International Journal of Analytical Chemistry
Volume 2018 (2018), Article ID 8045324, 8 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/8045324

Research Article

Determination of Trace Antimony (III) in Water Samples with Single Drop Microextraction Using BPHA-[C₄mim][PF₆] System Followed by Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry

Xiaoshan Huang, Mingxin Guan, Zhuliangzi Lu, and Yiping Hang

School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Yiping Hang; yphang@scut.edu.cn

Received 21 March 2018; Accepted 28 June 2018; Published 1 August 2018

Academic Editor: Marcela Z. Corazza

Copyright © 2018 Xiaoshan Huang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract.

A new sensitive method for antimony (III) determination by graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry (GFAAS) has been developed by using N-benzoyl-N-phenylhydroxylamine (BPHA) and 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([C₄mim][PF₆]) single drop microextraction. The single drop microextraction (SDMM) system is more competitive compared with other traditional extraction methods. Under the optimized conditions, the limit of detection (signal-to-noise ratio is 3) and the enrichment factor of antimony (III) are 0.01 μg·L⁻¹ and 112, respectively. The relative standard deviation of the 0.5 μg·L⁻¹ antimony (III) is 4.2% (n=6). The proposed method is rather sensitive to determinate trace antimony (III) in water.

1. Introduction

Antimony (Sb) compounds have been extensively applied for various industrial materials such as glass, semiconductors, and pharmaceutical products [1–3]. As Sb can be easily exposed to the surface water, it has been considered as a priority pollutant in drinking water in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Japan while their action levels are ranged from 2 to 6 μg·L⁻¹ [4]. Sb has two kinds of valence states including Sb (III) and Sb (V), and different chemical forms of them have different levers of toxicity. In inorganic chemistry, the compounds of Sb (III) are almost ten times more poisonous than the compounds of Sb (V) [5–7]. Many diseases including respiratory tract irritation, dermatitis, conjunctivitis, suppuration of the nasal septum, gastritis, or cellular damage in the lungs, heart, and kidneys will be triggered by excessive exposure to Sb (III) [8, 9]. Thus, a reliable and accurate method for the determination of Sb (III) is very necessary.

Several techniques including UV-visible spectrophotometry [10, 11], inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry [12, 13], hydride generation atomic fluorescence spectrometry [14, 15], flame atomic absorption spectrometry [16–18], and electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry [19–21] have been used for the determination of antimony species in various samples. Considering the poor sensitivities of flame atomic absorption spectrometry and UV-visible spectrophotometry, the more limited condition of hydride generation atomic fluorescence spectrometry, and the expensive price and analysis cost of inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry (GFAAS) is an efficient alternative to determinate trace and ultratrace amounts of antimony. Besides the requirement of a relatively small injection volume, a partially eliminated matrix during the pyrolysis is another advantage of GFAAS. Despite the high sensitivity of GFAAS, it is still necessary to use separation techniques that allow preconcentration of antimony species, due to the complex matrix interferences and the low concentration of antimony species in water sample.

Many miniaturized techniques such as homogenous liquid-liquid microextraction [22, 23], solid phase extraction technology [24–26], cloud point extraction [2, 27], single drop microextraction [28–30], hollow-fiber liquid phase microextraction [17, 31], and dispersive liquid phase microextraction [32, 33] have been used as the processing methods of preconcentration. Also, these methods have been applied to preconcentration of antimony species. Compared with other methods, SDMM is a new and environmentally friendly sample pretreatment technology. It has the advantages of low cost, simple device, easy operation, very low amounts of organic solvent, and high enrichment efficiency. For its striking advantages, SDMM was selected as the preconcentration methods in our study. Moreover, considering the toxicity and flammability of organic solvents, the ionic liquid of 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([C₄mim][PF₆]) has been employed in SDME because of its environmental friendliness. As reported, ionic liquids have been used as novel solvents for the extraction of metal ions at room temperature [34–37]. Ionic liquid does not have detectable vapor pressure and it can avoid environmental and safety problems. Up till now, few analytical applications of SDME method based on [C₄mim][PF₆] for extraction and preconcentration of Sb (III) have been reported. Thus, further studies into the use of [C₄mim][PF₆] in SDME are important in order to improve existing methods.

