Modification and characterization of amberlite XAD-2 with calcein blue for preconcentration and determination of copper(II) from environmental samples by atomic absorption spectroscopy

2011 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 1523-1531 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elham Moniri ◽  
Homayon Ahmad Panahi ◽  
Meghdad Karimi ◽  
Nasir Ahmad Rajabi ◽  
Mohammad Faridi ◽  
...  
1981 ◽  
Vol 27 (8) ◽  
pp. 1438-1440 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Weinstock ◽  
M Uhlemann

Abstract An injection method has been adapted for the determination of copper concentration in untreated, undiluted serum by flame atomic absorption spectroscopy. Serum, 50 or 100 microliter, is automatically injected by a commercial microprobe system into a plastic cone connected to the capillary tube of the burner, at a rate of 240 samples per hour. The required sample volume is considerably decreased, and sensitivity is increased 20- to 40-fold. After 500 measurements we observed no memory effects, carryover, or clogging of the burner. We discuss common difficulties with calibration standards due to viscosity and other physicochemical interferences, and suggest the use of pooled human serum as a secondary standard. Within-run CV was 1.8%, the day-to-day CV 2.2%. Comparison with a dilution method gave a correlation coefficient exceeding 0.98.


1986 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald J Hutchinson ◽  
Francis J Disinski ◽  
Christy A Nardelli

Abstract A rapid method for the determination of sub-part-per-million levels of copper in infant formula, which does not require decomposition of the sample matrix before analysis, has been developed. The method uses L’vov platform graphite furnace atomic absorption spectroscopy (GFAAS), a technique that greatly reduces matrix interferences limiting the applicability of normal GFAAS. The sample preparation consists of dilution of a weighed sample of infant formula to a known volume with a 0.5% solution of Triton X-100 in deionized water. The accuracy of the method, as assessed from the results of overspike recovery studies (96.5-101.3% recovery) for different matrix types and comparison to results generated with alternative methodologies, can be considered excellent. The overall precision of the method ranges from 2.5 to 4.3% RSD for different matrix types.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document