SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • Auxiliary solvent;
  • Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction;
  • Green analytical chemistry;
  • Ultrasound-assisted emulsification

Three modes of liquid–liquid based microextraction techniques – namely auxiliary solvent-assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, auxiliary solvent-assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with low-solvent consumption, and ultrasound-assisted emulsification microextraction – were compared. Picric acid was used as the model analyte. The determination is based on the reaction of picric acid with Astra Phloxine reagent to produce an ion associate easily extractable by various organic solvents, followed by spectrophotometric detection at 558 nm. Each of the compared procedures has both advantages and disadvantages. The main benefit of ultrasound-assisted emulsification microextraction is that no hazardous chlorinated extraction solvents and no dispersive solvent are necessary. Therefore, this procedure was selected for validation. Under optimized experimental conditions (pH 3, 7 × 10−5 mol/L of Astra Phloxine, and 100 μL of toluene), the calibration plot was linear in the range of 0.02–0.14 mg/L and the LOD was 7 μg/L of picric acid. The developed procedure was applied to the analysis of spiked water samples.