In this study, a method for Sb (III) determination in water samples by SDME combined with GFAAS was proposed. BPHA and [C₄mim][PF₆] were employed as complexing agent and extraction solvent, respectively. The SDME system was fully characterized through optimizations of the relevant variables influencing the extraction of Sb (III).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Reagents

All the reagents were of analytical grade. The experiment water was double distilled deionized water purified by Millipore (Millipore, Bedford, MA, USA). Potassium antimony tartrate was from Tianjin Kemiou Chemical Reagent Co. Ltd., Tianjin, China. N-Benzoyl-N-phenylhydroxylamine (BPHA), sodium thiosulphate, hydrochloric acid, ammonia solutions oxine, dpy, dichloromethane (CH₂Cl₂), and trichloromethane (CHCl₃) were bought from Aladdin (Aladdin Industrial Co., Shanghai, China). 1-Butyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([C₄mim][PF₆]) was bought from J&K (J&K Scientific Ltd., Beijing, China). The 1000 mg·L⁻¹ Sb (III) stock solution was prepared by amounts of potassium antimony tartrate dissolved in double distilled deionized water. The pH of the Sb (III) stock solution was adjusted to 2.0 with 0.1 M hydrochloric acid and 0.1 M ammonia solution. 1×10⁻³ M BPHA was dissolved in methanol.

2.2. Instruments

Atomic absorption spectra were performed by a Perkin-Elmer 900T atomic absorption spectrometer (Perkin-Elmer, USA) equipped with transverse heated graphite atomizer, pyrolytic graphite coated tubes (Beijing, China), and an antimony hollow cathode lamp (Perkin-Elmer, USA) recommended by the manufacturer. In the whole operation, except for atomization mode, argon 99.99% was used as protective and purge gas, and the flow rate was 250 mL·min⁻¹. The pH of all solutions was performed by pHB-3C (Shanghai Weiye Instrument Factory). And all the stir in this study was performed by 85-2A magnetic stirrer (Changzhou Aohua Instrument Co. Ltd.). Some instrumental parameters of GFAAS were as follows: the lamp current was 10 mA, the wavelength was 217.6 nm, the spectral bandpass was 0.7 nm, and the background correction was Zeeman. Table 1 showed graphite furnace atomizer temperature-rising program.

Table 1: Graphite furnace atomizer temperature-rising program.

Steps
Temperature
Ramp time
Hold time
Argon flow rate

(°C)
(s)
(s)
(mL·min⁻¹)

Drying
120
10
15
250

Pyrolysis
600
5
20
250

Atomization
2000
0
5
0

Cleaning
2400
1
3
250

2.3. Preparation of Samples

All the water samples were filtered through a 0.45 μm pore size membrane filter to remove the suspended particulate matters and the pH of all the water samples was adjusted to 2.0 by using 0.1 M hydrochloric acid and 0.1 M ammonia solution. Water samples including bottled mineral water, river water (pH=6.2, Beijiang River, Shaoguan, China), and tap water were collected locally. Each of the treated water samples was preserved at 1.9 mL for the later determination.

2.4. Process of Single Drop Microextraction

The apparatus of SDME was the same as what we studied before [39]. 1.9 mL treated water sample or 1 μg·L⁻¹ Sb (III) standard solution and 100 μL 1×10⁻⁴ M BPHA solution were added to a 5 mL vial. Microsyringe with 5 μL of [C₄mim][PF₆] was positioned above the vial, and the needle was inserted through the septum. The tip of syringe needle was attached to a flared polytetrafluoroethylene tube. Then, the needle tip was immersed into the sample solution, and the microsyringe was pushed slowly in order to make the microdrop hang under the needle tip steadily. The time of the extraction was 6 min under the stirring rate of 600 rpm. After extraction, microdrop was inhaled into the microsyringe and injected into the graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometer for analysis manually.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Chelating Agent and Extraction Solvent

A chelating agent has a great influence on the extraction efficiency of Sb (III). Thus, a suitable chelating agent is very important. Figure 1(a) showed the pattern of the atomic absorbance of Sb (III) with different chelating agents (BPHA, Oxine, and Dpy) and their background absorbance. It was found that the absorbance signal of Sb (III) with the chelating agent of BPHA was stronger than others. Although the absorbance signal of Sb (III) with Oxine was good, it had the stronger background interference. The absorbance signal of Sb (III) with Dpy had weaker signal compared with BPHA and Oxine. As a result, BPHA was selected as the chelating agent for SDME.

(a)

(b)

Figure 1: (a) The atomic absorbance of Sb (III) with different chelating agents such as BPHA, Oxine, and Dpy and their background absorbance. (b) The atomic absorbance of Sb (III) in different extraction solvents such as CH₂Cl₂, CHCl₃, and [C₄mim][PF₆] and their background absorbance; BG: background absorbance without Sb (III); Abs: absorbance.

A suitable extraction solvent is also important for SDME. The density of the extraction solvent can be supposed to be higher than water so that it could keep the drop stable. CH₂Cl₂, CHCl₃, and [C₄mim][PF₆] that were used in liquid-liquid extraction were evaluated as the extraction solvents. Each extraction solvent was dealt with via three different chelating agents, and then the method of SDME-GFAAS was applied to determine the amounts of Sb (III), and the results were shown in Table 2. Whatever the chelating agent was, [C₄mim][PF₆] always had the strongest signal. Figure 1(b) described the atomic absorbance of Sb (III) in different extraction agents (CH₂Cl₂, CHCl₃, and [C₄mim][PF₆]) with BPHA as the chelating agent and their background absorbance. Therefore, [C₄mim][PF₆] was selected as the extraction solvent for SDME.

Table 2: The atomic absorbance of three chelating agents in three different extraction solvents.

Chelating agent
Extraction solvent

CH₂Cl₂
CHCl₃
[C₄mim][PF₆]

Oxine
0.287
0.274
0.294

Dpy
0.158
0.143
0.176

BPHA
0.322
0.355
0.364

3.2. Optimization of Single Drop Microextraction Conditions

3.2.1. pH

The pH of the solution played an important role in the formation of metal chelate and the influence of the stability of chemicals. Also, it could affect the extraction of Sb (III) in the BPHA-[C₄mim][PF₆] system. The study of the pH was ranged from 1.0 to 6.0 and the results were shown in Figure 2. The absorbance signals of Sb (III) were high and less volatile in the range of 1.0-6.0. Considering that there may be interferences due to the competitive complexation reaction of other metal ions when the pH value was at a high level, pH=2.0 was chosen for the further study.

Figure 2: The atomic absorbance of Sb (III) in solutions with the pH value from 2.0 to 6.0.

3.3. BPHA Concentration

It was also necessary to find the minimal concentration of BPHA. The effect of BPHA concentration on the extraction efficiency of Sb (III) was investigated. The results were illustrated in Figure 3(a) and, as can be seen from it, the absorbance signal of Sb (III) increased with the BPHA concentration from 6×10⁻⁵ to 8×10⁻⁵ M and remained constant when the concentration of BPHA was above 8×10⁻⁵ M. To make the treatment easier, the value of 1×10⁻⁴ M was chosen for the further study.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 3: (a) The atomic absorbance of Sb (III) in solutions with the concentration of BPHA from 6×10⁻⁵ M to 10×10⁻⁵ M. (b) The atomic absorbance of Sb (III) in solutions with the drop size from 2.0 to 6.0 μL. (c) The atomic absorbance of Sb (III) in solutions with the stirring rate from 200 to 800 rpm. (d) The atomic absorbance of Sb (III) in solutions with the extraction time from 2 to 10 min.

3.4. Solvent Drop Size

The effect of drop size was shown in Figure 3(b), and it was found that the absorbance of Sb (III) increased with the increase of the drop size from 2.0 to 6.0 μL. However, the drop size increasing usually resulted in the fall of the microdrop. In general, the stability of the microdrop depends on upward floating force, downward gravity, and adhesion forces [18]. In order to enhance the adhesion force of the microdrop, a flared polytetrafluoroethylene tube was attached to the tip of syringe needle. All these things were taken into account, and then 5.0 μL was chosen as the drop size for extraction.

3.5. Stirring Rate

It was well known that the stirring rate could affect the extracting speed by changing the mass transfer in the sample solution. The effect of stirring rates on extraction efficiency was studied in the range of 200 to 800 rpm. The results in Figure 3(c) showed that the increasing stirring rate of the sample greatly improved the absorbance of Sb (III). However, the microdrop easily fell off the needle of the microsyringe when the stirring rate was above 600 rpm. Increasing stirring rate could also cause a reduction of [C₄min][PF₆] microdrop volume, because the dissolution of ionic liquid was enhancing. Thus, 600 rpm was selected as the best stirring rate in this study.

3.6. Extraction Time

The extraction efficiency depended on the length of the extraction time until the equilibrium was reached. Although the maximum sensitivity was achieved in equilibrium, complete equivalent was not necessary to obtain accurate analysis. Thus, the effect of extraction time on extraction efficiency had been studied from 2 to 10 min. The results were illustrated in Figure 3(d). There were a sharp increase from 2 to 6 min and a slow increase from 6 to 10 min. As the time went on, microdrop would fall into solutions. In order to avoid it, 6 min was selected as the extraction time which was enough for extracting Sb (III) for determination.

3.7. Optimization of Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry

In order to reduce the chemical interference and the background signal, the work investigated the influence of pyrolysis temperature from 400°C to 800°C and atomization temperature from 1800°C to 2200°C. The 0.5 μg·L⁻¹ Sb (III) standard solutions were dealt with via the pretreatment of SDME and determined by GFAAS. As shown in Figure 4(b), background signals were stronger when the pyrolysis temperature was lower because of the excessive vaporization of BPHA and ionic liquid at atomization stage, and the strongest signal appeared at 2000°C. It was found in Figure 4(a) that the matrix was sufficiently eliminated and maximum absorbance was achieved at the pyrolysis temperature of 600°C; however the absorbance decreased with increasing of the pyrolysis temperature due to the loss of Sb at higher temperature. In addition, the time of atomization was 5 s. As the results showed in Figure 4, 2000°C was chosen as the atomization temperature and 600°C as the pyrolysis temperature.

(a)

(b)

Figure 4: (a) The absorbance of Sb (III) with the pyrolysis temperature (PT) from 400°C to 800°C. (b) The absorbance of Sb (III) with the atomization temperature (AT) from 1800°C to 2200°C.

3.8. Effect of Interferences

One of the interferences was other metal ions reacting with chelating agents and the other was coextraction. In order to validate the selectivity of Sb (III) in microextraction system, different amounts of ions were added to the 1.0 μg·L⁻¹ Sb (III) solutions, respectively. After determination, coexisting ions were considered to have interferences when the change of Sb (III) absorption value was more than 5%. As shown in the Results, the tolerance limit of coexisting ions including Na⁺, K⁺, Ca²⁺, Mg²⁺, Cl⁻, , and was 2000 mg·L⁻¹; of coexisting ions including Co²⁺, Cd²⁺, Cu²⁺, Mn²⁺, Zn²⁺, and Ag⁺ was 200 mg·L⁻¹; of coexisting ions including Al³⁺, Cr³⁺, Fe³⁺, Ni²⁺, and Pb²⁺ was 50 mg·L⁻¹.

3.9. Standard Analysis

As shown in the Results, the low limit of detection (LOD, 3σ) was 0.01 ng·mL⁻¹, the relative standard deviation of 0.5 ng·mL⁻¹ (n=6) was 4.2%, and the linear value ranged from 0.02 to 5 ng·mL⁻¹. The regression equation was A=0.6832C+0.0034 (A represented the absorbance values and C represented the concentration of Sb (III) whose unit was ng·mL⁻¹). Linear correlation coefficient was 0.999. A comparison of the main features of the proposed method with other reported methods in the literatures was shown in Table 3. This method was more effective for detecting Sb (III) with lower limit detection and had better precision than majority of the other reported methods.

Table 3: Comparison of the proposed method with other methods for determination of antimony (III).

Method
Linear ranges
Limits of detection
Enrichment factor
Relative standard deviation
References

(ng·mL⁻¹)
(ng·mL⁻¹)

DLLME-
0.05-5
0.05
115
4.5%
[32]

CPE-
-
1.82
45
2.6%
[38]

VASEME-
0.4-8
0.09
53
5.4%
[20]

HFSLME-
5-200
0.8
160
7.8%
[17]

SDME-GFAAS
0.02-50
0.01
112
4.2%
This work

liquid-liquid microextraction-electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry.

point extraction- electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry.

-assisted surfactant-enhanced emulsification microextraction-electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry.

fiber supported liquid membrane extraction-thermospray flame furnace atomic absorption spectrometry.

3.10. Samples Analysis

A series of water samples were analyzed by the presented method. The results were shown in Table 4. The recoveries were in the ranges of 98-104% with the different standard of Sb (III) solutions spiked to the water samples. So, it demonstrated a good accuracy of this method.

Table 4: Determination of Sb (III) in water samples.

Samples
Added (μg·L⁻¹)
Found (μg·L⁻¹)
Recovery (%)

Bottle mineral water
0
< Limits of detection
-

0.1
0.102 ± 0.01
102±1

0.4
0.401 ± 0.008
100±2

River water
0
< Limits of detection
-

0.1
0.104 ± 0.015
104±2

0.4
0.407 ± 0.012
102±3

Tap water
0
< Limits of detection
-

0.1
0.098 ± 0.011
98±1

0.4
0.398 ± 0.009
99±2

4. Conclusions

The optimization method, combined with single drop microextraction using BPHA-[C₄mim][PF₆] system for separation of impurities, detected by GFAAS was developed to determinate trace Sb (III) in water samples. After a series of analysis of optimization conditions, an excellent accuracy, precision, and lower limit detection were obtained by this method. The relative standard deviation of the 0.5 μg·L⁻¹ Sb (III) was 4.2% (n=6). The detection limit (signal-to-noise ratio of 3) and the enrichment coefficient of Sb (III) were 0.01 μg·L⁻¹ and 112, respectively. What is more, the introduction of BPHA-[C₄mim][PF₆] system was not only ecofriendly comparing with traditional organic solution but also efficient for extraction. After the rapid extraction by SDME with the system of BPHA-[C₄mim][PF₆], the samples could be injected and detected directly. Thus, this method was a simple, effective, and environment-friendly way to determine the trace concentration of Sb (III) in water samples.

Data Availability

The [Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry] data used to support the findings of this study are included within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the South China University of Technology for supporting this work and the Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong (Grant no. 2016A020210012) for the research fellowship.

References

W. Shotyk, M. Krachler, and B. Chen, “Antimony: global environmental contaminant,” Journal of Environmental Monitoring, vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 1135-1136, 2005.

X. Jiang, S. Wen, and G. Xiang, “Cloud point extraction combined with electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry for the speciation of antimony(III) and antimony(V) in food packaging materials,” Journal of Hazardous Materials, vol. 175, no. 1-3, pp. 146–150, 2010.

Y. Li, B. Hu, and Z. Jiang, “On-line cloud point extraction combined with electrothermal vaporization inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry for the speciation of inorganic antimony in environmental and biological samples,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 576, no. 2, pp. 207–214, 2006.

S. D. Richardson and T. A. Ternes, “Water analysis: emerging contaminants and current issues,” Analytical Chemistry, vol. 83, no. 12, pp. 4616–4648, 2011.

P. Smichowski, “Antimony in the environment as a global pollutant: a review on analytical methodologies for its determination in atmospheric aerosols,” Talanta, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 2–14, 2008.

A. Gonzalvez, M. L. Cervera, S. Armenta, and M. de la Guardia, “A review of non-chromatographic methods for speciation analysis,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 636, no. 2, pp. 129–157, 2009.

J. O. Vinhal, A. D. Gonçalves, G. F. B. Cruz, and R. J. Cassella, “Speciation of inorganic antimony (III & V) employing polyurethane foam loaded with bromopyrogallol red,” Talanta, vol. 150, pp. 539–545, 2016.

M. Krachler, H. Emons, and J. Zheng, “Speciation of antimony for the 21st century: Promises and pitfalls,” TrAC - Trends in Analytical Chemistry, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 79–90, 2001.

N. Altunay and R. Gürkan, “Separation/preconcentration of ultra-trace levels of inorganic Sb and Se from different sample matrices by charge transfer sensitized ion-pairing using ultrasonic-assisted cloud point extraction prior to their speciation and determination by hydride generation AAS,” Talanta, vol. 159, pp. 344–355, 2016.

M. J. G. González, O. D. Renedo, and M. J. A. Martínez, “Simultaneous determination of antimony(III) and antimony(V) by UV-vis spectroscopy and partial least squares method (PLS),” Talanta, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 67–71, 2005.

A. Samadi-Maybodi and V. Rezaei, “A cloud point extraction for spectrophotometric determination of ultra- trace antimony without chelating agent in environmental and biological samples,” Microchimica Acta, vol. 178, no. 3-4, pp. 399–404, 2012.

P. Li, Y.-J. Chen, X. Hu, and H.-Z. Lian, “Magnetic solid phase extraction for the determination of trace antimony species in water by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry,” Talanta, vol. 134, pp. 292–297, 2015.

F. Séby, C. Gleyzes, O. Grosso, B. Plau, and O. F. X. Donard, “Speciation of antimony in injectable drugs used for leishmaniasis treatment (Glucantime®) by HPLC-ICP-MS and DPP,” Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, vol. 404, no. 10, pp. 2939–2948, 2012.

H. Wu, X. Wang, B. Liu et al., “Simultaneous speciation of inorganic arsenic and antimony in water samples by hydride generation-double channel atomic fluorescence spectrometry with on-line solid-phase extraction using single-walled carbon nanotubes micro-column,” Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 74–80, 2011.

Y. Zhang, M. Mei, T. Ouyang, and X. Huang, “Preparation of a new polymeric ionic liquid-based sorbent for stir cake sorptive extraction of trace antimony in environmental water samples,” Talanta, vol. 161, pp. 377–383, 2016.

S. Tajik and M. A. Taher, “New method for microextraction of ultra trace quantities of gold in real samples using ultrasound-assisted emulsification of solidified floating organic drops,” Microchimica Acta, vol. 173, no. 1-2, pp. 249–257, 2011.

C. Zeng, F. Yang, and N. Zhou, “Hollow fiber supported liquid membrane extraction coupled with thermospray flame furnace atomic absorption spectrometry for the speciation of Sb(III) and Sb(V) in environmental and biological samples,” Microchemical Journal, vol. 98, no. 2, pp. 307–311, 2011.

H. H. Nadiki, M. A. Taher, and H. Ashkenani, “Ionic liquid ultrasound assisted dispersive liquid-liquid/micro-volume back extraction procedure for preconcentration and determination of ultra trace amounts of thallium in water and biological samples,” International Journal of Environmental Analytical Chemistry, vol. 93, no. 6, pp. 623–636, 2013.

S. Wen and X. Zhu, “Speciation of antimony(III) and antimony(V) by electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry after ultrasound-assisted emulsification of solidified floating organic drop microextraction,” Talanta, vol. 115, pp. 814–818, 2013.

M. Eftekhari, M. Chamsaz, M. H. Arbab-Zavar, and A. Eftekhari, “Vortex-assisted surfactant-enhanced emulsification microextraction based on solidification of floating organic drop followed by electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry for speciation of antimony (ΙΙΙ, V),” Environmental Modeling & Assessment, vol. 187, no. 1, 2015.

I. López-García, S. Rengevicova, M. J. Muñoz-Sandoval, and M. Hernández-Córdoba, “Speciation of very low amounts of antimony in waters using magnetic core-modified silver nanoparticles and electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry,” Talanta, vol. 162, pp. 309–315, 2017.

A. R. Ghiasvand, S. Shadabi, E. Mohagheghzadeh, and P. Hashemi, “Homogeneous liquid-liquid extraction method for the selective separation and preconcentration of ultra trace molybdenum,” Talanta, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 912–916, 2005.

