2005Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis SunyatseniRequires access

Comparison of Extraction Techniques with Different Solvents for DDT Analogues in Sediments

Lang, Yin-Hai, Jiang Jiang, Xin, Martens, Zhao, Qiguo

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

Four techniques, Soxhlet extraction (SOX), ultrasonic extraction (USE), fluidized-bed extraction (FBE) and accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) with different solvents (methanol, hexane/acetone and acetonitrile) were used for the extraction of DDT analogues in sediments. Results revealed that the four extraction techniques had high recoveries (>86.0%) with low standard deviations (< 12.0%) for most of DDT analogues, meaning that they could all successfully extract DDT analogues in sediments. Accelerated solvent extraction using methanol and hexane/acetone (1:1), fluidized-bed extraction using hexane/acetone (1:1) and the ultrasonic extraction using hexane/acetone (1:1) were comparable or better than Soxhlet extraction using hexane/acetone (1:1). Considering solvent- and time-consumption, level of automation,and environmental risk, accelerated solvent extraction with hexane/acetone (1:1) was better than the other extraction techniques.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Four techniques, Soxhlet extraction (SOX), ultrasonic extraction (USE), fluidized-bed extraction (FBE) and accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) with different solvents (methanol, hexane/acetone and acetonitrile) were used for the extraction of DDT analogues in sediments. Results revealed that the four extraction techniques had high recoveries (>86.0%) with low standard deviations (< 12.0%) for most of DDT analogues, meaning that they could all successfully extract DDT analogues in sediments. Accelerated solvent extraction using methanol and hexane/acetone (1:1), fluidized-bed extraction using hexane/acetone (1:1) and the ultrasonic extraction using hexane/acetone (1:1) were comparable or better than Soxhlet extraction using hexane/acetone (1:1). Considering solvent- and time-consumption, level of automation,and environmental risk, accelerated solvent extraction with hexane/acetone (1:1) was better than the other extraction techniques.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Four techniques, Soxhlet extraction (SOX), ultrasonic extraction (USE), fluidized-bed extraction (FBE) and accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) with different solvents (methanol, hexane/acetone and acetonitrile) were used for the extraction of DDT analogues in sediments. Results revealed that the four extraction techniques had high recoveries (>86.0%) with low standard deviations (< 12.0%) for most of DDT analogues, meaning that they could all successfully extract DDT analogues in sediments. Accelerated solvent extraction using methanol and hexane/acetone (1:1), fluidized-bed extraction using hexane/acetone (1:1) and the ultrasonic extraction using hexane/acetone (1:1) were comparable or better than Soxhlet extraction using hexane/acetone (1:1). Considering solvent- and time-consumption, level of automation,and environmental risk, accelerated solvent extraction with hexane/acetone (1:1) was better than the other extraction techniques.

Key concepts: Acetone, Hexane, Extraction (chemistry), Solvent, Chromatography, Methanol, Chemistry, Acetonitrile

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of Extraction Techniques with Different Solvents for DDT Analogues in Sediments — Research Paper | ScholarLens