This section may be divided by subheadings. It should provide a concise and precise description of the experimental results, their interpretation, as well as the experimental conclusions that can be drawn.
Effect of the Type and Volume of Extraction Solvent
This experiment select 3 kinds of organic solvent is chlorobenzene (density of 1.10 g/ml), carbon tetrachloride (density of 1.59 mg/l) and trichloroethane (density of 1.35 g/ml), according to section 1.5 steps, the extraction effect of 3 kinds of extraction solvent on of chlorpyrifos has tested. The results show that (as shown in Fig. 2), trichloroethane has the highest concentration coefficient and good recovery, extraction effect was better than the other two. so choose trichloroethane as extracting agent in this project.
The extraction solvent volume affect the enrichment ratio of DLLME directly, thus affecting recovery, 5 extraction volume have selected in this experiment: 20, 22, 25, 30and35 µl. Results shows, that with the increase of the extractant volume, recoveries first increases then decreases by chlorpyrifos, 22, 25µl are can a.chieve ideal recovery, but with increase of the extractant volume, the enrichment factor decreases obviously. As 22 µl of the extractant volume, the recoveries and enrichment factor are better(Fig. 3, Fig. 4).
Effect of the Type and Volume of Dispersant Solvent
This experiment choose acetonitrile and acetone as dispersant, mix with 22 µl trichloroethane respectively, and add 5 ml water. The acetone extraction efficiency highest, the acetonitrile extraction rate is lower than acetone, and the peak has interference(Fig. 5, 6). So the experiment choose acetone as dispersant.
Experiment with different volume (700, 800, 900 and 1000 µL) of acetone and 22 µl trichloroethane as extraction system, after extraction of centrifugal, sample injection 1 µl sedimentation volume, of the peak area increased with the increase of dispersing agent volume. The result is due to the volume of acetone increased, makes a certain amount of trichloroethane more dispersed in water, the the extraction efficiency relative higher. When acetone volume is 1000 µl, peak area reached the highest. So select volume of acetone is 1000 µl (Fig. 7, 8).
Effect of Extraction Time and Eentrifugal Time
For this study, chose 3500 r/min, and the centrifugal time is 2, 5, and 10 min, with the increase of the centrifugal time, the peak area of chlorpyrifos keep the same level, centrifugal time had no significant effect on the extraction efficiency. extraction agent of scattered in the mixture as long as through the short time of centrifugal can deposit to the bottom of the tube, it is one of the great advantages in this DLLME method, so choose 2 min is more timesaving (Fig. 9).
Effect of Concentration of Salt
In this experiment, add NaCl change salt concentration in the water phase, concentration of 0%, 2% and 5%. Results (Fig. 10), a mixture of the increase of the extraction solvent solubility in the aqueous phase with the salt concentration increased, but volume of precipitated phase increased in the end, affecting the extraction efficiency of method, so the experiment without salt.
Method Validation
Th linear range of chlorpyrifos was 0.1–10 mg/l. Results show, in the optimized conditions, the peak area of chlorpyrifos had good linear relationship within a certain range, the Regression equation was Y = 16086x-1448, the regression coefficients were greater than 0.999. The LOD was 0.02 µg/ml. The enrichment factor was 554.51. The recoveries for standard addition was 98.07%, the intra-day relative standard deviations(RSD, n = 4) was 4.61%, the veracity and accuracy of the method can meet the requirement of pesticide residue analysis (Table 1).
Table 1
Recovery assay, Recovery assay, precision (repeatability) and trueness of target compounds in greente
|
Spiked Sample
|
RSD(%)(N = 4)
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
Average
|
Volum(µl)
|
9.50
|
8.20
|
8.50
|
9.40
|
8.90
|
6.31
|
Sampling concentration(ng/ml)
|
9.68
|
12.77
|
11.51
|
10.41
|
11.09
|
10.52
|
Enrichment factor
|
483.90
|
638.39
|
575.25
|
520.51
|
554.51
|
10.52
|
Recovery(%)
|
91.94
|
104.70
|
97.79
|
97.86
|
98.07
|
4.61
|