S. Igarashi, N. Ide, and Y. Takagai, “High-performance liquid chromatographic-spectrophotometric determination of copper(II) and palladium(II) with 5,10,15,20-tetrakis(4N-pyridyl)porphine following homogeneous liquid-liquid extraction in the water-acetic acid-chloroform ternary solvent system,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 424, no. 2, pp. 263–269, 2000.

L. Zhang, Y. Morita, A. Sakuragawa, and A. Isozaki, “Inorganic speciation of As(III, V), Se(IV, VI) and Sb(III, V) in natural water with GF-AAS using solid phase extraction technology,” Talanta, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 723–729, 2007.

C. Dietz, J. Sanz, and C. Cámara, “Recent developments in solid-phase microextraction coatings and related techniques,” Journal of Chromatography A, vol. 1103, no. 2, pp. 183–192, 2006.

A. K. Malik, V. Kaur, and N. Verma, “A review on solid phase microextraction - High performance liquid chromatography as a novel tool for the analysis of toxic metal ions,” Talanta, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 842–849, 2006.

R. Gürkan and M. Eser, “Application of ultrasonic-assisted cloud point extraction/flame atomic absorption spectrometry (UA-CPE/FAAS) for preconcentration and determination of low levels of antimony in some beverage samples,” Journal of the Iranian Chemical Society, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 1579–1591, 2016.

Z. Fan, “Determination of antimony(III) and total antimony by single-drop microextraction combined with electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 585, no. 2, pp. 300–304, 2007.

C. Mitani and A. N. Anthemidis, “On-line liquid phase micro-extraction based on drop-in-plug sequential injection lab-at-valve platform for metal determination,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 771, pp. 50–55, 2013.

C. Ye, Q. Zhou, and X. Wang, “Improved single-drop microextraction for high sensitive analysis,” Journal of Chromatography A, vol. 1139, no. 1, pp. 7–13, 2007.

E. Marguí, M. Sagué, I. Queralt, and M. Hidalgo, “Liquid phase microextraction strategies combined with total reflection X-ray spectrometry for the determination of low amounts of inorganic antimony species in waters,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 786, pp. 8–15, 2013.

R. E. Rivas, I. López-García, and M. Hernández-Córdoba, “Speciation of very low amounts of arsenic and antimony in waters using dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction and electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry,” Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 329–333, 2009.

S. R. Yousefi, F. Shemirani, and M. R. Jamali, “Determination of antimony(III) and total antimony in aqueous samples by electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry after dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME),” Analytical Letters, vol. 43, no. 16, pp. 2563–2571, 2010.

E. M. Martinis, R. A. Olsina, J. C. Altamirano, and R. G. Wuilloud, “Sensitive determination of cadmium in water samples by room temperature ionic liquid-based preconcentration and electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 628, no. 1, pp. 41–48, 2008.

H. Abdolmohammad-Zadeh and G. H. Sadeghi, “A novel microextraction technique based on 1-hexylpyridinium hexafluorophosphate ionic liquid for the preconcentration of zinc in water and milk samples,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 649, no. 2, pp. 211–217, 2009.

X. Wen, Q. Deng, and J. Guo, “Ionic liquid-based single drop microextraction of ultra-trace copper in food and water samples before spectrophotometric determination,” Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy, vol. 79, no. 5, pp. 1941–1945, 2011.

G.-T. Wei, Z. Yang, and C.-J. Chen, “Room temperature ionic liquid as a novel medium for liquid/liquid extraction of metal ions,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 488, no. 2, pp. 183–192, 2003.

Z. Fan, “Speciation analysis of antimony (III) and antimony (V) by flame atomic absorption spectrometry after separation/preconcentration with cloud point extraction,” Microchimica Acta, vol. 152, no. 1-2, pp. 29–33, 2005.

H. Yiping and W. Caiyun, “Ion chromatography for rapid and sensitive determination of fluoride in milk after headspace single-drop microextraction with in situ generation of volatile hydrogen fluoride,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 661, no. 2, pp. 161–166, 2010.