAD Milk 3.4 6.7 2.9 60 (PF) [17]
M
MEB)
ALB (FBZ and MBZ) SSEME-HPLC/PDA Milk <8.8 <8.8 2.6 38 (PF) [36]
D
ALB (TBZ, MBZ and FBZ) VASEME -HPLC/PDA TE Liver and kidney <8.0% <8.0% 0.5 60 (PF) [37]
ALB SS-DLPME-SFOD- Water, wastewater, milk, 6.5 5.0 0.02 281 This
EP
TCB HPLC/FLD honey and urine 6.0 5.3 0.06 311 work
C
RSD: relative standard deviation; LOD: limit of detection; EF: enhancement factor: PF: preconcentration factor UASEME: ultrasound-assisted
AC
VASEME: Vortex-assisted surfactant-enhanced emulsification microextraction; UAEME: ultrasound assisted emulsification microextraction;
31
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Highlights
- A novel dispersive liquid phase microextraction was developed for ALB and TCB.
- The analytes are extracted in a closed system using of two connected syringes.
- The dispersion is done by injection & back injection of mixture of solvent/ sample.
PT
- The dispersion is done without the use of dispersing agent, ultrasonic bath or vortex mixer.
- The combination of method with HPLC-FLD allows trace determination of ALB and TCB.
- The method is simple, rapid, green and accurate.
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC